|
Pogledi - English... |
|
|
Friday, December 30, 2005 REQUIEM FOR THE TORY PARTY by Srdja Trifkovic Before starting I need to declare a personal interest. In my 51 years I've belonged to a political party for a total of 22 months and 8 days, as a student in England in 1975-77. In those two academic years I was a card-carrying member of the Conservative and Unionist Party (to use its little known full name). I was also an officer of the Federation of Conservative Students at the University of Sussex, the editor of the FCS monthly newsletter, and a member of Enoch Powell's last faithful bastion in the Tory Party, the Monday Club. The 70s were not an easy time for people like me a red brick university, but non, rien de rien, je ne regrette rien . Standing up to the Trots, Stalinists and dikey "wimmin" was the right thing to do, and it was often fun. It is therefore in sorrow rather than anger that I have to announce the death of the Tory Party. Feeling panicky after a string of electoral defeats, and determined that out-Blairing Blair is the way to regain power, three weeks ago it elected a new leader - a horrible, plasticky homo novus by the name of David Cameron. Let's have this former manager of a chain of drinking establishments speak for himself. Cameron believes the party needs to change its look, feel and identity, and perhaps even its very name, but not if it's a mere rebranding exercise. The Tories must change and "be in tune" with a "modern compassionate Conservatism." He is a "believer in meritocracy ," but in the selection of his party's candidates for members of parliament he will practice affirmative action. He will draw a "priority list of candidates drawn up for target and Conservative-held seats with equal numbers of men and women and a significant proportion of black and ethnic minority candidates, and candidates with disabilities " and embark on an "Intensive programme of headhunting and mentoring to attract the brightest and best women and ethnic minorities to apply to become candidates." On religion, traditionally the cornerstone of the Tory world outlook, Cameron says "I try to get to church more than Christmas and Easter, but perhaps not as often as I should, but I don't feel I have a direct line." On world affairs, Cameron is an internationalist who believes in the supremacy of the United Nations and in the validity and usefulness of "humanitarian interventions." Specifically, he believes the Conservative party needs to say much more about Darfur than it does about the plight of white farmers in Zimbabwe victimized by Mugabe. Asked what he would have done about Darfur, Cameron replied : "We should have pressed for the situation to have been described as genocide by the UN, a decision which would have prompted a series of interventions." Some weeks before his election on December 6 there had been a bout of media frenzy over whether David Cameron had taken drugs, or, to be precise, not whether but when exactly he had last snorted cocaine . The Tory establishment, now firmly in the hands of PR executives from Islimngton and systems analysts from the Home Counties, responded with "so what, we know that, let's focus on his policies." But there are no Cameron policies; his crew insist on calling his rehearsed themes, "challenges." Among them one would search in vain for any Tory buzzword : "No heading of tax, crime, immigration, or Europe . . . Crime, for instance, gets looked at through the prisms of security, quality of life and social action; Europe through those of trade/aid, security and competitiveness. The idea is to avoid confirming prejudices and to keep an open mind. Suppose it turns out, for example, that immigration improves economic competitiveness, but also increases the danger of terrorism: you will then have to decide your final policy by weighing the advantage against the threat. You won't let the policy precede the facts." Talking of immigration, Cameron's Party chairman Francis Maude told the BBC it was important to show Tories did not have an "antagonism" and that they were "decent people." In his words , immigration had been "fantastically good" for the United Kingdom. No commentary is needed. People like Cameron and Maude mark the end of the Tory Party as we've known it, and as its previous custodians would have recognized it. As for the "fantastical goodness" please cheack out my article on "Britain's Road to Dhimmitude " of two months ago. When I wrote this article I was not aware of the widely acclaimed Old Vic production of Tamburlaine the Great, Christopher Marlowe's 16th century classic. Amidst the glowing reviews few noticed, however, that several insufficiently reverential references to Muhammad had been deleted from the production. Worse still, an essential scene in the play in which the Kuran is burned was also censored beyond recognition. In the original, "Tamburlaine" (Tamerlane) asks his servant to bring "the Turkish Alcoran, and all the heaps of superstitious books found in the temples of that Mahomet whom I have thought a god? they shall be burnt." As they light a fire Tamburlaine challenges Mahomet to send a whirlwind that would save the Kuran from burning, or else punish the perpetrator. Then he declares, Well, soldiers, Mahomet remains in hell; Director David Farr explained that he did not want to upset Muslims. Simon Reade, artistic director of the theater, agreed that if they had not altered the original it "would have unnecessarily raised the hackles of a significant proportion of one of the world's great religions." Worse still, he claimed that the censored version was better than the original: "The burning of the Koran was 'smoothed over,' he said, so that it became just the destruction of 'a load of books' relating to any culture or religion. That made it more powerful, they claimed ." It's the kind of empowerment Messrs. Cameron and Maude approve of. Pass the sick bag, Alice. All rights reserved, Погледи - 2005. године. Design
and maintenance - www.proxy.co.yu web
master |
|