Was That A Paradigm Shift, Or Is My Underwear Just Bunched Up?

Sometimes I loathe blogging and I hate blogs. At the moment I can’t stand all this waiting, it’s driving me absolutely, nailbitingly nuts. My refresh button is wearing out.

Although nemesis is approaching both the Blair and Bush governments in the form of prosecutions for corruption and for perjury respectively, it’s taking it’s own sweet bloody time about it.

I want poodle and chimp blood and I want it now!.

Maybe I’m projecting my own feelings about the endless grey tedium of January but the UK and US news media and punditerati seem to have gone oddly quiet of late. I don’t mean there’s no news, that’s patently absurd what with wars and massacres and plagues all over the place – but there’s a faint whiff of tense anxiety emanating from the political reporters and commentariat. I wonder why?

They do have cause to be tense: both the accelerating Cash for Honours and Plame investigations and subsequent prosecutions will result in large part from the persistence of bloggers on both sides of the Atlantic. Unpaid citizens have been doing the job that the pampered, self-perpetuating mediocracy should’ve been doing. The media’s passive collusion in propping up illegal government and facilitating the obstruction of justice is about to be exposed and it won’t be pretty; no wonder they’re nervous. (Or maybe they’re just desperately trying to catch up on the story. That’s why they’re quiet – they’re reading blogs.)

That doesn’t mean there are no bright, persistent reporters on the big papers, it means they are exceedingly rare pearls of rare price amongst the cosy insiderdom and casual venality that are the modern Cranfords of Westminster and Washington, those murky little worlds of interlocked party-politics, thinktanks, op-ed columns and off-the-record-socialising, where political reporters and pundits work, go to the same schools, live in the same neighbourhoods, go to the same dinner-parties and social events and help each others children do the same in their turn.

That this state of affairs exists is due both to the way patronage, largesse and plain access has been managed by political parties on both sides of the Atlantic in modern times, most recently and blatantly by Blair and Bush. But it also testifies to the media’s willingness to be patronised and managed by politicians, providing there is sufficient personal advantage.

It’s been a long comfortable ride for the pundits so far, but the papers they write for are losing circulation and profits as fewer people turn, not to the papers or tv for news and political analysis, but to the internet and bloggers.

The trouble is that the small world of political blogging is, though supeficially wide-open, actually self-regulated and just as parochial, narrow-minded and self-interested as any other self-selected grouping.

Liberal blogging is already producing its own insider elites even though it’s that which brought us to this pass in the first place. Although they’re much less well-paid (if paid at all) than the right bloggers, the money is coming. With the ascendancy of the Democrats in Congress and a record-funded presidential race on the way, bloggers are no doubt already anticipating a tasty slice of the ad-spending and political-consultancy pie. The Hillary blogads are all over the place already.

I suppose they might argue that that’s the way the system works and what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander., t’was ever thus, blah blah blah, don’t blame us, a blogger’s got to live and so on. Fine, make your living from politics if that’s what you want to do. I’ve no problem with that, it’s your choice.

But remember that the moment you start to make your living from politics you are part of the political establishment, not the counter-establishment, on the inside not the outside, and expect to be treated accordingly. (I think finding yourself on a Murdoch paper like the Times’ list of 10 bloggers most likely to sink Hillary Clinton signifies that you are indeed, Established.)

Athough superficially separate, the walls between the big liberal blogs. Democratic party politics and paid opinion, already paper-thin, are crumbling. What does this mean for smaller, less exalted left political blogs?

It means that their role as political samizdat is even more important than ever.

US Democratic bloggers argued recently in criticism of the US antiwar march on Saturday that the left is dead, ineffectual and out of date and that party politics, not protest is where the actions’s at. Other big blogs have bought into this too. Observer journalist Nick Cohen has argued the same thing, though from a different perspective ( that of someone who supported the invasion of Iraq and now must spend the rest of his life justifying it by attacking the war’s opponents).

It is not novel to say that socialism is dead. My argument is that its failure has brought a dark liberation to people who consider themselves to be on the liberal left. It has freed them to go along with any movement however far to the right it may be, as long as it is against the status quo in general and, specifically, America. I hate to repeat the overused quote that ‘when a man stops believing in God he doesn’t then believe in nothing, he believes anything’, but there is no escaping it. Because it is very hard to imagine a radical leftwing alternative, or even mildly radical alternative, intellectuals in particular are ready to excuse the movements of the far right as long as they are anti-Western.

Of course the ‘left ‘, at least as Cohen defines it – in terms of the Labour and Democratic parties – is dead: modern party politics is now merely a televised battle of who can raise most to spend on advertising, and electoral platforms are informed by market research, not political principle. Left? What left?

Those allegedly lleftist parties that liberal media and the big blogs argue and raise money for are all in thrall to to the free market. It’s the baseline from which all their political argument springs and it may not be gainsaid. Only in that sense is Cohen’s point valid; the Labour party left, that wanted to change the world is dead and gone, as are the New Deal Democrats. What remains is a bunch of middle-class policy wonks who beleive they can both simultaneously enjoy the fruits of the free market and assuage their liberal guilt by tinkering around the edges so things are a just a little nicer for the poor folk overseas and the blacks and the gays at home and they don’t have to feel so bad that they live so well.

But there is a another left – that’s iinternational and internationalist, that doesn’t trust any existing party, that’s comprised of people who would not necessarily call themselves leftists but who loathe injustice and lies (local or global) who abhor hypocrisy, cruelty, corruption and greed, who see that the free market as a panacea for all social ills doesn’t work and who are not afraid to say so, loudly and often, through any means they can find. They’re not seduced by power because they know they are powerless.

Blogs have given them a voice.

They might forget it now but that’s how the big blogs started too; Kos is only as big as he is now because of all the diarists. That made him and his site dangerous. That he’s now lauded in the media as a Democratic power-broker is the political establishment using the old ‘inside the tent pissing out’ strategy. By neutralising Kos they neutralise the his readers and diarists too, goes the thinking.

Power is very seductive, so I’m not at all surprised by the continuing co-option of the big blogs into the political establishment. It’s the way elites always work: co-opt, absorb and neutralise. Just so long as those bloggers co-opted remember that that they are no longer outside the system but within it and we’ll all get along fine.

But back to my original point, the current nervousness of the media. I may be entirely wrong about the reason why they’re so subdued. Maybe this is all an excuse for self-absorbed metablognoodling and they’re all just waiting for Bush to drop the Big One on Iran.

Now that really would be a paradigm shift
.

An attack on Iranian nuclear infrastructure would signal the start of a protracted military confrontation that would probably grow to involve Iraq, Israel and Lebanon, as well as the USA and Iran. The report concludes that a military response to the current crisis in relations with Iran is a particularly dangerous option and should not be considered further. Alternative approaches must be sought, however difficult these may be.

Yes, that might certainly make the subject of the co-option of liberal blogs somewhat irrelevant.

Come In Mr Blair, Your Time Is Up

Mr. Plod.

Yesterday I posted that Rove’s having been called to the stand in the Scooter Libby trial could sink Bush. On this side of the pond a similar fate is approaching Tony Blair with accelerating speed.

Scotland Yard, using New Labour’s own, recently-passed, draconian investigative powers over email and computers, is getting ever closer to uncovering the proof of Blair’s alleged complicity in the political corruption of Cash for Honours affair.

The Independent on Sunday has a very good roundup of the situation so far:

[…]

Following the arrest of Ruth Turner, one of the Prime Minister’s closest aides, last week, it is perhaps not surprising that members of the Cabinet are now invoking God to come to their aid.

The police inquiry which they curtly dismissed as opportunism a few months ago is swiftly gaining ground. Files of evidence are now in the hands of Crown Prosecution Service with the prospect of charges growing every day.

Not only is the Scotland Yard investigation under the 1925 Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act gathering pace, but the police are also making solid progress in their investigations into breaches by Labour of electoral law.

The Electoral Commission, which has been advising the police on the Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act, is expected to recommend that the Act is tested in court and that Labour be tried for breaching its terms on disclosure of commercial loans.

What is more, Labour’s attempts to keep secret millions of pounds in loans made by millionaire supporters before the last election are being seen as supporting evidence in the case on the abuse of the honours system.

There is fresh talk of another police interview for Mr Blair. Even if the Prime Minister is not charged, ministers fear that Labour may be brought to court and the PM cross-examined, if not as a defendant then as a witness, where he could be asked anything by lawyers.

“It could be extremely embarrassing, and Blair would not have the same kind of protection he would have as a defendant if he is called to give evidence as a witness,” said one QC. “In many ways it would be worse.”

During Prime Minister’s Questions on Wednesday, Mr Blair’s communications chief David Hill chewed his nails as his boss was asked by Tory MP Bill Wiggin: “Will he confirm that if a close aide is charged he will leave office?” Labour MPs sitting behind the Prime Minister stared nervously at their shoes as Mr Blair snapped back: “I have absolutely nothing to say about that inquiry at all.”

Mr Blair was possibly the only politician not talking about the latest revelations in the cash-for-honours inquiry. There was open talk in the tea rooms of forcing the Prime Minister to resign early as a damage-limitation exercise. “We are leaking support to the Conservatives,” said one former cabinet minister. “How can we fight the May elections with Blair in office and all these cash-for-honours headlines dogging us?”

One senior aide to the Prime Minister said that the hope now was that, if there are charges, Mr Blair would not be dragged to court as a serving Prime Minister. With the police inquiry expected to drag on until the end of February, a trial would not take place until after Mr Blair leaves office, which is expected in July.

John McTernan, director of political operations, who worked with Ms Turner in choosing names for peerages, has been interviewed again by the police. Jonathan Powell, Mr Blair’s chief of staff, has also been interviewed again. And unlike their first round of interviews these have not been cosy, informal chats, but, it is believed, grillings under caution.

The newly resolute mood in Scotland Yard is a sign of frustration that it has not been given the complete picture by the Labour Party. Senior figures in Government say that Downing Street, despite its protestations about aiding the police, has not been as helpful as it could have been.

One senior Whitehall figure said that although No 10 had not withheld information requested by Scotland Yard, it had done nothing to help them actively to find evidence. “They only give them what they ask for. They don’t say ‘you want to look here and you want to look there’,” he said.

But the police have proved persistent. They have followed an email trail which has shown inconsistencies and compared witness statements, which have not always added up. Emails deleted from aides’ personal queues have been discovered by police who have trawled through a secret back-up archive set up by Downing Street to store files that had been erased.

Government sources say that before Christmas six plainclothes police officers, trained in recovering missing computer files and emails, went into Downing Street and the Cabinet Office where they spent days downloading emails from computers belonging to staff who drew up Tony Blair’s honours list. The police looked through the secret internal Downing Street email system and other emails used for communications between journalists and outside organisations.

They even took away emails sent to Mr Blair himself. The emails referred to potential nominees for the honours list, including Labour donors. Others are believed to have discussed conversations between Jonathan Powell and Lord Levy, who preferred to communicate with Downing Street by phone.

The emails are understood to refer not only to those who were nominated for peerages but also to donors who did not make it to the final nomination stage. Sir Christopher Evans, whose loan of £1m is being repaid by Labour, is thought to have been among those names floated as a possible peer. Notes the biotechnology tycoon took of a conversation he had with Lord Levy give a rare insight into New Labour schmoozing. The note referred to talk of “a K [knighthood] or a big P [peerage]?”.

[…]

This is getting interesting on both sides of the Atlantic: like I keep saying, the wheels of justice grind exceeding slow but exceeding fine. Blair and Bush may have been able to escape justice so far with the use of nifty political footwork and outright lying, but it’s coming for them.

Downing St Corruption: It’s Not Just Blair, It’s Brown Too

Oooh. Looks like Inspector Knacker may bag more than one major Labour politician. A major corruption and patronage storm is brewing around Gordon Brown, who has been anointed by the faithful to take over as Prime Minister when Tony Blair finally goes or is arrested (whichever comes soonest).

The story in brief: Brown is accused of being complicit in what may be fraudulent activity concerning an allegedly non-political ‘educational’ charity, the Smith Institute.

The institute is fimanced and run by Brown supporters, staffed by his and his wife’s personal friends, and holds closed meetings at No.11 Downing St.. the Chancellor’s office, which the Chancellor himself attends. These meetings are where prominent buinesspeople are dictating government economic policy to Brown and channeling fcharitable funds to the Smith Institute, Brown’s private slush fund, for the privilege of doing so – all the while claiming charitable status and the tax perks that go with it.

As Guido Fawkes puts it, it smells. More than that, it reeks. he has put together a timeline of posts that give the whole backstory, and a stinking mess of secret dealings, jobs for the boys, general self-interestedness and cynicism it is.

Cash for Policy.

Sith attempt to cover-up use of No. 11.

Mrs Brown recruits Konrad as the Sith apprentice.

The back story to the Sith’s Konrad.

The public charity which refuses to talk to the public.

Cameron : Brown is the dark side. [Sith Death Star graphic]

more….

BBC2’s Newsnight also did a an expose last night which can be viewed here.

Just because the major media is keeping schtum on this one for the moment doesn’t mean it won’t develop into a yet another major New Labour corruption story. I can’t wait. Brown is the architect of New Labour’s disastrous neoliberal economic policies and he’s as big a warmonger and liar as Blair.

Perhaps we’ll be rid of them both in one godalmighty, gigantic scandal and dramafest. That would be sweet.

It’s not enough for me that they’re gone: I want to see them go with piles of burning coals heaped upon their heads, never to be able to show their faces in public again, preferably to end their days chronically ill, on means-tested benefits, gibbering madly in one of their own privatised hellholes of a homeless hostel.

Or do you think I’m being too soft?

Thought For The Day

‘Politics, as I never tire of saying, is for social and emotional misfits, handicapped folk, those with a grudge. The purpose of politics is to help them overcome these feelings of inferiority and compensate for their personal inadequacies in the pursuit of power.’

— Auberon Waugh, “The Power Urge”, The Spectator, 15 December, 1982

Bloody God-Botherers Again

Of all the things that you think might’ve finally split the British Cabinet – Iraq, Bush poodlism, Trident, cronyism, cash for honours, general corruption, gross incompetence – in the end it may come down to religion, if Inspector Knacker doesn’t swoop on No. 10 first, that is.

Why? Because paedophile-enabler and Roman Catholic Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor‘s outrageous and blatant political pressure on individual ministers to exempt the church from anti-gay discrimination legislation means that those promiinent Opus Dei members, marital Catholics and sporadic mass-attenders that overpopulate Blair’s cabinet and his hangers-on ( the recently-arrested Blair aide Ruth Turner, for example, is the daughter of a prominent Catholic theologian) are going to have to choose between their beliefs and what few political principles they have left.

Rome and O’Connor are determined to oppose UK gay rights legislation and the church has already bullied themselves an exemption from ensuring gay equality in employment and now they’re trying it on on the issue of gay adoption rights, saying that they should be special, exempt from the law on the spurious grounds of ‘conscience’. (Spelled B_I_G_O_T_R_Y.)

Shit, I’d like to be excused from any number of laws on the grounds of conscience. For instance, what about the Rastafari? Cannabis is a sacrament in their religion: can they ignore the drug laws?

Cherie Blair ‘split Cabinet in Catholic adoption row’
By Colin Brown, Deputy Political Editor
Published: 24 January 2007

Senior cabinet ministers have told MPs privately that Cherie Blair is the cause of the cabinet split over demands to exempt Roman Catholic adoption agencies from equality laws on gay adoption.

The row intensified yesterday when the Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, the leader of the Catholic Church in England and Wales, was accused by gay rights campaigners and some Labour MPs of trying to blackmail the Government.

The accusations flew after Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor wrote to cabinet ministers warning them that Catholic adoption agencies would have to close if they were not exempted from the new laws.

The leaders of the Church of England backed Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor, warning the Government that religious people may feel that their conscience forbids them from undertaking public work under the new laws. The Archbishops of Canterbury and York, Rowan Williams and John Sentamu, wrote to Tony Blair saying: “In legislating to protect and promote the rights of particular groups, the Government is faced with the delicate but important challenge of not thereby creating the conditions within which others feel their rights to have been ignored or sacrificed.”

The Equality Act, due to come into effect in England, Wales and Scotland in April, outlaws discrimination in the provision of goods, facilities and services on the basis of sexual orientation.

Ruth Kelly, the Communities Secretary, a committed Catholic, was accused of seeking to gain an opt-out for the Church. But Ms Kelly and the Education Secretary, Alan Johnson, have privately told MPs the pressure for an exemption has come from the Prime Minister.

“They said Tony is the one who has been asking for this exemption, not Ruth, who is pretty annoyed at the way she has been presented in the media,” said a senior Labour MP. “Another cabinet minister told me it’s all coming from Cherie.”

Read More