The New Labour Project is the Political Equivalent of the Atkins Diet
Opinion, By Ben Everitt
Remember the Atkins Deit? You know the one, it was all the rage a few years ago - eat all the nice things like steak and eggs and cheese and look like Brad Pitt, or Claudia Schiffer, or whoever. It had amazing results too - if people could face being off the booze and bread - the weight just dropped off. But there was a snag: you had to keep doing it to keep thin. We all probably know someone who tried it, they maybe even stuck at it long enough to drop into a size ten dress or see their todger when they pee, but chances are that they are now more-or-less the un-supermodel-like figure that they were before. That's because, to be honest, eating burgers without the buns and no chips is a bit of an arse, and beer is one of the key staple food-groups for men.
So what am I getting at with this elaborate and tenuous metaphor? No, nothing to do with Prescot, though he does have a part to play in his own special way. The point is this: the New Labour Project was concocted and conducted with only one intention - Power. Specifically, winning the 1997 election. And it worked, in 1997 New Labour won the election in dazzling Brad Pitt, Claudia Schiffer style, with glitz and glamour and a portion of cheese so large that it makes us quite queasy to think that back then we swallowed it.
Take nothing away from Blair-Campbell-Mandleson, the New Labour Atkins regime was hard, they had to do without clause four, swallow some distasteful doses of market force capitalism, and eat their public services without extra bread. But they got through it. And they're committed dieters, in 2001, the New Labour Project won the 1997 election again. We were a bit bored of the same diet, but Brad was still looking just as good, Claudia scrubs up well with an airbrush and all seemed on track for the diet.
Here we are: 2005. It looks as if the diet is flagging a bit. It's been eight years but some of the less committed New Labour Diet Group are still wincing under the strict discipline of the diet that keeps them in power. Backbenchers, former Cabinet Ministers are back to their old 'buy lots of cake - eat lots of cake' days, and that doesn't sit well with the electorate. After 18 years of Thatcherite slimming, they like their government lean and their pockets heavy.
Got to keep going, got to keep winning that 1997 election. The great dietician Campbell is back, scraping the mud off the bottom of the barrel and slinging handfuls of the stuff at the Tories. The cellulite is being covered up once again, this is going to have to be the quickest loss of weight since Rene finished filming Bridget Jones. Put out the young Tory sounding ones for the cameras, hide the un-photogenic lumbering old trade unionists and everybody smile. Pretend like we care about what they think and for God's sake breathe in.
Tony Blair may be dressing his party in baggy clothes and poncing around like Brad Pitt, or Claudia Schiffer, or whoever, but underneath the dieters are losing the battle. Bit by bit, the pounds are piling back on, distasteful stuff like low taxes and individual freedom are being replaced by pre-packed foods with the illusion of goodness like stealth taxes, ID cards and bans on this that and the other. The diet is slipping, the spare tyres are showing through and the public can smell desperation measures.
Labour has pretended to be the Tories for the past two elections. It's latest manifesto is almost identical to those of Hauge, Duncan-Smith and Howard, but whereas the Tory years were a careful balance of health eating and exercise, Labour has proved itself to be a fad dieter. Beware the sheep in wolf's clothing, if it's a choice between the Tory party with Tory policies, and the New Labour Project with Tory policies I'll be choosing the Tories: at least they mean it.
Remember the Atkins Deit? You know the one, it was all the rage a few years ago - eat all the nice things like steak and eggs and cheese and look like Brad Pitt, or Claudia Schiffer, or whoever. It had amazing results too - if people could face being off the booze and bread - the weight just dropped off. But there was a snag: you had to keep doing it to keep thin. We all probably know someone who tried it, they maybe even stuck at it long enough to drop into a size ten dress or see their todger when they pee, but chances are that they are now more-or-less the un-supermodel-like figure that they were before. That's because, to be honest, eating burgers without the buns and no chips is a bit of an arse, and beer is one of the key staple food-groups for men.
So what am I getting at with this elaborate and tenuous metaphor? No, nothing to do with Prescot, though he does have a part to play in his own special way. The point is this: the New Labour Project was concocted and conducted with only one intention - Power. Specifically, winning the 1997 election. And it worked, in 1997 New Labour won the election in dazzling Brad Pitt, Claudia Schiffer style, with glitz and glamour and a portion of cheese so large that it makes us quite queasy to think that back then we swallowed it.
Take nothing away from Blair-Campbell-Mandleson, the New Labour Atkins regime was hard, they had to do without clause four, swallow some distasteful doses of market force capitalism, and eat their public services without extra bread. But they got through it. And they're committed dieters, in 2001, the New Labour Project won the 1997 election again. We were a bit bored of the same diet, but Brad was still looking just as good, Claudia scrubs up well with an airbrush and all seemed on track for the diet.
Here we are: 2005. It looks as if the diet is flagging a bit. It's been eight years but some of the less committed New Labour Diet Group are still wincing under the strict discipline of the diet that keeps them in power. Backbenchers, former Cabinet Ministers are back to their old 'buy lots of cake - eat lots of cake' days, and that doesn't sit well with the electorate. After 18 years of Thatcherite slimming, they like their government lean and their pockets heavy.
Got to keep going, got to keep winning that 1997 election. The great dietician Campbell is back, scraping the mud off the bottom of the barrel and slinging handfuls of the stuff at the Tories. The cellulite is being covered up once again, this is going to have to be the quickest loss of weight since Rene finished filming Bridget Jones. Put out the young Tory sounding ones for the cameras, hide the un-photogenic lumbering old trade unionists and everybody smile. Pretend like we care about what they think and for God's sake breathe in.
Tony Blair may be dressing his party in baggy clothes and poncing around like Brad Pitt, or Claudia Schiffer, or whoever, but underneath the dieters are losing the battle. Bit by bit, the pounds are piling back on, distasteful stuff like low taxes and individual freedom are being replaced by pre-packed foods with the illusion of goodness like stealth taxes, ID cards and bans on this that and the other. The diet is slipping, the spare tyres are showing through and the public can smell desperation measures.
Labour has pretended to be the Tories for the past two elections. It's latest manifesto is almost identical to those of Hauge, Duncan-Smith and Howard, but whereas the Tory years were a careful balance of health eating and exercise, Labour has proved itself to be a fad dieter. Beware the sheep in wolf's clothing, if it's a choice between the Tory party with Tory policies, and the New Labour Project with Tory policies I'll be choosing the Tories: at least they mean it.
Crikey. Does that mean we can get rid of the rubbish underneath this post?
Posted by
Matt |
Thu Feb 17, 02:56:00 pm
maybe, but I still don't understand the latin.
Would prefer to understand it before we get rid of it.
Otherwise I run the risk of being a bit hypocritical re Fox Hunting etc...
Posted by
Ben |
Thu Feb 17, 03:29:00 pm
I can tell this is going to be a lot of fun...
The latin is gone, but it was Lorem Ipsum, the passage used for placehlding by printers. A translation can be found here. Now you can understand it enough to get rid of it. Like fox hunting.
Posted by
Matt |
Thu Feb 17, 03:58:00 pm
Having had a brief look at one side of the argument that matches my preconceived conceptions I feel that I am now in a position to get rid of it.
No, wait. First I must set up an independent inquiry into it, then ignore the findings because they're not in line with my preconceived conceptions.
Bit of a trauma, blame the toffs.
Ok, now it can go.
Posted by
Ben |
Thu Feb 17, 05:03:00 pm
Actually, the latin was due to go anyway, long before the independent enquiry was set up. The latin is a relic of a bygone age, and while it may be something we feel nostalgic about, it really has no place in the modern world. I don't feel this is a biased opinion of latin, and I don't really understand why you're resisting us getting rid of it. And anyway, the Romans were a bunch of bloodthirsty thugs who had it coming.
Posted by
Matt |
Thu Feb 17, 05:08:00 pm
Yes, but people will still conjugate verbs, but just in other ways. Getting rid of Latin is actually cruel to language, because without the control of ancient grammar rules people will just go about using the accusative and conjugating willy-nilly.
It's a modern fad to ban first and think later. We'll always have to talk, just think of the poor sentences, not dispatched quickly with efficient use of Latin based grammar, but mangled in the rusty traps of 'innit' and 'y'know'. The verb feels nothing when conjugated by Latin grammar, but shoot it with modern verbiage and it may take days of weeks as it skulks of to it's lonely demise.
Posted by
Ben |
Thu Feb 17, 05:27:00 pm
Crikey Chris there you go, getting personal already.
You're all the same.
Bloody lefties...
Posted by
Ben |
Thu Feb 17, 05:28:00 pm