How the left has been left-behind by the right

First there was Sarah Palin

Palin on politicians and crony capitalism "I'm not for sale"

On crony capitalism: "So many of them, they arrive in Washington, DC of modest means and then miraculously throughout the years they end up becoming very, very wealthy. Well, it's because they derive power and their wealth from their access to our money, to taxpayer dollars."

"They use it to bail out their friends on Wall Street. And their corporate cronies. And to reward contributors. And to buy votes via earmarks. There is so much waste. And there is a name for this. It's called 'corporate crony capitalism,'" she said.

"Like you, I'm not for sale. I believe in the free market and that is why I detest crony capitalism. And Barack Obama has shown us cronyism on steroids. It will lead to our downfall if we don't stop it now."

OK, I don't trust Sarah Palin one bit. I don't think she believes a word of what she is quoted as saying. I'm not even sure she understands what she is saying.

But I do think the sentiments she expressed are correct. What we have in most Western countries today is not free markets. What we have is crony capitalism.

What I did not expect was to hear a member of the Republican Party express these views. The Republican Party today is, after all, the political arm of the crony capitalists.

But then we have this from Charles Moore, former editor of Britain's Telegraph newspaper.

I'm starting to thing that the left might actually be right

 

It has taken me more than 30 years as a journalist to ask myself this question, but this week I find that I must: is the Left right after all? You see, one of the great arguments of the Left is that what the Right calls "the free market" is actually a set-up.

The rich run a global system that allows them to accumulate capital and pay the lowest possible price for labour. The freedom that results applies only to them. The many simply have to work harder, in conditions that grow ever more insecure, to enrich the few. Democratic politics, which purports to enrich the many, is actually in the pocket of those bankers, media barons and other moguls who run and own everything.

Note, this is the editor of The Telegraph. The Telegraph is not usually thought of as a Bolshevik rag.

Even The Spectator is getting into the act.

The undeserving rich

Ever since the Elizabethan poor laws - if not before - society has tended to divide the poor into the deserving and the undeserving. But, as I write in this week's magazine, our politicians are now taking aim at a new category, the undeserving rich.

Then I saw this bit of well-deserved self-flagellation in The Guardian which brought it all together.

Now we have to rely on the right to fight the feral rich

Once again a spectre is haunting Europe. But don't look to the left for any pointers. Instead, keep up with some very interesting voices on the right, and their increasingly feverish interest in some fundamental issues: the position of wealthy and unaccountable elites, the extent to which supposedly liberalised economies have been fixed in their favour, and a restive public mood across the globe.

Fear not. This is one man who will never again look to the left for anything useful.

However I used to consider myself mildly left-wing. I was never a Marxist. I never bought into Stalinism. The superiority of market economies over dirigisme seemed to me to be self-evident.

But I did think we needed a government to moderate some of the effects of a market economy. For instance, I think government ought to ensure that those at the bottom of the income spectrum reap some of the benefits of a growing economy.

In the end, I feel, it is about people.

I did not leave the left. The left abandoned me. I really cannot be part of a "movement" that makes a celebrity out of the likes of David Hicks.

To the modern lefties any cause, even the rights of Somali pirates, has a higher priority than the welfare of ordinary working folks at home.

Somali pirates you say?

Pirates protected from EU taskforce by human rights

…Modern European navies are now so mindful of the legal loopholes they face in tackling pirates that they often instruct commanders to simply let them go.

…The Royal Navy admits, unofficially, that it is under similar instructions.

So what does the Royal Navy do when, despite its best efforts, it captures pirates? Would you believe it supplies them with nicotine patches?

HMS nursemaid shame as navy seizes 17 armed Somalis, gives them halal meat and nicotine patches...then sets them free!

The 17 outlaws were armed with an arsenal of AK 47s and rocket-propelled grenades, and had forced hostages on a hijacked fishing vessel to work as slaves for three months.

But instead of bringing them to justice, the British servicemen were ordered to provide the pirates halal meals, medical checks, cigarettes – and in one case even a nicotine patch – before releasing them in their own boats.

I just love it. Cigarettes and nicotine patches. Well, I hope the pirate was successful in quitting.

Message to the left:

It's not about gay marriage, or Somali pirates or a carbon tax or soon-to-be obsolete NBN or the rights of women in Hucaresistan or asylum-seekers. It's not even about Israel.

Depending on your predilections each of these may be worthy causes in their own right.

But your primary function, the whole raison d'etre of your existence, is looking after the interests of the less powerful right here in Australia without regard to race, religion or gender. You are even supposed to look after the interests of the never-to-be-sufficiently-derided white working-class Australian men.

In fact I would say you should put the interests of white working-class Australian men ahead even of cheering David Hicks.

Yes, even ahead of cheering Hicks.