Liberty Alone

Cllr Alexis Rowell claims this on his Belsize LibDems blog.

I don’t see that as true. He obviously likes the ‘broken windows’ theory of crime and his actions in banning drinking on the tube are not exactly liberal, but not particularly right wing.

I’ve seen no racism in Boris Johnson, just poorly chosen words (not that racism is only the domain of the right, look at Respect and recent Labour Party propaganda to see that).

He doesn’t seem particularly nationalistic (although again, the left are capable of that too).

He doesn’t appear to support the corporate state which defines the far right.

Oh, perhaps he’s a bit of an economic liberal (not compatible with the corporate state of course). If so, then I must be a hyper-right winger, but I know plenty of people on the left who are very strong supporters of free markets.

Skeptical about climate change hysteria? Well, again, I know people on all parts of the political spectrum who are skeptical, mostly because those who are responsible for this hysteria are using it to push their own political agenda rather than looking for real solutions. I have however seen little to suggest that Boris is skeptical of the climate change arguments.

I’m sorry, Boris may be an idiot, he may even be a disaster as mayor, but he is not an extreme right winger. Unless Cllr Rowell is so far left that he thinks Ken Livingstone is right wing.

Rather, this is a case of labeling someone you have an almost irrational fear of as a right wing bogey man because we all know that the ‘right’ are evil nasty people who want to steal sweets from babies and grind the poor under their heels.

Oh and whilst I’m at it, Cllr Rowell doesn’t seem to have read LibDem policy on the congestion charge. He gave opposing Ken’s punitive taxes on polluting cars as a reason not to vote for Boris - except what was Brian Paddick’s position? Oh dear, opposing Ken’s taxes and using the congestion charge for taxing congestion… oops…

(this is another case of responding on my own blog, because Cllr Rowell offers no comment facility on his blog).

The problem is he’s often quite perceptive, but has a way with words which provokes outrage and backlash.
Take his ‘pioccaninny’ comment:

It is said that the Queen has come to love the Commonwealth, partly because it supplies her with regular cheering crowds of flag-waving piccaninnies.

That is actually quite perceptive. I read it as a criticism of the role the Commonwealth plays in British life. It is mainly used as a way for the Queen and assorted royals to get crowds of cheering flag-waving people, something which they cannot easily get at home. It is also used for the UK government to preen itself and say ‘look how popular the British are abroad’.
The piccaninny part doesn’t read as if he’s calling all people of other Commonwealth countries piccaninnies, but more as though that’s the attitude the royal family and government takes towards them, they are useful little people of no great importance. A bit of colour for royal visits. (It is also reminiscent of the sort of language we’ve come to expect from Prince Phillip).

Perhaps this interpretation is coloured by my instinctive dislike for power and growing skepticism over our role in institutions like the Commonwealth (which has the potential for immense value for its member countries), but I’d suggest that those who rail against this quotation like to take it out of context due to their instinctive dislike for all Tories.

From a political point of view, such language does reveal quite a bit of naivety and buffoonery (and not in a good way), its handing a gift to your opponents.

Its things like this lack of judgement, not the sentiment I see expressed which leads me to question Boris Johnson’s suitability for Mayor. That said, I cannot stomach voting for Ken Livingstone, a man who openly engages in the implied racism of racial politics, whose pronouncements I find far more disturbing.

For me its a case of do I use my second vote at all, not do I use it for Boris of Ken. I don’t think I’ll decide until I’m in the voting booth at all.

Because that’s what some seem to think.

I get the impression that many LibDems think we should vote for Ken Livingstone so we can keep Boris, and by extension, the Tories out of power.

If I was in politics to keep the Tories out of power I’d have joined the Labour Party. That is not my aim however, my aim to to promote liberalism and freedom for the individual. The party I judge to be best positioned to work towards this is the Liberal Democrats.

Frankly, I find the Tories, in general, slightly less odious than the current Labour Party, although I’ll grant you that in some areas the Tories are worse (in my home town they’re both equally despicable and I couldn’t vote for either) and they leave a massive amount to be desired.
True, there are the old Tory snobs and a fair smattering of idiots, but at least their snobbery and idiocy is out there for all to see. The Labour party contains its fair share of such people, but they hide behind being ‘progressive’ and ‘left wing’ which supposedly makes it all okay.

When it comes to the mayoral elections - I believe Brian Paddick would genuinely make the best Mayor - and that’s not just party loyalty speaking. After that however I see the twin horrors of Ken and Boris. Out of the two, I find Boris less objectionable. He at least has some liberal bones in his body unlike Ken who is an enemy of all things liberal and free.
I also rather like inefficient politicians, they’re less likely to get things done, encouraging us to depend less on government and more on individual and community efforts.

Frankly, if the London Mayor has so much power that he could destroy London then he has too much power unfortunately the only way to drive this home would be for someone to abuse that power, perhaps then we can start acting to reducing the power of politicians.

Acknowledging the fact that Brian Paddick is very unlikely to win, I’d rather have Boris with an Assembly which will oppose him than anything else. For me, Boris is just the lesser of two evils.

I still don’t get the anti-Boris sentiment.
The man is clever and witty, but has cultivated his buffoon image, that may backfire, but that is no reason to dislike him, merely a weakness.

In my book, he’s a far better bet than Ken. He won’t be consorting with dictators or micro-managing London’s affairs and he has more liberal bones in his little finger than Ken has in his entire body. If Boris is ineffectual then that’s a blessing, perhaps Londoners can get on with their lives without interference from the Mayor’s office.

But he’s a Tory, which means enemy number one, even if the Labour candidate is an illiberal socialist managerial politician who is opposed to liberty.