By Mike Newland.
Tony Blair’s self-justifying ramblings are at last being recognised by official opinion as the emanations of a man with a personality disorder.
Boris Johnson now says that Blair needs a psychiatrist. That is scarcely a new insight. The Labour MP Leo Abse described the great election victor as a psychopath many years ago in a book he wrote about him.
It’s tempting to think that recognition of Blair’s condition spells sanity returning to our political life. No such good fortune. The motive is simply to enable the ambitious to distance themselves from those whose star has fallen into the mire. With the implication that ‘We’d never do anything like it‘. Sure sure.
But most of the leading players in our national life will and are doing exactly the same sort of things. What kind of country desperately short of housing sells its new developments to foreign investors? Large swathes of new housing are now being sold – to the Chinese for goodness sake! You could hardly invent a more graphic example of the utter indifference of our rulers to the welfare of our own people.
The generality of leading politicians may not be quite as disordered as Blair. That is, in fact, why they are less successful. People with disordered personalities enjoy a huge advantage over the rest of us. They know no constraint of conscience or sentiment which might inhibit them from exerting their worst impulses. Anyone who has met such people is left wondering. How could they do that we say to ourselves after some horrible passage of events? The disordered give it no more thought than you or I would give to buying a bar of chocolate. Their followers commonly are under the toxic spell of a charisma seemingly above human limitations.
You do not require any Hare psychopathy test to see what sort of person reaches the top in politics. The French President Mitterrand neatly summed it when he said that the most important quality required by top politicians is ‘indifference‘. They simply don’t care – except about their own gratification. We are playthings.
In usual circumstances, and in a society like ours which is not an outright dictatorship, there are some controls. Wary civil servants, newspapers and rivals not wishing to take the blame.
But in present-day Britain we have drifted into a position in which the political establishment now cannot admit to the mistakes made except peripherally – the worst during thirteen years of misrule by The Tony. To do so is to condemn themselves since they were almost all willing accomplices climbing the greasy pole.
Condemning Blair over Iraq is easy. We are not directly engaged in Iraq any more. But condemning him over insane policies like multiculturalism and migration and thoroughly rejecting them is impossible since the same policies are being used to advantage those who have taken the places of Blair and his coven – and for the same reasons. To condemn would be to both reject their own advantage and to define themselves as unsuitable to rule.
Simon Heffer suggests that Blair should be impeached by the House of Commons for ‘criminally damaging the public interest’ in forcing an invasion of Iraq. Many will conclude that this description should be applied to Labour’s flooding of the country with millions of new people in order to ‘rub our noses in diversity’. The malice contained in Labour’s own description of its actions is enough. But no newspaper will currently suggest impeachment over immigration. Who inside the big three parties paid more than lip service to opposing it?
The entire system conspires to avoid any admissions. Outsiders cannot obtain even a toehold among the mainstream if they question the basic premises of an apparatus of control which must deceive or die. UKIP has decided to travel within the system and is it not plain in its inability to present a coherent ideology? As Lenin put it from a viewpoint of entirely different ideas about what is good, we are given the chance now and then decide which of the oppressors should sit in parliament.
So we travel at the moment on a march of folly no one will halt or even admit to.
Sooner or later, however, the contrast between reality and the requirements of the system’s equilibrium will become too great to sustain any more. We are not far off that point now and the mere admission that Blair has a disordered mind indicates the forces under the surface of what appears an irremovable system.
A large part of power is simply to give an impression of eternal dominance to a house of cards.