Blair is the business.....
3 Comments Published by Tom Gara on Saturday, May 7 at Saturday, May 07, 2005.
Tony Blair romped it home on Thursday in the UK elections,securing a third term in Parliament for probably the most influential left of centre politician in the world. Yes, left of centre. Despite the Iraq war and his cosying up to Bush, Blair is a lefty, no doubt about it. His problems as UK Prime Minister, and in losing credibility to the mainstream "left" have come on two fronts, in my opinion.
First, he HAD to join the US in Iraq. Any UK or Australian Prime Minister, from any part of the political spectrum, would always, 100 times out of 100, join the US into such a war. This is a complicated issue that maybe I should write another post on, but basically, unless the US invades Norway on grounds of racial superiority, Australia and the UK will be following behind, wherever they go. So, poor old Tony had to do what he did, even though I am fairly sure it wouldnt have syncronised very well with his overiding politics of internationalism, rule of law and international consensus building.
Second, he has modernised "progressive" politics in some essential ways. The world has changed a lot in the last 20 years, but in many countries, left of centre politics still remains essentially unreconstructed 1950's postwar socialism - with many aspects becoming more irrelevent as people become wealthier, more aspirational and more consumerist. Blair has kept the basic spirit of leftist politics alive, and demonstrated that it is a relevant, energetic, and popularly supported political position. However, he had to take some flack for his reforms, and he has. However, where Labour in the UK stands right now is, I am sure, where leftist politics in many western countries would aim to be in the mid term future.
In many ways, Blair in the UK has done for Labour and leftist politics what the Thatcher/Reagan revolution of the 80's did for conservatism - he has demonstrated that with the right reforms and better positioning, you can attract solid popular support to a previously marginalised political position.
If you have any doubts on this, read his election victory speech. He is, quite simply, kicking ass in a big way:
First, he HAD to join the US in Iraq. Any UK or Australian Prime Minister, from any part of the political spectrum, would always, 100 times out of 100, join the US into such a war. This is a complicated issue that maybe I should write another post on, but basically, unless the US invades Norway on grounds of racial superiority, Australia and the UK will be following behind, wherever they go. So, poor old Tony had to do what he did, even though I am fairly sure it wouldnt have syncronised very well with his overiding politics of internationalism, rule of law and international consensus building.
Second, he has modernised "progressive" politics in some essential ways. The world has changed a lot in the last 20 years, but in many countries, left of centre politics still remains essentially unreconstructed 1950's postwar socialism - with many aspects becoming more irrelevent as people become wealthier, more aspirational and more consumerist. Blair has kept the basic spirit of leftist politics alive, and demonstrated that it is a relevant, energetic, and popularly supported political position. However, he had to take some flack for his reforms, and he has. However, where Labour in the UK stands right now is, I am sure, where leftist politics in many western countries would aim to be in the mid term future.
In many ways, Blair in the UK has done for Labour and leftist politics what the Thatcher/Reagan revolution of the 80's did for conservatism - he has demonstrated that with the right reforms and better positioning, you can attract solid popular support to a previously marginalised political position.
If you have any doubts on this, read his election victory speech. He is, quite simply, kicking ass in a big way:
"And one final thing, which is that I've also learnt something about the
British people, that, whatever their difficulties and disagreements with us and
whatever issues and challenges that confront them, their values of fairness and
decency and opportunity for all and a belief that people should be able to get
on, on hard work and merit, not class or background - those values are the
values I believe in, the values our government will believe in. "
Tony Blair has always been more hawkish in humanitarian and moral ground;
He was the main champion for NATO intervention in Kosovo conflicts (and British Paratrooper great work in ending Sierra Leone tragedy).
In Iraq, he is a willing proponent.
Jesse:
To be correct, it was equal in terms of human exposure to fine particles (not in terms of total emissions to the atmosphere) and was only for coal-fired power plants. I do not have the specific paper at my disposal. It was published by Kirk Smith in the School of Public Health at UC BErkeley. I believe that it was referenced in a recent paper by Lance Wallace and (possibly) by Ott and Roberts. I hope this helps.
Rich
Richard L. Corsi, Ph.D.
Professor & Raymond F. Dawson Centennial Teaching Fellow
Department of Civil Engineering
The University of Texas at Austin
His speech could have been written by a workgroup consisting of Mark Latham, Mike Rann and John Howard, so it's not surprising that there's something for everybody.