LONDON -- There seem to be two fundamental political issues here
this summer: how much more tightly to entoil the United Kingdom
with the European Union and how to defeat Islamist terror, much of
it home grown.
The first issue is not easily apprehensible to a Yank visitor.
Suffice to say that if London's ties to the EU get much tighter,
the UK will no longer be an independent country and its special
relationship with the United States will be but a memory. The
ordinary British citizen probably opposes further integration in
the EU. On the other hand, politicians -- even many conservative
British politicians -- surreptitiously invite further integration.
As with the hubristic bureaucrats now running the EU, many British
politicians see themselves as superior to the electorate. They
believe in "progress" and ever since the end of World War II, one
of the ingredients of progress has been integration of all the
nations of Europe into one vast continental government. The
continental government's regulations, however, are beginning to
offend local ways of life, which explains the rejection of the EU
constitution by the French and the Danes and my suspicion that
Britain's electorate would reject further integration into the
EU.
This scheme to insinuate Britain further into a grand
continental government is also colliding with Britain's need to
defend itself against Islamist terror. The country's new prime
minister, Gordon Brown, has prescribed "Britishness" as an antidote
to the Islamofascists who tried to blow up two cars in the heart of
London and in desperation rammed a gasoline-laden Jeep Cherokee
into a terminal at Glasgow airport, hoping it would blow them to
Kingdom come and all the welcoming virgins. By Britishness he means
a renewal of patriotism and civic virtue, a reverence for British
history and the flying of the Union Jack. Yes, Brown actually
called for the flying of the flag.
Now Prime Minister Brown is a member of the British Labour
Party. It was founded on ideas of "progress." It has long been a
party of the left, and flying one's national flag has never been a
progressive thing to do. In fact, it is actually quite reactionary.
I fly the Stars and Stripes with relish seven days a week. Need I
say more?
What has turned the leader of the Labour Party into a flag
waver? Well, London is under more grievous threat from Islamist
terrorists than any city in Europe, and Brown understands that
patriotic fervor is apt to bring the British citizenry --
Christian, Jew, non-believer, and Muslim -- together and isolate
the terrorists. But this will not be sufficient to repress the
suicide bombers. Hence this week in London we are hearing a refrain
that Americans have been hearing for several years, the refrain
lamenting "Our Porous Borders."
"Our Porous Borders Are Exacting A Terrible Price," is how
Monday's Daily Telegraph titled its lead editorial.
It is fascinating to see how Labour has moved away from so many
of the misconceived ideas of progress. Brown seems to have little
in common with the bubble-headed socialists, pacifists,
vegetarians, and other zanies who founded his party. I suppose this
should not surprise us. Any party of the left that has wanted to
win high office has discarded its left-wing enthusiasms of yore.
Think of the Clintons in the Democratic Party. They came to
political maturity -- if that is the term for it -- in the late
1960s abounding with the ideas of the likes of Saul Alinsky,
various Marxists, and other proponents of utopia. Those of us who
in the 1960s adhered to the ideas of William F. Buckley and Milton
Friedman have never had to cover our intellectual tracks. The
Clintons have, and today, at least on a good day, they intone some
of the values of Buckley and Friedman. Alinsky and Marx are
forgotten.
How far to the left Brown was in his youth I do not know. But
there was one embarrassing lapse during his summons to the flag.
When he first brought the matter up in public he said there was a
rule against government buildings flying the Union Jack more than
18 days a year. "We've got to get rid of the rule," he vowed. A day
later he embarrassedly admitted that no such ban existed. The
actual rule required the flag to be raised on buildings on 18
specific days. Well, cheerio, now the flags are flying from every
government flagpole. They look very good to me. Not only is it a
handsome flag, but it is an indication of British grit against
terror, which frankly I never doubted.
topics:
Islam, Constitution, European Union, Oil
