Further to the two articles written on the topic, in addition to my own on the reluctance of both the far-right and left to engage in their usual shared and favourite hobby of aiming cynical, disdainful screeds at popular mainstream politicians, I have the following to add:

American politics has a tendency to lead Britain’s. The rise of the New Right admittedly occurred here before it did there in terms of political success but from Major’s embrace of the consumer model for public services as suggested by neo-liberals to triangulation  obviously informing the Third Way to Blair’s later and whole-hearted embrace of at least the democratic revolutionary elements of Neoconservatism Britain has followed America’s lead.

This is far more rational than it is craven. It stands in union with empiricism to observe what has proven successful in a country far larger than your own and then attempt to apply it to our small island. If anything can bring together so immense and ideologically oxymoronic a nation as America {that only a fool would attempt to apply a blanket statement towards, except for to say that it is so torn it defies any assumption} then it is a matter of ease to apply it here. This form of borrowing of strategy and method is what allowed Blair to use much the same message that allowed Clinton to triumph in a general election to bring the Labour Party such a landslide as to crush the Conservatives to messes for nearly a decade.

In seemed likely that Cameron was attempting to follow this recent tradition through his espousal of what could only be described as Compassionate Conservatism, a rather inherently contradictory variety of the philosophy adopted by Bush and then abandoned, undeveloped and unloved, shortly after reaching power in favour of tax cuts for the  extremely wealthy, Neoconservative myth-craft and The Politics of Fear.

However Bush has become an increasingly unfavourable model to follow, especially seeing as the fashion in which Rove brought together the unsustainably broad church of the right seems to be less a fusion and more a crude stitching, now resulting in the aberrant hybrid beast tearing itself free from itself, messily.

And so we now witness the spectacle before us. When someone can cause both much of the hard right and left to suspend their immutable fury you know that you witnessing something rare. When a first-term Senator has caused both the Prime Minister {who is of a party that has been in power for over a decade} and leader of the opposition {who leads a party called Conservative} to embrace an agenda marked “Change”, to engage in an act of obvious mimickry before the mimicked has even been elected, before his means have even been demonstrated a success, then you know that you are witnessing something vast.

The backlash over Northern Rock has begun already. The Tory blogosphere has already begun to wail intolerably over the fact that it’s (gasp!) nationalisation. It’s, “total humilation” says Iain Dale, representatively. I note that there’s little actual rational debate of nationalisation in the post and much whinging about, “my money.” Apparently, the government couldn’t, “run a whelk stall,” and should be trusted with nothing.

Because, of course, the (private-sector) bankers who shat up Northern Rock so badly could.

Thankfully, the Tory blogosphere still has about as much influence as a whelk, whatever its delusions. The BBC has provided a list of quotations from areas that are a little more listened to. Forgive me if I lapse into snarling sarcasm while translating these, but they’re too predictable:

“We have tried our best to save the Northern Rock and the jobs of the staff. We put all the resources of Virgin’s senior management team on this for five months and we believe had a very strong proposal, an experienced team and one of Britain’s best brands. We believe nationalisation is not the right answer and that a commercial solution would have been the best way forward.” - Richard Branson

Translation:

“We couldn’t have recovered the Rock if we tried.  If we’d actually been given the Rock, we’d have failed.  If we’d weren’t given it, then we’d have lost face.  So, thanks Gordon for getting me out of this, and giving me someone to blame.  Love, Richard.”

Actually, I’m not sure how accurate that one is.  Branson was probably convinced he could have done something with Northern Rock, or he wouldn’t have bid for it.  But, we’ll see.  The next one is easy.

“After months of dither and delay we have ended up with this catastrophic decision. We now have the situation where the government will be making decisions on whether or not to foreclose on people’s loans in a falling housing market.”  - George Osborne

Translation:

“Oh thank God!  Plenty of petty party point scoring to be done here.  We were beginning to run out of opportunities for it - we’d have had to reveal some more policies soon!  That really would have been a catastrophic decision.

Now, do excuse me.  I’m off to don my Punch costume.”

That, and if nationalisation works here, everything the Tories have done since 1979 would look oh-so-questionable.  The next one is even easier, though.

“Belatedly the government has made the right decision. The first priority must be to work out the seriousness of the problems at the bank with an independent audit of its loan book. This must be conducted under the auspices of the Bank of England, not the FSA. Secondly, the bank must stop irresponsible lending at more than the value of property, and aggressive deposit-taking. Thirdly, there will be difficult times ahead, especially for the employees, as the bank is downsized. However, there is now hope for the long-term future of the bank when it is eventually sold in more satisfactory conditions.” - Vince Cable

Translation:

“I told you so!”

Notice, while you’re here, the glaring difference between Cable’s statement and Osborne’s.  Cable’s contains actual policy.  Osborne’s does not.  Nor does it actually contain a proposed alternative.  I feel vindicated in my appraisal of his statement.

“I’m shocked and appalled. Nationalised industries do not run very well at all. I thought that there was a good offer made by the management of Northern Rock as recently as late on Friday night and that seems to have been brushed to one side with this rush into macho politics. We’ve had far too much of that throughout the Northern Rock saga. Originally the burning embers were inflamed by the petrol of government publicity poured on it, and we’ve gone right the way through to this disastrous announcement today which I think is going to do irreparable damage to Britain’s reputation as a financial services sector.” - Robin Ashby, Northern Rock Small Shareholder’s Group

Translation:

“Oh fuck, our shares.  Time for a knee-jerk at the wrong people to make us feel better.”

Their reaction is understandable - but really, how many people will give it heed?  They’re about the least disinterested party of all in this.  What they mean when they say, “nationalised industries do not run very well at all,” is that nationalised industries do not run well for them.

“This is a debt that no one in the private sector wanted, even when the Government offered it in a heads you win tails we lose deal. The government has left the taxpayer saddled with billions of risky debt that no one else would touch. Taxpayers could now end up paying a very high price for the government’s incompetence.” - Matthew Sinclair, Taxpayer’s Alliance

Translation:

“To the barricades!  Damn rational consideration of whether this will work or not!  Money is being spent!”

Well, what did you expect them to say?  They were never going to give nationalisation a fair hearing, especially not in questionable circumstances such as these.  Although, even they seem to be aware of the dilemma in play here.  “No one in the private sector wanted,” Northern Rock, they say.  In which case, I’m forced to ask, what else would they do with it?  Let it sink?  Risk even more economic damage?

And, finally:

“What I would like to see now, and the industry would like to see now, is that this ceases to become something of quite such general interest, important though it is, and we can move forward into a more stable and calmer environment than that which we’ve had for the last few weeks or months.” - Angela Knight, British Bankers’ Association

Translation:

“Can someone please get the spotlight of banking?  Please?  Something embarrassing will turn up soon if there’s much more of that.”

Depressingly, of all these statements, only Cable’s makes any sense.  He called for nationalisation from the start, has been consistent, but knows it’s probably too late now.  He is the only one to present a proper plan in his statement.  All the others whinge vacuously - and propose nothing else.

Actually, this could - tenuously - be an opportunity for the Lib Dems.  They have been the only party to present a constant, coherent line over Northern Rock.  Today was a massive U-Turn for the government.  The Tories have only been consistent in their opportunism.  Both the Tories and Labour are suffering in polls over who might be trusted with the economy.  If the Lib Dems got a bit more vocal, they could make something of this.

But, we’ll see.

Prime Minister’s Questions was a fairly forgettable half-hour today.  Nothing much was said.  Punches were thrown from all sides, but none of them stuck.  Clegg seemed to get a bit more ballsy, and, if memory serves me, Brown failed to wave him away with a cheap shot at the LibDems’ distinct lack of support.  Cameron tried too hard with the laughs, and the only decent gag was an impromptu wordplay.  Brown continued to refuse to answer questions, continued to go on about Tory policy.  Mercifully, we were spared mention of Norman Lamont.  Overall, everyone came away a loser today.

See what I did there?  I made a judgement about the most media-covered debate of the political week.  Many people do that each week: the BBC runs the Daily Politics for 90 minutes on a Wednesday, and gets high-level guests on, whereas many bloggers give instant reactions to the weekly Punch and Judy-fest.  I wonder if anyone reads just one of these reports and is misinformed by it.

Fraser Nelson, Spectator | It’s like it’s 1995 all over again. Brown is an attack machine, never happier than when he’s behind a machine gun firing off statistics into men wearing blue rosettes. That’s the position he now assumes at PMQs.

ConservativeHome | Emphatic victory for David Cameron.  He talked about the big issues of the week - Northern Rock and economic weakness. He made the Prime Minister look evasive because he failed to answer questions about taxpayer exposure.

Bob Piper | Six questions, peppered with pre-written ‘jokes’ including a piss-poor attempt to copy Cable’s Mr Bean quip with an Del Boy joke (that would please you if your savings or job was at risk) and none of them giving even a hint as to what the Tories would do if they were in office. that’s a clever strategy Dave. Take on a man who has been Chancellor for 10 years and what do you decide the challenge him on? The economy… stupid! Brown parried each question easily and smacked it back with venom.

James Kirkup, Telegraph | Very bad say for Nick Clegg. He too went on Northern Rock, but sounded underpowered compared to Mr Cameron.  And his suggestion that Labour is “running scared of the Conservatives” suggests he needs to shoot whoever writes his lines, and soon. Result: a win for Cameron, but only with help.

Each of these sources has their biases (I’ll refrain from using the very un-parliamentary “piss-poor” to describe them), and it is difficult to see who would listen to their opinions on the subject.  I can understand why ConservativeHome would consider today a good day for Cameron, but it wasn’t.  I know why the Spectator wants to compare Brown to Major, but things simply aren’t that bad yet.  James Kirkup is right on the money with his comments, I think, but while Clegg is shooting his inept scriptwriter he might want to pick off Bob Piper who seems to have watched a different spectacle to the one I did: Brown doesn’t do “venom”.

It is good and healthy for a range of opinions on the same event to be heard, but it is would be regrettable for anyone to be misled on the subject.  I hope people think twice before forming opinions from one or a combination of blogs or media sources.  I hope people aren’t influenced by unfounded victory calls.  Knee-jerk analysis is fun, but not informative.  Put simply, where the outcome of PMQs is so subjective, I hope nobody expects and objective view of proceedings.

There is, of course, the important question of whether PMQs is remotely important.  But I’ll save that for another time.

The power of perspective, eh?

Yes, I suppose that with a pack of rabid, ambitious nationalists it was just to good to last but EiE is no longer to be the focus of the insurrectionist side of the schism and I’m finding it quite a pity. Instead a new site by the name of Voice of Change has been established in order to serve as the focal point of the rebel forces.

There is to be no new party, it seems, which is a true pity but presumably they cottoned on to the fact that all of us evil Reds were actually salivating at the prospect of a neatly divided far-right vote, thus condemning them to remain forever beyond power, and thus they have aimed for a method that will either tear apart the party entirely or else at least get them some free publicity. Basically this approach amounts to suing Griffin for his discharge of them and trying to run a leadership election, despite have been officially expelled.

A daft idea from a daft bunch of people. At least it sounds like it will make an endearing mess.

It was often suggested on the Enough is Enough comments that they should stop being so negative and creative a website which had positive intentions. Unfortunately, this being the hard right, the only way which they can be positive is…Being negative. About the country’s present {but never, ever its past} and future and the state of the loyalist BNP and the condition of all races save white {with even this packed full of race traitors!} and…Well…Everything except for them, really.

Quite frankly I much preferred it when they were being destructive.

You can see their policies here. I would suggest a brief comparison with the old BNP Policies. Spot any real differences?

Yeah, me neither.

This website also obeys Fenby’s Law of Website Design: the more extreme the politics, the more shoddy the formatting. In some senses the VoC seems to be the Tory Party as the Daily Mail wants it to be, which is to say utterly irrational and unhinged. Accordingly their much-vaunted designer {fired by Griffin} seems to have fouled up pretty severely. The fact that there are Google Ads referring to “Cultural Diversity” blocking out the rhetorical nonsense only makes it more superb. Also, despite being described as “Fully functional” on EiE in places it simply isn’t.

Still, at least it’s not as much of a mess as Respect Renewal’s.

Meanwhile, back in loyal land things are starting to become even worse. On the EiE is posted an exchange between Griffin and a former underling where the latter writes a lengthy and impassioned piece to which Griffin…Responds with a total non sequiter and displays a striking cognitive dissonance to all that might challenge his pleasing, comforting and above all simple internal fantasy world.

He also announces that the new sub-Fuhrer for Yorkshire will be one Adrian Marsden, a man who he describes as “Very experienced”. What he neglects to mention is the exact variety of this experience, although an EiE comenteer calling themselves Chorlton helpfully fills in the blank:

Adrian Marsden? I’m I right in thinking that Adrian Marsden was a member of C18? Has Griffin not declared that he has gotten rid of the Nazi’s from the party?Then why the hell has he just appointed a former member of C18???

A spot of verification shows that the answer to these first three questions is yes, yes and yes. Indeed Adrian is even as lucky as to get a mention in C18’s very own Wikipedia Article.

If you are not yet aware of who these lovely young men are then read their really, really racist website. Not while mother is in the room, though. It really is racist. Really.

Interesting, is it not, that Griffin alleges that the break-aways are a rabble of unreformed neo-nazis, yet leaves the most popular BNP region in charge of this gentleman? Ah well, on the upside the Mirror reports:

“For years Marsden was local organiser for the fascist group. His address was used as the regional contact point for C18.

During the 1990s he produced a home-made “newspaper”, the Halifax Patriot, which celebrated the deaths of people from the local Asian and black communities.”

So he obviously is experienced. Experienced with mocking dead non-whites, arranging militant far-right pseudo-para-military groups and the use of assault rifles amongst like-minded thugs.

If this is Griffin modernising then I have to wonder what he looks like when reactionary…

The Tories look bad.  Labour looks bad for making the Tories look bad.  All the while, the LibDems are silent.  Either they have something to hide or they are seriously failing to fit into their typical role of playing the nice guy.