A man more sinned against than sinning?
and 27 June is the departure date. are already lining up to give their verdict. After an unpopular war in Iraq, the public's also divided about his legacy: he's Saint Tony to some; Tony B-Liar to others. But when the dust settles and we gain some historical perspective, how will we look back on the Blair years? For what it's worth, I've a feeling that history will be kind to Tony Blair.
Comments
I agree. he was a great leader of the Labour party and a great Prime Minister.
Tony's always seemed like a very nice guy to me, and I believe he's been a very comptent and, in some areas, an excellent Prime Minister. I agree that history will be kind to him, not least of all because of what he's helped to accomplish in Northern Ireland. I disagreed with many of Blair's domestic policies, but he listened to his idol Margaret Thatcher in some of the right areas. My opinion- he'll be missed.
I miss him already John! Brown's no personality and politics is going to eb REALLY dull ...
I was thinking about what Tony Blair's unpardonable sin was that made so many in Britain hate him so much. Iraq is the excuse to hate him, not the nub of it. And then it hit me even before I read this in the history link above;
"Ten years of presidential-style government have eroded the authority of the House of Commons."
In watching the political evolution of Tony Blair it seems to me he looked around for a successful model to learn from, to emulate, whose lessons he could adapt for himself and Britain. And that lesson was the United States. He was not America's poodle, he was its student. I think his guru, the one American politician he admired and tried to emulate most was President Clinton. They have a lot in common and if Blair is popular in America, it should be understood that despite everything you've heard about Monica Lewinsky and the impeachment, President Clinton is still also very popular in America. Blair's government owes much of the success it brought to Britain's economy from following Clinton's example. Clinton is unusual for a Democrat. He is the most moderate (centerist by American standards) politician in that party, almost Republican like. He is one of the few Democrats who showed leadership in fiscal responsibility, in part because he was forced to by the Republican controlled Congress. I think also in part because he comes from America's conservate heartland in Arkansas, not the more liberal northeast or west coast. Blair was in agreement with America's policies in Afghanistan, Iraq, and elsewhere not because he was an obedient servant but because he analyzed the situation the same way, drew the same conclusions, and decided the same course of action was best. He rejected the failed socialist dogma of the traditional Labour party and thought for himself. He was pragmatic in the way Americans are, he used what works. This was his unpardonable sin for which he will no more be forgiven than Thatcher was. She did about the same and that is why Britain is not in the same sinking economic boat as France and much of the rest of Europe.
Blair has something else in common with Clinton which should be noted and that is that he is very worried for and about Africa. What other European leader or government gives a damn really about Africa except to keep its economic migrants out of their country? By the way, despite a lower key approach, President Bush is also worried as well. That is why he committed 15 billion dollars to fight AIDS there, that is why he is working with Ethopia to eliminate the Al Qaeda backed Islamic Courts Uniion in Somalia, and that is why he has hinted at unilateral American military action against the government of Sudan if Darfur is not resolved satisfactorily.
As for eroding the power of the House of Commons, if the price of success means that someone who shows leadership by not being a slave to his party's dogma and there is a glimmer of separation of power between the executive and legislative branches of British government for a change, that that should also come as welcome news.
Sarkozy says he admires Blair but I think his understanding of all this is very superficial and he will find it difficult or impossible to effect anything like comparable changes in France. The prospect of adopting an economic and social program resembling the so called "Anglo-American model" as they call it is a heresy in the French religion. I think ultimately they'd rather go down in flames.
I'm very pro-Blair. A new style of UK PM. he modernised Britain. More work still to do before we lose the monarchy though!
Hi William,
i taped your exploration of death and dying the other week and found it very insightful and helpful.
I'm a clergyman and never get used to it though i'm surrounded by it in all sorts of ways.
Very thought provoking programme.
Well done