TI, August 2010
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Special points of interest: No. 54 - August 2010 • Thoughts on multiculturalism • Goodbye to an old friend and comrade • Libertarian beliefs in Britain • A more! WRITING WHILST WEARING MANY HATS... I begin by merely restating what is a matter of much ongoing. In any event, I am trying to public record. The membership of both the get back into the swing of things and I thank SIF generally and that of its Executive Com- members for their patience. mittee and National Council is these days on average … not in the first flush of youth. Nevertheless, it is an indication that we need Recent years have seen the death or retire- to think about the future of the SIF. Could ment or attempted retirement (oh, the arms we be doing things in a radically different that have had to be twisted…) of a number fashion? Or has our time passed? of Officers who have run the SIF for some time. Which brings me to the main contents of this issue of The Individual. And a further apology As a callow youth of even now just 45, during from me. Readers may be depressed by my this same time I have found myself taking on analysis of the prevalence of libertarian views more and more functions such editing as well in Britain. However, we do ourselves no as writing for this journal, organising the favours at all by fooling ourselves about the membership subscriptions and arranging and dire situation that lovers of individual free- promoting most of the SIF’s public meetings. dom find themselves in today’s world. Assuming that such an accumulation of re- I am pleased to publish Peter Richards’ biog- sponsibilities (I hesitate to say “power”) is raphy of Enoch Powell. It is fair to say that benignly intended (and I became involved in Powell will always remain “controversial” and the SIF after the attempted take-over in the his life and career always overshadowed by early 1990s), the problem remains: what hap- the “Rivers of Blood” speech. A speech pens when “events” happen to that individ- which, I suspect, was rather inflammatory in ual? Which, some good and some bad, is tone and possibly inaccurate in its predictions exactly what happened to me and for which I had the British state and society perused a al apologise. policy of assimilation. OM D u E I will not bore readers with the details, only Nevertheless, this article serves his memory E to say that some matters have been success- well by reminding us of the decidedly libertar- R fully concluded whilst others are still very (Continued on page 8) d F i AL DISCLAIMER & v PUBLISHING DETAILS i DU I Views expressed in The Individual V are not necessarily those of the Inside this issue: I Editor or the SIF and its members, but d D are presented as a contribution to At the Margins of Politics: The Prevalence (and Irrelevance?) of Libertarian 2 N debate. Attitudes in the UK - Dr Nigel Gervas Meek I n Only policies or opinions that have Enoch Powell: Libertarian, Tory and Nationalist - Peter Richards 9 I R been approved by the SIF Management Committee, and are O noted as such, can be taken as F having formal SIF approval. This also applies to editorial comments in Y this journal. e T Edited by Dr Nigel Gervas Meek IE and published by the Society for C Individual Freedom. Contact details O can be found on the back page. Th S Page 2 THE INDIVIDUAL AT THE MARGINS OF POLITICS: THE PREVALENCE (AND IRRELEVANCE?) OF LIBERTARIAN ATTITUDES IN THE UK Dr Nigel Gervas Meek How many of “us” are there? sets of attitudes. These are the (in my view unfor- tunately named) Left-Right dimension as a measure Large numbers of people can hold very silly of attitudes towards economics or socio- views. Small numbers of people can hold very economic relationships and the Authoritarian- sensible views. In other words, the number of Libertarian dimension as a measure of attitudes people who believe X or Y is not necessarily an towards civil liberties, morality or law and order. indication of the goodness or veracity of X or Y. Each of these dimensions consists of a number of Nevertheless, if one is engaged in social market- relevant items to which people are asked to re- ing, the selling of ideas rather than brands of spond. This is for a number of reasons. For ex- toothpaste, then it must be sensible to have some ample, rather than crudely ask people if they con- idea of where one stands vis-à-vis one’s potential sider themselves to be “libertarian or authoritarian market. How already popular is the product that or somewhere in-between”, one can assess com- one is trying to sell? Is one pushing at an open plex constructs that cannot be summarized in a door, or is that door locked, barred and indeed single question. Also, multi-item scales are also possibly booby-trapped. This is important. It more reliable and less volatile than single-item surely requires a different approach if one is try- questions: they even-out the impact of individual ing to sell something that people already want bugbears. (even if they are not consciously aware of it) as against if one is trying to sell something that peo- As is often the case in social research, these items ple do yet not want (even if they are not con- are presented with a response option set that I am sciously aware of it). sure readers will be familiar with: a 5-point set of Agree strongly, Agree, Neither agree nor disagree, This article aims to do just that: to ascertain using Disagree and Disagree strongly. The responses to “How already at least reasonably academically defensible meth- these items are added together to give a final sore popular is the ods the degree to which the British population or measure along each dimension. already adheres to economically and/or personally product that one is liberal (in the SIF’s proper, 19th century sense of The items for each dimension are as follows: trying to sell?” the term) attitudes. Authoritarianism-Libertarianism Finding suitable measures • Young today don’t have enough respect It is not my intention to start from first principles for traditional British values. or to try to reinvent the wheel. Instead, I start by • People who break the law should be given accepting the views of a number of authorities on stiffer sentences. the measurement of political attitudes, including • For some crimes, the death penalty is the the prevalence of libertarian ones, who emphasise most appropriate sentence. the primacy of matters connected with (1) eco- • Schools should teach children to obey nomics or socio-economic relationships on the authority. one hand and (2) civil liberties, morality or law and order on the other. • The law should always be obeyed, even if a particular law is wrong. Anthony Heath and Richard Topf (1987: 59) ar- • Censorship of films and magazines is nec- gued that, “These two sets of variables might be essary to uphold moral standards. said to represent the two most fundamental ideo- logical principles in contemporary society.” J.A. (Sometimes this dimension is encountered with Fleishman (1988/1991: 3) agreed, noting that an additional item regarding attitudes towards such a “two-dimensional model adequately de- homosexuals. However, this is not always the scribes the structure of social attitudes”. case and I have not used such an item in the fol- lowing analysis.) This assumption accepted, I have chosen to use two widely-used, statistically valid and reliable multi-item scales or dimensions to measure these (Continued on page 4) NO. 54 - AUGUST Page 3 Chart 1: Economic Dimension 600 500 480 454 400 378 364 359 341 cy n e 300 qu e r 237 F 190 200 156 150 131 130 117 106 95 100 81 36 18 9 9 0 0 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 Economic Illiberal Economic Middle Economic Liberal Score Chart 2: Personal Dimension 600 491 500 436 412 410 400 359 cy n e u 300 277 q e 247 Fr 211 192 200 164 144 112 100 83 85 63 56 38 36 17 8 7 4 3 1 4 0 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 Personal Illiberal Personal Middle Personal Liberal Score Page 4 THE INDIVIDUAL (Continued from page 2) it seems that custom and practice led to the al- most invariable use of the unbalanced versions Left-Right used here. That said, in the early to mid 1990s two leading researchers in the field, Geoffrey Ev- • Government should redistribute income ans and Anthony Heath, looked at this issue for from the better off to those who are less these two dimensions. They concluded that in well off. practice the effects were often small. • Big business benefits owners at the ex- pense of workers. A first look • Ordinary working people do not get their fair share of the nation’s wealth. Before proceeding, to avoid any confusion over nomenclature, from now on I shall refer to the • There is one law for the rich and one for Left-Right dimension as the Economic dimension the poor. and to the Authoritarianism-Libertarianism dimen- • Management will always try to get the bet- sion as the Personal dimension. ter of employees if it gets the chance.