Tuesday, March 01, 2005

A Couple Of Links

Pearsall has a post about chavs (the link should be fixed now, except see the comment by Pearsall below), which I've been commenting on. In a way, what's really interesting about the whole phenomenon is whether or not the moral decline that I think the scorn points to actually has occurred. It might just be a case of each generation thinking its moral panic is uniquely terrifying. But it might not. I don't know. Answers on a postcard to...

John Holbo, following from a frighteningly long comment in an earlier post about Disraeli, has a discussion of conservatism and value pluralism, in which he bashes the idea that conservatives might better be able to accommodate genuine value pluralism than anyone else. The idea is that because conservatives don't have some commitment to a kind of master value, they are better able to make decisions based on the competing considerations generated by genuine value pluralism. But, hey, if anyone has a master value, its conservatives: after all, they want to conserve stuff.

Also, I got the most recent edition of the LRB over the weekend. It has a piece by Ross McKibbin on gambling in it, which I think is basically sensible, but has a really confused account of state neutrality (I haven't linked to it because I'm not sure about the copyright issues). If I manage to get the rewrite of my thesis done relatively quickly, I might say something about it.

4 comments:

Pearsall Helms said...

You actually commented in the wrong box heh, but I ended up running with it. The comments are at the bottom of the "discover the nutjobs" post.

Dick said...

What a lot of collective nouns. "Chavs" "conservatives" or maybe some conflation of the two are part of a suspicious effort by The Daily Mail or Alistair Campbell - depending on your point of view - to objectify an enemy.Or establish one's own sense of superiority. Who are these people? Do they recognise the categories in which you wish to place them. I see little sense of collective identity in any of our current political parties. They seem often defined by the fact of their opposition to each than any sense of common coherence - rather like the Blues and the Greens of the Byzantine chariot races. For the politicians I know they have more in common with each other - for the most part - than with a sense of crusade. Rather like footballers who play for Crystal Palace one year and Birmingham the next. As John Osborne - a real working class radical conservative has it - "there aren't any good brave causes left. If the big bang does come and we all get killed off , it won't be in aid of the old-fashioned grand design. It'll just be for the Brave New-nothing-very-much-thank you. About as pointles and inglorious as stepping in front of a bus." So why not enjoy yourself. Join the Chavs Liberation Front.

Rob Jubb said...

so the questions become: is Andy Johnson a chav, and do Crystal Palace have any hope of anything better than finishing seventeenth, or should they just all step in front of buses?

Rob Jubb said...

And about the thing on conservatives and value pluralism, Kekes does self-identify as a conservative. Whether or not the British political party which calls itself conservative does or does not agree with him is entirely another matter. Equally, whether, if they do disagree, either could be said to be using the term misleadingly is another.