Where are we going?

I don’t think I’m alone in being alarmed about all the things that seem to be going the wrong way. And here we are, just about to elect a party into government that very few people have a good word to say about - and which was complicit in, and in many cases greatly supportive of, the policies that have got us into the mess we’re now in.

Let me list my concerns, partly to invite anyone who cares to tell me that I needn’t worry, and partly as an exercise in catharsis - or in getting it off my chest, to put it in plain English.

It’s a personal list. I don’t add concerns about the wider world - Russia’s invasion of the Ukraine, the threats from violent Islamists, the Gaza conflict, China. This is not in any way to minimise those concerns. I am merely focussing on the ways that we, in the West, seem to be shooting ourselves in our collective feet - and, actually, making us less able to confront the various external threats.

Here we go. Am I too pessimistic?

Net Zero             

I’m embarrassed to keep going on about this. But the fact is that we, along with other Western countries, are pursuing illogical and damaging policies to address climate change - policies that one of the leading climate scientists in the world, Professor Richard Lindzen of MIT, says are “absurd”. (He is supported by hundreds of other experts in the field.) Supporters of the policies seem, mercifully, to be retreating somewhat in the face of public hostility, but largely because of the costs, not because of their underlying futility, the aspects that cause the likes of Professor Lindzen to call them absurd. The Nobel physics laureate Dr John Clauser calls the purported science behind the policies as a “crock of crap” - which shows that getting a Nobel Prize doesn’t stop you using a rich vocabulary. (I won’t bang on here about why the policies are so obviously mistaken as I’ve written about it before. See elsewhere on this website. Or check it out with Prof Lindzen or indeed Emeritus Professor William Happer of Princeton.)

Lockdown             

Again, I feel the need to apologise for going on about the lockdowns. They may seem to be a thing of the past, but we are certainly still suffering from the consequences. Let’s refresh our memories, uncomfortable though that is. We, along with all other Western countries - except Sweden, to their enormous credit - pursued untried lockdown policies, contrary to then existing scientific recommedations, to deal with Covid. We are now suffering, and will continue to suffer, the huge damage and suffering consequent on those policies, all of which were forecast at the time - yes, they were, even by me!

That is indeed the past. The worry is that the authorities still appear to cling to the belief that the policies were sensible, even if badly implemented - evidenced by the current inquiry that has so far failed after many months to address the vital question, namely were they the right approach in the first place? One can only assume that this is because all the major political parties, greatly supported by public opinion and the media, were behind the policies. No one likes to admit error. Will we be faced with similar policies when the next virus emerges, which it certainly will? The experts will inevitably warn that it may be dangerous. Of course it may. These warnings will likely be supported by the World Health Organization. Will we fail to learn from the past mistakes? (Note: the country with the lowest “excess mortality” during the years concerned was Sweden, which bravely and in the face of much criticism, did not lockdown. Need one say more?)

Virtue Signalling             

Virtue-signalling - the recently coined term (coined originally, they say, in an article in The Spectator) to refer to the multitude of opinions and even policies that sound good but in reality do harm. Net Zero is obviously one - who could object to saving the planet? But reality gets in the way when you look at the detail - as people, including even politicians, are beginning to do.

Other examples are too numerous to list, but many come under the heading of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI),again theoretical concepts that no one could object to. The detail, however, includes the vilification (and exclusion,ironically) of J K Rowling for stating scientific facts about sexuality, on the grounds that she is being trans-phobic (which she certainly isn’t), in breach of the ideals of Diversity. More seriously, the RAF has rejected white male applicants in its efforts to be diverse. It must also be relevant to the weakness shown by the police in protecting us from Islamic extremists - the fear of being Islamaphobic.

Cancelling             

It is also relevant to the culture of “Cancellation” and “Safe Places” at universities. The academic philosopher, Kathleen Stock, was sacked from her position as professor at the University of Sussex for insisting on the truth of scientific facts about sexuality. Views which offend against the perceived virtues of DEI are unacceptable in universities because they deny the required “safe places” for students.

It’s a problem elsewhere, including, of course, in the United States. Martin Kulldorff has been sacked from his professorship at Harvard (no less) for expressing his views about Covid policies - even though those views have turned out to be correct. One of the key purposes of a university must be to provide a forum for questioning ideas, particularly ideas that conflict with government policies - and even ideas that students may find uncomfortable. How can any university continue to perform its function in society if it is subject to these constraints?

Racism             

We, and certainly the United States, are encouraging, sometimes requiring, people to confess to be being racist and, in many situations, attend classes that are meant to address this. Common sense would suggest that these moves would tend to increase levels of racialism rather than the reverse. Many non-white people have said that this country is one of the best countries in the world, perhaps even the best, for a non-white person to live in - and are critical of the policies - driven, as they are, largely by white people who have been taught to feel guilty.

Historic shame             

Similarly, we are teaching young people to be ashamed of our past. An example is the treatment of slavery, which plainly everyone recognises to have been an appalling aspect of our history. The sad thing is that no one seems to focus on the remarkable fact that it was we, the British, who led the world in abolishing it. The details are inspiring - and appear to be largely forgotten.

Immigration             

I now come to the most serious concern of all - immigration. This is a subject that we hesitate to discuss - ever since Enoch Powell’s “rivers of blood” speech in the 1960s - for fear of being accused of racism. Yet no one can deny that the levels of immigration we are now seeing are unsustainable. The Tory party has endlessly promised to deal with it. The general public, particularly those members of the public outside the urban “elites”, are massively supportive of more stringent controls. Yet nothing effective has been done. There are two reasons why this has been so, which make one despondent about finding a solution. One is that we have come to rely on immigrants to do many of the jobs that native Brits are unable or unwilling to do.

The other is that dealing with the problem is increasingly likely to involve taking steps that will cause human suffering of a kind that societies like ours will shy away from. It would also presumably involve leaving institutions like the European Convention on Human Rights, which would send shock waves throughout the establishment - and would thus probably be politically impossible.

Integration             

Finally, a point that brings together some of the things already mentioned. If immigration continues at anything like its present levels, we will be faced with the enormous challenge of integrating the immigrants into our society. Maybe we have already passed the point at which this is any longer realistic or even possible. Let’s hope not. But it will not be helped by the tendencies described above to denigrate ourselves.

How can we expect immigrants to integrate happily into a society that is perceived by its own citizens to be racist, trans-phobic and ashamed of its history and traditions?

I await eagerly to be told that I am talking nonsense and that we are looking at a bright and rosy future.

Tony Herbert

28 March 2024