From: "roger" <diogenes.jones-AT-attbi.com> Subject: Re: "You will lose, Mr. President..." Date: Tue, 11 Mar 2003 16:20:37 -0800 > > I just got the link to wirk (WIRK?). It's an article quoting US Secretary > o State Colin Powell warning Bush that he is going to lose the Security > Council vote. Bush doesn't care. Maybe he is beginning to feel the > heat on Blair. Over the weekend the Original George gave a speech > advising his son not to discount the necessity of the UN's approval. Bush > isn't paying attention to that speech either. > <snip> > carp > yeah, tony's got his balls in a vice. he bet the farm that the french, et. al. would come along in the end. while public support for the war is solidifying over here, his base is running away from blair like he had cooties. if Dave, and Iain, and Andy would get off their asses and engage in a little direct action instead of their constant, defeatist whinning . . . no, wait, that's us ain't it. sometimes i get confused a bit. seriously, though, if there is any chance of stopping this thing, it rides on getting blair to get bush to give it a few more weeks. who knows, maybe something will happen in korea that will convince bush that this thing is ill concieved (THAT's really something to hope for, eh). maybe some intense, direct action in britain WILL work over the next days/weeks. i understand the points about the anti-Poll Tax movement by Dave, Iain, etc. i was a teacher in gawga then and spent two summers in lancashire and birmingham during the period and the anti-poll tax fun WAS fun. and it did do a lot of the good things that these actions do (i sent a post a while back about all the coolness involved in direct action). you can see how the lads across the pond are still pretty stoked about those days. and rightfully so. BUT, i also see your point, carpo. the poll tax was a radical attempt to shift a significant portion of the tax burden to those of modest means. by tying local spending (heavily welfare related) to a flat head tax instead of a graduated, steeply progressive income tax, it was a frontal assault on the Welfare State. you know this and you know that while it failed, much of the actual substance of the logic behind the Poll Tax has been enacted by blair and his bunch of wankers. they've done more slowly what thather/major tried to do quickly. taxation in britain is LESS progressive, and falls more on the working poor, than at any time since before WWII. Labour has done the dirty work in britain just like Clinton brought us "Welfare Reform" over here. that doesn't invalidate the anti-Poll Tax movement, but it also is a hard lesson. roger
Display software: ArchTracker © Malgosia Askanas, 2000-2005