The Problem with Trump
I have no wish whatsoever to diminish the concerns we should have regarding having Trump in charge of the most powerful country in the world. The man shows many of the symptoms of a high functioning psychopath (his self-delusional notion of the truth, and his obsessive need to control and manipulate others). But I do fervently believe that the real issue for us in the UK is that by focusing on Trump and his fake news, we increasingly are prone to overlook the re-writing of the modern history of our own country.
By focusing so much upon a foreign leader, the press and significant commentators are able to deflect attention from the fact that the British people have been consistently fed a diet of fake history.
In particular, the notion that the national debt was a function of the profligate overspending of the Gordon Brown government. It seems that however many times there are attempts to squash this distortion of the truth, the government, largely as a product of repetition strive to maintain the falsehood.
What did happen of course was a collapse of the financial markets. Did Gordon Brown need to borrow billions of save the financial markets? No one can with certainty answer this question. But it seems unlikely that the sector would have coped without some very major casualties. Barclays famously attempted to save themselves, and as a consequence some of their executives from that time are currently facing charges. Queues outside banks are a red flag that few governments can ignore. The City had been laying golden eggs for the UK for some years (which is probably why Gordon Brown did not reverse the ridiculous freedoms offered to the banks by Thatcher. It was considered inconceivable not to bale out the banks
What is abundantly clear from the evidence is that it was not the spending of the government under its programme of building new schools, hospitals, etc, that led to the build up a huge national debt, rather it was an emergency operation to save the country, as they saw it, from financially bleeding to death. We should focus on why this version of events is not accepted by many people, and why lies and deliberate misinterpretations have held sway.
By focusing so much upon a foreign leader, the press and significant commentators are able to deflect attention from the fact that the British people have been consistently fed a diet of fake history.
In particular, the notion that the national debt was a function of the profligate overspending of the Gordon Brown government. It seems that however many times there are attempts to squash this distortion of the truth, the government, largely as a product of repetition strive to maintain the falsehood.
What did happen of course was a collapse of the financial markets. Did Gordon Brown need to borrow billions of save the financial markets? No one can with certainty answer this question. But it seems unlikely that the sector would have coped without some very major casualties. Barclays famously attempted to save themselves, and as a consequence some of their executives from that time are currently facing charges. Queues outside banks are a red flag that few governments can ignore. The City had been laying golden eggs for the UK for some years (which is probably why Gordon Brown did not reverse the ridiculous freedoms offered to the banks by Thatcher. It was considered inconceivable not to bale out the banks
What is abundantly clear from the evidence is that it was not the spending of the government under its programme of building new schools, hospitals, etc, that led to the build up a huge national debt, rather it was an emergency operation to save the country, as they saw it, from financially bleeding to death. We should focus on why this version of events is not accepted by many people, and why lies and deliberate misinterpretations have held sway.
Comments
Post a Comment