tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post6819592696719119642..comments2023-08-20T11:07:28.396+01:00Comments on Freeborn John: A Land fit for HeroesPeter Risdonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17792275403997179926noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-65015289376176239282008-11-14T13:11:00.000+00:002008-11-14T13:11:00.000+00:00TDK, the Fen story is very specific - I can name t...TDK, the Fen story is very specific - I can name the pub they were bought beers in by the Squire, and this pub is still open for business. The agitators did have some supporters locally. The Bishop of Ely was hated for centuries, other bishops might not have been. The Squires, though, did far worse than eat when others were hungry. If the water was high they'd go upstream and blow the banks of the drains to make sure it was someone else who got flooded.<BR/><BR/>But though the anecdote is very specific to a group of people and a place, it illustrates a more general point. There was no rebellion in Britain between 1770 and 1870 - but there was a hell of a lot of agitating for one. The Chartists were just one movement. Huge rallies were held around the country. Elsewhere, countries had revolutions. But in mainland Britain the tide turned and ebbed out again, round about the time this anecdote was set. It illustrates a larger truth. <BR/><BR/>The majority of people didn't want to lose their masters, as the American colonists did. They wanted better ones, or to replace the masters with some structure like a Party that would perform the function of the masters.<BR/><BR/>Anonymous, the evidence that people fought for a welfare state, if they fought for anything except patriotism (remember conscription), lies in the results of the General Elections following both world wars. In fact, it might be more accurate to say they felt that having been obliged to fight, they deserved the tender embrace of a welfare state.<BR/><BR/>What's your evidence they wanted to avoid being bossed around?Peter Risdonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17792275403997179926noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-67903031448989567732008-11-14T12:56:00.000+00:002008-11-14T12:56:00.000+00:00I am not sure people went to war to fight for the ...I am not sure people went to war to fight for the creation of the Welfare State.<BR/><BR/>I think they went to war (where they went willingly at all) because they didn't want to be bossed about by foreigners in their own country, and - particularly - to ensure that the kind of tyranny that existed in some European countries would never happen here.<BR/><BR/>This is why Worstall is so furious. He feels - and I agree - that we won the war, only to give up everything we fought to keep, <B>after</B> all the blood and treasure had been sacrificed. <BR/><BR/>Am I being too simple?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-58335713211476219022008-11-14T11:09:00.000+00:002008-11-14T11:09:00.000+00:00Incidentally, my objection to the story is just th...Incidentally, my objection to the story is just that. Your main point is surely correct. There is no mainstream movement demanding opposition to statism. "The state can solve it" is the unchallenged belief.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-13700526198513619302008-11-14T11:04:00.000+00:002008-11-14T11:04:00.000+00:00I don't know how much you've left out of the Fen s...I don't know how much you've left out of the Fen story but something smells about it.<BR/><BR/>I'm not disputing the poverty and starvation. These are historic facts. But was every squire and every Bishop happy to eat themselves to obesity in these circumstances? Was every peasant happy to doff his cap?<BR/><BR/>We know from modern famines that they don't occur from NO food but rather from a percentage less than 100% of the requirement. We know that they don't affect everyone equally - there is a scale of hardship. <BR/><BR/>This tale is too black and white.<BR/><BR/>Which brings me to the political lesson. It's too simplistic to assume that ALL the peasants needed a master. It's quite likely that several understood the fact that there wasn't a utopian choice of action. That in the good times a peasant living on subsistence farming was unlikely to be as well off as a peasant who supplemented his income by working for the local landowner and that driving such people away was unlikely to improves prospects in the long term. Also he recognises that the average employer is suffering too. That knowledge gives our peasant rather different choices.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12471112.post-60550072698267702092008-11-13T12:40:00.000+00:002008-11-13T12:40:00.000+00:00Much the same warning was made by Hilaire Belloc i...Much the same warning was made by Hilaire Belloc in "The Servile State".Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02948105455433369982noreply@blogger.com