The Spectator

Letters | 17 July 2010

Spectator readers respond to recent articles

Already a subscriber? Log in

This article is for subscribers only

Subscribe today to get 3 months' delivery of the magazine, as well as online and app access, for only £3.

  • Weekly delivery of the magazine
  • Unlimited access to our website and app
  • Enjoy Spectator newsletters and podcasts
  • Explore our online archive, going back to 1828

Take the kind of constituency common in the south in which the Lib Dems have already squeezed the Labour vote. Of the 100,000 who have voted, 42,000 have voted Conservative, 38,000 Lib Dem and 18,000 Labour. Ten thousand of these Labour voters, the sturdy rump of the party, are appalled by the coalition and do not cast a second preference for anyone. Seven thousand Labour voters give their preferences to the Lib Dems and a quixotic 1,000 to the Tories. The last 2,000 votes are evenly distributed between Lib Dems and Tories. The final result is 44,000 votes to the Conservatives, 46,000 to the Lib Dems. Neither has a majority of over 50,000.

Sheridan Gilley
Durham

Absurd system

Sir: Charles Moore (The Spectator’s Notes, 10 July) complains that you can’t have first-past-the-post for the vote to get rid of first-past-the-post. You can — it is called reductio ad absurdum.

Dr Alexander Paseau
Wadham College, Oxford

Home truths

Sir: Lucas Klein (Letters, 10 July) is wrong to equate his experiences, while watching the England vs Germany World Cup match in an English pub, with a general prejudice against Germany. In any serious match the supporters of one team, on the territory of and surrounded by their rivals’ supporters, would expect worse than hostile glares if they visibly celebrated a goal against their opponents, however restrained. That is why rival supporters are segregated in nearly every stadium. No sensible Charlton supporter would go near a pub in Millwall or Crystal Palace territory to watch a ‘local derby’ on TV. If they happened to be in one without at first realising, they would be wise to celebrate their opponents’ goals and express dismay when their own team scores — painful but essential for self-preservation. I’m afraid Herr Klein’s experience shows England supporters at their most tolerant and civilised.

Keith Ferris
Coxheath

Frustrated liberals

Sir: James Delingpole (You Know It Makes Sense, 10 July) is right, the so-called ‘liberal elite’ are not carrying the liberal torch in our times: they constantly cheerlead for big, interfering governments. But neither is freedom the domain of ‘the right’.

Ask any person on the street what views they associate with the ‘right-wing’ and you will most likely hear: anti-immigration, nationalism, NIMBYism, social conservatism. All of these are strong forces working against the freedom of the individual.

The Liberal Democrats have a good record defending civil liberties (opposition to ID cards, detention without trial, et cetera) but Liberal Vision wants the party to go further — to support lower taxes, a smaller state and more personal freedoms.

To promote freedom we must encourage liberal thinking wherever it falls on the political spectrum, and this can be done without sullying it with the association of ‘the right’. James Delingpole may be glad to discover that many of us Liberals are just as frustrated by bureaucrats, politicians and rent-seekers as he is.

Julian Harris
Director, Liberal Vision, London NW6

Pound cake

Sir: While I enjoyed Rod Liddle’s recipe for ‘a nice right-wing cake for summer’ (‘We should all be free to call each other coconut’, 3 July), I believe I have spotted a mistake. Surely the ingredients for such a cake should be measured in imperial units, not metric?

Christopher Stephens
New York

Happy ending

Sir: Many thanks to Geoffrey Wheatcroft (Letters, 3 July) for his very gracious response to me. If my memory is good, the last time we met was at the Garrick over some champagne, with Max Hastings, I think, more than ten years ago. Let us take up exactly where we left off, as soon as my schedule opens up, but he should not think I am resigned to him being the host — perhaps we can compromise and lay it off on Max. I much look forward to it.

Conrad Black
Coleman, Florida, USA

Comments

Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months

Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.

Already a subscriber? Log in