Palace knights Tony Blair

[french frank]

But then there is the question of why they held those ideas in the first place - not for no reason connected with the subject matter of the book, clearly!

That's true. They have pursued their research and their conclusions are (I assume) in line with their ideas. An additional point which provokes caution (not disbelief, but caution) is that, for example, a researcher writing in Jacobin and Tribune finds their scientific contribution comparable with those of Galileo and Darwin. The Spectator's review ("an enjoyable rant") seems rather less persuaded, not to say dismissive (still looking for a review in The Telegraph!). Reviews say as much about the reviewer, it seems.

and indeed the lack of answers is one of its weak points, as several sympathetic critics have pointed out.

It may, of course, reflect the fact that there are no answers available to us as yet (not to say it's not worth continuing to look for them), and it would be a weak point to suggest that we have? At any rate I will do my best to absorb their 700-odd pages (rather relieved to read that 63 pages are taken up with bibliography).

[RichardB]

The Spectator's review ("an enjoyable rant") seems rather less persuaded

I should be shocked if it were otherwise!

[french frank]

I should be shocked if it were otherwise!

That was why I looked for it! Not exactly shocked, but unsurprised. Actually, quite gratified!

[Boilk]

Contributors (and non-contributors alike) to this thread may care to sign the online petition for Tony Blair to have his "Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter" rescinded. Now approaching half a million signatories. I wonder how many millions would sign if the 'impartial' BBC publicised the existence of this petition on its news bulletins?

https://www.change.org/p/the-prime-minister-tony-blair-to-have-his-knight-companion-of-the-most-noble-order-of-the-garter-rescinded?

[LHC]

Contributors (and non-contributors alike) to this thread may care to sign the online petition for Tony Blair to have his "Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter" rescinded. Now approaching half a million signatories. I wonder how many millions would sign if the 'impartial' BBC publicised the existence of this petition on its news bulletins?

https://www.change.org/p/the-prime-minister-tony-blair-to-have-his-knight-companion-of-the-most-noble-order-of-the-garter-rescinded?

Like this do you mean?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-59866084

[RichardB]

At a certain critical mass, something like that becomes newsworthy. The BBC news item is from less than an hour ago whereas the petition actually started several days ago.

I think it's worth signing, not because I think it's a particularly important issue in itself (I never refer to people with this "honour" as "Sir X" anyway), but because it does express a feeling on the part of many people that Blair's behaviour over Iraq (to name only this) shouldn't be forgotten, especially since he has a tedious tendency to pop up in the news media with advice for his successors at every opportunity.

[gradus]

Contributors (and non-contributors alike) to this thread may care to sign the online petition for Tony Blair to have his "Knight Companion of the Most Noble Order of the Garter" rescinded. Now approaching half a million signatories. I wonder how many millions would sign if the 'impartial' BBC publicised the existence of this petition on its news bulletins?

https://www.change.org/p/the-prime-minister-tony-blair-to-have-his-knight-companion-of-the-most-noble-order-of-the-garter-rescinded?

No pantomime moustache or horns, surely some oversight.

[RichardB]

No pantomime moustache or horns, surely some oversight.

He's not so much a villain as a symbol of ruling class arrogance.

[Barbirollians]

No pantomime moustache or horns, surely some oversight.

Or demon eyes .

It is interesting that the originator of the petition seems most angry about Blair being responsible for devolution so I suspect hard right and left both signing up .

FWIW I think the Iraq war as a complete disaster and opposed it totally at the time - but that 13 years of Labour Govt did far more good than harm. Unlike the Corbyn opposition which did no good to anyone at all.

[RichardB]

that 13 years of Labour Govt did far more good than harm. Unlike the Corbyn opposition which did no good to anyone at all.

Yes to the first part - but it was 13 years of Labour government with all the hard work being carried out by hundreds of committed people, many of whom of course opposed Blair's foreign policy at the time. As for the second point I'm not going to get into an argument but at the very least I would say that it's too early to tell. The younger generation who saw some hope in the fact of Corbyn's election to the party leadership haven't gone away, and their voice - through organisations like XR since the Labour party has made it clear that they aren't welcome - is only going to get louder.

[ChandlersFord]

If you're offered an honour - no matter how humble - my strong advice would be to accept it. Tables in fully-booked restaurants will suddenly become available to you and you'll get an automatic upgrade on flights and in hotels.

:)

As for Tony Blair, I will say this: I may not have cared much for him at the time, but he was easily the most successful PM of my adult lifetime. Iraq was a big mistake but does that make everything he did worthless? I would say not.

And isn't he much to be preferred to the 'current incumbent', whose incompetence and venality our grandchildren will still be paying for long after we're dead?

Personally, I think honours are silly (but most people don't - see my initial point) and not even worth complaining about. But the misguided folk who have started this pointless and futile 'poll' evidently think 'honours' are very important.