The Three Estates of the modern régime
All aboard for ... wherever we’re going to
In November (of 2023), the UK’s Labour Party revolted en masse against its leader, Sir Keir Starmer, as a reaction to his stance on a ceasefire in Gaza. The question is: why?
You want it short, that’s the question.
The first estate: either the 56 rebels had patrimonial interests in a ceasefire, which they wanted to turn to account by pressing for one. That would be enough to sway a vote, wouldn’t it?
The second estate: or they are dyed-in-the-wool pacifists and would always vote in favour of a ceasefire, wherever in the world there was conflict. But maybe not always, not if there’s conflict in the Labour Party ... Perhaps that’s it, a rebellion conditioned by deep-seated principle. Er, just like a vote in favour of patrimonial interests. That’s deep-seated principle, as well, in fact. Isn’t it?
The third estate: or, were they somewhere in the middle? Sometimes wanting to vote in favour of profit, but not too much profit, of course; and sometimes voting on principle, provided it doesn’t cost too much. Or perhaps voting the way their constituents want, so they blow with the wind a little bit. Always making sure they’ll get plenty of cheers from those who voted for them. Maybe that’s it. A bit good and a bit bad, and not principled at all. Just like most of us.
Sorry, the answer’s never as short as the question.
I was reading about Henry Kissinger (I never know if it’s “gher”, as in gherkin, or “ger” as in Rangers). I think he changed it. To blow with the wind. Because he didn’t want to be Henry Kissing Her. Although, by all accounts, he did, quite a lot.
They say he was a criminal, and I’m left wondering: who in international politics isn’t a criminal? I mean, if you knowingly send refugees who are fleeing for their lives back to Mexico, where they are murdered just a few days later, after they said, “Don’t send me back or I will be murdered,” is that not criminal? Or you send them to Rwanda as a deterrent, and then say Rwanda is not a dangerous place, so it isn’t therefore a deterrent, then what is it that you actually want? And whatever it is, the courts have said it’s criminal anyway. If it isn’t criminal, why is it criminal to engineer the downfall of a democratically elected president in a South American republic? Kissing Her didn’t pull the trigger, did he?
The piece about Henry Kissinger also mentions Otto Von Bismarck. A Junker power-monger. Wheeling and dealing to establish power structures that would bring in spondoolacks.
When it comes to voting for ceasefires, you can follow the line of principle, or you can do what most of us do, which is doing whatever looks good on Facebook. So, if your principle is to trash the Earth at all costs in order to make lots of money, then that’s the principle you must follow. And if your principle is to do what is fundamentally right in this world and love your fellow man as you love yourself, then you will be trampled underfoot, but you will assuredly go to Heaven.
And those of us who simply want lots of likes on Facebook—and Substack, why not?—and are never really that bad (but we do need a job and to bring up our kids and pay for the TV licence), but are never that good (because, after all, we can’t give all our money away, because, what the heck, what did they do to deserve it?) As long as our bit of the planet doesn’t get too warm or flooded, we’re okay.
I think there is still a belief among the general populace that principle is fine, but it’s simply a gesture to show to the world on Facebook, and that, for the rest, we can all be as selfish as we want. (Which is a bit obvious, or is it oxymoronic? Tautological? Whatever.)
Here’s what Sir Thomas More said about gestures. In A Man For All Seasons, More learns that the Church in Convocation has acquiesced in the Act of Settlement and removes his Chancellor’s chain of office:
ROPER: Sir, you’ve made a noble gesture.
MORE: A gesture? I make no gesture! My God, I hope it’s understood, I make no gesture! Alice [his wife], you don’t think I would do this to you for a gesture! That’s a gesture! (Jerks up two fingers.) I’m no street acrobat to make gestures! I’m practical!
ROPER: You belittle yourself, sir; this was not practical; (resonant) this was moral!
MORE: Oh now I understand you, Will. Morality’s not practical. Morality’s gesture. A complicated gesture learned from books—that’s what you say, Alice, isn’t it … And you Meg [his daughter]?
MARGARET: It is, for most of us, Father.
MORE: Oh no, if you’re going to plead humility—! Oh, you’re cruel. I have a cruel family.
Facebook’s a gesture.
Anyhow, let me tell you this dumb blonde joke, at the risk of being castigated for dumb-blonde-ism.
A blonde gets onto an airplane and sits down in the first-class section of the plane. The stewardess tells her she must move to coach because she doesn’t have a first-class ticket. The blonde replies, “I’m blonde, I’m beautiful and I’m going to New York.”
The stewardess fetches the purser, who asks the blonde to move to the other section of the plane. The blonde again repeats, “I’m blonde, I’m beautiful and I’m going to New York.” The purser speaks about the problem to the co-pilot, who says, “No problem; my wife is blonde, I can handle this.”
The co-pilot approaches the blonde and whispers something in her ear. The blonde immediately gets up and moves to her seat in the coach section. The purser is amazed and asks, “What did you say to get her to move?” The co-pilot replies, “I simply told her that first class isn’t going to New York.”
Don’t worry about power-mongers and climate disaster. Your bit of the world isn’t going to New York, either.
A Strange Land
Click above to listen to this article as a one-act play. Babies can do as they please. They’re allowed to barf, poo, sleep and eat. And when they don’t get what they want, they cry, till they get it. Because they’re helpless and vulnerable and sweet and ours.