sea changeというフレーズの連想させるものと、20人の首相たち。

Who was the best PM of the 20th century?
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/politicspast/story/0,,1860576,00.html

Whereas in 1997 there was a mood for a real "sea change" (to use James Callaghan's phrase from 1979) for a new sort of society.

sea changeというフレーズが読者に何を連想させていたか、やっと具体的にわかった。キャラハンが1979年に使ってたフレーズ、つまり、サッチャー登場前夜だったのか。

sea change：
http://homepage2.nifty.com/nofrills/words/data/1032400900.html

キャラハン：
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Callaghan
http://ch.kitaguni.tv/u/917/todays_news_from_uk/0000197738.html

このガーディアン記事、Haus Publishingという版元からこの秋の党大会の時期にあわせて出る「20世紀の英国の首相」という伝記のシリーズで、20世紀の20人の首相を５点満点で採点して、歴史家の間で物議をかもしているFrancis Beckettというシリーズの編者のインタビューなんだけど、とてもおもしろい。

読めばわかるけど、ベケットさん自身は「ゆりかごから墓場まで」系の左翼（社会主義者）。でも満点をつけた首相は、第二次大戦直後のアトリー＠welfare stateと、サッチャーの２人。
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clement_Attlee
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Thatcher

で、アトリーが満点なのはさておき、サッチャーはなぜ、ということを訊かれて、
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/politicspast/story/0,,1860576,00.html

FB: I strongly disapprove of her legacy, but if you look at it simply as a management consultant - evaluating how effective they are in achieving their mission, if they leave office with "mission accomplished" - then you have to concede she had a very clear mission, and implemented it. She is a very, very great prime minister on that basis.

In fact, she implemented a far more radical agenda than the manifesto she was elected on. But the thing about her is that there were others - Sir Keith Joseph, for example, but others too - who thought the same way. But would they have had the skills, the determination and the sheer courage to implement it? I doubt it.

It was the same with Attlee. Others in his cabinet were saying "oh, do we need to move so quickly on the welfare state? - what's the hurry? the country's wrecked after the war", and he got on and did it.

(^^;)

ブレアは３点。

FB: He gets quite a low rating because he had no clear vision of what he wanted to achieve - he just knew what he didn't like, primarily the instincts of most of his own party. And so one of the big innovations of his government has been PFI - but so what? That's only a mechanism, neither good or bad on its own, what's its objective? I don't think even he understands it.

And assuming Blair leaves next year, he will leave no legacy bar Iraq.

Whereas in 1997 there was a mood for a real "sea change" (to use James Callaghan's phrase from 1979) for a new sort of society. But what we got was a sort of Thatcherism with a social face. And spin doctors! There was a mood for a fundamental change, but Blair was not interested. That was the conclusion of our Blair book.

I don't think even he understands it.ってのは無茶苦茶きついけど、そうなのかもね。発声とかの技巧に酔いしれていて、何をしたいのかすら把握していない俳優、って感じだ、というブレア評は、前にどっかで読んだことあるような気がする。

しかし、he will leave no legacy bar Iraqってのもな・・・ブレアの唯一の流血阻止の取り組みが北アイルランドなのだけど（国家テロの隠蔽もコインの裏表の関係だが）、1998年には８割以上が支持した和平合意にしても、いまではかなりたくさんの人（ベルテレでは40％超）が「ベルファスト合意（グッドフライデー合意）は見直すべき」と考えているとのことで、そりゃ、ＩＲＡもＵＤＡもうやむやにしてしまえという方向に動いているのだから無理もない。

The latest report from the think tank Democratic Dialogue cames as the political pace is expected to pick up in the next few weeks.

It showed backing for the opinion that "the Agreement is basically right but the specifics need to be renegotiated" has increased to 41 per cent from 35 per cent three years ago.

And that is a view shared by 41 per cent of Catholics as well as 42 per cent of Protestants, according to the report based on the public opinion survey taken late last year.

※この記事は

2006年08月30日

にアップロードしました。
1年も経ったころには、書いた本人の記憶から消えているかもしれません。