Thanks for the link. I think you may find that the speech itself (if not some of the coverage) is grappling with some of the dilemmas your initial post discussed.
What risks getting lost in translation is that it is a critique of a purely needs-based egalitarianism, rather than a rejection of egalitarianism per se.
I think this is an important but quite complex debate.
2 comments:
Thanks for the link. I think you may find that the speech itself (if not some of the coverage) is grappling with some of the dilemmas your initial post discussed.
What risks getting lost in translation is that it is a critique of a purely needs-based egalitarianism, rather than a rejection of egalitarianism per se.
I think this is an important but quite complex debate.
Hi Sunder
Yes, having read your post I realise there was a lot more to the speech. I was a bit surprised as I've always thought John Denham was a good bloke.
My generalised whinge stands tho!
cheers
Tom
Post a Comment