|
|
Churchill, Kennedy, Carter, now Blair? (17 September 2006) Glen Rangwala considers the wisdom of the supposedly mooted Tony Blair School of Government An edited version was published in the The Times Higher Education Supplement (22 September 2006) What political analyst in their right mind would want to work for a Tony Blair School of Government? Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government and Cambridge’s Churchill College had iconic politicians with whom to associate, whose identities transcended narrow political affiliations. Arkansas University could get away with establishing a school named after Bill Clinton, now remembered as a unifying figure (at least in Arkansas). Blair may have done some valuable things over the past ten years – although I struggle to think of something just now that was Tony’s and not Gordon’s. But surely only the most dedicated of followers would have the confidence to hitch their professional lives to the Blair mantle, given the dubiousness of the achievements and the expectation that he will continue to make disturbing and dangerous comments once out of office, particularly on international affairs. Take this one, from his pamphlet for the Foreign Policy Centre earlier this month: “The struggle against terrorism in Madrid, or London … is the same as the struggle against the terrorist acts of Hezbollah in Lebanon”. In one sentence, Blair consigns the majority in the Middle East to the label of al-Qa‘ida supporters. You can imagine academics working for the school hurriedly shredding their Blair-headed notepaper after statements like that. So a Blair school would only attract the devotee to its ranks, turning it into yet another partisan think-tank. Is it really the proper business of a university to host these? Would it not put a considerable dent into the LSE’s otherwise immaculate international reputation once Blair finally exits government and intrudes upon the Academy? It’s almost enough to make you wish that Blair would stay in power for another year. And what would the school be able to present as the distinctive political identity that it has inherited from its founder’s life story? There is no set of political ideas or values with whom Blair will be prominently associated, ten or even five years from now. Blairism, as distinct from the particular political catastrophes that Blair has been engaged with, can only be taken as an approach – a mode of organisation involving the personalisation and informalisation of power, and a style of presentation, constructed around persistently false choices and a turgid portrayal of the leader suffering for his cause, all conveyed through an intensely managed mass media. The ongoing fall of Blair is also in large part the rejection of those techniques, and, one hopes, their abandonment. But that does mean that there could well be a suitable place to house the Tony Blair school of government, if its current owners are willing to let it out. It’s a lovely building just around the back of the LSE, off Kingsway. They could even keep its current name: The Old Curiosity Shop.
|
||||||||
|
|
Author: Glen Rangwala Back to the Index of Writings |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||