I frequently get the feeling that the contributors and commentators on the left-wing alliance website Liberal Conspiracy haven't got a clue. How would it feel if the Government couldn't sell Che Guevara t-shirts to socialists? Its not really a feeling, anyway, its more of an economic question. Hundal's confusion of economics with emotions is unlikely to trouble the government too much, but it is enlightening that so many of his acolytes fail to spot it.
There must be a name for people who confuse concepts with their own emotions - emotionalists maybe*. But can they tell us anything useful about Government policy, aside from the fact that they don't like it. Probably not, but it can be fun watching them try.
Liberal Conspiracy is almost a fact free zone. Whereas Sherlock Holmes spent may long hours, searching for clues with his oversized magnifying glass, contributors and commentators on LC alike dispense with these old-fashioned pleasantries and dive-in for a fact-free wallow in their own emotions. Because we are talking about emotions here, almost nothing is subject to challenge, and they get very, very shirty if you do. Yesterday I suggested that Dear Guido was doing a good job ironing out wrinkles in Gordon Brown's strategy, today we meet the people who just want him to look good in those newly ironed shirts.
Hundal asks us what he assumes is a rhetorical question: Why is the government losing the argument? He doesn't show any grounds for this, he just assumes we all feel just as he does. There's quite a bit of difference between clueless and without a clue. My remedy for the LC site is for its participants to adopt giant magnifying glasses for the day, to see if they can spot the clues they are missing. If you want to take part in this site, it can be great fun. It's the only website I have found that bans "sarcasm", the dread emotion of emotionalists clearly. Be ready for some quite surprising responses though, if you really try to engage in a political discussion.
*This was just a lucky guess, it felt right to me and when I looked it up it does seem to be the correct definition