Betting men
Sir: The bet between Martin Rees and me that Matt Ridley recounts pits two kinds of scruples of disinterested rationality against each other (‘Wuhan wager’, 7 December). One is the scientific ethos that calls for factoring in all relevant information in updating one’s degree of credence in a hypothesis. The other is the logic of the epistemological tool of betting, which demands an agreed-upon fixed criterion and deadline for resolving the bet. My degree of credence has been influenced by Matt and Alina Chan for the lab leak hypothesis, but also by counter-arguments from Peter Miller for the zoonotic theory.
When Martin and I joined the bet, neither of us thought that the ensuing train of events would be so causally ambiguous, so we did not anticipate that we would need to lay out rigorous criteria for resolving it. As Covid-19 unfolded, we quickly agreed that a lab origin would mean that Martin won. We also agreed that the early ‘consensus’ about a zoonotic origin was not convincing enough to settle the bet. We kicked the can down the road until the prediction site Metaculus set up a forecast for the origin of Sars-CoV-2 together with a criterion and deadline for resolving it. The two of us agreed that this satisfied the logic of betting and agreed to use it to resolve our own too-vague-to-settle bet. But as Matt points out, my winning the bet does not resolve the scientific question.
Steven Pinker
Cambridge, Massachusetts
A free Ukraine
Sir: Sean Thomas (‘Korea move’, 7 December) is quite right that, willy-nilly, the division of South Korea – ugly, unrecognised, yet lasting – is beginning to look like Ukraine’s future. President Zelensky implicitly accepted this with his recent suggestion that a military reconquest of the occupied territories could be abandoned in return for rapid Nato membership. Industrious, dynamic, largely democratic, and militarily powerful South Korea is not the worst model for a free Ukraine. Considering that it is unlikely that the West can or will be able to help turn the war decisively against Russia, we need to be thinking more sharply now about what could help a rump Ukraine prosper after any de facto division. Of course, that means aid and investment for reconstruction, but it also means proper security guarantees of the sort only Nato’s Article 5 has hitherto been able to provide. This may not be our or the Ukrainians’ ideal solution, and need not mean giving up on hopes of Kyiv’s military victory, but if we allow ourselves to hide behind the usual mantras – as long as it takes, Putin must fail, etc – and not even start thinking about contingencies, then as usual we will find ourselves caught unawares if and when the situation on the ground changes.
Dr Mark Galeotti
Broadstairs, Kent
Hunters or hunted?
Sir: In the final months of the second world war, the SAS formed a team to investigate Nazi war crimes perpetrated upon their own men – those who had been captured and disappeared into Hitler’s Nacht und Nebel, the ‘night and fog’. That team, headed by the superlative SAS intelligence officer Major Bill Barkworth, would hunt for the SS and Gestapo murderers across Europe, and long after the SAS itself had been disbanded in October 1945.
They had a secret HQ at the Hyde Park Hotel (today’s Mandarin Oriental), run by former SAS commander Colonel Brian Franks, a ‘black’ budget massaged out of the War Office, and a clandestine rooftop radio transmitter to send orders from London to their base in Gagenau, Germany. Though backed to the hilt by Winston Churchill, they were in essence an illegal, clandestine outfit formed from a unit that no longer existed, masquerading as an official War Crimes Investigation Team and hiding in plain sight. They became known as ‘The Secret Hunters’, and they were without doubt the most successful British war crimes unit of all time, bringing more than 100 Nazi war criminals to trial. Expanding their remit from their SAS comrades, they also tracked down those who had murdered female agents of the Special Operation Executive.
I wrote their story in my book The Nazi Hunters. Had the Human Rights Act or the rule of lawyers been applied to Barkworth and his team, they would have been halted in their tracks, dragged through the courts and pilloried in the press for their exceptional efforts. Thankfully, they were not. They were left free to track down the Nazi killers by all and any means possible. Having read Paul Wood’s article on the great betrayal of the SAS (‘Daggers drawn’, 30 November), one wonders if there could ever be their likes again today?’
Damien Lewis
Briantspuddle, Dorset
Out of South Africa
Sir: Mary Wakefield rightly praises William Kentridge’s genius (Arts, 30 November). For those of your readers who cannot watch his work on Mubi, we at the Towner Gallery in Eastbourne are showing seven of his short animated films which brilliantly explore South Africa’s political history through the characters Soho Eckstein and Felix Teitlebaum. There are two screenings a week in our cinema until 29 January 2025. Tickets are free and can be reserved online at www.townereastbourne.org.uk.
David Dimbleby
Towner Gallery, Eastbourne, East Sussex
Brady’s bunch
Sir: Alex Burghart is evidently a tiresome moderniser (Books, 7 December). He seeks to turn Graham Brady, the longest-serving chairman the 1922 Committee has had, into a mere chair, following the wretched fashion of the day. Brady should always be accorded the dignity of his full title. He scarcely put a foot wrong during one of the bleakest periods in Conservative history, constantly showing up the deficiencies of hurried fleeting ministers through his imperturbability and tactical skill. During the 14 years he presided over his influential backbench committee, the Conservative party at large got through 15 chairmen, ‘transient and embarrassed phantoms’ (in Disraeli’s famous phrase) every one of them. Brady might perhaps have done a little more to help quash the myth that the 1922 Committee was the creation of heroic Tory backbench MPs who kicked Lloyd George out of power in October 1922, and to substitute the modest truth: that it was brought into existence in April 1923 by a handful of new boys elected in November the previous year.
The one serious criticism that might be made of the otherwise model chairman is that he did not end the current embarrassing system for electing the party leader. What could be more obvious than that party members should select four or so candidates, from which MPs would then elect the leader with whom they felt best able to work?
Alistair Lexden
House of Lords
Home truths
Sir: The desperate situation faced by most young British workers, as identified by Douglas Murray (‘How to get on the housing ladder’, 30 November) may not be as bad as it sounds; most property is bought by couples and flats are much cheaper. But the numbers hold up. Here in Dorset the average salary is £40,000 and the corresponding house costs eight times that.
As one might expect, the average age in this charming county is 51, and in our corner of the urban sprawl (a dozen or so four-bedroom detached houses), my wife is the only person under 50, while our house is one of only two with more than two residents. Away from our door, the joyful sound of children playing is perversely absent. More relevantly, their bedrooms lie empty. Thereby hangs an opportunity: we have a small rental flat nearby which is lived in by a retired couple, who sold their house to downsize. They’re excellent tenants, so we do all we can to keep them happy. As a result of their public-spirited gesture, they enjoy a moderately affluent lifestyle and if anything goes amiss with the property they simply phone the agent.
If the government were to provide a gentle but well-publicised boost, coupled with some monetary assistance to developers, this kind of initiative might reduce the pressure on house prices.
J. John Dyer
Poole, Dorset
Electoral dysfunction
Sir: Matthew Parris’s defence of ‘first past the post’ (FPTP) as the guardian of ‘bold and decisive government’ fundamentally misunderstands the complexities of modern governance (‘Proportional representation is a fraud’, 7 December). By arguing that decision-making is inherently binary, Parris reduces nuanced challenges to oversimplified, zero-sum contests.
Ironically, his argument is itself an unfortunate artefact of FPTP. By framing politics as a winner-takes-all struggle, Parris seems unable even to imagine governance as a collaborative effort to serve the public good. His so-called ‘Joe’s Law’ is merely a symptom of FPTP’s divisive nature, which rewards dominance over deliberation and stifles inclusive problem-solving.
FPTP not only distorts electoral representation but also fuels public disillusionment. Only 6 per cent of Britons believe voters significantly influence government decisions. Proportional Representation (PR), by contrast, ensures broader voices are heard, fostering more durable and widely supported solutions. Recognising these failings, the APPG for Fair Elections has called on the government to establish a National Commission for Electoral Reform to identify a system which ensures every vote counts equally.
Parris claims voters desire decisive government. But do they truly value decisions made with a fraction of public support, or would they prefer policies reflecting a genuine majority? PR delivers stability and long-term clarity of purpose, replacing the political whiplash caused by FPTP, where successive governments waste too much time and energy dismantling their predecessors’ work rather than finding consensus and building on it.
It’s time to move beyond outdated, zero-sum thinking and embrace a system that does more than pay lip-service to the will of the people.
Mark Kieran
Interim Director, Fair Vote UK
Stamford, Lincolnshire
The reel thing
Sir: Christopher Tookey’s experience of muddled film reels (‘Screen test’, 30 November) reminds me of my time in the early 1980s as a teacher in the Darfur region of Sudan. Thursday night was film night and we joined half the town at the ramshackle open-air cinema to watch whatever was showing while nibbling roasted sunflower seeds. One rarely knew what was on – the handwritten posters were intriguing rather than informative – but one evening we were pretty sure that Paint Your Wagon was the feature. Expecting a light-hearted musical comedy, what we saw was something quite different, courtesy of the projectionist picking the reels entirely at random. This produced a noirish masterpiece of non-linear narrative, unresolved conflict and absurdist dialogue to which the songs only added a sense of discombobulation worthy of Dennis Potter. Truly a surrealist classic!
In the years since, I’ve occasionally had the urge to see it as intended but the risk of ruining a treasured memory has always proved too great.
Chris Callaghan
Lustleigh, Devon
On the sauce
Sir: Olivia Potts’s delicious recipe for minced beef and onion pie recommends Worcestershire sauce (The Vintage Chef, 16 November). While this is a tasty addition to many a red meat dish, I must promote Henderson’s sauce as a worthy alternative recently discovered on a trip to Derbyshire, and also mentioned on TMS, I believe.
J. Eaton
Cowes, Isle of Wight
Write to us The Spectator, 22 Old Queen Street, London SW1H 9HP; letters@spectator.co.uk
Comments