Time-honoured paradox Sir: Tristram Hunt’s argument (‘Gove’s Paradox’, 21 April) seems convincing. At first glance, economic liberalism does appear at odds with social conservatism. However, one cannot exist without the other, as Thomas Hobbes realised over 300 years ago. Without a social contract based upon shared values and common interests, anarchy would ensue, making it
Capital letters Sir: As Neil O’Brien (‘Planet London’, 14 April) rightly says, London is New York, Washington and LA rolled into one, which is unhealthy for our national politics. So I have a serious suggestion. If the House of Lords is going to be reformed in the next year, part of the reform should be
Threatened Christians Sir: Douglas Davis’s article on the plight of Arab Christians (‘Out of the east’, 7 April) raised a very important issue. What a shame he cynically exploited their misery to perform a clumsy character assassination on Muslims generally. Conjuring sensational phrases like ‘judenrein’ to raise the spectre of 1930s German fascism, was not
Generation wars Sir: Viva Carol Sarler (‘Battle of the generations’, 31 March)! I don’t think I’ve ever read anything as ridiculous as Daniel Knowles’s babblings, which merit a strong riposte. It is galling to read a 24-year-old simplistically categorise all of we ‘baby-boomers’ (I was born in 1946) as the people responsible for today’s economic
Inside the dragon Sir: How refreshing to read some sharp insight on ‘The Chinese question’ (24 March). We have all had enough of handsome Niall Ferguson on our television screens, one moment telling us that China is running the world, then abruptly changing tack and saying that the People’s Republic is collapsing. Jonathan Fenby offers
Unmentionable question Sir: Peter Hitchens is no doubt right that the collapse of marriage among heterosexuals is a more serious matter than extending marriage to same-sex couples (‘The gay marriage trap’, 17 March). The damage to the family started with the removal of stigma from having children out of wedlock and divorce on demand; and
Israel’s dilemma Sir: Jeffrey Goldberg (‘Israel isn’t bluffing’, 10 March) is probably right, but if Israel does attack Iran, they are in a no-win situation. Iran is a large country some distance away. One or two bombing missions will have little effect — look at the weeks it took for Nato to degrade Libya’s defences.
Blowback Sir: Matt Ridley’s article ‘The Winds of Change’ (3 March) says that the government has finally seen through the wind energy scam. If this is the case, it is most welcome news to those who have been fighting on all fronts to keep Britain’s countryside clear of unwelcome, unnecessary and inappropriate wind farms. In
Pension scheming Sir: As a pensions professional who has witnessed his once-mighty industry’s sustaining of blow after blow, I was heartened to read The Spectator’s call for Conservatives to resist the temptation to make ‘yet another raid on pension funds’ (Leading article, 25 February). The government’s lack of understanding of pensions tax relief was revealed
Forfeiting the VC Sir: Although Charles Moore (Notes, 18 February) is correct to say (quoting Colonel Tim Collins) that a holder of the Victoria Cross cannot be stripped of it whatever subsequent disgrace he suffers, he could have added that this is so only thanks to royal intervention. Early in the last century, some functionary
America the saviour Sir: Andrew Alexander’s book America and the Imperialism of Ignorance (Books, 11 February) alleges that since 1945 ‘the world is a much more dangerous place, as a result of America’s determination to save it’. With respect to Mr Alexander, a distinguished journalist who has often been right, this analysis is very wrong.
China’s foreign policy Sir: As Hillary Clinton just stated, China and Russia ‘neutered’ the UN by vetoing the sanctions on Syria. Russia did it because Syria is an ally with which it does business. China vetoed because it wants no judgments on how it has mauled its own population since ‘Liberation’ in 1949. Beginning with
A woman’s work Sir: I enjoyed Andrew M. Brown’s article on the rise of the ‘Dalis’ (28 January). As the working wife of a man who earns more than I do, I drew comfort from the fact that more and more women are becoming the main breadwinners. At the same time, it is irritating to
Behind the pack Sir: Melissa Kite (‘Labour’s Iron Lady’, 21 January) writes an excellent article examining the pros and cons of Yvette Cooper’s suitability for leadership of the Labour party. She is quite wrong, however, to state categorically that ‘Cooper’s intelligence is beyond doubt’. Cooper’s academic ability may be so described but, dear oh dear,
Full speed ahead Sir: William Astor (‘Signal failure’, 14 January) writes that High Speed 2 is supported only by ‘northern Labour MPs who relish the thought of the beauty of the Chilterns being destroyed’. He seems to have missed the MPs from across the House of Commons who joined forces this week to welcome the
Pick your battle Sir: In your leading article ‘Save the Union’ (7 January), you allude to Alex Salmond’s plan to hold a referendum on Scottish independence shortly after the 700th anniversary of the battle on Bannockburn. I suggest a referendum on the 500th anniversary of the battle of Flodden Field (September 2013) when we English
Russian resolution Sir: Anne Applebaum (‘Russia’s new dissidents’, 31 December) welcomes the Moscow protestors’ challenge to a smug and venal elite. We can all agree with that. But she asks if they are developing into an opposition — and the simple answer is ‘no’. Alexander Navalny, the Moscow protest leader, cries out against ‘villains and
Chiller app Sir: Niall Ferguson (‘On being called a racist’, 17/24 December) says that ‘the freedom of the press does not extend to defamation’. This is an odd idea, but one which Ferguson shares with the governments of those countries in which journalists are routinely imprisoned for insulting the powerful. In England, defamation is a
Enough Brussels Sir: Owen Paterson (‘Dave’s big push’, 10 December) is absolutely right to suggest that we should use the EU summit to renegotiate our relationship with Europe. The Prime Minister’s wielding of the veto offers real scope for change. He must now be bold enough to seize the moment. This fundamental renegotiation of our
All at sea Sir: The Spectator’s cover article last week was entitled ‘The Sea Level Scam’. You can rest assured that no such scam exists. Most claims of the author, Nils-Axel Mörner, have never been published in peer-reviewed articles so cannot be independently verified. However, he published on his research in the Maldives in the