Liberal England’s Jonathan Calder points Lib Dems to the article by leader Sir Menzies Campbell on the Beijing Olympics in the Grauniad.
Mr. Calder thinks it’s a bit weak, and judging by the user comments most of the paper’s website readers agree. Personally, I’m surprised that Ming did not use his new ‘spikiness’ to take a stronger line. Freer markets must be aided in making lives freer for people in communist state.
Follow @libdemvoice.org on Bluesky
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
The defence of International Law in an age of impunity (John Kelly)
Social care and the triple lock (Gordon Lishman)
Tom Arms’ World Review (Tom Arms)
Ukraine‘s plight means UK must rearm for war now, and not by ten years’ time (George Cunningham)
Observations of an Expat: Ukraine in Trouble (Tom Arms)
The Joy of Six 1593
Do shouty politicians gain long term votes?
Captain Beefheart and his Magic Band: Autumn's Child
Farage let off Reform staffer accused of racist slur
Stalling an Ambush and protecting more than the countryside
Mozart died in 1791. Neil Young believes one 1960s songwriter has the same immortality
Latest voting intention and leadership ratings opinion polls
An article for Lion & Unicorn: Malcolm Saville and the children's holiday adventure
Tristan Ward 
Katharine Pindar 
tom arms 
Andy Daer 
paul barker 
5 Comments
Whilst I share a disappointment that the article isn’t spikier, I don’t think that “freer markets” are really the key word for a Guardian audience. Like Jonathan said, “Ming” would have done better simply to sound angrier about the human rights issues, and not to try to paint an optimistic picture where there isn’t much of one to be had.
I’ve given my take on the article too. I’m not impressed either I have to say. If it was done by a ghost writer then they should not be used again. If it was Ming then some work needs doing on sharpening up our China policy PDQ.
1 – Andy: yeah, I was meaning that China can’t expect to enjoy the benefits of free trade without conceding freedom to the populace. It was more of a comment from me than a suggestion of how the article could have been spikier.
Yes, if this is the “new Ming,” then I don’t know what to say. But there’s more bad stuff in the Guardian today.
China simply proves once again that free markets does not equate to individual liberty and human rights.
Liberals should stop deceiving themselves otherwise. In fact governments like China create a demand that free markets are only too happy to fulfill, to produce the implements of oppression, as we see with the arms trade, or with Yahoo cooperating with the Chinese government over internet censorship.
Blair and Bush thought that introducing a free market economy to Iraq would lead to greater human rights, but in fact what we are witnessing there today is the opposite.
Lets continue supporting human rights as liberals, but lets not be so starry eyed about free markets.