Nick Cohen has asked in the Observer 'Why do we still honour free-market intellectuals?', adding 'It's mystifying that the former chairman of Northern Rock is still garnering plaudits'
His curiosity is justified, and caused by the Institute of Economic Affairs presenting its annual free enterprise award to The Right Hon Matthew, 5th Viscount Ridley last month.
The IEA citation referred to Ridley's 'writings for The Times and his insight into critical issues such as the regulation of the UK economy, energy policy and inequality'. As Cohen pointed out, it failed to mention his role as chairman of Northern Rock from 2004 to 2007.
Cohen is perplexed that any organisation should wish to give an award for their contribution to free enterprise to the person who chaired the first bank in the UK to suffer a run for more than a century. I confess, I am not at all surprised that they have done so.
Let's ignore for a moment that the Institute of Economic Affairs has always been at the forefront in purveying Hayek's bizarre worldview, and let's also ignore for a moment that this was the favourite think tank of Margaret Thatcher. Let's even ignore the inflated status that it gives to its director, Mark Littlewood, who is the only person I know who persistently greets me by the title 'Comrade'. Instead let's note instead that the IEA never discloses who funds its activities such as its commitment to transparency, and then let's presume that those who might provide its resources are the very same people who were both the architects of and beneficiaries from the downfall of the British economy that resulted from the banking crash of 2007/08. Let's call them bankers. Is it any surprise that they might reward one of their own?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I tweeted Matt Ridley and asked him to comment on his somewhat ironic award as a champion of ‘free enterprise’ with the need for the taxpayer to stump up £27 billion to stop Northern Rock from collapsing. It is strange that Matt has yet to reply to me to explain this apparent contradiction.
No doubt he will supply a full and cogent answer to this conundrum in the fullness of time.
Richard,
Please outline further what you consider bizarre about Hayek’s economic philosophy as it would be interesting to understand if you in fact understand Hayek’s world view.
Much obliged.
Ed Redmagne
There are about 11,000 blog posts on this site that explain that
Come back when you have read them
More reward for failure – quelle surprise. Many of these bank ‘leaders’ like fred Goodwin and no doubt Ridley himself had no real understanding of what the structure of these ‘exotic’ financial instruments entailed.
Nick Cohen’s conclusion is spot on:
“More than any opinion poll, the inability of the left to say how it can move on from a failed status quo, and the inability of the right even to admit that it has failed, explains why we are stuck in a kind of limbo and the most likely result of next year’s general election is another stalemate.”
In the meantime, keep campaigning – the politicians aren’t going to educate the public anytime soon.
As far as hayek is concerned we’ve followed the ‘road to serfdom’ and arrived.
Thanks Simon
I do appreciate your commentary
I read the article yesterday and it really does sum up the depths of idiocy the modern political right have sunk to. The cant, humbug and hypocrisy of people like Ridley and the IEA are breathtaking. How can Ridley have any credibility on any subject whatsoever given that he is a Social Darwinist, one of the foremost promoters of the ‘stand on your own two feet’ ideology, yet he was in receipt of a colossal bailout due to the utter failure of this very philosophy?
He is a charlatan, who shouldn’t be writing or broadcasting anything, except (not that it’ll ever happen) abject apologies to the rest of us. Goodwin is rightly castigated for his role in the financial crisis, but even he has the good grace, (or savvy, or common sense) to keep his head down and his mouth shut.
Depressingly, as Simon points out:
“Nick Cohen’s conclusion is spot on:
“More than any opinion poll, the inability of the left to say how it can move on from a failed status quo, and the inability of the right even to admit that it has failed, explains why we are stuck in a kind of limbo and the most likely result of next year’s general election is another stalemate.”
How do you propose to redistribute wealth, on a global basis, without a World Bank? You totally and blissfully ignore the fac that 2007 was caused by capital surprises exported by your German allies and the Chinese, into deficit countries where e investments could only go wrong, creating unemployment and crisis throughout the world, and in particular in the PIGS. The Banks were unable to deal with the surplus capital. Simple. Read Pettis and stop ranting! You might then contribute something positive to what you portray as the evil of globalisation, rather than a singularly insular view.
You may not have noticed Keynes got there a long time ago
Some of us have read him
Barings, BCCI and Johnson Matthey Bank were all British banks that collapsed in the quarter century before NRK did.
Would be interested to know whether Ridley has given a view on whether reducing NRK – historically Labour’s bank – was the right thing for government to do.
“Mark Littlewood, who is the only person I know who persistently greets me by the title ‘Comrade’.”
Obviously I am not privy to your meetings with Littlewood and context is very difficult to deduce from outside, but have you considered the possibility that he is being ironic?
No, surely not?
Of course he’s being ironic, but it also indicates a mindset