The Economist - USA (2020-02-01)

(Antfer) #1

14 The EconomistFebruary 1st 2020


Lettersarewelcomeandshouldbe
addressedtotheEditorat
TheEconomist,TheAdelphiBuilding,
1-11 JohnAdamStreet,LondonWC 2 N 6 HT
Email:[email protected]
Morelettersareavailableat:
Economist.com/letters

Letters


The origins of one nation
Regarding Bagehot’s column in
the January 4th issue, Benja-
min Disraeli’s “one-nation”
conservatism was born as a
convenient historical fiction.
Disraeli denoted a commit-
ment to healing a great social
divide in his novel, “Sybil: or
The Two Nations”. And in two
famous speeches in 1872,
Disraeli spoke of “elevating the
condition of the people”. But it
was Stanley Baldwin in 1924
who first used the famous
phrase when he told the
Conservative Party that “we
stand for the union of those
two nations of which Disraeli
spoke...union among our own
people to make one nation.”
During the next five years,
Neville Chamberlain, the most
remarkable social reformer the
Tories have ever had, gave
substance to Baldwin’s vision.
Conservatives today would
be proclaiming proudly that
they were Baldwinian one-
nation Tories if his reputation
had not been so gravely dam-
aged, very unfairly in my view,
by the belief after 1939 that he
had not rearmed Britain in the
face of the Nazi menace. Noth-
ing more might have been
heard of one nation if a num-
ber of able, ambitious younger
Conservatives, including Iain
Macleod and Enoch Powell,
had not adopted it as the name
of a group they formed.
“One Nation” adorned a
pamphlet that excited the party
conference in 1950. Tory
Central Office decided that this
badge of moderate conserva-
tism would be more effective if
a great name from the past
could be attached to it. Disrae-
li’s speeches from 1872 were
now reprinted for the party
faithful, and were quoted
frequently by Tory leaders
from Anthony Eden on. There
has been a one-nation group of
mps almost constantly since
then, formulating no more
than mildly controversial
policies to help counter “the
almost traditional anti-intel-
lectualism of the Tory party”, as
The Economistput it (“Class of
1950”, December 25th 1954).
If Boris Johnson now gives
real political substance to what

hasbecomeanoverusedcatch-
phrase,hewillberecreating
theToriesintheimageof
“HonestStan”Baldwin.But
willtheghostofDisraeliever
belaidtorest?
alistairlexden
HouseofLords
London

Chinesechips
China’sshiftfrominvestingin
chipmanufacturingtochip
designislongoverdue,butit
willtakesignificanttimeto
plugitsintellectual-property
gap(TechnologyQuarterly,
January4th).Thatisthevery
pieceofthepuzzlethatcreates
themostenablingvalue,with-
ina chipandwithintheend
product.Chinastillimportsa
vastnumberofsemiconduc-
tors,andimportsubstitutes
havehadanimpactonlyatthe
lowendofthechipmarketand
forsomesmartphones.China
isstillheavilyreliantonchips
fromAmericaforitsdatacen-
tres,andchipsfromJapanand
Europeforcars.Theintellectu-
alpropertywithinsuchchips
ishighlypatented.Evenwith
thewindatitsback,it willtake
Chinasometimetodevelop
therequisiteipandsteerclear
ofthepatentlandmine.Atthe
sametime,Americanand
Britishinnovatorswillcontin-
uetoadvancethestateofthe
art.It isthenewgreatgame.
wozahmed
Chiefstrategyofficer
ImaginationTechnologies
KingsLangley,Hertfordshire

Spinal trap
The personal and socioeco-
nomic costs of joint pain
(“Backs to the future”, January
18th) are very much greater if
you include the many millions
of people suffering chronic
knee and hip pain, which are
very similar to back pain and
similarly mismanaged by over
medicalisation. Yet effective,
low-cost, non-medical in-
terventions are available that
could easily be scaled up to
help people with joint pain live
better and do more. escape-
pain is an evidence-based
programme that helps people
understand their problems and

howphysicalactivitycanhelp.
Peoplewhocompletethe
programmeoftengofrom
consideringmedicationand
surgeryastheonlyoptions,to
usinglifestylechanges(losing
a bitofweight,beinga little
morephysicallyactive)to
controltheirpain.
Thismovetowardintegrat-
edhealthandsocialcare
necessitatesnewwaysof
coveringitscosts.Someleisure
companieschargea nominal
feefortheprogramme,ora
membershipfee,ordevise
additionalclassesandactiv-
itiesforpeoplewhowantto
continueexercisingafter
completingtheprogramme.
Somehealth-carecommis-
sionershavegivenlocalleisure
firmscontractstoprovide
escape-painawayfromhospi-
tals.Thisavoidsunnecessary
primary-andsecondary-care
consultations,therebysaving
preciousresources.
professormikehurley
CentreforAppliedHealthand
SocialCareResearch
StGeorge’s,Universityof
London

Asa recentlyretireddoctorI
agreethattheoveruseof
opiatesinparticularhasgiven
manypatientslivingwith
persistentpaintheadditional
problemofopiatedependency,
withoutrelievingtheirsymp-
toms.Harmfromtheoveruse
ofimaging,particularlymri,
hasitsownacronym,vomit:
VictimOfMedicalImaging
Technology.
douglassalmon
Birmingham

A corporate legacy
The 737 maxfiasco (Schumpe-
ter, January 11th) was the ulti-
mate result of running Boeing
like a hard-nosed business
rather than a great engineering
firm. This was not its first
blunder. When Airbus won the
contract for the American air
force’s aerial tankers, Boeing
cried foul instead of sharp-
ening its pencils for next time,
got the contract reopened and
won it in 2011. It has been a
disaster, well over budget and
still not ready for full produc-
tion (the Airbus tanker has

been in service since 2011).
And it was Boeing that
started the spat with Airbus
over subsidies. After the wto
makes a ruling this year both
companies will lose out on
sales, which will hurt Boeing
more than Airbus because
Boeing sells more to the eu
than vice versa, and Airbus has
an American assembly plant to
get around some of the duties.
In 2016, Boeing became
alarmed that Bombardier’s C
Series aircraft had won a con-
tract from Delta, and fought to
kill it off through tariffs. Bom-
bardier, a Canadian aircraft-
maker, sold a majority stake in
the C Series to Airbus, which
converted it into the successful
A220. Because of Boeing’s
behaviour, the Canadian gov-
ernment cancelled a contract
for Boeing fighter jets.
Will Boeing’s culture
change under David Calhoun?
The signs are not encouraging.
Boeing offered the victims of
the 737 maxcrashes $50m in
total compensation. Dennis
Muilenburg, Mr Calhoun’s
predecessor, got a $60m
payout. Not a good start to
repairing Boeing’s reputation.
graeme shelford
Thetis Island, Canada

Horrible history
I commend your article on the
importance of culture in defin-
ing what is disgusting (“Over-
coming the yuck factor”,
January 11th). Readers interest-
ed in the subject should turn to
William Ian Miller’s superb
book, “The Anatomy of
Disgust”, published in 1997. Mr
Miller provides such trenchant
insights as “vomit may be more
disgusting than faeces (only
faeces is playing by the rules)”,
and that “even in the Middle
Ages, with its presumably high
thresholds of disgust...one
simply did not drink pus.”
john hanson
Cambridge, Massachusetts
Free download pdf