My previous post has prompted a couple of commenters to accuse me of "socialism".
First of all, I have never denied that there are elements of my politics which some would clearly label as socialist - so what? The idea of a state owned monopoly is "socialist" but I still think that the only way to provide such a service as a universal postal service is through a state run monopoly - and so did many great conservative leaders. Does that make them "socialists"?
Secondly, the previous post was aimed at the vast amount of attention that the relatively few Britons stuck abroad were receiving from the media and the government in comparison to the lack of interest shown in the millions of "abandoned" Britons at home that are never given a second thought.
My personal political philosophy has always been a mixture of left and right - I am a social conservative. My over riding belief is that the principle job of a national government is to manage the country to the benefit and with the least inconvenience to the majority of the nation's people.
My main complaint about progressive liberal governments and the media that supports them is that they do not do this. Instead they manage the country to the benefit of various minority self-interest groups at the expense of and with the most inconvenience to the majority - and this flight ban episode has demonstrated this all too well.
What else can you call 150,000 people stuck in foreign airports because their flights back from their very expensive Easter holiday (one of the most expensive times to fly) have been cancelled but a minority self-interest group?
If you believe these people deserve special attention from the government and the media then you accept the principle that other minority self-interest groups also deserve such special attention.
I do not.