After Churchill’s War Churchill was crushed in the British election of 1945. The democratic socialists went in. They set wages and prices and made the whole economy, already on its ass from the War, worse.

One particular piece of genius was an act trying to be sure that all post-War building would be planned by Mommy Professors who owned the Labor Party. With a major part of the country in ruins, anyone who rebuilt anything was charged a flat thirty percent tax on the total value of that construction. Payable up front.

It is never mentioned, for some reason, that the German inflation of the 1920s was the result of a similar act. The ruling social democratic coalition set out, purposely, to destroy the price system. So, though no one mentions it today, the inflation was a piece of Mommy Professor strategy.

Did I say that no one mentions it today?

This thirty percent up front tax on all rebuilding made in post-War Britain as much sense as the German inflation did. Did I mention it is not mentioned today?

In the 1950s, when all of Europe was flatter on its face than Britain was, the Labour Party of Britain was Mommy Professor’s ideal. That was the Future.

But during the 1960s even the media began to notice that Britain was replacing Turkey as the Poor Man of Europe. I met British workers who had flooded into Germany, where wages were twice as high. Britain was a stagnant wreck.

Did I say that no one mentions that today?

Another things that is not talked about is that the Labor Party was defeated in the elections of 1950 and 1951. The Conservative Party took over and ruled almost continuously all through the ruin of the next twenty years.

But it was a RESPECTABLE Conservative Party. Almost all the Labor Party’s program was left intact. They did what the Contract With America conservatives did in congress after 1995.

Respectable conservatism is not new. Nor are its results.

In fact, respectable conservatives have always been an integral part of the strategy that leads to collapse. Leftists make policy, then respectable conservatives endorse it in a couple of decades. National Review has become a worshipper of everything it opposed in the 1960s.

This is the reason the left finds respectable conservatives so respectable. It is like the King signing legislation in London. It isn’t necessary, but it makes the stuff more untouchable, traditional, you know,

And above all, one can say that “both sides in America” agree with what has been done. That makes anyone who opposes our national direction an extremist. You can’t have “both sides” without respectable conservatives.

The far left is seen as wanting the same future liberals and respectable conservatives eventually agree to. As they used to say, “A Communist is a liberal in a hurry.” He is a radical but not an extremist. He is pointed in the direction the Nation and National Review agree on.

Only those who challenge this whole direction are extremists. Respectable conservatives are essential to endorsing this whole national direction.

No one SAYS it, but this National Direction is based on the proven fact that respectable conservatives, therefore “both sides,” will always end up denouncing their earlier delays in the National Direction, as the British Tories did while Britain collapsed economically from 1950 to 1980, and as conservatives can be counted on to do today.

Whenever National Review announces, once again, that it was wrong in the past, the word “again” is always missing. Everybody knows it, but even their worst critics on the left will never mention it.