That might make for an interesting *Miner's Strike down the line. Skinner's radical, but he's far more sane than Scargill and MacGahey.
TLIAW: Walking In My Dreams
- Thread starter Comisario
- Start date
That might make for an interesting *Miner's Strike down the line. Skinner's radical, but he's far more sane than Scargill and MacGahey.
That's not hard though, considering that we're talking about a man whose office was adorned by a giant painting of himself as a Marxist revolutionary leader.
If the miners do end up on strike, Skinner would definitely be a much more reasonable adversary of the government than Scargill.
The man was/is a proper nutter. Still, men like him may well not see themselves rise to any position of prominence ITTL.
Time will tell, of course...
Great to see this continue so soon 
A shame to see our leftist paradise start to fall apart already, but I sense that you've a few more twists and turns for us yet.
Nice alternative source for '70s inflation. Did Romney win re-election?
There must be a fair number of dissatisfied and marginalised members of the Old Right at the moment. How are they reacting to the government's fall in fortunes?
A shame to see our leftist paradise start to fall apart already, but I sense that you've a few more twists and turns for us yet.
Nice alternative source for '70s inflation. Did Romney win re-election?
There must be a fair number of dissatisfied and marginalised members of the Old Right at the moment. How are they reacting to the government's fall in fortunes?
Great to see this continue so soon
Well, it's great to have you reading and commenting
(that sounds so cheesy, I must apologise)Oh yes, our Labour government won't exactly be a one-time experiment. Britain won't change overnight (if it ever really changes at all), I can assure you.
Cheers! Romney is quite a moderate, liberal-leaning Republican who believes in social safety nets, workers' rights and desegregation. His domestic spending would be going through the roof whilst foreign aid to South Vietnam could reach crippling levels for the US economy. But, that's the kind of money you've got to spend if you're a Cold War liberal.
I'll get onto the '72 election in retrospect in a couple of updates. No spoilers here!
Rubbing their hands together at the fact that the Left seems to have overestimated the strength of their opposition. However, their base in the unions has drifted leftward to some extent. Old Right ties with the unions are beginning to look sketchy at the moment.
Let's just say that Jim Callaghan won't be swooping in to save the day any time soon... probably.
Haha, it's good to know I've got you right-wingers running scared!
Cheers anyway. I'm glad that the Shapiroverse can be interesting across the political spectrum.
I'm just going to say that you're headed in the right direction with one of those two names.
Haha, it's good to know I've got you right-wingers running scared!
Cheers anyway. I'm glad that the Shapiroverse can be interesting across the political spectrum.
I'm just going to say that you're headed in the right direction with one of those two names.
A vocally pro-life Democratic President!?
Also I should commend you most highly for your use of obscure political figures - I really like it when that's done.
A vocally pro-life Democratic President!?
I just said that one of the names was headed in the right direction. Whether the candidate themselves is headed in the right direction is another matter entirely.
Thank you very much - I always think it's important to use the lesser-known names filling up wikiboxes and tables of OTL Cabinet members. They had lives, ideas and ambitions too, so why not place them front and centre?
Who Governs Britain?
The 1973 general election came a month after the 17th March meeting between the government and Britain’s trade union leaders. Entering the election with a manifesto composed of the pledges of the Prime Minister and the Chancellor to Vic Feather and Jack Jones, Labour believed that victory was in reach.
A legislative recognition of closed shop agreements, a 5% pay increase for all public sector workers, cuts to public sector managers’ wages, and the promise of a new Tax Reform Committee set up in conjunction between the Treasury and the DEA to re-evaluate the different rates of income tax: these were the pledges that the government promised the TUC on the 17th March that would be repeated in Labour’s manifesto – Labour Works For You – for polling day on the 19th April. Of course, not everyone agreed to the deal made with the unions. There was a feeling that this “heartfelt contract” would be broken soon enough and that Labour would agree to any terms. It was a feeling especially felt amongst middle-class voters who were beginning to grow weary of the “class war rhetoric” from the government.
Despite Labour’s insistence, disquiet grew within the party. It was, as the right-wingers foretold, the feeling that Labour was deserting the millions of middle-class voters that had seen the party through to victory in both ’64 and ’68. Bargaining with the unions only added to Labour’s image problem.
Contrasted with the Conservatives, Labour appeared worn and weary after nearly a decade in government. It was a clear reversal of the party images in 1964, where Labour had been the younger and more modern party whilst the Conservatives appeared tired and frustrated by crisis upon crisis. Maurice Macmillan had, due to the aura that remained around his father and due to his own personable nature, trumped Castle in three quarters of the polls leading up to the general election. The Conservative manifesto – A New Deal For Britain – was the kind of inspired amalgamation of progressive rhetoric and One Nation principle that had fallen out of favour since Maurice’s father occupied No. 10. Within the document, promises were made to create a new “Council of Industry” with the co-operation of the TUC and the Confederation of British Industry, legislate against the militancy of the shop stewards’ movement, preserve the “necessary” nationalisations of the Greenwood and Castle governments, and cut the “oppressive weight of socialist taxation” to encourage growth in business.
For the Conservatives, “Macmillan the Younger” was a breath of fresh air after the hectoring and haphazard leadership of Enoch Powell. Had he been leader in 1973, most commentators believed that Powell would have been booed out of every local Conservative association from Bodmin to Banffshire. Macmillan, on the other hand, exuded a similar charisma to his father. He was easy-going, unflappable, and appeared to find his country-wide tour of walkabouts pleasurable rather than taxing. He was a man brought up for the family business, which provided him with the qualities that Castle and her cabinet lacked: a patrician attitude and a clear mind for business. Amongst the Labour leadership, there weren’t any politicians of a similar outlook. The only leader who could have feigned that kind of persona would have been Anthony Greenwood, or so many believed. Greenwood was enjoying his retirement, however, and had announced that he would not be standing in the 1970 election. In doing so, he opened the way for the young moderate and former secretary to Barbara Castle, Betty Boothroyd, to join Parliament after fifteen years of attempting election to Westminster. Greenwood’s inclusion in the Resignation Honours List of 1973 confirmed that his return to frontline Commons politics was over, for he was known thereafter as Baron Greenwood of Rossendale.
Though Macmillan’s Conservative Party was often between four and eight points ahead of Castle’s Labour, the actual results of the election demonstrated the fallibility of the pollsters.
Labour dropped from 351 seats to 303, a much shorter fall in seats than had been expected. The Conservatives climbed high, however, to win a slim majority with 321 seats. The Liberals, the consistent sideshow to the great divisions of the two-party system, lost a single seat to the Conservatives and decreased to nine seats. With an effective majority of just seven, the Conservative Party was thrust into a precarious situation.
The Labour Party regrouped and coalesced around their outgoing Prime Minister, with most talk of coups against Castle being quashed by the end of May and a new election expected within the next year. There was little time for internal squabbles when, just as the government and the TUC believed that they would begin upon a path to economic recovery together, Labour was thrown out of power and the task of bringing unions and businesses together was left to the Conservatives. Still, a small majority wasn’t imperturbable. If, as most anti-Marketeers believed, Macmillan forced Britain’s entry to the EEC, then a motion of no confidence could make quick work of the Conservatives’ mandate and cause another election. In such times, continuity was needed and Castle would eventually remain as leader of the Labour Party for another two years.
Though it appeared Britain hadn’t chosen decisively enough, Maurice Macmillan formed his government on the 20th April and appointed his cabinet. Anthony Barber became Chancellor of the Exchequer, William Whitelaw became Home Secretary, and Francis Pym was sent to the Foreign Office. Other important appointments included Lord Carrington to the Ministry of Defence and Edward du Cann to the Department of Economic Affairs (an appointment that was so significant it was made redundant by the department’s abolition in July of that year).
This was the beginning of the second Macmillan era: the true beginning of the 1970s.
A legislative recognition of closed shop agreements, a 5% pay increase for all public sector workers, cuts to public sector managers’ wages, and the promise of a new Tax Reform Committee set up in conjunction between the Treasury and the DEA to re-evaluate the different rates of income tax: these were the pledges that the government promised the TUC on the 17th March that would be repeated in Labour’s manifesto – Labour Works For You – for polling day on the 19th April. Of course, not everyone agreed to the deal made with the unions. There was a feeling that this “heartfelt contract” would be broken soon enough and that Labour would agree to any terms. It was a feeling especially felt amongst middle-class voters who were beginning to grow weary of the “class war rhetoric” from the government.
Despite Labour’s insistence, disquiet grew within the party. It was, as the right-wingers foretold, the feeling that Labour was deserting the millions of middle-class voters that had seen the party through to victory in both ’64 and ’68. Bargaining with the unions only added to Labour’s image problem.
Contrasted with the Conservatives, Labour appeared worn and weary after nearly a decade in government. It was a clear reversal of the party images in 1964, where Labour had been the younger and more modern party whilst the Conservatives appeared tired and frustrated by crisis upon crisis. Maurice Macmillan had, due to the aura that remained around his father and due to his own personable nature, trumped Castle in three quarters of the polls leading up to the general election. The Conservative manifesto – A New Deal For Britain – was the kind of inspired amalgamation of progressive rhetoric and One Nation principle that had fallen out of favour since Maurice’s father occupied No. 10. Within the document, promises were made to create a new “Council of Industry” with the co-operation of the TUC and the Confederation of British Industry, legislate against the militancy of the shop stewards’ movement, preserve the “necessary” nationalisations of the Greenwood and Castle governments, and cut the “oppressive weight of socialist taxation” to encourage growth in business.
For the Conservatives, “Macmillan the Younger” was a breath of fresh air after the hectoring and haphazard leadership of Enoch Powell. Had he been leader in 1973, most commentators believed that Powell would have been booed out of every local Conservative association from Bodmin to Banffshire. Macmillan, on the other hand, exuded a similar charisma to his father. He was easy-going, unflappable, and appeared to find his country-wide tour of walkabouts pleasurable rather than taxing. He was a man brought up for the family business, which provided him with the qualities that Castle and her cabinet lacked: a patrician attitude and a clear mind for business. Amongst the Labour leadership, there weren’t any politicians of a similar outlook. The only leader who could have feigned that kind of persona would have been Anthony Greenwood, or so many believed. Greenwood was enjoying his retirement, however, and had announced that he would not be standing in the 1970 election. In doing so, he opened the way for the young moderate and former secretary to Barbara Castle, Betty Boothroyd, to join Parliament after fifteen years of attempting election to Westminster. Greenwood’s inclusion in the Resignation Honours List of 1973 confirmed that his return to frontline Commons politics was over, for he was known thereafter as Baron Greenwood of Rossendale.
Though Macmillan’s Conservative Party was often between four and eight points ahead of Castle’s Labour, the actual results of the election demonstrated the fallibility of the pollsters.
Labour dropped from 351 seats to 303, a much shorter fall in seats than had been expected. The Conservatives climbed high, however, to win a slim majority with 321 seats. The Liberals, the consistent sideshow to the great divisions of the two-party system, lost a single seat to the Conservatives and decreased to nine seats. With an effective majority of just seven, the Conservative Party was thrust into a precarious situation.
The Labour Party regrouped and coalesced around their outgoing Prime Minister, with most talk of coups against Castle being quashed by the end of May and a new election expected within the next year. There was little time for internal squabbles when, just as the government and the TUC believed that they would begin upon a path to economic recovery together, Labour was thrown out of power and the task of bringing unions and businesses together was left to the Conservatives. Still, a small majority wasn’t imperturbable. If, as most anti-Marketeers believed, Macmillan forced Britain’s entry to the EEC, then a motion of no confidence could make quick work of the Conservatives’ mandate and cause another election. In such times, continuity was needed and Castle would eventually remain as leader of the Labour Party for another two years.
Though it appeared Britain hadn’t chosen decisively enough, Maurice Macmillan formed his government on the 20th April and appointed his cabinet. Anthony Barber became Chancellor of the Exchequer, William Whitelaw became Home Secretary, and Francis Pym was sent to the Foreign Office. Other important appointments included Lord Carrington to the Ministry of Defence and Edward du Cann to the Department of Economic Affairs (an appointment that was so significant it was made redundant by the department’s abolition in July of that year).
This was the beginning of the second Macmillan era: the true beginning of the 1970s.
Ah, it just wouldn't be the 1970s without a nice minority government. Genuinely couldn't guess which way the '73 election was going to go, so good work on the set up there.
All primed for some confidence vote cliff hangers in a few years time?
Incidently, Enoch Powell as a lacklustre and ineffective, ultimately deposed, Tory leader was a good subversion of all the old tropes of "fascist Britain by teatime". An effective portrayal of the more pragmatic and compromised circumstances under which political leaderships operate in reality.
Hipster PMs forever! With a streak of dynastic politics going on too. Noice.
Taking one of the big issues of the OTL 70s, where do things stand now between Britain and the EEC?
All primed for some confidence vote cliff hangers in a few years time?
Incidently, Enoch Powell as a lacklustre and ineffective, ultimately deposed, Tory leader was a good subversion of all the old tropes of "fascist Britain by teatime". An effective portrayal of the more pragmatic and compromised circumstances under which political leaderships operate in reality.
Hipster PMs forever! With a streak of dynastic politics going on too. Noice.
Taking one of the big issues of the OTL 70s, where do things stand now between Britain and the EEC?
Well it looks like this 1970s will be very different from OTL; a second Prime Minister Macmillan with a somewhat fragile Conservative Party and disunity growing within Labour thanks to trade union links & discontent over the Left rising stars.
An exciting place to be sure!
The Tories are in for some interesting times ahead: they look fragile, but they're committed to a firmly centrist path. Labour, on the other hand, are hoping to waltz back into office and finish the revolution.
Will the consensus be solidified or will it collapse? Well, we'll just have to wait and see.
Pah the liberals have power in the Tories as usual.
Loving this - keep it up.
Better the Tory Reform Group than the Monday Club. And cheers, will do!
Thanks very much. When I was writing the third update, I wasn't even sure where I was going to go with it. A continued Castle premiership would have been interesting, but the Tories hanging on by just seven seats is a brilliantly desperate situation to write (and, to be honest, a more realistic scenario than perpetual Labour rule).
All primed for some confidence vote cliff hangers in a few years time?
We'll just have to wait and see, won't we?
Thank you very much. I'm not a big fan of the PM Powell trope, so I think "Ienoch Duncan Smowell" is a much more realistic alternative. As electrifying as his oratory could be and however intelligent he was, Powell wasn't the King Arthur of Conservatism that he was made out to be in OTL.
I suppose this is looking like a really fleshed-out "Hipster PMs list", eh? I've got some more ideas rolling around in my head to do some more TLIAWs with obscure political characters... President Abraham Ribicoff or President Stewart Udall, anyone?
Britain is essentially out in the cold when it comes to Europe. With no attempts to join (like those under Wilson IOTL) and a renewed focus on the Commonwealth and the countries of the Non-Aligned Movement, Britain's future in the EEC looks bleak at best. We don't even have Value-Added Tax yet!
Macmillan the Younger may set Britain back on course, though...
People In Glass Houses
Whilst Maurice Macmillan had every intention of meeting his manifesto pledges in time, the ongoing crisis with the unions necessitated one to be swiftly fulfilled.
Within days of taking office, Macmillan announced the creation of the National Council of Industry and that its first meeting would take place on the 25th April. Formally, the council was an advisory body composed in equal parts businesspeople, trade unionists and government representatives; informally, it was the largest concession to the unions that Macmillan could afford. Ray Mawby, the Conservative MP for Totnes, was appointed Chairman of the NCI due to his history of work within the trade union movement and his understanding of labour issues. As an official in the Rugby branch of the Electrical Trades Union and president of the Conservative Trade Unionists’ national advisory committee, Mawby had the right qualifications and background to deal with the leaders of the TUC. The meeting on the 25th April, which included the Confederation of British Industry, the TUC and Robert Carr (Employment Secretary), was a moderate success for the government. Mawby’s chairmanship exemplified the new attitude of the Tory Party towards the unions: cautious and conciliatory. Whereas Powell’s Conservatives would have entered into such negotiations as if they were a battlefield, the Mawby-Carr double act reassured the assembled trade union leaders that they had the full trust of the government. Conflict was in absence when Jack Jones returned to his members in the TGWU and led them back to work.
The tripartite agreement made on the 25th April secured the end of the widespread strikes that had flared up in the private sector without the threat of anti-union legislation. On the side of the CBI, the government agreed to put aside any nationalisation plans for failing businesses. This induced fear in the TUC, given the threat to jobs. But, Macmillan was adamant that his government would not directly intervene to save failing businesses when they started becoming uneconomical. Indirectly, however, the government would be able to intervene by funding the purchasing of new industrial equipment and sustaining workers’ wages where there were threats of cuts. With that, however, came the condition that there would be increased spending on the NESS to facilitate more training programmes for unemployed workers. The changing nature of work in Macmillan’s Britain would be a “revolving door”, whereby unemployment would be an ultimately temporary situation even without the same Greenwoodite guarantees of full employment.
On the international stage, Macmillan endeavoured to rebuild the bridges that Barbara Castle had burned with the Romney administration in the USA.
Against the Sargent Shriver/Terry Sanford ticket of the Democrats, Romney’s position looked precarious in the election of 1972. Furthermore, the third party challenge of George Wallace promised to decimate what little support Romney had in the South. But, in the general election, Romney’s fears dissipated as George Wallace managed to steal away the votes of disillusioned working-class whites from the Democrats in both the South and the Midwest to split the traditional Democratic vote and allow the Romney/Reagan ticket to win re-election. The strong showing of Wallace, however, caused considerable discomfort for the political establishment as a whole. Winning 62 Electoral Votes, building on from the 57 won in 1968, solidified George Wallace’s American Independent Party as an effective third force in US politics. With the entirety of the South (minus Florida) lost by both of the two main parties in ’72, fears of growing racial discord and Southern regionalist sentiment plagued the culture of the USA in the early days of Romney’s second term.
But, outside of the domestic situation, Romney could count on Maurice Macmillan as a fellow former businessman and moderate conservative to rebuild the “special relationship”. American businesses were welcomed into British economic life once more, with trade barriers between the two nations falling after John Connally resumed talks with the British Treasury. Political commentators on both sides of the Atlantic were relieved that Britain and America had “found each other once more”, even though some on the Conservative benches in Parliament were less than enamoured by the situation.
Both Enoch Powell and Edward Heath felt uncomfortable with Britain’s cosying up to the Americans, but for wildly different reasons. Though both of them had no great emotional attachment to the Anglo-American alliance that predated the Second World War, it was more the modern circumstances of world politics that informed their anti-American feelings. On the one hand, Heath was opposed to the unnaturally powerful influence of America on British affairs when Europe saw Britain as a possible “Trojan horse” for the United States in the EEC. On the other hand, Powell believed that America’s position of uniting Europe as an anti-Soviet bulwark was pushing Britain further into the orbit of the EEC.
Despite the apprehensions of both pro-Europeans and anti-Europeans within the Tory Party, there was one concern that trumped all others: the economy. Where American investment was most felt, economic growth was soon expected to follow. The expansion of Ford’s operations in Dagenham and Merseyside in the spring of 1974 was welcomed by members on both sides of the Commons, despite the Shadow Chancellor insisting upon a policy of urging car manufacturers to adopt an experimental “industrial co-operative” model, and the future of British manufacturing looked secure with the protection of American investment.
The Conservatives were walking on a tightrope in the 12 months following the ’73 election, their majority in Parliament barely holding when they lost the constituency of Ripon to the Liberals in the summer of 1973 and had their majority slashed from 9000 to 3000 votes in the Isle of Ely by-election later that year.
Britain lived cautiously in 1973 and 1974: the voters were holding their collective breath over just when Macmillan would dissolve Parliament and the Conservatives would win the decisive majority they so desperately needed… or fall back into Opposition in the attempt.
Within days of taking office, Macmillan announced the creation of the National Council of Industry and that its first meeting would take place on the 25th April. Formally, the council was an advisory body composed in equal parts businesspeople, trade unionists and government representatives; informally, it was the largest concession to the unions that Macmillan could afford. Ray Mawby, the Conservative MP for Totnes, was appointed Chairman of the NCI due to his history of work within the trade union movement and his understanding of labour issues. As an official in the Rugby branch of the Electrical Trades Union and president of the Conservative Trade Unionists’ national advisory committee, Mawby had the right qualifications and background to deal with the leaders of the TUC. The meeting on the 25th April, which included the Confederation of British Industry, the TUC and Robert Carr (Employment Secretary), was a moderate success for the government. Mawby’s chairmanship exemplified the new attitude of the Tory Party towards the unions: cautious and conciliatory. Whereas Powell’s Conservatives would have entered into such negotiations as if they were a battlefield, the Mawby-Carr double act reassured the assembled trade union leaders that they had the full trust of the government. Conflict was in absence when Jack Jones returned to his members in the TGWU and led them back to work.
The tripartite agreement made on the 25th April secured the end of the widespread strikes that had flared up in the private sector without the threat of anti-union legislation. On the side of the CBI, the government agreed to put aside any nationalisation plans for failing businesses. This induced fear in the TUC, given the threat to jobs. But, Macmillan was adamant that his government would not directly intervene to save failing businesses when they started becoming uneconomical. Indirectly, however, the government would be able to intervene by funding the purchasing of new industrial equipment and sustaining workers’ wages where there were threats of cuts. With that, however, came the condition that there would be increased spending on the NESS to facilitate more training programmes for unemployed workers. The changing nature of work in Macmillan’s Britain would be a “revolving door”, whereby unemployment would be an ultimately temporary situation even without the same Greenwoodite guarantees of full employment.
On the international stage, Macmillan endeavoured to rebuild the bridges that Barbara Castle had burned with the Romney administration in the USA.
Against the Sargent Shriver/Terry Sanford ticket of the Democrats, Romney’s position looked precarious in the election of 1972. Furthermore, the third party challenge of George Wallace promised to decimate what little support Romney had in the South. But, in the general election, Romney’s fears dissipated as George Wallace managed to steal away the votes of disillusioned working-class whites from the Democrats in both the South and the Midwest to split the traditional Democratic vote and allow the Romney/Reagan ticket to win re-election. The strong showing of Wallace, however, caused considerable discomfort for the political establishment as a whole. Winning 62 Electoral Votes, building on from the 57 won in 1968, solidified George Wallace’s American Independent Party as an effective third force in US politics. With the entirety of the South (minus Florida) lost by both of the two main parties in ’72, fears of growing racial discord and Southern regionalist sentiment plagued the culture of the USA in the early days of Romney’s second term.
But, outside of the domestic situation, Romney could count on Maurice Macmillan as a fellow former businessman and moderate conservative to rebuild the “special relationship”. American businesses were welcomed into British economic life once more, with trade barriers between the two nations falling after John Connally resumed talks with the British Treasury. Political commentators on both sides of the Atlantic were relieved that Britain and America had “found each other once more”, even though some on the Conservative benches in Parliament were less than enamoured by the situation.
Both Enoch Powell and Edward Heath felt uncomfortable with Britain’s cosying up to the Americans, but for wildly different reasons. Though both of them had no great emotional attachment to the Anglo-American alliance that predated the Second World War, it was more the modern circumstances of world politics that informed their anti-American feelings. On the one hand, Heath was opposed to the unnaturally powerful influence of America on British affairs when Europe saw Britain as a possible “Trojan horse” for the United States in the EEC. On the other hand, Powell believed that America’s position of uniting Europe as an anti-Soviet bulwark was pushing Britain further into the orbit of the EEC.
Despite the apprehensions of both pro-Europeans and anti-Europeans within the Tory Party, there was one concern that trumped all others: the economy. Where American investment was most felt, economic growth was soon expected to follow. The expansion of Ford’s operations in Dagenham and Merseyside in the spring of 1974 was welcomed by members on both sides of the Commons, despite the Shadow Chancellor insisting upon a policy of urging car manufacturers to adopt an experimental “industrial co-operative” model, and the future of British manufacturing looked secure with the protection of American investment.
The Conservatives were walking on a tightrope in the 12 months following the ’73 election, their majority in Parliament barely holding when they lost the constituency of Ripon to the Liberals in the summer of 1973 and had their majority slashed from 9000 to 3000 votes in the Isle of Ely by-election later that year.
Britain lived cautiously in 1973 and 1974: the voters were holding their collective breath over just when Macmillan would dissolve Parliament and the Conservatives would win the decisive majority they so desperately needed… or fall back into Opposition in the attempt.
Yeah, it's back!
It's a shame to see Castle's premiership end ignominiously (so far...), although the Conservatives don't seem quite so stable as might be expected. It's intriguing to see occurrences across the pond as well, albeit interesting in the Chinese sense.
Looking forward to more!
It's a shame to see Castle's premiership end ignominiously (so far...), although the Conservatives don't seem quite so stable as might be expected. It's intriguing to see occurrences across the pond as well, albeit interesting in the Chinese sense.
Looking forward to more!
The next update should give a good hint of where Castle is going next. I'll probably have it done for this evening.
Oh yeah, America has been irrevocably fucked by the strong showing for Wallace and the liberal leanings of the Republican and Democratic tickets. We can only pray that '76 restores some semblance of sense.