"It is not an arrogant government that chooses priorities, it's an irresponsible government that fails to choose"
About this Quote
Politics is the art of disappointing everyone equally, unless you’re willing to disappoint some people on purpose. Blair’s line turns that hard truth into a moral litmus test: choosing priorities isn’t hubris, it’s duty. The rhetorical move is clean and lawyerly. He takes a word politicians fear - “arrogant” - and flips it onto his opponents, recasting decisiveness as humility before scarcity. Government, he implies, doesn’t get to opt out of trade-offs; it only gets to decide whether it will make them openly or let them happen by accident.
The subtext is New Labour’s governing philosophy in miniature: managerial competence with an ethical sheen. In the late-1990s and early-2000s, Blair’s project was to detoxify big-state activism by framing it as pragmatic triage rather than ideological spree. Priorities signal “modernization,” “targets,” “what works,” and the belief that public services can be re-engineered if you’re willing to pick winners and absorb the backlash.
There’s also an anticipatory defense embedded here. “Choosing priorities” often means centralizing power, setting metrics, and telling local institutions and voters that their preference isn’t at the top of the list. Blair’s formulation pre-emptively brands that friction as the cost of seriousness. Refuse to choose, and you’re not neutral; you’re negligent, letting markets, bureaucratic inertia, or crisis dictate outcomes. The line works because it treats constraint not as an excuse but as the very reason legitimacy exists.
The subtext is New Labour’s governing philosophy in miniature: managerial competence with an ethical sheen. In the late-1990s and early-2000s, Blair’s project was to detoxify big-state activism by framing it as pragmatic triage rather than ideological spree. Priorities signal “modernization,” “targets,” “what works,” and the belief that public services can be re-engineered if you’re willing to pick winners and absorb the backlash.
There’s also an anticipatory defense embedded here. “Choosing priorities” often means centralizing power, setting metrics, and telling local institutions and voters that their preference isn’t at the top of the list. Blair’s formulation pre-emptively brands that friction as the cost of seriousness. Refuse to choose, and you’re not neutral; you’re negligent, letting markets, bureaucratic inertia, or crisis dictate outcomes. The line works because it treats constraint not as an excuse but as the very reason legitimacy exists.
Quote Details
| Topic | Decision-Making |
|---|
More Quotes by Tony
Add to List
