Menu Home

Oct 14th. The trousers and the stalemate.

Jeremy Corbyn cycles past us on a bicycle when we are out walking, and I lurch after him eagerly, anxious to modify his trousers to the benefit of all. The lead restrains me and he sails by unaware.

The Owner says that was a narrow escape. She says that I have got to stop attacking trousers, and this applies in particular to the trousers of anyone who sits on the Front Bench in the House of Commons. Whilst she accepts that my intentions had nothing to do with Mr Corbyn’s politics and everything to do with his trousers, she seems to feel that, given that it was Mr Corbyn the repercussions would have been even more severe than those I faced yesterday in the coffee shop regarding the Small Human and the Pink Party Dress.

I say it is nothing to do with repercussions. If you don’t want a Moral Dog to pursue trousers that flap at the ankle, don’t wear trousers that flap at the ankle. Controlling flapping trousers is one of the first duties of the Moral Dog. It doesn’t matter which Bench you sit on. Duties are part and parcel of being a Moral Dog. The Duties regarding trousers that flap are rather like those around the Ancestral Cat and the Evil Waste Bin, they are non-derogable. And the Pink Party Dress was sparkly. And I would only have eaten the dangly bit.

The Owner disagrees. She says the only non-derogable duties are the ones we must do for sake of others and our own honour. She says duties about trousers are just Primeval Instincts. The Primeval Instincts direct me to trousers because they resemble my Ancestral Prey, but now that I have Puppy Duck and Rice served daily in a bowl, and cheese almost on demand, I should be Moral enough to resist this.

I notice that she says the cheese is almost on demand but decide to let this pass for now. I suggest that one cannot pick and choose which Ancestral Behaviours are desirable and which are not. It is evolution.

She says the Moral Dog cannot hide behind the Ancestral Dog because the Moral Dog must think of the consequences. She adds that, had I attacked Jeremy Corbyn’s trousers I could have changed the course of history, and not in a good way.

I imagine she means that the cogs of power could realign themselves in new and unpredictable ways, affecting macro-economics far into the decades ahead. I suggest these are simply the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune and politics is like that. But she says she did not mean it was Jeremy Corbyn’s history that would change, but that of the Moral Dog, and she was thinking of something rather more immediate than the decades ahead and rather less about the macro-economics of governments than the micro-economics of cheese. Just to be crystal clear, she adds, she would not be acquiring any.

By the time she has completed this rather convoluted explanation Jeremy Corbyn is far into the distance.

She seems to think she has proved her point but I take inspiration from Jeremy, who never lets Boris Johnson shut him up at Question Time. I observe that it is by no means clear to me that the Moral Dog should ignore his Primeval Urges, since the Owner has already had reason to be grateful to them. Without Primeval Urges how would the Moral Dog have known, for instance, that he must attack the Evil Waste Bin and disperse its contents evenly around the kitchen? It seems to me that the best solution is to ask Jeremy Corbyn to tuck his trousers into his socks. I suggest that we write to him on the subject.

The Owner says she thinks that the Leader of the Opposition has rather more to worry about than the Moral Dog and his Trouser Urges, and that comparing her to Boris Johnson is simply unacceptable. She says Boris Johnson is as ideologically loyal as Squeaky Cat whereas she is Entirely Consistent. She says I must simply accept the criticism and stick to chasing pigeons.

I am mortified to hear my Primeval Instincts reduced to Trouser Urges. I say (in somewhat hurt tones) that I think the Owner needs to reflect on the the nature of Ideological Loyalty and her Politically Inconsistent Attitude to Trousers. The Owner says (in somewhat grumpy tones) that she thinks Moral Dogs need to reflect on the link between their Politically Consistent attitude to trousers and their Politically Inconsistent expectations of cheese.

I find this all somewhat unfair on Squeaky Cat, who has been unable to defend himself since his squeaker broke, but I feel we are making no progress. I observe that, even though it is obvious which of us is Morally Consistent and which of us is renegotiating their ideology to suit their purposes, the fact is that since nobody has a majority we seem to have a stalemate.

By strange coincidence, says the Owner, that’s exactly what Jeremy Corbyn would say.

Categories: dog dog philosophy philosophy Politics

Hergest the Hound

I am a dog of many thoughts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: