Henry Ergas wrote a piece for The Australian this week in which he talked about Thatcher’s achievements in the UK and the need for politicians to change ideas about how the world works if they are to achieve reform.
The headline, not Ergas’s work I am sure, was “Thatcher showed Keating the Way” which was not what Ergas wrote in the article at all.
It was though, enough to spur Keating to write to defend his achievements and to say that he was not at all influenced by Thatcher (or anyone else it seems) but worked it all out himself. Keating may be right about Thatcher but I am sure there are a number of former Treasury officials who would say they helped educate him.
Many (including me) would say that Keating achieved more good things as Treasurer than anyone else in that office since the War. It is a pity in a way that he fears his reputation is so insecure that he needs to react to a misleading headline. In any event in twenty or perhaps ten years he will be little more than a footnote.
But why are politicians, as a class, so determined to maintain and indeed often promote their reputations? Most former prime ministers write memoirs that are usually unread and unreadable. I once thought that Menzies’s Afternoon Light might have interesting insights into an important period of Australia’s history but gave up after a hundred or so pages. (If you are interested there are plenty of copies in the second hand bookshops for around $5.)
Howard is apparently working on his, for an advance of $1 million. I will not be a buyer.
As the cabinet papers covering 1972-75 were released under the thirty year rule, Whitlam made sure that his gloss on the events was given prominence, in case something in the papers might be misinterpreted. Fraser is now doing the same for his period of government.
Who cares? Historians will interpret and reinterpret recent Australian history out of all recognition many times, in the light of prevailing theories and fashions. Most politicians will be forgotten except by old men explaining boring history to their grandchildren.
I cannot think of another profession where people try so hard to create and promote their own legacy. Not businesspeople. Who knows the managing director of BHP who decided it needed to move into resources and away from steel making? This was one of the most important steps in recent business and economic history and no one remembers who did it.
Few academics are remembered. Perhaps some for scandals – Orr and Anderson – but almost no others. Generals, Archbishops, Surgeons: who?
So what is it about politicians that they want so much to be remembered and that they want so badly to control what they are remembered for?
