Show Hide image

The 50 people who matter today: 21-30

21-30 on our diverse list of individuals, couples and families changing the world, for good and ill.

21.Jimmy Wales

The Wiki man

Wales set up the biggest encyclopaedia ever compiled and revolutionised the way content is generated on the internet. His website Wikipedia established one of the first successful examples of "user-generated content" on the web, allowing visitors to the site to submit and edit articles. Wikipedia has more than ten million articles and reported 7.5 million unique users in August this year. Last year, Wales was called to meet with China's State Council Information Office to open dialogue on censorship. Unlike the internet heavies at Google, he has refused to submit a censored version of his site to China and continues to champion the model of collaborative, uncensored web publishing.

22. Amartya Sen

Nobel economist and thinker

If intellectuals "matter" insofar as they influence politicians and policymakers, then the Nobel Prize-winning economist Amartya Sen certainly does. When Nicolas Sarkozy declared recently that quality of life matters as much as GDP, he was channelling Sen. And when Brit­ish politicians argue that inequalities of "capability" matter as much as inequalities of income and wealth, they are rehashing one of Sen's most influential academic papers. His workhas also been vindicated by recent events: long before the crash of 2008 made the case for proper regulation of the financial sector irresistible, Sen was arguing that market economies are not free-standing, self-correcting mechanisms.

23. Viktor Bout

Lord of war

A former military officer, 42-year-old Viktor Bout built up a fleet of aircraft after the collapse of the Soviet Union and went on to become the world's largest arms smuggler, supplying some of the most unsavoury groups and regimes on the planet, including Colombia's Farc rebels, the former Liberian dictator Charles Taylor and Libya's Colonel Gaddafi. Or so say his opponents, notably the US, which has been trying to extradite him from Thailand for over a year. Some of his assets have been frozen, Interpol has issued a warrant for his arrest, and he has been the subject of UN sanctions. But according to his website he is just a "normal businessman striving for success".

24: Ashfaq Kayani

Pakistan's fighting chance

The government has repeatedly claimed that three in every four terror plots here in the UK have links back to al-Qaeda in Pakistan - where General Ashfaq Kayani, head of the Pakistan army, is the man responsible for the battle against the jihadists. He is also leading the fight against the Taliban along the country's border with Afghanistan, managing ongoing tensions with neighbouring India, and is in charge of securing his country's arsenal of roughly 90 nuclear warheads. To say his is a big job is an understatement of epic proportions.

In a country blighted by military dictatorships, where stability is threatened by Islamist militants, Kayani and his troops remain the dominant power. So far, however, he has stopped the army from meddling in politics. It was Kayani who ordered military officers to withdraw from their lucrative posts in civilian ministries and who kept his soldiers out of sight during the February 2008 elections. And it was Kayani who allowed the opposition to move against the then president, Pervez Musharraf, letting it be known there would be no military action to defend him.

A former chief of the notorious Inter-Services Intelligence agency, Kayani has been instrumental in brokering various deals that have dominated Pakistani politics. He is close to all major players - a confidant of Musharraf, the Bhutto family and the Pentagon. A quiet man, he tends to avoid the limelight. But given how many army chiefs have become president, he may not keep a low profile for long.
Mehdi Hasan

25. Warren Buffett

The philanthrope

With an estimated net worth of $62bn (£38bn), Warren Buffett - one of the most successful investors in history - regularly takes the top slot on the Forbes rich list. The "Oracle of Omaha" warned in 2003 that credit derivatives were "financial weapons of mass destruction"; his exceptional financial insight has led to his being touted as a possible future treasury secretary by Barack Obama, whose campaign he backed. He has invested hundreds of millions in eco-initiatives, and pledged to give away 85 per cent of his fortune to philanthropic causes.

26.Pope Benedict XVI

Papa Ratzi

The former Cardinal Ratzinger has always been a stern guard of Catholic doctrine: he ran what used to be the Holy Office of the Inquisition for more than 20 years and led the campaign against "liberation theology". But, as Pope Bene­dict XVI, he has gone even further. He reintroduced the Latin Tridentine Mass and lifted the excommunication on members of a renegade sect that includes a "bishop" who denies the Holocaust - suggesting to some that the liberal reforms of the Second Vatican Council were in danger of being reversed. He may lack his predecessor's charisma, but Benedict XVI still claims the allegiance of the world's more than a billion Catholics - one-sixth of the global population.

27. Jairam Ramesh

Green giant

Western diplomats credit Ramesh, India's new environment minister, with "getting" the scale of the climate change crisis, and - having been a long-time adviser to the Congress leader, Sonia Gandhi (no 31) - as key to India's crucial role in sealing a deal at December's COP15 summit. A former television anchor, he occasionally writes for the Times of India.

28. Ingvar Kamprad

Leader of the flat-pack

Why does Ingvar Kamprad matter? Well, the chances are that you're sitting on the evidence. Or lying on it, drinking from it, or storing your kitchen utensils in it. Kamprad is the 83-year-old founder of Ikea, the home furnishings giant that has come to dominate the way our homes and offices look. His "flat-pack" approach to furniture sales is integral to 21st-century capitalism: a system that promises choice and simplicity but where, in the end, the individual does all the work and the large multinational corporations pocket the cash.

29. Gordon Brown

Recession proof

He is insulted by Tories, battered by events and undermined in his own party. But on the international stage Gordon Brown has been credited with preventing recession turning to depression, and leading the economic fightback with his dramatic "fiscal stimulus" and bank bailout programmes. The Nobel Prize-winner Paul Krugman concluded that Brown, along with Alistair Darling, had "defined the character of the worldwide rescue effort". Although Britain's influence in the world is a fraction of what it once was, Brown's continued troop ­deployment in Afghanistan retains influence with Washington, and the UK still has the fifth-largest economy in the world.

30. Amr Khaled

Head preacher

Amr Khaled commands a larger television audience than Oprah Winfrey. His shows, broadcast on a Saudi-owned TV station throughout the Middle East, tell simple, often emotional stories about Islam. Their message is peaceful and uplifting - but also deeply conservative. Khaled is considered as responsible for large numbers of Egyptian women choosing to wear the hijab; and despite his fervent condemnation of Osama Bin Laden, not all are convinced that his influence is benign.

This article first appeared in the 28 September 2009 issue of the New Statesman, The 50 people who matter

Show Hide image

Geoffrey Howe dies, aged 88

Howe was Margaret Thatcher's longest serving Cabinet minister – and the man credited with precipitating her downfall.

The former Conservative chancellor Lord Howe, a key figure in the Thatcher government, has died of a suspected heart attack, his family has said. He was 88.

Geoffrey Howe was the longest-serving member of Margaret Thatcher's Cabinet, playing a key role in both her government and her downfall. Born in Port Talbot in 1926, he began his career as a lawyer, and was first elected to parliament in 1964, but lost his seat just 18 months later.

Returning as MP for Reigate in the Conservative election victory of 1970, he served in the government of Edward Heath, first as Solicitor General for England & Wales, then as a Minister of State for Trade. When Margaret Thatcher became opposition leader in 1975, she named Howe as her shadow chancellor.

He retained this brief when the party returned to government in 1979. In the controversial budget of 1981, he outlined a radical monetarist programme, abandoning then-mainstream economic thinking by attempting to rapidly tackle the deficit at a time of recession and unemployment. Following the 1983 election, he was appointed as foreign secretary, in which post he negotiated the return of Hong Kong to China.

In 1989, Thatcher demoted Howe to the position of leader of the house and deputy prime minister. And on 1 November 1990, following disagreements over Britain's relationship with Europe, he resigned from the Cabinet altogether. 

Twelve days later, in a powerful speech explaining his resignation, he attacked the prime minister's attitude to Brussels, and called on his former colleagues to "consider their own response to the tragic conflict of loyalties with which I have myself wrestled for perhaps too long".

Labour Chancellor Denis Healey once described an attack from Howe as "like being savaged by a dead sheep" - but his resignation speech is widely credited for triggering the process that led to Thatcher's downfall. Nine days later, her premiership was over.

Howe retired from the Commons in 1992, and was made a life peer as Baron Howe of Aberavon. He later said that his resignation speech "was not intended as a challenge, it was intended as a way of summarising the importance of Europe". 

Nonetheless, he added: "I am sure that, without [Thatcher's] resignation, we would not have won the 1992 election... If there had been a Labour government from 1992 onwards, New Labour would never have been born."

Jonn Elledge is the editor of the New Statesman's sister site CityMetric. He is on Twitter, far too much, as @JonnElledge.

Show Hide image

What Jeremy Corbyn can learn from Orwell

Corbyn’s ideas may echo George Orwell’s – but they’d need Orwell’s Britain to work. It’s time Corbyn accepted the British as they are today.

All Labour Party leaderships since 1900 have offered themselves as “new”, but Tony Blair’s succession in 1994 triggered a break with the past so ruthless that the Labour leadership virtually declared war on the party. Now it is party members’ turn and they, for now at any rate, think that real Labour is Jeremy.

To Keir Hardie, real Labour had been a trade union lobby expounding Fellowship. To the Webbs, real Labour was “common ownership” by the best means available. Sidney’s Clause Four (adopted 1918) left open what that might be. In the 1920s, the Christian Socialist R H Tawney stitched Equality into the banner, but during the Depression young intellectuals such as Evan Durbin and Hugh Gaitskell designated Planning as Labour’s modern mission. After the Second World War, Clement Attlee followed the miners (and the London Passenger Transport Board) into Nationalisation. Harold Wilson tried to inject Science and Technology into the mix but everything after that was an attempt to move Labour away from state-regulated markets and in the direction of market-regulated states.

What made the recent leadership contest so alarming was how broken was the intellectual tradition. None of the candidates made anything of a long history of thinking about the relationship between socialism and what the people want. Yvette Cooper wanted to go over the numbers; only they were the wrong numbers. Andy Burnham twisted and turned. Liz Kendall based her bid on two words: “Have me.” Only Jeremy Corbyn seemed to have any kind of Labour narrative to tell and, of course, ever the ­rebel, he was not responsible for any of it. His conference address in Brighton was little more than the notes of a street-corner campaigner to a small crowd.

Given the paucity of thinking, and this being an English party for now, it is only a matter of time before George Orwell is brought in to see how Jeremy measures up. In fact, it’s happened already. Rafael Behr in the Guardian and Nick Cohen in the Spectator both see him as the kind of hard-left intellectual Orwell dreaded, while Charles Cooke in the National Review and Jason Cowley in the New Statesman joined unlikely fashion forces to take a side-look at Jeremy’s dreadful dress sense – to Orwell, a sure sign of a socialist. Cooke thought he looked like a “burned-out geography teacher at a third-rate comprehensive”. Cowley thought he looked like a red-brick university sociology lecturer circa 1978. Fair enough. He does. But there is more. Being a middle-class teetotal vegetarian bicycling socialistic feministic atheistic metropolitan anti-racist republican nice guy, with allotment and “squashily pacifist” leanings to match, clearly puts him in the land of the cranks as described by Orwell in The Road to Wigan Pier (1937) – one of “that dreary tribe of high-minded women and sandal-wearers and bearded fruit-juice drinkers who come flocking towards the smell of ‘progress’ like bluebottles to a dead cat”. And though Corbyn, as “a fully fledged, fully bearded, unabashed socialist” (Huffington Post), might make all true Orwellians twitch, he really made their day when he refused to sing the National Anthem. Orwell cited precisely that (see “The Lion and the Unicorn”, 1941) as an example of the distance between left-wing intellectuals and the people. It seemed that, by standing there, mouth shut, Comrade Corbyn didn’t just cut his wrists, he lay down full length in the coffin and pulled the lid shut.


Trouble is, this line of attack not only misrepresents the Labour leader, it misrepresents Orwell. For the great man was not as unflinchingly straight and true as some people think. It is impossible, for instance, to think of Orwell singing “God Save the King”, because he, too, was one of that “dreary tribe” of London lefties, and even when he joined Labour he remained ever the rebel. As for Corbyn, for a start, he is not badly dressed. He just doesn’t look like Chuka or Tristram. He may look like a threadbare schoolteacher, but Orwell was one twice over. Orwell was never a vegetarian or a teetotaller, but, like Corbyn, neither was he interested in fancy food (or drink), he kept an allotment, drove a motorbike, bicycled, cared about the poor, cared about the environment, loathed the empire, came close to pacifism at one point, and opposed war with Germany well past the time when it was reasonable to do so.

In Orwell’s thinking about socialism, for too long his main reference point was the London Marxist left. Not only did he make speeches in favour of revolutions, he took part in one with a gun in his hand. Orwell was far more interested, as Corbyn has been far more interested, in speaking truth to power than in holding office. His loyalty was to the movement, or at least the idea of the movement, not to MPs or the front bench, which he rarely mentioned. There is nothing in Corbyn’s position that would have shocked Orwell and, should they have met, there’d have been much to talk about: belief in public ownership and non-economic values, confidence in the state’s ability to make life better, progressive taxation, national health, state education, social care, anti-socially useless banking, anti-colonialism and a whole lot of other anti-isms besides. It’s hard to be sure what Orwell’s position would have been on Trident and immigration. Not Corbyn’s, I suspect. He was not as alert to feminism as he might have been but equally, few men try to write novels from a woman’s point of view and all Orwellians recognise that Julia is the dark hero of Nineteen Eighty-Four. In truth they are both austere types, not in it for themselves and not on anyone else’s expense account either. Corbyn won the leadership because this shone through from the very beginning. He came across as unaffected and straightforward – much as Orwell tried to be in his writing.

Except, as powerfully expressed in these pages by John Gray, Corbyn’s politics were made for another world. What sort of world would he need? First off, he’d need a regulated labour market: regulated by the state in partnership with a labour movement sensitive to what people wanted and experienced in trying to provide it. He would also need capital controls, a manufacturing base capable of building the new investment with Keynesian payback, an efficient and motivated Inland Revenue, a widespread public-service ethos that sees the country as an asset, not a market, and an overwhelming democratic mandate to get things done. In other words, Corbyn needs Orwell’s Britain – not this one – and at the very least, if he can’t have that, he needs the freedom to act that the European Commission forbids.

There’s another problem. Orwell did not trust left-wing intellectuals and spent half his life trying to work out their motivations as a class who spoke for the people, went in search of the people, and praised the people, but did not know them or believe in them. True, Corbyn says he wants to be open and inclusive, but we know he can’t possibly mean it when he says it will be the party, not him or the PLP, that will decide policy, just as we knew it couldn’t possibly be true when he said he’d turn PMQs into the People’s Question Time. Jeremy hasn’t changed his mind in forty years, appears to have great difficulty (unlike Tony Benn) in fusing socialism to national identity or experience (Hardie, Ben Okri and Maya Angelou were bolted on to his Brighton speech) and seems to think that not being happy with what you are given somehow captures the historic essence of socialism (rather than its opposite).

Granted, not thinking outside the ­circle is an inherent fault of the sectarian left but some of our most prominent left-wing journalists have it, too. Working-class support for nationalisation? Good. Right answer! Working-class opposition to benefit scroungers and further mass immigration? Bad. Wrong answer! Would you like to try again? In his essay “In Defence of Comrade Zilliacus” (1947) Orwell reckoned that left-wing intellectuals saw only what they wanted to see. For all their talk of representing the people, they hated the masses. “What they are frightened of is the prevailing opinion within their own group . . . there is always an orthodoxy, a parrot-cry . . .”

The game is hard and he may go down in a welter of knives, yet Corbyn still has time. He may go on making the same speech – on the benefits of apple pie to apple growers – but at some point he will have to drop the wish-list and get on the side of the British people as they are, and live with that, and build into it. Only the nation state can even begin to do the things he wants to do. The quicker he gets that, the quicker we can see if the latest incarnation of new Labour has a future.

Robert Colls is the author of “George Orwell: English Rebel” (Oxford University Press)

This article first appeared in the 08 October 2015 issue of the New Statesman, Putin vs Isis