Sir, William Rees-Mogg’s typically informed and powerful article (Comment, March 21) surveys the genesis of the expression “creative destruction” recently deployed by Danny Kruger, leading to his withdrawal as a Conservative candidate in Tony Blair’s parliamentary seat.

Creative destruction, an apparent oxymoron, describes how new thinking drives out old for the betterment of mankind. Rees-Mogg gave the example, among others, of railways destroying stagecoach services. He then convincingly and accurately explained how Mr Kruger was misunderstood when he talked of “creative destruction in the public services”. Simply put: the NHS ain’t working properly, so how can we reform it for the betterment of society?

However, William Rees-Mogg concludes that Danny Kruger should be asked to “go back to Sedgefield”, Tony Blair’s constituency. If only political debate were conducted on the lines of Rees-Mogg’s reasoned article, that might be possible. It is not. Labour, beleaguered, cornered and injured, will fight a nasty election campaign.

Michael Howard had no choice. With Danny Kruger still a Conservative candidate, there would have been incessant and inaccurate claims of how a Conservative government would “destroy” our public services. Attempts at an intellectual explanation of the origins of creative destruction would have been drowned out by contrived righteous indignation by Labour. William Rees-Mogg would know all this for a lie. Many others would not.

Yours faithfully,
MICHAEL FABRICANT,
House of Commons.
March 21.

From the Reverend Edward Carter

Sir, William Rees-Mogg does well to draw our attention to to the economic theories of Joseph Schumpeter. Schumpeter’s doctrine of “creative destruction” ensures a central place for entrepreneurship within economic theory, when it is normally absent, and this is to be applauded.

However, I believe Schumpeter’s more significant contribution was seen in the way he presented economics as being, by necessity, integrated with sociology and history. By the time I read my first degree in economics in the 1980s Schumpeter was nowhere to be seen, having been replaced by the mathematically based Chicago School model, which has no proper understanding of society or history.

Can we hope that Mr Kruger and others will now rediscover the full richness of Schumpeter’s work, and so bring a new realism and humanity into the economics of politics?

Yours faithfully,
EDWARD CARTER,
The Vicarage,
Glebe Road, Didcot OX11 8PN.
March 21.

Explore Letters

• Feedback