It describes my political stands closely enough, but not with precision.
It seems still mired in postwar left British political perspective and bemoans that most on the political mainstream left admits the pragmatic adequacy of at least some privatisations:
Social Democratic parties adopting - reluctantly or enthusiastically - the new economic libertarian orthodoxy (neo-liberalism).
Leaving one wandering how come the concerned countries still have social security, progressive income tax, and in many cases even universal heathcare.
On the other hand, while laissez-faire rhetoric is being fashionable for the last twenty years, it failed to yield any actual Victorian renaissance, and although the confidence in the postwar mixed-economy model (or bourgeois-democracy if you must) has been quite eroded, no working alternative is currently implemented in developed western countries, whether from the side of the market-cult plutocrats, or from the side of the sessantottista total-revolution kooks.
In the meanwhile the louder leftist empty rhetoric (mostly from the far left) has replaced the Third-Estate by the Third-World in the role of the meeks worthy to inherit the earth, with a measure of antirationalist spirituality thrown in.
Should the People's Republic of China achieve a stable and functional model of laissez-faire economy in a totalitarian regime (or perhaps in a milder authoritarian form), it will be considered a viable alternative from swaths of both the right and the left, to the already slandered (notably on this very board) model of modern representative democracy; as these fellows have longings for a strong leadership to guide them and make them feel like they belong, as do most rebellious youth.