|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Disillusioned with "politics"? Why?
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
I am reading a lot about people in America and Europe who are "disillusioned with political elites", and supporting "outsiders" for that reason.
Why?
It is not as though it is the 1930s. I feel that in that era, people had some excuse for feeling disillusioned, what with mass unemployment, savage totalitarian regimes apparently dominant etc. etc.
And even so, people in many countries were mostly prepared to stick with the system!
I feel we in the 2010s have much less excuse to throw our toys out of the pram. And yet we appear to be doing so.
My theory - we the people are less mature than we were in the 1930s and are not prepared to accept responsibility for our society. Also perhaps we have unrealistically high expectations. So when things go wrong we like to blame the government, or politicians in general, for them.
Overall result - people start to feel that politics is "no job for a decent person" and thus the calibre of politicians goes down.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
lowlands_boy
Shipmate
# 12497
|
Posted
Or we are much better informed, and have access to much more detail about things, allowing us to see the apparent strangeness of decisions.
And we are much less deferential....
--------------------
I thought I should update my signature line....
Posts: 836 | From: North West UK | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
I am reading a lot about people in America and Europe who are "disillusioned with political elites", and supporting "outsiders" for that reason.
Whilst it isn't the 1930s, neither is it the 1950s/1960s, I think people rightly perceive that entire sectors of influence have been taken over by a self perpetuating elite to an extent that wasn't so 30-40 years ago.
Case in point - look at the career of the average head of state post their time in office - compare those of the present age Blair/Major (and their fortunes) etc with that of Wilson/Callaghan.
quote:
My theory - we the people are less mature than we were in the 1930s and are not prepared to accept responsibility for our society.
Why isn't voting for an 'outsider' taking responsibility for our society? In fact getting behind a candidate that promises change and reform is surely the epitome of wielding democracy responsibly.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
W Hyatt
Shipmate
# 14250
|
Posted
My theory is that in the age of the internet, each of us can find our own "experts" and can decide for ourselves who seems to be a reliable source of information from a virtually infinite number of possible sources. Which means there is much more diversity in opinions now compared to when there were a handful of predominant news media, so more people are deciding that the establishment is wildly wrong and needs to be replaced.
My hope is that a generation (or two) from now, the population as a whole will be a bit more mature about dealing with so much raw information.
--------------------
A new church and a new earth, with Spiritual Insights for Everyday Life.
Posts: 1565 | From: U.S.A. | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
M.
Ship's Spare Part
# 3291
|
Posted
Chris Stiles, I assume you mean Prime Ministers? None of Blair/Major/Callaghan/Wilson were head of state, thankfully.
M.
Posts: 2303 | From: Lurking in Surrey | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Galloping Granny
Shipmate
# 13814
|
Posted
I'm not much good at politics and my spontaneous comments may seem naive. But the world political situation seems to have become much more complicated/confusing over time.
I compare the Middle East/African developments – and others – in this century with the last World War ('not even the war to end all wars') when countries decided to join up with one 'side' or the other and pound one another until someone came out on top. Each lot convinced at some level that God was on their side.
At the national level, it sometimes looks as if, once representatives are democratically elected, they can push ahead with their chosen schemes, convinced that they are much smarter than the people who elected them. No matter how many citizens come out to protest a measure, they can be dismissed as a 'rent-a-crowd'.
Just a grizzle from one of the groundlings.
GG
--------------------
The Kingdom of Heaven is spread upon the earth, and men do not see it. Gospel of Thomas, 113
Posts: 2629 | From: Matarangi | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
One reason that comes to mind is that for much of the fifties to seventies, politicians promised general prosperity and rising living standards for everyone. Within modest limits they delivered. Most people were better off in the seventies than they would have been in the fifties.
These days, average living standards haven't increased (technology excepted). The rich are much richer as a class than they have been, but the neoliberal revolution under Thatcher and Reagan has largely not delivered to the people who have voted for it.
Even a group as mainstream as Cameron/Osborne's Conservatives are selling themselves much more as an alternative to those who are even worse.
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chris stiles:
Case in point - look at the career of the average head of state post their time in office - compare those of the present age Blair/Major (and their fortunes) etc with that of Wilson/Callaghan.
Major? Really? I'd put him in the bracket with Wilson and Callaghan frankly. He's generally kept his head down since finishing as PM - sure he's got a couple of directorships, written the odd book here and there, generally not made things difficult for his successors as PM (of either hue). Blair on the other hand, has gone stratospheric on the international speaking circuit and has his faith foundation to play with.
Aside from that, Major may have *joined* the elite, but only after he'd finished doing his A levels at night school. Sadly, and I mean that, I don't think we'll be seeing someone with his background at the top of the tree again any time soon. (Up there with the best election posters of all time - "What does the Conservative party offer a working class kid from Brixton?")
If we're worried that people getting rich in politics is something new I'd throw in David Lloyd George at this point...
The real elephant in the room is age - people are coming to the end of their time as PM at an age when they quite reasonably need to have something to do with their time - for perhaps decades. The temptation to get out there and milk the gravy train must be enormous. If people were still becoming PM in their seventies we wouldn't have so much of this phenomenon.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by M.:
Chris Stiles, I assume you mean Prime Ministers? None of Blair/Major/Callaghan/Wilson were head of state, thankfully.
Yes, my language was somewhat imprecise. 'Head of state' was trying to broaden the point - as the same phenomena is observable on either side of the Atlantic (and in the continent), the specific examples I picked were British (and PMs)
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Major? Really? I'd put him in the bracket with Wilson and Callaghan frankly. He's generally kept his head down since finishing as PM - sure he's got a couple of directorships, written the odd book here and there, generally not made things difficult for his successors as PM (of either hue).
In Major's case it's more about the personal fortune he made after leaving office. 'Couple of directorships' is really an understatement, he has a net worth of several hundred million dollars mainly from his stint with the Carlyle Group.
quote:
The real elephant in the room is age - people are coming to the end of their time as PM at an age when they quite reasonably need to have something to do with their time - for perhaps decades. The temptation to get out there and milk the gravy train must be enormous. If people were still becoming PM in their seventies we wouldn't have so much of this phenomenon.
To an extent this is true - the other side of this is that politics has therefore become - to many - a tool to further career advancement/enrichment. I recently read an interview with a senior German Finance Ministry official, where the interviewer expressed surprise that he didn't have 'that standard stint in Goldman Sachs in his CV'. The revolving door has become assumed
[fwiw, I'd be very surprised if Hunt wasn't working for Murdoch or a private health company in 5-10 years time].
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Frankenstein
Shipmate
# 16198
|
Posted
The word politics has become a dirty word.
Politicians are some of the least trusted people in society.
The are good on rhetoric and bad on substance.
They take credit for things that go right and blame others when things go wrong.
They make statements that are at odds with the facts.
--------------------
It is better to travel in hope than to arrive?
Posts: 267 | From: Scotland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
I think it is an unavoidable disadvantage of representative democracy that it creates a class of politicians that over time gets disconnected from the population.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Frankenstein
Shipmate
# 16198
|
Posted
Margaret Thatcher was given 3 million pounds from a grateful tobacco industry after her term in office.
Why?
--------------------
It is better to travel in hope than to arrive?
Posts: 267 | From: Scotland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
This may not be a change in actuality, but in perception politics has become a career choice rather than an act of service to the community and nation. There have always been exceptions, of course, but a few decades ago politicians were seen as people who (sometimes reluctantly) entered politics after some other career - depending on where you were on the political spectrum that might be successful business men seeking to put something back into society and help create a society where others could succeed as they did, that might be people who had found themselves organising unions and were recognised as champions of the working classes, or whatever.
Whereas we now have more people entering politics without first doing something else (or, seeming to do so - the publicity given to very young MPs straight out of university politics degrees may skew the impression). That might be reflected in the tendancy of senior politicians now being younger than would have been the case 30-40 years ago.
Add to that the fact that politicians are, compared to the vast majority of the electorate, fabulously wealthy - what other job (especially at graduate entry level) would give you a salary of £65k plus expenses? Put the way many MPs worked the expenses system, and many more have parallel careers as consultants, directors of businesses etc, and the recent above inflation pay rises for MPs and the impression of "they're doing it for the money" is reinforced.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Interestingly, I know at least two local Councillors who stepped down in this town because they became utterly disillusioned with the political process.
In particular they both felt (and they came from different parties) that maintaining party unity and scoring points against the opposition seemed to be reckoned far more important than pooling different points of view and working together to improve the fortunes of our town.
By the way, we are blessed with two good MPs (I say that even though I disagree with their politics). One actually stepped down last year from a Junior government role (and thus scuppered his chances of preferment) because he profoundly disagreed with the policies that were being adopted: see this article. He has also gone back to spending some time as a doctor, even though he is in a very safe seat.
[ 22. February 2016, 10:43: Message edited by: Baptist Trainfan ]
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
Whereas we now have more people entering politics without first doing something else (or, seeming to do so - the publicity given to very young MPs straight out of university politics degrees may skew the impression).
I'm not entirely sure it is a skewed impression - especially when it applies to so much of the current front bench.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
I know there have always been safe seats and marginals, but has this got worse over the years? There used to be such things as Tory MPs in Liverpool. Nowadays the Tories give the impression that they can't even be bothered trying. Meaning that anyone who is disillusioned with Labour has no obvious reason to favour the Tories over a protest party.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
I've known two MPs quite closely, one is a family member, and the other I worked with. They are both intelligent, but completely barking mad.
They are quite entertaining, but the idea that they discuss the weighty issues of state in the Commons fills me with merriment.
And I used to be in the Labour party, well, that was a bureaucratic and right-wing nightmare, although I have been tempted back by the Jez.
As Mae said, a hard man is good to find!
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Raptor Eye
Shipmate
# 16649
|
Posted
I am disillusioned with politics as I used to be naive enough to think that I was voting for someone who represented those in the constituency, who would deliver election promises (or at least try to), who would have the qualities of integrity and honesty, and who was standing forward to do this for the sake of making a positive difference in order for everyone to benefit.
I am cynical through observation. The electoral system seems to be about duping the fools to give a party power as dictators for five years, so that those within the party can feather their nests for a little longer. I am sure that most go into it for the right reasons, but the system soon sucks them into its ways so that before long that is forgotten, and they soon lose touch.
--------------------
Be still, and know that I am God! Psalm 46.10
Posts: 4359 | From: The United Kingdom | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
I live in the US. The OP's question has one answer here, one word: Trump. I am sure I need say no more.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
I live in the US. The OP's question has one answer here, one word: Trump. I am sure I need say no more.
Except that on one level there is a certain logic to Trump.
The Republican party has a number of factions which have interests that run slightly counter to each other (amongst them a big business faction). At the moment, big business generally, and finance in particular is very unpopular amongst the working class/lower middle class voters who would normally vote Republican based on values and small government (and have seen successive Republican national governments not take the action on immigration that they feel is necessary, regardless of the initial noises made).
Hence Trump - who whilst he is a businessman appears to be rich enough to not be obviously in hock to some other set of 'large business interests'
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
I know there have always been safe seats and marginals, but has this got worse over the years?
I think it has got somewhat worse - though I think in many ways the argument that it wasn't worse in the past has little merit, primarily because the way in which the political class take in both politicians, large parts of the civil service, big business and the media (of all stripes) these days. You can see this in the number of columnists who are either descended from the aristocracy, or related in some way or married to a political figure.
At this point if someone with the background of Zac Goldsmith was running for Moscow mayor, we would describe him - correctly - as an oligarch.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
I live in the US. The OP's question has one answer here, one word: Trump. I am sure I need say no more.
I would say that Trump (specifically the fact that he's even considered a contender for the Republican nomination) is a result of disillusionment with politics rather than a cause. He's the end of a line (hopefully) of a long period of growing disinterest in politics by the majority of people, which has resulted in political organisations becoming increasingly the playground of extremists. And, as the extremists have gained the upper hand more and more normal, reasonable people have decided that they want nothing to do with the way the parties have moved - reducing their participation and increasing the influence of the people they don't actually agree with. A self-fulfilling prophecy.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Barnabas62
Shipmate
# 9110
|
Posted
Not sure how many of you can access this, but it contained some excellent observations about the social effects of technology on human expectations for work.
I think globalisation and increasing automation together are taking power away from national governments and security away from the lives of many people. Local politicians get it in the neck, basically for promising to deliver more than they ever can. And, more recently, for spinning what they do, or have done. I think these things are feeding the little Englander mentality in the UK and the isolationist tendencies in the US.
Meanwhile, the multinationals carry on ..
--------------------
Who is it that you seek? How then shall we live? How shall we sing the Lord's song in a strange land?
Posts: 21397 | From: Norfolk UK | Registered: Feb 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lyda*Rose
Ship's broken porthole
# 4544
|
Posted
Baptist Trainfan: quote:
In particular they both felt (and they came from different parties) that maintaining party unity and scoring points against the opposition seemed to be reckoned far more important than pooling different points of view and working together to improve the fortunes of our town.
This is certainly much of the reason for the very low esteem in which the US Congress is held. People feel that they are totally impotent as law makers with their constant squabbling with each other and the president. And it's the reason Obama turned to the power of executive orders to get some of his agenda through. Of course, one of these days when we have a Republican president and a Democratic Congress, this tactic will likely bite the Dems in the butt.
--------------------
"Dear God, whose name I do not know - thank you for my life. I forgot how BIG... thank you. Thank you for my life." ~from Joe Vs the Volcano
Posts: 21377 | From: CA | Registered: May 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
I got disillusioned real early, when I attended a strategy meeting for a local city position, one question was which side of an argument on public housing should the candidate endorse. I asked "which side does she believe is best?" They said "that doesn't matter, the question is which publicly stated position will get her elected."
Jump to more recent decades, the few rich get tax breaks and business subsidies to help them get even more richer, while workers get poorer - why should we want more of the same of that?
The two parties refuse to discuss and negotiate and compromise with each other, why should we want more of that?
Every president starts or continues an unnecessary war - why should we want more of that?
Some people have so totally lost faith in the establishment's supposed interest in the good of the country or of the world, that they truly believe Trump or Sanders, with all their quirks, would be overall no worse and likely much better than the "more of the same" the party estabishments offer.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chapelhead
I am
# 21
|
Posted
There's much here to agree with. I'd add that there's the feeling that 'I' ('we') can't do anything about it. I've never lived anywhere where my vote had any chance of making a difference to the election of the MP.
I've no evidence for it, but I wonder if one of the reasons why Jeremy Corbyn was elected leader of the Labour Party was that people thought that here, for once, was a chance to vote on something that would make a difference.
--------------------
At times like this I find myself thinking, what would the Amish do?
Posts: 9123 | From: Near where I was before. | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Garasu
Shipmate
# 17152
|
Posted
Or, possibly, that if it wasn't going to make a difference then not being pragmatic wasn't the heinous crime they tell us it is...
--------------------
"Could I believe in the doctrine without believing in the deity?". - Modesitt, L. E., Jr., 1943- Imager.
Posts: 889 | From: Surrey Heath (England) | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Barnabas62:
I think globalisation and increasing automation together are taking power away from national governments and security away from the lives of many people. Local politicians get it in the neck, basically for promising to deliver more than they ever can. And, more recently, for spinning what they do, or have done. I think these things are feeding the little Englander mentality in the UK and the isolationist tendencies in the US.
Meanwhile, the multinationals carry on ..
I agree with all this, and with Chapelhead's observation that people are increasingly looking to vote in the only way they feel can make a difference. More out of disconnection rather than desperation.
I don't believe it is simple disillusionment that is afflicting the US and UK electorate. Fear and cynicism are in there as is boredom. It could well be that bland politicians no longer command our respect, we might still though have to be careful what we pray for in terms of what might replace them.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
I think that (from what I see) it is not the concept of "politics" that is the problem, but politicians and the political process.
Politicians are, as a whole, some of the most loathed and detested people. Unfortunately, the good politicians - and there are some - are lumped in with the more vociferous shitheads.
The process is in disrepute because (in the UK at least) the Tories had 20% of the vote, but have control over parliament. That - as an example - is seen as an abuse of the system, and a failure of "democracy".
From a personal perspective, I am disillusioned with the process because it is not truly democratic. And yet politicians claim that they have a democratic mandate.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
orfeo
Ship's Musical Counterpoint
# 13878
|
Posted
People are disillusioned with politics because it no longer involves much policy development.
And it's only going to get worse, because if anyone tries to engage in policy development - a necessarily long, complex and difficult process if you're putting any effort into it - they will be pounced upon. They will be told that they're not decisive enough, and not providing the quick fix entertainment of a cat video.
People are addicted to political junk food, in the same way they are addicted to actual junk food, and musical junk and reality TV junk and everything else that requires minimal effort in return for a brief buzz.
[ 23. February 2016, 08:25: Message edited by: orfeo ]
--------------------
Technology has brought us all closer together. Turns out a lot of the people you meet as a result are complete idiots.
Posts: 18173 | From: Under | Registered: Jul 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Frankenstein
Shipmate
# 16198
|
Posted
Most politicians are too concerned in trashing the opposition.
--------------------
It is better to travel in hope than to arrive?
Posts: 267 | From: Scotland | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
agingjb
Shipmate
# 16555
|
Posted
The criterion for judging politicians is "are they on my side". They do make it hard to believe that.
--------------------
Refraction Villanelles
Posts: 464 | From: Southern England | Registered: Jul 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Brenda Clough:
I live in the US. The OP's question has one answer here, one word: Trump. I am sure I need say no more.
So people say they are disillusioned with "politicians" because "they" are corrupt, untrustworthy bloatbags who'll say and do anything to get their fix of fame, money and power... and then they vote for...
As rolyn says, we should be careful what we wish for, in case of finding something worse. A lot worse.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
But this is the problem with the lack of democracy we have. So often you have a choice between shitbag A and shitbag B. When B wins, he assumes that he has huge support, ignoring the fact that he only won because of being slightly better than the opposition.
It is not democracy when there is no real choice, and so often that is the case. The fact that some parties manipulate this to achieve a win doesn't help.
As was said on South Park once: "Every election is a choice between a douche and a turd sandwich". There is a lot of truth in that.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
No, there's very little truth in that. And if you think there is, then you stop seeing the real bad apples like Trump.
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Brenda Clough
Shipmate
# 18061
|
Posted
When you compare Hillary to Trump, the choice is easy. By every measure other than actual height, he comes just about up to her shins. Not even knee height.
--------------------
Science fiction and fantasy writer with a Patreon page
Posts: 6378 | From: Washington DC | Registered: Mar 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
If you want to know why people are disillusioned re politics, take a gander at the current discussion down in the nether-regions on the Sanders thread.
'nuff said.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
TurquoiseTastic
Fish of a different color
# 8978
|
Posted
Not at all. Said thread exemplifies what I said in the OP - the general public (even Shippies) are just as unedifying as politicians - in fact rather more so - when they start trying to work out What, Exactly, Is To Be Done. It ought to make us admire politicians and the way they often doggedly beaver away at "the art of the possible". But no, we are convinced that politicians are all the devil's spawn, unlike wonderful "We, The People".
Posts: 1092 | From: Hants., UK | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
TT--
I don't know what it's like in the UK. Maybe your politicians are all dedicated public servants, who try hard every day to make the UK a better place, and never do anything unwise or wrong.
Here in the US, it's more complicated. Our particular style of campaigns and elections means that candidates need at lot of money, especially at the state and national level. Donors of large amounts generally want influence, in return for their money. I honestly don't think it's possible to achieve state or federal office with clean hands, no matter how pure your intentions.
Then there are the temptations of power, and gifts and money from lobbyists. Having to make stinky deals to get something done. Going along with your party's leaders. Trying to stay in office.
That's before you get anywhere near politicians not be willing to work together *at all*, or with the president, governor, etc.
TBH, the ideas and opinions expressed in the OP seem incredibly naive.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ricardus
Shipmate
# 8757
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by orfeo:
And it's only going to get worse, because if anyone tries to engage in policy development - a necessarily long, complex and difficult process if you're putting any effort into it - they will be pounced upon.
Pounced upon by whom?
Recently the Leader of the Opposition attempted to give a nuanced view of the war in Syria and was dismissed by the Prime Minister as a terrorist sympathiser. ISTM that if anyone is impeding the power of politicians to express complex policy development, it is other politicians.
--------------------
Then the dog ran before, and coming as if he had brought the news, shewed his joy by his fawning and wagging his tail. -- Tobit 11:9 (Douai-Rheims)
Posts: 7247 | From: Liverpool, UK | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
chris stiles
Shipmate
# 12641
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ricardus:
ISTM that if anyone is impeding the power of politicians to express complex policy development, it is other politicians.
Yes, this was what I was alluding to above, in large part this is the product of politicians buying into a particular model of doing politics (via endless triangulation and soundbites), which ultimately relies on a close - and fairly fluid - relationship between the press, government and large business.
There is a particular manifestation of this in the UK which is influenced by the close proximity of the various sources of power - it manifests itself somewhat different in the US - my own perception is that politicians have increasingly shorter careers in the UK, with a stint as a junior minister often being used as a stepping stone into think tankery or big business.
Posts: 4035 | From: Berkshire | Registered: May 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by TurquoiseTastic:
Not at all. Said thread exemplifies what I said in the OP - the general public (even Shippies) are just as unedifying as politicians - in fact rather more so - when they start trying to work out What, Exactly, Is To Be Done. It ought to make us admire politicians and the way they often doggedly beaver away at "the art of the possible". But no, we are convinced that politicians are all the devil's spawn, unlike wonderful "We, The People".
Well, I've seen something similar in various workplaces. The people who float to the top tend to be supernerds, or obsessives, or schemers. Of course, the reply might be - so why don't you rise to the top then, and challenge them? Well, I did for a while, I was head of a dept in a uni, and then I had to deal with the supernerd heads in the other depts. Left eventually.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
... Well, I did for a while, I was head of a dept in a uni, and then I had to deal with the supernerd heads in the other depts. Left eventually.
Being of course at the same time totally unlike them in every way. ![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
Matthew Parris said some years ago that far too high a proportion of his fellow politicians of whichever party, were nerds who had gone into politics because they had been the sort of youngsters that other children wouldn't have in their gangs. They were looking to compensate themselves for their own spotty inadequacies.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
... Well, I did for a while, I was head of a dept in a uni, and then I had to deal with the supernerd heads in the other depts. Left eventually.
Being of course at the same time totally unlike them in every way.
Matthew Parris said some years ago that far too high a proportion of his fellow politicians of whichever party, were nerds who had gone into politics because they had been the sort of youngsters that other children wouldn't have in their gangs. They were looking to compensate themselves for their own spotty inadequacies.
Very good - yes, guilty as charged. However, I wasn't very good at it. I was going to start singing 'do you wanna be in my gang?', and then I realized who sang it.
I'm not sure about spotty inadequacies, plenty of people have those. But I've already mentioned that two MPs of my acquaintance strike me as very infantile people, whom other adults tolerate with exasperation. I suppose they have to do something, like the hangman.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But I've already mentioned that two MPs of my acquaintance strike me as very infantile people, whom other adults tolerate with exasperation. I suppose they have to do something, like the hangman.
A truth lies in there somewhere. People who find, or get themselves into positions of power do act with a form of responsibility -- yes, like even the hangman does.
In some ways the *hard-to-please* masses and, as has been mentioned, the age of instant gratification have all contributed to make the modern politician what he or she is today.
Not exactly wanting to leap to the defence of our delicate little petal politicians, there is however the simple fact that without them we inherit mob anarchy. A single day of that I'm certain would have most pleading for the return of a political system with it's politicians.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
quote:
Originally posted by quetzalcoatl:
But I've already mentioned that two MPs of my acquaintance strike me as very infantile people, whom other adults tolerate with exasperation. I suppose they have to do something, like the hangman.
A truth lies in there somewhere. People who find, or get themselves into positions of power do act with a form of responsibility -- yes, like even the hangman does.
In some ways the *hard-to-please* masses and, as has been mentioned, the age of instant gratification have all contributed to make the modern politician what he or she is today.
Not exactly wanting to leap to the defence of our delicate little petal politicians, there is however the simple fact that without them we inherit mob anarchy. A single day of that I'm certain would have most pleading for the return of a political system with it's politicians.
Sure, baby and bathwater.
There's an old idea in psychoanalysis that people who feel powerless seek power over others. However, it's rather vacuous, and I don't know if it's ever been put on a scientific basis. Also, I don't know how you define the terms.
And probably most people feel powerless. But sometimes I can see the truth of it, I mean the compensation idea. On the other hand, the common idea that bullies deep down feel powerless, is probably not always true.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
rolyn
Shipmate
# 16840
|
Posted
The 'balance' of power is important and often overlooked. When someone or one Nation becomes drunk on power problems can occur and the balance of power has to be restored one way or another. I think that's how Thatcher came a cropper in the end.
This can also be seen it on the world stage with hegemony. It could be this that is happening in the States. If, heaven forfend, someone like trump came to be President with an isolationist agenda then the New World Order which has yet to materialise in the Mid East could be at risk generally. Pardon the doom watch ramble which should be on another thread anyway.
We the people either seem to resent our leaders or shoulder them through the streets. With the latter there does though often come a time when, with a certain corner being turned, we drop them in nearest gutter.
--------------------
Change is the only certainty of existence
Posts: 3206 | From: U.K. | Registered: Dec 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
quetzalcoatl
Shipmate
# 16740
|
Posted
Or occasionally we get the tumbrils out. The trouble with that, apart from being violent, is that the drivers of the tumbrils tend to be also autocratic in the end. The revolution (like Saturn) devours its children, as somebody said.
--------------------
I can't talk to you today; I talked to two people yesterday.
Posts: 9878 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
