Two political stories reveal the absurdities of our current political debate.
First there is the news that Hilary Clinton has pneumonia but tried to carry on regardless and collapsed as a result. It is, apparently, a shocking thing to discover that politicians are finite human beings with limited amounts of energy and subject to frailties like all the rest of us. Only a fool would think otherwise. I would hope she reacts by making clear how she will run the White House within those constraints because it is vital that anyone does so.
Then there is Theresa May of whom we discovered a willingness to pursue a policy that is without an evidential basis, which she's likely to lose in the Lords, and maybe even the Commons, and whose appeal is to a very narrow group who were always likely to vote for herparty anyway. This reveals that politicians are irrational human beings with limited intellectual capacity and subject to a lack of discernment that distinguishes what's right for us in particular from what is right for society at large like too many if the rest of us.
Which option do I prefer? The Clinton weakness, by far.
Which option have we got? The May variety.
It takes a very special ability to pick a first priority that has a high risk of failure despite the absence of an effective opposition in the House of Commons but that would seem to be what Theresa May has done. The sorry state of UK politics is laid bare for all too see.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
I have a friend whose idea to deal with things like the BREXIT vote is for potential voters to haver an IQ test before being allowed to vote.
I told him that he lacked imagination and that it was far wiser that the politicians be subjected to that test instead before becoming MPs.
I’m at the point in my life where it is very hard for me to quell my contempt for far too many of our politicians. In fact they are not ‘ours’; they are obviously owned by others like G4S, Starbucks and Serco and the like.
The Democrats’ approach to this Election has been an utter disaster. First they tried to crown Hillary as candidate without a competition, then when Sanders challenged they did their best to put him out of the game from the start despite the strength of his appeal.
The fix was in, despite the evident weaknesses of her as a candidate. The baggage, the divisiveness etc. Crazy.
With any normal Republican candidate, I suspect she would have been annihilated but the Republicans have themselves committed Hari Kiri by picking Trump. But Trump has been canny in attacking her physical robustness and that’s now a critique that can stick. Very worrying times going forward.
Surely grammar schools are some kind of smokescreen?
I find it hard to believe that nobody in the May team noticed that the majority Cameron government kept trying to ram things through that their own party wouldn’t vote for in sufficient numbers.
What is the bad news from which they are trying to distract the party faithful? That Brexit won’t be all it’s cracked up to be?
Maybe
It’s clear that nothing very concrete about Brexit is going to emerge for years, especially nothing very positive, although there will be intermittent bursts of noise and uncertain predictions.
So May is throwing a bit of raw meat into the lions’ cage, to keep them, and the spectators, occupied in the meantime. There will be a lot of noise and fury from all sides and it really doesn’t matter to her which way it turns out. Just as long as the wild cats in Parliament and the press don’t turn on her.
I expect another few sacrificial lambs early next year when people again start wondering out loud when Article 50 is going to be triggered.
Robin,
Blair did EXACTLY the same with the ban on fox hunting, which gobbled up an astounding 740+ hours of Parliamentary time, as I recall.
What a waste of Parliamentary time on an issue laudable in itself, but which would have been better spent on e.g. solving our (even then) shocking housing crisis (perhaps by abolishing the “Right to Buy” scam, for a start, replacing it with real assistance for Council tenants to move into home ownership, if they wished), not to speak of measures to protect those employed, and to encourage employers to provide more, and better quality, jobs in terms of skills and remuneration.
Now that is feasible.
What is worse is that it maybe a smokescreen for something much bigger.
Surely that’s wrong Richard – Theresa May is the very epitome of ‘a safe pair of hands’. Laura Kuenssberg was assuring us of this again only last week.
It’ll take the media establishment years to get over this (ludicrous) characterisation, whilst in the meantime ignoring huge amounts of evidence contrary to their narrative. You only have to look at how they covered George ‘master political strategist’ Osbourne.
Also interesting, but not surprising to note, is that all the events Clinton has had to cancel so far have been fund-raising rather than ‘campaigning’. So aside from the PR hit (which always occurs when the media focus is on her), the detrimental effects on her campaign can easily be made good by a quick call (from her or Bill) to the Koch brothers, Goldmans or JP Morgan.
Aah………..Laura Kuenssberg………..what perception! What sagacity? What insight!
Ms Kuenssberg would be better off working at Hello! magazine in my view and the quicker she makes that move the better.
And I’m no misogynist by the way…………….
But then she would remain employed in some form of “journalism”. Let me venture that it would be better for the rest of us, let alone herself, if she took up the onerous duties of polishing Mark Littlewood’s cufflinks…
I have no experience in the field of social psychology, but it seems to me that there is a disturbing & growing neurosis within society, both in the body politic and the electorate, that manifests itself as behavioral cognitive dissonance, resulting in outcomes that are contrary to peoples’ intuitive wellbeing. One would expect this at political extremes but it is increasingly evident towards the centre-ground, especially on the right. This may in part explain the Theresa May ‘effect’.
There are a number of academic studies into the politcal implications of CD, viz. http://news.harvard.edu/gazette/story/2015/06/the-art-of-political-persuasion and this slide presentation http://www.slideshare.net/ehabelbaz1/cognitive-dissonance-in-politics.
The ‘solution’ would necessitate some form of clinical group therapy (lol!) but, of course, the afflicted, by definition, don’t recognise their dissonance. So, once again, it seems that radical change can only come about via total collapse of the status quo.
I’d be interested if anyone with professional experience in this area could elaborate on the topic. How else to explain why turkeys consistently vote for Christmas?
While I could give you a long and complicated answer the short and sweet version is fear coupled with its companion hate. Divide and conquer has never gone out of fashion and the propaganda machine is endless.
Meanwhile in the Labour Party thousands of members are being suspended, and not given the reason, as a result of rightwing members targetting local Corbyn supporters and combing through social media for anything vaguely against the rules. In my own case I have not broken the rule which my letter refers to vaguely as ‘Recruitment’. I am the CLP secretary and the only delegate to conference. An email with attached letter of suspension (still not received) landed last Saturday when I was trying to enjoy a holiday in Yorkshire, no vote appearing and suspecting the worst. The suspension ‘cleverly’ timed so that there is no time to appeal before the conference. The conference is due to vote on a rule change to reinstate shadow cabinet elections. Deliberate plotting.
And you say there’s no witch hunt, Richard.
Well when you do find out let us know what the evidence was
Richard, I suspect you may have long retired from blogging before the reasons for these suspensions come through. Our Brighton Constituency Labour Party was suspended months ago, and as far as I can see, Labour Head Office is happy to let the suspension remain in place until the party “comes to its senses”. The crime, as far as I can judge, was to hold an AGM with three times the normal attendance, full of members who cared passionately about the future of the party. Worse, a pro-Corbyn executive was elected, but the election has been declared null and void, while the disqualified members’ writings back to primary school are examined for evidence of unworthy thoughts.
I expect that commenting on your blog will soon be considered evidence of links to a proscribed organisation. I am no starry-eyed Corbyn fan, but I prefer decency, honesty and incompetence to incompetence without redeeming features.
I know exactly what the evidence is and I suspect I know who dobbed on me (a local Progress member – I sat next to him at the Special Conference last year, when we had a hug and everything was bright and cheerful). But what I did was not against the rules on recruitment. I offered to pay the £25 fee to enable one new member of my branch to vote, their having already paid the membership fee via a website which said they could vote, and then being told they couldn’t. I had in mind a local severely disabled woman who could not afford the fee, but there were many others in the same boat. My branch chair made the offer, to these members only, on my behalf but the offer was not taken up. I cannot find what I put on Facebook to this effect, perhaps just a comment, which someone may have then tweeted – I do not do Twitter.
It’s the Glorious Twelfth again today and the outlook is bleak.
Well that does not seem like reason to be barred, I agree
I can see why I would never have got a vote, but not you
On re-reading, I want to make it clear that I hugged you not the Progress member;o)
🙂
Well Carol, I made sure I voted for Corbyn, so maybe that’s a consolation for you. I don’t think the anti Corbyn brigade are going to win this one. As to the future with him as a leader…..who knows?
Alledgedly unelectable according to received opinion, including people I like and respect (Richard, some friends of mine) as well as his enemies on the right.
Perhaps, perhaps not. If a week is a long time in politics, (especially as we have it now), then 4 years is an eternity.
I wish I could share your belief
I’m struck by three thoughts:
This seems straight out of the Lynton Crosby play book – a dead cat thrown on the table to distract attention from the massive problems facing the government (Brexit, NHS, housing …).
When Cameron got into power and made his speech, at least it took a few years for his commitments to unravel. ‘Greenest government ever’, ‘NHS safe in our hands’, et al. May’s statements about tackling the left-behind and inequality have been shown to be meaningless within a few months with the grammar school stunt, which all the expert data seem to suggest will make things worse. But then who needs experts. Policy driven evidence again
To John D’s point – George Lakoff and his work on ‘framing’ are well worth reading. How you set about persuading the public that taxation is theft rather than a means to provide them with the public services they need. Its not an accident that the US public bizarrely sees public health as a socialist threat. The Tories have clearly learnt the lessons about how to shape the language in ways that the opposition ends up playing their game – the language of ‘austerity’ and ‘hard working people’ being perfect examples
I’d admit to having thought that maybe May was the least worst option and that maybe her appointment of the Three Brexiteers was a sign of Machiavellian cunning. Im not so sure now. UK politics is indeed in a sorry state.
I wonder whats happened to those initiatives around cross-party alliances…?
I agree that it has taken very little time at all for the wheels to fall off the May bus
‘I can’t understand…….’.
Well what I have come to understand is this: that there is overwhelming evidence arounds us (especially since 2008) that markets have failed.
We constantly hear (from for example say Adam Curtiss) that those in charge ‘ do not know what to do’ about this.
I believe this to be wrong.
They know what they need to do alright.
But what we have to contend with is that they simply do NOT want to do it because it cuts off opportunities for their own and other’s agendas.
It is a complete failure therefore of not only markets but demoracy and even national Governance itself.
In short, it is a disaster that can only lead to more disaster.
That is where we are.
Perhaps the problem with Clinton is that she (or her team) lied about her health. This in a context where her main opponent accuses her of being a habitual lier is reckless.
Upton Sinclair had it right all those years ago – “It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.”
As PSR suggests, I’m not convinced that any of the current government have any interest whatsoever in changing a system from which they and their supporters (the powerful ones that is) benefit so much.
However I also think (hope?!) that there are enough of us who believe that there is a better way, one that is currently not convincingly on offer from any of the current parties. The challenge is how to mobilise the kind of thinking that is so often visible on Richard’s blogs
The appeal, Richard, isn’t to a small group. The decision to open more grammars has a huge lead in the polls over either not opening any more and shutting them down. It’s seemingly lost in the current media narrative that grammar schools are actually a popular policy.
Because very few have experienced their destructive power
Ask how many would vote for secondary moderns