Thursday, 20 December 2012

Political evolution

From Mad magazine

Wikipedia shows us that our three main party leaders are somewhat inexperienced, which we already knew because it's a common enough criticism :-

David Cameron. He became Director of Corporate Affairs for Carlton from July 1994 to February 2001, making it his only professional excursion beyond the cosseted world of Westminster - as Wikipedia puts it.

Nick Clegg. Between 1992–1993, he was employed by GJW, which lobbied on behalf of Libya. He was later sent to Hungary, where he wrote articles about the mass privatisation of industries in the former communist bloc. In April 1994, he took up a post at the European Commission.

Ed Miliband. In 1992, after graduating from Oxford, Miliband began his working career in the media as a researcher to Andrew Rawnsley in the Channel 4 show A Week in Politics. In 1993,Shadow Chief Secretary to the Treasury Harriet Harman approached Rawnsley to recruit Miliband as her policy researcher and speechwriter.

So it has come to this. Our three leading UK politicians are rank amateurs, with no background in a technical or scientific profession, almost no experience in business, the armed forces or industry and consequently nothing to recommend them to the intelligent voter.

It's often worth sticking to the simplest explanation in these situations. So Dave, Nick and Ed seem to be grossly over-promoted because they have been grossly over-promoted.

Are they stooges?

Well maybe that's a bit Kafkaesque, although I'm not entirely sure the thought is out of place in these complex times. Sticking with simple explanations probably leaves us with stupidity and cupidity. Even so, it's surely worth repeating the oft-asked question - how did it come to this?

These dopes can't even muster a decent CV between the three of them. Do voters check these things? Do they study the candidates before they lumber into the voting cubicle, grab that pencil so thoughtfully tied to a length of string and make their mark on the ballot paper?

Apparently not.


Anonymous said...

A thought-experiment. What kind of ideal leader would be able to make a difference - to magic new industries out of thin air. To identify, throw out and keep out all the vested interests. To turn the most lumpen citizens into models of hard working intelligent
knowledge workers pulling in billions in foreign exchange. Er that's a no then.

So is business plotting to bleed us all cash-wise, treating us like financial farm animals?
Quite possibly. Therein lies the nub, once upon a time politicians and wealth-creators were part of the same class. Globalisation changed that and politicos are stuck running piddling little patches of land and earning chump change for their pains.

The business answer is mergers & acquisitions. The snag is paying off the redundant board of directors, the blighters have delusions of grandeur. A secret for you, I have identified an ideal takeover target with a weak board of directors desperate for cash. Needs a good clear-out and the electrics are a bit ropey - know where I mean? Merry
Christmas everyone.

A K Haart said...

Roger - you really should blog yourself! Do you mind if I post that?

Anonymous said...

Welcome to. Obviously the 'redundant board of directors' must be changed or taken over more subtly than in previous primitive eras. Otherwise people might come over all nationalistic.

Afraid I am too lazy to set up a blog.

Michael said...

By coincidence, I've been reading some old 'Yes Minister' books, as I still recall being wholly amused by the series.

I'm on the chapter where Hacker is asked whether he feels he's achieved anything, and all he can remember is being called as a Privy Councillor, and also admitted to some committee or other.

As for doing any actual work for the UK, - zilch...

Demetrius said...

It is possible that the first of the three pictured was the most intelligent and capable of survival. As time goes by the species gets more and more stupid. Also, it is not just the leaders. Around the parties the MP's are drawn from an increasingly limited field and social grouping.

A K Haart said...

Michael - I like Yes Minister - it comes across as a gentle hint of a bumbling reality.

Demetrius - yes, I sometimes wonder what kind of world Neanderthals would have created.

Anonymous said...

Always eager to be of service in offering useful suggestions to the various predicaments you describe so well, AK, so how about shortening the length of string thus forcing people to pause as they work out how to get the pencil to the ballot paper, or vice versa, and thereby providing an opportunity for them to think even if the only thought they have is along the lines of, 'Sod it, sod them and sod that stupid bit of string'!

(Oh God, I get dafter as I get older but just to say that I hope you and yours enjoy a splendid Christmas.)

A K Haart said...

David - good idea. Or we could do away with pencils so that only those with a minimum level of foresight get to vote.