As we contemplate Keir Starmer and his Cabinet rabble, what comes to mind? Probably many impolite descriptions considerably worse than the word ‘rabble’, but how about ‘antiquated’?
That would be the antiquated, unidirectional mode of government where those at the top dictate to those further down the social scale. We’re familiar with unidirectional government. Yet since the internet became a significantly bidirectional means of communication, rigidly top down government begins to seem curiously antiquated.
As if cobwebs hang festooned above the Cabinet table and the persistent dust of time settles gently on the heads of nodding Cabinet members. Metaphorical dust and decay pervade even their most enthusiastic deliberations and there aren’t many of those.
Like Miss Havisham in Charles Dickens’ Great Expectations, Sir Keir Starmer presides over lost expectations and the visible decay of intellectual authority conferred on itself by authority.
Anyone with the time and the inclination to browse the internet, and this must be the majority of the population, knows about its bidirectional aspect. Watch a video, browse social media, scan favoured news channels, leave a comment or a ‘like’, subscribe or don’t subscribe or put your own material, opinions, likes, ideas, parodies or eccentricities out there.
By comparison, legacy media outlets are creaking antiques, still clinging to the old unidirectional ways, as are our political parties and governments. In an interesting sense, the internet is intelligent, it responds to questions, offers alternative sources, answers or possibilities.
Compare this to Keir Starmer’s Cabinet, his world of cobwebbed rules, legalistic dust and a crabbed, antiquated faith in laws, lies and spiteful deception.
Anyone with the time and the inclination to browse the internet, and this must be the majority of the population, knows about its bidirectional aspect. Watch a video, browse social media, scan favoured news channels, leave a comment or a ‘like’, subscribe or don’t subscribe or put your own material, opinions, likes, ideas, parodies or eccentricities out there.
By comparison, legacy media outlets are creaking antiques, still clinging to the old unidirectional ways, as are our political parties and governments. In an interesting sense, the internet is intelligent, it responds to questions, offers alternative sources, answers or possibilities.
Compare this to Keir Starmer’s Cabinet, his world of cobwebbed rules, legalistic dust and a crabbed, antiquated faith in laws, lies and spiteful deception.
9 comments:
I think the whole lot of them are not capaable of making policies to run a country.
They've never had real jobs, and never understand how to run even a small company, so to hear TTK with his dreary nasal drone, telling the UK that he has a 'plan', is total hogwash. He's deluded and destined to fail, just like Brown did - and Major for that matter...
My morning paper tells me that 2TK is bringing Labour mayors "to heel". The policy includes their having to hand over part of their salaries to the Labour Party. Really? It's not the First of April, is it?
Agreed, and there's also something curiously modern about the whole enterprise. Traditionally, governments would have had a sense of where they wanted to go, a vision of what the country would be like if their policies worked as intended. However this vision was imbibed or constructed, they would thereafter have a set of slogans and responses to communicate with the public.
This lot seem to have moved directly to the slogans without having any idea of what they are there for, what the purpose of their government actually is. It's either because the only group capable of managing a power-grab is a disparate bunch of Stalinists, Islamists, eco-loons, feminists, and Fabians; or the purpose of the government is supra-national and cannot be disclosed to the governed.
My beloved tells me I'm being naif and that this money grab has been done by "both" parties before. Do the Limpdems do it, Reform, the Greens, the SNP, the mad mullahs? Dunno.
Scrobs - I agree, total hogwash. He doesn't have the experience, just relies on rules, laws and ideology and he treats ideology as a set of rules.
dearieme - I don't know the answer, but I bet your beloved is right. Starmer is not one for striking out on his own in cases like this, but a precedent would be enough for him.
Sam - "This lot seem to have moved directly to the slogans without having any idea of what they are there for"
That's a good point, explains the oddity of it all because there is certainly something important missing. Starmer doesn't seem to notice though, as if he's merely an advocate with a brief.
I could make a reasonable argument that Two Tier Free Gear Keir Starmer Farmer Harmer (TTFGKSFH) in setting out to show the world Leadership for Cooling Britannia as an example of a positive response to Climate Change is just following in the footsteps of his political Dad. Starmer, for the want of better ideas, is the Son of Blair.
Look out for a fresh stab at ID cards, and examine any calls for war. Look out for surging house prices and further de-industrialisation (already happening).
Be afraid, be very afraid.
DJ - the main thing going for us at the moment is that Starmer has no charisma, not even enough to pretend he isn't intransigent. He is worrying though, because we need to be rid of him.
Even when they appear to have had some sort of employment outside politics, it is no more than a cog in the machine, a place in a system to be worked merely for personal advantage.
djc - yes, professional politicians are more and more common, people who have never gained significant employment experience beyond the world of politics. Personal advantage is the career incentive. A lower age limit for MPs might improve the situation - nobody below 50 for example.
Post a Comment