It may be an age thing, but when I take a gander at our political elites, I tend to see them as trainee recruits who have a degree but aren’t doing too well and don’t give the impression that training them is worthwhile.
They think too much of themselves, should be doing something else and now is the time to tell them. It’s odd, but Keir Starmer and his shower do give that impression - mouthy trainees who never quite grasped what the world of work is about, duds who should be doing something less taxing (pun intended).
Merely an impression this one, but it's not easy to see them as serious people doing a job they know how to do. It's not easy to see them ever learning how to do it.
8 comments:
Arguably many main stream politicians are last gasp of the old elite and they have obtained their jobs by patronage.
Whether sponsored by unions, charities, big business, international organisations, or oligarchs they have been bought to support their sponsors, and day to day running the country is not the premier call on their time.
One could also argue that whoever provided the patronage for the current government paid a bargain price and is now reaping the rewards of bargain price competence.
Yes, just narrow the focus to one of them for a minute. I'm sure we've all met people like Angela Rayner; coarse, driven, opinionated, and the epitome of the Dunning-Kruger effect. Jokes about barmaids aside, she could probably run a school or a local government department.
Now, where on earth did she acquire the view that she could actually run the entire country - spending 1.2 trillion quid a year, negotiating our interests in a complicated global situation, and deal with multiple interlocking crises? Conversely, how did she retain juvenile fantasies of near-omnipotence?
That's just Ange. The same applies to the entire cabinet. They might as well be a different species. Our system is a Mediocracy.
DJ - that does seem to be how it works, there is no sense that these people are professionals doing a job they were trained to do. As if the first six months have been an induction period where they were softened up by being made to look foolish and now the serious debacles begin.
Sam - "Our system is a Mediocracy"
yes, the puzzle is, how did they get there? If our system is a Mediocracy then they were able to fit in quite easily. It's a serious point, a Mediocracy suits the largest possible number of ambitious mediocrities.
They are quite good at ideological rhetoric and that is what it takes to rise in an ideological party steeped in Socialist theory. They speak, but cannot act in a pragmatic fashion in a real world setting of technology, commerce, economics or national rivalry. So their specialist advice, which is also severely compromised by ideology and special interests is useless to them. They are the sad end of a political system that has reached the end of its usefulness. What would replace it I cannot tell.
@Sam
Or perhaps our system is a media-ocracy? Until recently the majority of the MSM and the BBC boosted the 'Establishment' view and politicians knew where they stood. Critical voices still worked within the system.
I imagine Starmer & Co are still surprised that their 'cover' has been blown so quickly, by so many.
Tammly - "They are the sad end of a political system that has reached the end of its usefulness. What would replace it I cannot tell."
I agree and I can't tell either, but there is a sad end aspect to it. It cries out for rational, pragmatic energy, but those who have that are probably elsewhere.
DJ - I agree, the cracks we see seem to be matched by cracks in media dominance and also cracks in the more general control of information.
They seem to me to be over-indulged children: praised for every minor accomplishment, never had to consider that perhaps they are not really that good and should try something more withing their capabilities. viz Rachel from Complaints.
Yes, the old media —and its 'ocracy— are zombies, dead but they don't know it. I watch a lot of youtube, probably too much, but what is obvious is that one person filming on an phone can produce better content than any 'professional' production team.
djc - I agree, they do seem to be over-indulged children who do not understand the limits of their own capabilities. I watch a lot of youtube too and as you say much of the one person material is better than any 'professional' production team. This seems unlikely to change either, as more and more inexpensive or even free digital tools become available.
Post a Comment