Unfortunately this is an expected trend. Back when, politicians were self-supporting and more trustworthy. Yes, yes, I know they were toffs but so what, eh? They had a public service ethic. This was also true on the Labour side (they weren't toffs but they were still trustworthy and gentlemen).
Then along comes that nice Mr Wilson, and in the chase after "trendiness", as aped later by Blair, he decides that he'll make Labour appear modern and forward thinking (as opposed to those fuddy duddy old tories) by having politicians become professional and properly paid.
Professionals is now what we've got, and our present-day attitude to them follows as night follows day.
I beg to differ. Politicians are just the modern day equivalent of robber barons. They were never "trustworthy gentlemen" - it's just that the common people were deluded into thinking that.
I the olden days, you knew that's what they were. BUT they were also mindful of not pushing it too far. Don't want trouble at t'mill etc.
Today, they don't have a mill. Politicians have nothing to lose but the next election. AND if they have stitched up a cosy job on the board of Subsidy Rapists Incorporated, they don't care if that happens either.
OK it wasn't a Golden Age, but the interests of the common man and the employing capitalist, or the land owning classes, were not that far apart, after all. In fact a lot of so called 'socialist' developments of the latter part of the 19th century are simply enlightened self interest. Public health, affects all. Education, as the need for skilled workers arose. Etc.
That plus a general military background - nothing is easier than an accidental discharge as the unloved ossifer leads you into battle..meant that the so called ruling classes had a generally good background in man management, looking after the troops, and general nous when it came to planning stuff and getting it done..
..None of which is in evidence today in these so called egalitarian times.
If politicians tell it like it is no-one will vote for them. None of the three parties would admit to how bad the finances really were before the last election. The conservatives tried it briefly and the feedback they got from focus groups was so bad they adopted the same line as ZaNuLiebour, i.e. talk a lot but give away nothing. Will Self said it most accurately on the 'Question Time' program before the election when he looked straight at the audience and told them to ignore all the politicians because they (the voters) had no idea how bad it was going to be *whoever* won the election. Channel 4 had an alternative 'meet the three chancellors' and it was obvious that the audience still thought that making a few 'efficiency' savings was going to wipe out an *annual* deficit of £156 BILLION. Thanks a lot Gord. I know where I would start cutting - the NHS gargantuan annual budget of £110 BILLION - half a million more staff since 1997 (nearly all from overseas), huge pay rises (which leads on to even huger gold-plated pensions), hospitals built with PFI that will end up costing us £5 billion per hospital (eg The London Hosp Whitechapel).
The world owes no-one a living. If you can't afford kids why assume you have a right to sponge off the rest of society ?. We live in a capitalist society - either get used to it or emigrate. I hear that Cuba and North Korea have well developed socialist command economies.
Wait till all those hordes of unemployed muslims from Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan etc arrive in the EU expecting to find gold plates on the pavements. There are an awful lot of them, 80 million in Egypt alone and a very high percentage under 25, all desperate for work (and 'free' handouts).
If my recollection of the seventies is correct, inactivity and strikes was the regarded as a fair exchange for money. That's why we no longer build non-military ships, and ford build all their cars on the continent.
And every single MP who stepped down at the last election claimed the optional £65,000 tax-free 'resettlement' fee. And then there's that juicy pension that they always increased immediately after every election.
There's the rub, 50% of the electorate don't have a brain, quite literally too stupid to be allowed to vote, whether they do or not. And we get a government that about 20,000 people in marginal constituencies decided, on the spur-of-the moment, to vote for.
The joys of a state education designed as a caucus race and indoctrination engine. And to reject the ability to think dor yourself as dangerous counter-revolutionary elitism.
and what other alternatives were there?
All you can really say was that the majority of the country didnt want Broon, or Laber, any more, and indeed, its fairly clear that Laber were far happier in opposition, given the shit they left behind.
Exactly. It's not what they earn as an MP that attracts them. It's all the directorships where they get paid a fortune for working 1 day a year. And when they finish they will get a highly paid job no matter how incompetent they are.
They should be paid well as MPs but banned from any other form of paid employment during their term of office. And they should be forced to get a proper job when they finish.
I am becoming more and more convinced that they are /all/ untrustworthy bastards.
The only glimmer of hope is if we get a better electoral system which would end safe seats but I doubt that will actually happen.
I take it you are too young to remember the Vietman war, Watergate, the Monica Lewinsky, "Wont get fooled again", ...
just as paedophiles naturally gravitate to the Church, Primary Schools or the Boy Scouts, inveterate bullshit merchants and con artists naturally gravitate to power politics.
Dream on. Its all sewn up by the big parties one way or another and they are all bought years ago,
The first thing to realise is that it is the way it is. Voting is almost a complete waste of time. However that doesn't mean you are powerless.
In fact, today with governments running out of cash, their power is considerably diminished. Ditto the banks.
Also big business in the consumer area, and the marketing that goes with it, have taken a huge hit.
The establishment, in short, is crumbling.
You have to work with the system.
One way is to create new agenda. Start getting hot under the collar about something that actually IS relevant, create media interest, get people focussed on it, and then get the arguments across. If that then becomes an item that can help someone get elected, they will go along with the bandwagon.
That counters the false agendas that are put in front of people by the big powerful lobby groups as a distraction.
In my case I have picked power generation. Hammering away at the idiocy and vested interest of it all, and the total BS that is being spread as truth. It makes a difference. Its hot on the blogs, its upsetting the ministry involved, and people are aware of the arguments more than they were.
Fathers for justice ran a similar campaign: Looked at it rationally, they had some very good points. Once everyone was aware of the issues, it would have been political suicide to NOT engage with that agenda, and make changes.
Contrariwise, look at the mess that came out of the MMR BS... One doctor comes out with a 'theory' and a whole government policy was nearly destroyed. And a lot of children's lives with it.
There's a natural order in all this. "Extra rights for pink tailed rabbits' doesn't really cut it with the population, so silly issues vanish naturally unless kept alive by big money.
But an issue that really does affect everybody - like children's health, their electricity bills and so on, or putative 'climate change' is a lever that can but used to get votes. The advantage of the democratic process that we have, is that ultimately no matter what else the politicians may fudge, they cant ignore a large popular movement on a certain subject. That's all we have to change things with, but in the most massive of cases it does in fact work.
Another tool the peepul have, is that they have not (yet) removed all purchasing power and funneled it through the State. That's why socialism is so fundamentally un-democratic..it seeks to make your purchasing decisions for you. However if you use what you have to NOT purchase what you dislike, on ethical, moral or out of pure unfitness for purpose, then you also bend the power of the corporate profit machines towards things YOU want, not things THEY decide you ought to want. Likewise charitable donations. Support organisations whose aims and views coincide with your own.
Your feeling of helplessness only arises because you have bought into the socialism model of life: You want the government to change things for you. Accept that they can't and even if they could, mostly they wont. I work on the basis that they are manipulable puppets, and my task is to manipulate them, using their innate cowardice, lack of intelligence, massive egos and venality as the basic tools.
From that point onwards it is simply an exercise in marketing, strategic planning, tactical planning and game theory. In short its a neat intellectual challenge.
If you want to win a game with bent rules, cheat. Just don't get caught.
Don't whinge about the rules. That is ineffective. Use the rules as they are. The idiocy of the peepul is incalculable. Its used by smart men to control the game in a 'democratic system' BUT the people can be swayed by other smart men who have consciences and that's what you have to do.
Get smart.There's a battle on for the hearts and minds of the nation: the main protagonists are the big corporations, banks and politicians, with the media as a semi independent arm, and a large body of smart people who are not included. To be cynically blunt, the rest of the population is cannon fodder until they get educated to think for themselves. There is no sign of that happening yet. And yet they are not that stupid either. They can be roused by arguments that make sense.
So, stop thinking it terms of rights, oughts, perfect systems. Imagine that you have been slotted into a video game, at birth. It's rules are unclear, and most of the help screens don't. To advance in the game, you have to develop a strategy to test things you can do with the controls you have been given, and judge their effects and develop a game plan that either moves you up the levels, or changes the game entirely. It is rumoured that if you move up the levels, you may have more ability to change the game. On the other hand it is also suggested that if you move up the levels, your desire to keep moving up in a system you have now come to understand, may reduce your desire to change the rules. That is simply a function of whether your motive of moving up is to change the system, or protect your own position and score a lot of points.
HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.