We live in an era of 'strong-leader' government. The politenesses of democratic discourse have been put aside and people like Trump, Putin and Xi Jinping march on, imposing their brands of single-minded right-wing control on their nations. Like dictators, they assume they are the only people who can 'make their nations great again'. Any dissent is shouted (or tweeted) down or suppressed.
Was it a coincidence that there was a spy-poisoning scandal at the same time as Putin was running for president? There is nothing to galvanise a nation around its leader than the sight of that leader showing apparent toughness in foreign affairs. Think Maggie and the Falklands. Theresa May needed no prompting. She shrugged off the shambles of Brexit to grab the reigns and show that she could deal with Johnny Foreigner, and promptly expelled 23 Russian diplomats.
On the eve of the election, the BBC website asked Does Putin's Russia reject the West? Many of the themes seemed somehow familiar and oh so typical of those 'strong leaders'. May is adopting the same political tactics as Putin, adopting the same messages to position herself, like him as 'the natural leader' of her country.
'For those who don't remember the [1990s], officials and the state-run media machine now constantly spread the fear of chaos. It comes with the message - President Vladimir Putin brought an end to that. He brought order and stability.'
It is good to have someone strong and stable to solve the problem of 'chaos'. According to the Tory narrative it was Labour who created the world-wide recession and chaos of 2009 and only they, the 'natural party of government' who brought an end to that.
'The idea that Russia faces a hostile outside world has spread. ... it was the West that fomented chaos ... and tried to force its ways on to Russia, Putin argues. ... the West wanted to humiliate the former superpower.'
The Tory narrative would have us believe that the UK also faces a hostile world, one inhabited by the EU/France/Germany who have been trying to undermine and humiliate another former superpower.
'We used to have a powerful civil society. Now they are bringing order and control.' The former manager of a Gulag museum says and his organisation has been branded a 'foreign agent', a term 'applied to all groups engaged in "political activity" and receiving funding from the West.'
Civil society is hated by right wing governments. You do not have to read many Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, Daily Express or Sun headlines to see how despised any organisation is that dares to question the government. 'Snowflakes'!
There is a growing emphasis on religious belief and traditional values, 'away from the corrupting influences of the West ... Putin has undergone his own transformation in power. He now styles himself as religious and refers to "Russian values" on a regular basis ... he also places great stress on the institution of the family.''
I am still unclear what those British values are that our schools are meant to be promoting. Something to do with honesty, decency and respect for the law which are surely universal values and (whisper it quietly) not unique to Britain (or the UK). They may sound Churchillian, Bulldog spirit and all that. Come on, let's all sing 'The British, the British, the British are best ...'
Close to the Ukraine border, some born-again Cossacks argue that the West is 'a parasite that destroyed the Soviet Union, fed off the spoils, and tried to humiliate and subjugate Russia ... such views would once have been dismissed as extreme but over the past few years they've merged into the mainstream in Russia, pushed by senior officials and state television.'
Back to our news media again, adopting the various lies about the outside world and the EU, making them mainstream in public discourse. Vide the Jacob Rees-Mogg idea about the EU making us a vassal state.
An entrepreneur says that '"The government is doing everything possible to isolate Russia. It's a very sad fact." Taming the media was one of the president's priorities, very soon after coming to power, and it has had a long-lasting impact. "Instead of talking about problems we have inside the country, they talk about how we are surrounded by enemies who all want the worst for us. It's really scary, because it whips everything up. People then think we need to push back, otherwise we will be overrun and destroyed."'
Oh those European enemies, determined to do down the proud Brits.
The over-powerful Murdoch media empire which is far too close to ministers and the Tory party is as close to state control of the media as we are likely to get. Even the BBC is acting like a stricken rabbit, uncertain whether to follow its instincts or protect its licence fee and charter.
'Putin said "forget about modernisation, we're going back to traditional things."' The Curator of an art museum argues 'Being open, challenging and modern - all are firmly out of fashion. They've been ousted by isolation, control and tradition.'
Fear of outsiders; Isolationist not globalist; Control of the media. Stamping down on dissent (remember those treasonous saboteurs); Endorsing traditional values ... Yes, they all sound very familiar.
Now we know where our government got their ideas from. Strong and Stable, folks!
PS: Putin won with 75% of the vote. It would be unkind to mention that all political rallies of more than 12 people required 'government approval' and that he had imprisoned most of his biggest critics.
At least we have not come to that quite yet, but the direct personal attacks on Jeremy Corbyn are as close as we get to the same. It is so much easier to play the man and not the ball.
Showing posts with label What do they take us for?. Show all posts
Showing posts with label What do they take us for?. Show all posts
Sunday, 18 March 2018
Thursday, 12 March 2015
Getting it
Back in December, the editor of the Independent wrote a leader entitled Our view of MPs has been tested to breaking point.
In it, he said:
Over the past few parliaments, the reputation of our MPs has taken a battering. The sleazy 1990s were followed by the Iraq War, launched on shoddy intelligence, and against which a million of us marched, to no avail. Then in quick succession came an expenses crisis which showed many politicians stealing from the public purse, and a financial crisis which wasn’t caused by the poor, but for which they picked up the bill.
And in all that time this newspaper has resisted the caricature of our political class as a bunch of grubby apparatchiks on the take. We believe very strongly in democracy, and reckon that for all its failings, Britain’s democracy is relatively free of corruption. We’ve also argued that though Westminster has its share of crooks, many if not most MPs are decent, industrious, public-spirited types who could get paid better elsewhere.
And so he went on.
This week's news was that the former Head of Civil Service who might arguably have an axe to grind but equally might just know more about MPs than the rest of us, said: Ministers don't get reality of life. He went on: few politicians have any idea what life is like for people living on benefits and criticised those who argued We send our children to private schools, we have private healthcare, we travel by car or chauffeur, we don't go on public transport.
He went on to suggest that ministers should have done jobs like the population they're serving.
Locally, activists who want to change the system argue that they will note vote as the whole system is rotten. Is it surprising when they feel their MPs are as far removed as this. Not that they have any idea what system they do want of course.
We continue to live in difficult and unpleasant times.
In it, he said:
Over the past few parliaments, the reputation of our MPs has taken a battering. The sleazy 1990s were followed by the Iraq War, launched on shoddy intelligence, and against which a million of us marched, to no avail. Then in quick succession came an expenses crisis which showed many politicians stealing from the public purse, and a financial crisis which wasn’t caused by the poor, but for which they picked up the bill.
And in all that time this newspaper has resisted the caricature of our political class as a bunch of grubby apparatchiks on the take. We believe very strongly in democracy, and reckon that for all its failings, Britain’s democracy is relatively free of corruption. We’ve also argued that though Westminster has its share of crooks, many if not most MPs are decent, industrious, public-spirited types who could get paid better elsewhere.
And so he went on.
This week's news was that the former Head of Civil Service who might arguably have an axe to grind but equally might just know more about MPs than the rest of us, said: Ministers don't get reality of life. He went on: few politicians have any idea what life is like for people living on benefits and criticised those who argued We send our children to private schools, we have private healthcare, we travel by car or chauffeur, we don't go on public transport.
He went on to suggest that ministers should have done jobs like the population they're serving.
Locally, activists who want to change the system argue that they will note vote as the whole system is rotten. Is it surprising when they feel their MPs are as far removed as this. Not that they have any idea what system they do want of course.
We continue to live in difficult and unpleasant times.
Wednesday, 4 March 2015
The stars have it
Astrology is a 'diagnostic tool' that may help the National Health Service and people who say otherwise are 'racist' an MP has claimed. So says an article in my newspaper.
Astrology could be used to 'take huge pressure off doctors' and that one day it would have a role in healthcare.
[The MP] was critical of people 'such as Professor Brian Cox'.
The opposition is based on ... the SIP formula - superstition, ignorance and prejudice. They are deeply prejudiced, and racially prejudiced, which is troubling.
As usual, one is lost for words. I assume his definition of 'racist' is rather different from the rest of the world's.
And as for ignorance: I wonder how good he is at special relativity and understanding spacetime. I know who I would trust to know about the cosmos.
This is not, as one might expect, the outpourings of a UKIP MP but of a Tory one. We must study their manifesto closely.
Astrology could be used to 'take huge pressure off doctors' and that one day it would have a role in healthcare.
[The MP] was critical of people 'such as Professor Brian Cox'.
The opposition is based on ... the SIP formula - superstition, ignorance and prejudice. They are deeply prejudiced, and racially prejudiced, which is troubling.
As usual, one is lost for words. I assume his definition of 'racist' is rather different from the rest of the world's.
And as for ignorance: I wonder how good he is at special relativity and understanding spacetime. I know who I would trust to know about the cosmos.
This is not, as one might expect, the outpourings of a UKIP MP but of a Tory one. We must study their manifesto closely.
Sunday, 1 March 2015
Language
Janet Street-Porter - not someone I usually quote - on the subject of politicians:
... The problem for all political leaders is that they may have policies, and they may have conviction, but none of that is getting through to disenchanted voters, a large percentage of whom haven't decided whether to bother voting, and if they do, who will get their support.
The tragedy of talented people on the left or right is that they are trapped in a system which has lost the support of a big proportion of the electorate. Politicians speak, and we don't understand what language they are using. It's not one in common usage. It's antediluvian, peppered with platitudes about 'hard-working people'.
She goes on:
If only we could remove modern politics' false demarcation lines. They seem redundant to most of the population who can't understand why essential stuff like the NHS and education, care of the elderly and transport aren't run through cross-party consensus aided by impartial advisers. Instead, convention dictates that each new government imposes a new strategy from the top, and huge sums of money are wasted implementing what I call macho dick-on-table strategy: change for change's sake.
We've already heard how Andrew Lansley's re-organisation of the NHS has been dubbed a 'disaster'. Ditto Michael Gove's rewriting of the school curriculum and examinations, now being toned down by his successor.
I seem to recall that we once had an independent civil service who ran things under the watchful eye of Ministers. Now we have Ministers thinking they are Chief Executives without any knowledge, or grounding in the relevant subjects - although most did go to school, some may have used public transport and some even the NHS - and interested in their own short-term career enhancements.
Oh yes, it was so good to hear that the Education Minister wrote to the school of the three girls who gone to join ISIS. Well done on another sterling letter (gets publicity; no cost; appears caring).
... The problem for all political leaders is that they may have policies, and they may have conviction, but none of that is getting through to disenchanted voters, a large percentage of whom haven't decided whether to bother voting, and if they do, who will get their support.
The tragedy of talented people on the left or right is that they are trapped in a system which has lost the support of a big proportion of the electorate. Politicians speak, and we don't understand what language they are using. It's not one in common usage. It's antediluvian, peppered with platitudes about 'hard-working people'.
She goes on:
If only we could remove modern politics' false demarcation lines. They seem redundant to most of the population who can't understand why essential stuff like the NHS and education, care of the elderly and transport aren't run through cross-party consensus aided by impartial advisers. Instead, convention dictates that each new government imposes a new strategy from the top, and huge sums of money are wasted implementing what I call macho dick-on-table strategy: change for change's sake.
We've already heard how Andrew Lansley's re-organisation of the NHS has been dubbed a 'disaster'. Ditto Michael Gove's rewriting of the school curriculum and examinations, now being toned down by his successor.
I seem to recall that we once had an independent civil service who ran things under the watchful eye of Ministers. Now we have Ministers thinking they are Chief Executives without any knowledge, or grounding in the relevant subjects - although most did go to school, some may have used public transport and some even the NHS - and interested in their own short-term career enhancements.
Oh yes, it was so good to hear that the Education Minister wrote to the school of the three girls who gone to join ISIS. Well done on another sterling letter (gets publicity; no cost; appears caring).
Monday, 23 February 2015
Saying it as one sees it
Despite my best endeavours, it is becoming almost impossible to make wry comments about the nastiness of the election campaign. The politicians are almost beyond parody, promising free daffodils to anyone who will vote for them; promises which will be conveniently lost when they see the reality of what they have inherited; the lack of money for daffodils - due of course to the incompetent daffodil growers; or being an aspiration without a specific time commitment which can then be kicked into the very long grass.
Labour announces an initiative one day. The Tories - and last week it was Grant Shapps - promptly said it was 'rubbish' and that Labour was doing no more than re-announcing something they had already 'announced'; and anyway they (the Tories) had already done it and more. So, yah boo! the playground bullies used to end.
Who to believe? Much better to read the Daily Mash and have done. There is more truth there than in anything supposedly grown up politicians are saying.
A circular came through the letterbox from Labour today. Labour's Tim Dwelly, who chairs Cornwall Council's Economy Committee, commented:
It is now clear that the Government simply doesn't trust Cornwall to spend its own money. I would describe the Government's approach to the EU programme as a total shambles. It is hard to believe they could be this incompetent - our MPs appear to be either devoid of any influence or completely silent.
Overstatement? Probably not since the arguments on who should take decisions on EU money have been going backward and forward for months. Hey ho for Localism.
He goes on: While £500m of funding for Cornwall is held back, Cameron and Clegg, though adults, could not sort out between them who was going to announce, or re-announce - crumbs from the Whitehall table to provide cycle paths in Redruth.
Having been involved in just such bickering about who should announce what in the past, it all sounds horribly familiar.
But hang on: cycle paths in Redruth? Are they going to make a step-change to the economic performance of Cornwall? Maybe I agree with Whitehall after all and Cameron and Clegg were simply arguing who should not announce the money.
Labour announces an initiative one day. The Tories - and last week it was Grant Shapps - promptly said it was 'rubbish' and that Labour was doing no more than re-announcing something they had already 'announced'; and anyway they (the Tories) had already done it and more. So, yah boo! the playground bullies used to end.
Who to believe? Much better to read the Daily Mash and have done. There is more truth there than in anything supposedly grown up politicians are saying.
A circular came through the letterbox from Labour today. Labour's Tim Dwelly, who chairs Cornwall Council's Economy Committee, commented:
It is now clear that the Government simply doesn't trust Cornwall to spend its own money. I would describe the Government's approach to the EU programme as a total shambles. It is hard to believe they could be this incompetent - our MPs appear to be either devoid of any influence or completely silent.
Overstatement? Probably not since the arguments on who should take decisions on EU money have been going backward and forward for months. Hey ho for Localism.
He goes on: While £500m of funding for Cornwall is held back, Cameron and Clegg, though adults, could not sort out between them who was going to announce, or re-announce - crumbs from the Whitehall table to provide cycle paths in Redruth.
Having been involved in just such bickering about who should announce what in the past, it all sounds horribly familiar.
But hang on: cycle paths in Redruth? Are they going to make a step-change to the economic performance of Cornwall? Maybe I agree with Whitehall after all and Cameron and Clegg were simply arguing who should not announce the money.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)