Instead of admiring the people who have to sit through hours and hours of boring meetings to get democratic changes on our behalf we now think they are all slimy and untrustworthy. This could be do do with awarding themselves an 11% pay rise at a time of austerity, taking their basic salary to £66,000 a year, or that they claimed for a duck house on expenses, or just that the big institution of government makes it hard to carry out all their principled promises.
But what is the alternative?
If we are that disillusioned we could have a revolution. Man the barricades, wave flags and sing songs from Les Miserables. Unfortunately, no one writes romantic stories about what happens after the revolution. We could put a military dictator in charge: someone who would promise great things and deliver on many of them, smoke cigars and shoot anyone they don't like but chaotic dictators don't make the best romantic leads. We still have a Queen, so we could revert all powers back to her. Let her decide that we can eat cake. That doesn't sound so bad. I like cake.
Unfortunately, we haven't done either of those two things. We've just used the voting system to 'stick it to the man'. I know several people who voted to leave the European Union, just, "to show that tosser Cameron what we think of him." When people are asked why they like Nigel Farage they say it's because he's not like a normal politician and they can relate to him. They like him because instead of doing the job he was elected for (i.e. sitting in the European parliament holding officials to account and getting the best deal for the UK) he is leaning on the bars of the world, pint in hand, making lewd comments at young women. Jeremy Corbyn is the same. Well, obviously he's not the same but he is popular in the same way: not for actually doing his job and opposing the government in a sparkling and scintillating way at PMQs but for sitting on the floor of a train complaining that he can't get a seat.
Local elections are coming up and in the depths of Essex you can vote for a conservative candidate or you can 'stick it to the man'. Socialism and liberalism doesn't get this far east from London. Recognised parties don't bother fielding candidates for the disillusioned Tory voter, so it's left to the independents and it's up to us to decide who is least qualified for the job. We could look to Flo, the flower arranging sixty year old, who seems nice and liberal with a pleasant smile and can talk at length on the subject of keeping gardens tidy. We could choose Mark, the ex-policeman who has a history of wearing dresses (only in panto) but he has been the Mayor, so he might be over qualified.
I'm a little wary of voting for an independent candidate. It feels like a leap into the dark. How do we know what they stand for? At least if they are Conservative we know they put wealth creation above everything else; if they are Labour they are fighting for social welfare and workers rights; if they are Liberals, they are trying to make everyone happy; if they are UKiP, they want to leave the European Union and if they are BNP the most important thing is to send all the foreigners back home. They have manifestos and they try to stick to them An individual within that party can't make it their sole mission to ban cake but an independent candidate could.
I would like to vote for a candidate who is clear and honest. Someone who is standing up to do the job, with the backing of a party registered with the electoral commission, so that I can check on their principals because I don't think that choosing the most incompetent person is the best way to get what you want.
One candidate on our ballot paper is running under the party name "Fighting Unsustainable Housing Because We Care Party." I was confused. What does this mean? It seemed very vague and I had images of people in nurses uniforms battling straw houses, so I looked them up. The electoral commission has the name registered as one of eleven name changes the BNP made in 2016. The BNP have worked out that if they choose a stupid title that everyone agrees with like, "Because we can make Britain Better," or "Because we love Scotland" or "Local people first" they can win, especially if they have chosen a candidate who appears to be totally incapable of doing the job. They have scoured the country for anarchists and idiots and promised to pay for their leaflets and told them that they are just going to help them 'stick it to the man.' They have done particularly well in this area by managing to find a man who can't even sign his own name.
Politics is important. Democracy is vital. The alternatives are worse.
I will be making certain that I know who I am voting for and will try to put my cross next to the person I think is most capable of doing the job I want them to; the person who has similar principals to me and will go to meetings and argue and vote on my behalf. I hope you do the same. If you want to vote for the BNP candidate then you should so. I won't agree with you but that is what democracy is for. However, you shouldn't be fooled into thinking that voting for someone who is pretending to be something else so they can not bother to turn up for meetings and do the job you have elected them for is somehow 'sticking it to the man.'
If we are that disillusioned we could have a revolution. Man the barricades, wave flags and sing songs from Les Miserables. Unfortunately, no one writes romantic stories about what happens after the revolution. We could put a military dictator in charge: someone who would promise great things and deliver on many of them, smoke cigars and shoot anyone they don't like but chaotic dictators don't make the best romantic leads. We still have a Queen, so we could revert all powers back to her. Let her decide that we can eat cake. That doesn't sound so bad. I like cake.
Unfortunately, we haven't done either of those two things. We've just used the voting system to 'stick it to the man'. I know several people who voted to leave the European Union, just, "to show that tosser Cameron what we think of him." When people are asked why they like Nigel Farage they say it's because he's not like a normal politician and they can relate to him. They like him because instead of doing the job he was elected for (i.e. sitting in the European parliament holding officials to account and getting the best deal for the UK) he is leaning on the bars of the world, pint in hand, making lewd comments at young women. Jeremy Corbyn is the same. Well, obviously he's not the same but he is popular in the same way: not for actually doing his job and opposing the government in a sparkling and scintillating way at PMQs but for sitting on the floor of a train complaining that he can't get a seat.
Local elections are coming up and in the depths of Essex you can vote for a conservative candidate or you can 'stick it to the man'. Socialism and liberalism doesn't get this far east from London. Recognised parties don't bother fielding candidates for the disillusioned Tory voter, so it's left to the independents and it's up to us to decide who is least qualified for the job. We could look to Flo, the flower arranging sixty year old, who seems nice and liberal with a pleasant smile and can talk at length on the subject of keeping gardens tidy. We could choose Mark, the ex-policeman who has a history of wearing dresses (only in panto) but he has been the Mayor, so he might be over qualified.
I'm a little wary of voting for an independent candidate. It feels like a leap into the dark. How do we know what they stand for? At least if they are Conservative we know they put wealth creation above everything else; if they are Labour they are fighting for social welfare and workers rights; if they are Liberals, they are trying to make everyone happy; if they are UKiP, they want to leave the European Union and if they are BNP the most important thing is to send all the foreigners back home. They have manifestos and they try to stick to them An individual within that party can't make it their sole mission to ban cake but an independent candidate could.
I would like to vote for a candidate who is clear and honest. Someone who is standing up to do the job, with the backing of a party registered with the electoral commission, so that I can check on their principals because I don't think that choosing the most incompetent person is the best way to get what you want.
One candidate on our ballot paper is running under the party name "Fighting Unsustainable Housing Because We Care Party." I was confused. What does this mean? It seemed very vague and I had images of people in nurses uniforms battling straw houses, so I looked them up. The electoral commission has the name registered as one of eleven name changes the BNP made in 2016. The BNP have worked out that if they choose a stupid title that everyone agrees with like, "Because we can make Britain Better," or "Because we love Scotland" or "Local people first" they can win, especially if they have chosen a candidate who appears to be totally incapable of doing the job. They have scoured the country for anarchists and idiots and promised to pay for their leaflets and told them that they are just going to help them 'stick it to the man.' They have done particularly well in this area by managing to find a man who can't even sign his own name.
Politics is important. Democracy is vital. The alternatives are worse.
I will be making certain that I know who I am voting for and will try to put my cross next to the person I think is most capable of doing the job I want them to; the person who has similar principals to me and will go to meetings and argue and vote on my behalf. I hope you do the same. If you want to vote for the BNP candidate then you should so. I won't agree with you but that is what democracy is for. However, you shouldn't be fooled into thinking that voting for someone who is pretending to be something else so they can not bother to turn up for meetings and do the job you have elected them for is somehow 'sticking it to the man.'
No comments:
Post a Comment