Ken Clarke opines the fact that Angela Merkel is western democracy’s last hope, adding that he is: angry and depressed at the appalling state politics in the UK has descended into.
This article continues by stating that he has: a deep unease about the rise of populist, far-right forces that are ramping through western liberal democracies from the US to France. Clarke is reported to have said: It’s resistance to change, resistance to the modern world and a desire for simple solutions to very complicated political problems,” he says. “The manner in which the political debate is publicised has changed, the mass media is hysterical and competitive and social media is taking over with short soundbites. It has thrown politics into complete confusion.
Citing coverage of the New Statesman’s recent interview with Tony Blair as an example of media hysteria, he is positive about Blair’s intervention: My understanding [of the interview] was that Tony only wants to play a part in trying to reform centre-left politics, and that’s a good thing .
Those statements by Clarke beggar belief.
- just who is it that should be held responsible for the appalling state into which politics in the UK has descended, if not the political class when it is they that have controlled politics through their iron control of information, coupled with their lack of knowledge of matters in which they should be knowledgeable?
- just why have, what he terms, populist far-right forces rampaged through western liberal democracies?
- just why does he think that they are resistant to change, resistant to the modern world and have a desire for simple solutions to very complicated political problems;
- just why does he believe that the manner in which the political debate is publicised has changed, resulting in the mass media being hysterical and competitive and social media having taken over with short soundbites; and throwing politics into complete confusion?
- On the basis that all Blair is attempting is to derail Brexit, something in tune with Clarke’s wishes, where Clarke’s comments about Blair’s motives are concerned, all that amounts to is one Europhile supporting another. Come to that, is not Clarke centre-left – so what the hell is he doing in in the Conservative Party? Perhaps, yet again, I digress?
Might just it be that they have created their own problem through their control of information, coupled with the fact they are, in truth unknowledgeable on world matters? Might it just be that the people Clarke terms ‘populist far-right’ are fed up with western liberalism, seeing ‘foreigners’ receiving better ‘treatment’ than themselves, the indigenous people of their land? For what reason should such people be termed populist far-right when all they want is for their own kind to be cared for before others? Might it just be that if change is to come, that they wish for said change to be on their terms – after all, just whose country is it? It is all very well for Clarke to complain about people wanting simple solutions to very complicated problems – but who is it who has failed to educate the electorate because they know not themselves? Yes, the manner in which political debate is publicised has changed, so the political class who have failed to realise this now consider themselves blameless? Just why should the media be blamed for becoming hysterical when Clarke and his ilk have stoked hysteria – and the media – by their benign utterances and articles? Do not politicians resort to soundbites? Have not politicians thrown politics into confusion by their total lack of knowledge where matters of state are concerned?
It is perhaps unfair to single out Kenneth Clarke as he is not alone in his ability to not fairly address the problems our nation faces – due to being unaware of the detail involved and thus attempting to ‘flannel’ because of that; or, having a hidden agenda of his own.
I can but return to the comment of Tscheuhcter: You know he didn’t get up there by himself, he doesn’t belong up there, he doesn’t know what to do while he’s up there, he’s elevated beyond his ability to function, and you just wonder what kind of dumb arse put him up there to begin with.
Just when has any MP told us the truth; just when has any MP who pontificates about democracy actually addressed – and discussed with us – the actual meaning/origin of the word ‘democracy’? Not one has, as to so do would undermine their power over us, a power they retain through, probably, the most undemocratic form of democracy ever invented. It is unfair to blame the ‘dumb arses’ who placed Clarke and his ilk where they are, because they know no better; as they have been lied to – and thus led up the garden path – during the course of decades, by a collection of charlatans.
On his blog, Richard North takes to task Peter Lilley for being ‘stupid’; and illustrates his article with a picture of Lilley speaking in the HoC while MPs in the background are seen to be laughing. If only the reason for their hilarity was they recognized Lilley’s stupidity of what he was saying. Then we might be witnessing that we had serious politicians and not mindless voting fodder. Due to time constraints it has not been possible to read the Hansard account of Lilley’s speech, however I fear that what was amusing his colleagues was some quip – which means we then saw a ‘standing joke’ making another.
While this ineptitude by our political class continues it will not be long before a decision they make – and this observation is not related just to matters Brexit – will cause such outrage among the public that the result will make the ‘Duggan’ riots of 2011 seem like a gentle walk in the park. It would, perhaps, be quite fitting if we, the people, who have allowed our seat of democracy – aka, the Augean Stables ( a condition or place marked by great accumulation of filth or corruption) – to be created, were to clean it up.
On the other hand, rather than create ‘societal unrest’, perhaps before then the light may dawn about the benefits of direct democracy – and yes, I am known to indulge in wishful thinking……….