Skip to main content

What? WHAT? Oh for fuck's sake

Argh. Just, argh.

What? Why argh?

Well, it's fairly straightforward. I'm a citizen of a country which labours under the apprehension that it's a functioning democracy. As most students of the political process will be aware a democracy can be defined as a governmental system consisting of opposing parties, voted for by the population at large. The party of government is the party in power, the party not in power (generally known as "the opposition") is a vital counterweight to the government, acting as it does as a check and a balance to the party in power. The fundamental idea, the driving principle behind this system is that it is for the people, that a government has a strong and effective opposition. That, in effect, nobody gets a bit carried away (or "a bit Lenin" as it could be known, add or delete dictator of you choice here, I'm aware it's a lazy analogy, stick whoever you like in, I don't fucking care. "A bit Clegg" might not have quite the same impact, however), that their actions are scrutinised, questioned, tested. That, in the end, something workable comes out.

Now I'm painfully aware that this is unworkable cobblers and what we're reduced to is a shambolic popularity contest, but I was kind of clinging to the hope that maybe, just maybe, HMG's oppostion did actually have some ideological problems with the current crop's somewhat worrying managing of affairs. Y'know, the victim-blaming, straw-man building, borderline racism, money-laundering and, when all else fails, just plain lying. I'd have thought there was a bit there for an opposition with a touch of get up and go to work with.

So, imagine my despair this evening when my twitter feed included the following gem from HM's Leader of the Opposition:

Ed Miliband ‏@Ed_Miliband 2h
Huge congratulations to @JermainJackman. Knew you were an incredibly special singer from the first time I heard you. #TheVoiceUK

Let's break this down. Point by depressing point. Point one. Ed has time to watch The Voice, or rather, Ed has free time in which he ACTIVELY CHOOSES to watch The Voice. Point two. Ed has no calibration for "incredibly special singer". Otis Redding was an incredibly special singer. Sam Cooke was an incredibly special singer. Laura Nyro was an incredibly special singer. A quick whizz over to YouTube informs your humble correspondent that yer man off The Voice is certainly a decent singer. He has yet, however, to the best of my knowledge to release "a change is gonna come". Point three, either Ed is a tin eared dick with too much time on his hands or, and this, I suspect, is the case, some fucking PPE policy gonk in his office wrote a memo to the effect in order to appeal to the voters of Britan Ed had to pretend to like some shit off the telly, which is the worst thing of all, because that implies that they hold us in nothing but contempt.

Politicians of Britain, I genuinely don't care what you think about popular culture. If you like One Direction or Tom Waits, if you like to have a morning jog or are addicted to the the Great British Bake-off. Politicians of Britain, let me be clear. I AM NOT INTERESTED IN YOU AS A PERSON. You are there to do a fucking job. You are paid to do said job. Do it. And keep your think-tank generated faux opinions to yourselves for the love of God. I want to know what you think about actual things, not mere stuff.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Inedible

"He says it's inedible" said my front of house manager, as she laid the half-eaten fish and chips in front of me, and instantly I relaxed.  Clearly, I observed, it was edible to some degree. I comped it, because I can't be arsed arguing the toss, and I want to make my front of house's lives as simple as possible. The haddock had been delivered that morning. The fryers had been cleaned that morning. The batter had been made that morning (and it's very good batter, ask me nicely and I'll give you the recipe some time). The fish and chips was identical to the other 27 portions I'd sent out on that lunch service, all of which had come back more or less hoovered up, we have have a (justified, if I do say so myself) very good reputation for our chips. But it was, apparently, "inedible". When it comes to complaints, less is more. If you use a hyperbolic word like that, I'll switch off, you've marked yourself as a rube, a chump, I'm not g...

Creepy old men

I note, somewhat wearily, that creepy old men are back in the news, being creepy. Creepy old men, and their apologists and enablers, who argue that their creepiness is somehow the natural order of things. Old men would have you believe that it is difficult to not be a creepy old man. That it is a task of epic proportions. It is not that difficult. It is a matter of intention. As yet more of the grimness of Epstein unfolds, creepy old men are, sadly, a flaccid topic once again. Whether it be pursuing students thirty years their junior, or simply not asking too many questions about the background of the probably legal young woman who you've just been introduced to by your good pal Jeff. To be clear, I am not referring to criminal creepy old men, the ones who actually committed statutory rape, the ones who fucked trafficked hirls. That is not something which is allowed to get away merely with the contempt of the observer.  That deserves prison.  No , I'm referring to the hinterla...

Chop chop

I was completely ignorant of the fuss over the edited Trump speech in an edition of Panorama until, one moment later, I wasn't. And the reasons for my ignorance are instructive. I had no idea that the story was even brewing until the surprise Sunday night news of the resignations of Tom Davie and Deborah Turness. As I'm sure you are by now aware, this was occasioned by a clumsy edit in an old edition of Panorama, which has already been on the iplayer for a year. It's a non-story. Except people decided to make it a story. The reason I'd heard nothing of it until the resignations was that I'm not on X, where, apparently, it was all the media classes had been talking about for a week. It was an obsession of the unholy right-wing trifecta of the Mail, Telegraph and Times (who, given that they sent a bloke just last week to interview the wrong Bill di Blasio, you'd think would wind their necks in over factual inacccuracy). It was big news on GB news, all self-contain...