Dang people who make politics their career! Don't they know that experience isn't necessary in politics? Worse yet their self-interest will do terrible things such as... forcing them to do a good job.
Neo, sometimes it's wise to at least make an attempt at understanding what is being discussed before declaring your own opinion
Thankfully Faraday is only a politician for a short period of time and then he is planning to retire. Notice how he isn't doing a good job? That is how you know. *joke... because I need this apparently*
To be honest I don't see how it is in a politician's best interest to screw over the country... I guess it could be like that one president who basically screwed over his country in a way that looked good (Because it caused a very brief golden age... Selling everything will do that)...
Can someone explain that?
Some words are prudent here, they are the words of
are basel Nyjal Faraday. A young man asked him a question, I can't remember the exact wording, however it can be paraphrased as thus:
"I am very interested in politics and would be interested in becoming a politician so I can represent my country; how do I get into politics? How do I get work experience with MPs or Lords?"
The advice Nigel Farage gave him was profound: Get a job, make his own money, learn how the world
works, and I mean in every sense of the word works. Only after all that, consider going into politics.
The alternative is become yet another career politician.
The reasoning is simple; I have talked to a great many workers who say that in a lot of cases there is a discord between what is taught and what is reality, particularly in business and finance. I personally too have seen insane cases in the education system where though it is broken, though solutions are readily available, it is impossible to push meaningful reform because of the ideological positions of the teachers. Couple that with the insular nature of Western Universities that enforces homogeneous ideology and broaches no dissent, you get a dangerous situation where the leaders we can choose have no understanding whatsoever of how the people they represent think, belief or work. They cannot solve the problems of people they know nothing of, they cannot be relatable to people they know nothing of, they cannot represent the people they were elected to represent, thereby violating the only legitimacy they have to exist on taxpayer funds.
However the problem goes deeper than that.
As we entered the post-war era the House of Commons stopped being dominated by workers and tradesmen and started being dominated by career politicians. The typical trajectory of the career politician begins with a child under private tutorship to meet the demanding requirements of accessing elite private secondary schools. Upon entering these schools whose funds are far beyond the means of normal people to pay, they emerge with the highest odds possible for entering an Oxbridge or Russel league Uni at a minimum. Upon graduation they are able to secure work placements with Lords, MPs and civil servants whom they have already known since they were a teenager, whom they have potentially already been given work experience given that these secondary schools and Unis coordinate work placements for their students and alumni. Then they must pick which borough to be their seat; note, I did not say pick which party - the party doesn't matter, what matters is your electoral odds of winning in that borough, that decides what party you're in. Gain favour in the party, you get given a safe seat to represent. From then on it's upwards, accepting gifts, job placements, speeches, promotions, earning enough lucrative sums to fund the next generation's tutorship, and the process begins anew - if they're even spending their own money, and not spending donations or state expenses.
Consider this. A third of MPs in the House of Commons went to private school and a tenth went to Eton.
The average salary of a person in the UK is £26,500 a year, British families need to make around £25,000 a year just to survive, a single year's worth of school fees for one pupil at say Eton or Westminster is £33,000. This is not just for MPs,
71% of senior judges, 62% of senior armed forces officers, 55% of top civil servants, 36% of the Cabinet, 43% of newspaper columnists all being from privately educated backgrounds. If you want to push an agenda onto the entire country, decide the curriculum for its future leaders in a handful of schools. Normal people cannot afford anywhere near any of the tools required to access such an elite system. This is an easily abusable system for a select minority of the UK to decide the destiny of the UK; they ignore that their power ultimately rests with the UK's people at their peril. Look at the two principle populists that are threatening in equal measure to destroy the UK or the EU; the SNP and UKIP. Most of SNPs MPs were educated in state schools, most of UKIPs MEPs never went to University, then consider how more Labour and Tory MPs got their degrees from Oxbridge than all other Unis combined, how can MPs say they represent their voters when they resent them and have no understanding whatsoever of their struggles? They live in idealistic worlds where they have spent their whole lives powerful and wealthy from childhood, it's an impossible endeavour. Thus such a system is naturally unstable and liable to extreme revolt.
But it gets worse.
Why does it seem so objectionable to have elite families command the nation, producing career politicians? Well, what is a career politician first and foremost? Well, it's a politician who pursues politics as a permanent profession of theirs. If you ignore my previous criticisms, on paper it can seem wonderful to have an established aristocracy who are raised with all the experience and intellectualism required to be a commander. Trained with excellent rhetoric, multilingualism, musical aptitude, athletics, scientific proficiency and philosophy, with experience and personal training from established politicians - it seems logical that such persons are the best suited to be leaders. I can speak from firsthand experience that their lists of talents are not exaggerations or lies, they truly do possess the skills they claim to possess.
Here it gets worse. A career politician concerned with politics as their profession is first and foremost concerned with maintaining and advancing their career, not the nation. They literally have no other choice, it is what pays their bills and maintains their elite social status. This means they must be willing to use every tool at their disposal, every person at their disposal, every connection at their disposal, the only thing that is indispensable is their career path. To put it in terms you may better empathize with, David Cameron did not campaign on the promise that he would deliver an EU referendum because he wanted the UK to leave the EU, he campaigned on the promise because he believed it would ensure his career would be maintained.
Combined together these factors all produce a horrifying situation, where high ranking officials and supposedly representative elected politicians are all schoolmates and have loyalties to one another regardless of what political aisle they sit on. They promote one another as they naturally trust the people they know already, and on a quid pro quo basis they in turn are promoted. Thus in spite of their elite intellectualism, the system produces ineffable sums of corruption where people are rewarded by corporations or foreign governments with lucrative jobs after their British career ends, and it produces politicians who are woefully inappropriate for leadership. See such things as Tony Blair become the Middle East peace envoy or Boris Johnson become for the foreign secretary for some extreme examples. Leaders that exist outside of the already established networks made in schooldays must then act ruthlessly and muster their own zealous following, hence why the four principle movers of British politics; Theresa May, Nigel Farage, Jeremy Corbyn and Nicola Sturgeon have constantly and immediately sought about purging and removing from power the elite in their ranks. For the elite career politician their loyalties are to their friends and themselves, not the countrymen they can scarcely empathize with. Contrast this with a working citizen who stands for election in their county, not because their county is a safe seat, but because it's
their county. They represent their country not because they got the best advice from spin doctors and future colleagues but because it is
their country, and they really do represent it. They want to serve, not command, and as we all know the greatest leaders are born from those who first learned how to follow.
It's been an overdue purge and it's still a long way from being completed. Democratic leaders must be selected without nepotism, corruption, favoritism, and represent the country and stand on their own merits - when they finish and their merits are exhausted, or their loyalties conflicted, retire or return to their career. Having a small boy's club of elite children control the future is liable to end in worse political fiascos than the ones we have already witnessed. As it stands the weaknesses in the system are obvious, if you have enough capital at your disposal you need only lavish a select few with gifts, donations and job placements to buy their loyalty, and with it the whole political system. Thus the option for those left who do not want to merely vote for the lesser of two corruptions must vote for any alternative available - and given how liberals reacted to the uprisings of populists, communists, nationalists and conservatives all over Yurop, it would be prudent to stop trying to make more Blairs and Clintons.
Thus when you hear are based Nige sneering at our government replacing a knighted career diplomat with a knighted career diplomat, you hear such noble titles; Knighthood awarded for gallant service, a career professional with in depth expertise in international diplomacy -
we just hear "some bloke who is a family member, friend or fundraiser for the party". We no longer see anything professional in the conduct of the professional politician. The British public's relations with Whitehall mandarins is strained to say the least; Sir Ivan is yet more proof of the dubious loyalties of professional politicians, it is fortunate that our negotiations were in the end, not to be conducted by a pro-EU unelected official
Author
Topic: Brexit! Conversation Continued (Read 192932 times)