The crunch

[sandGroundZero]

regarding post #458

The MP for Mansfield may be a busy little ideologue on the evidence I've seen. Born since the Miners' strike and elected to parliament in 2017, his vlog suggests to me that a large number of MPs most time-consuming activity is campaigning for re-election. He is symptomatic of Labour's enduring weakness, though.

[sandGroundZero]

post #456
"Haven't seen the Schama series, but a quick read of the Graun review seems to indicate that there's nothing new, really."

Crucially, Schama never talks down, or attempts to sugar the pill by presenting a complex argument as anything other. Your brain has to keep up. — Euan Ferguson in the Observer

I anticipate most people do not have a view on Romanticism, per se. Romanticism and the European 'Enlightenment' are hard to reconcile; it is hard to sort out. Simon Schama asserts contemporary parallels. The Romantics and Us gives contemporary events some context.

Also, Melanie Phillips' Dreamers express our feelings but then betray us all — the contrarian view?

It’s in the widespread support for Black Lives Matter as an “anti-racist” cause, whereas it is in fact an anti-white, anti-west revolutionary movement.

[Snig's foot]

regarding post #458

The MP for Mansfield may be a busy little ideologue on the evidence I've seen. Born since the Miners' strike and elected to parliament in 2017, his vlog suggests to me that a large number of MPs most time-consuming activity is campaigning for re-election. He is symptomatic of Labour's enduring weakness, though.

A friend of mine worked with him some years ago....long before he became an MP. She describes him as 'Quite the laziest young man I've ever met.'

[said]

Most people (in any country) vote for a party, whose policies most closely match their own views. I always do - tactical voting excepted.......Why would it matter what colour/race an M.P. happened to be, so long as they do what they promised?

In which case, colour, creed, faith etc., each have one common trait - none do as they promise. But certain MP's are more likely to be chosen as scapegoats.

[said]

Not the most interesting vlog I've ever seen. Very 'middle management in a stationery firm' vibe. His Wiki entry proves him something of an a-hole.

The only reason people become MP's is for their own personal aggrandisement - if any were to tell you any different, they would be blatantly lying.

No-one in their right mind thinks any differently. The best you can hope for in a representative, is that he/she follows the will of the people so that they may be re-elected. Even then - it is all an act.

[Toodles McGinty]

The only reason people become MP's is for their own personal aggrandisement - if any were to tell you any different, they would be blatantly lying.

No-one in their right mind thinks any differently. The best you can hope for in a representative, is that he/she follows the will of the people so that they may be re-elected. Even then - it is all an act.

To my, and I've no doubt your surprise, I find myself agreeing with you. In part anyway.

As discussed on another thread, they aren't in it for the money. Even the PM's salary is ridiculously low. There are some in Parliament that I look at and think they are utterly useless, and goodness knows what they'd do if they had to get a real job. Those in safe seats, just treading water. Those you can virtually guarantee that if they are ever in the news for whatever reason, a constituent would pop up and say 'we never saw him / her. They never did a single thing for us'.

However I do think that some of our politicians at least started out with ideals. In all parties, all colours. I'm not saying that makes them any better at the job, but their hearts were in the right place. Perhaps the political process jades them. Sadly, they are unlikely to advance to any real position of power.

[sandGroundZero]

I have to say posts 463 & 464 are cynical and misguided. It is neither level of remuneration nor "for their own personal aggrandisement" that results in us having MPs that "are utterly useless".

There is a systemic problem. If any idealists ever became politicians to improve our lot, they were deluded. In any case these days, idealism is surpassed by ideology. Council chambers and parliament are battle grounds. Most citizens (though clearly, not all) have better things to do than spend their time and energy on ideological tub thumping and democratic institutions should recognize that fact.

[local]

I simply don't accept that all politicians are in it for vanity or personal aggrandisement.

There are many MP's on all sides who work hard for all of us.

They are committed for their cause and put themselves out.

Many have faces for radio and the charm of a used nappy but trek the lonely miles to Westminster for us all.

[said]

I have to say posts 463 & 464 are cynical and misguided. It is neither level of remuneration nor "for their own personal aggrandisement" that results in us having MPs that "are utterly useless".

There is a systemic problem. If any idealists ever became politicians to improve our lot, they were deluded. In any case these days, idealism is surpassed by ideology. Council chambers and parliament are battle grounds. Most citizens (though clearly, not all) have better things to do than spend their time and energy on ideological tub thumping and democratic institutions should recognize that fact.

It is you who are misguided or perhaps unaware of certain characteristics of mankind. Ask yourself - Why would any person put themselves forward for employment in Parliament in the first place? Why are none trained for such a position? Why are the huge majority from Public Service backgrounds? How is it that so many can change their ideology so easily when found to be lacking in their chosen position? Why do so many submit high expenditure claims? The answers are most certainly not convincing for a person committed to their country's ideals.

[Alikado]

It is you who are misguided or perhaps unaware of certain characteristics of mankind. Ask yourself - Why would any person put themselves forward for employment in Parliament in the first place? Why are none trained for such a position? Why are the huge majority from Public Service backgrounds? How is it that so many can change their ideology so easily when found to be lacking in their chosen position? Why do so many submit high expenditure claims? The answers are most certainly not convincing for a person committed to their country's ideals.

People put themselves up because they want Power, Influence and the not so miserly Salary & Expenses, it is a far better option than stacking shelves in Asda.
The backgrounds of MP's I think are dominated by Banking / The City, Legal and 'Professional Politicos' who have started of as researchers etc, I see few from the 'Public Service' professions save a handful of Doctors & Teachers.
Many change there ideas once arriving in Westminster and meet the Whips and then find out what the real world is about, a sniff of power and taste of the gravy train soon changes views.
The £85k salary may not seem a lot but when you add on all the perks it soon mounts up.

[local]

Where would you put Mr Pugh in all that.

[Alikado]

Where would you put Mr Pugh in all that.

Irrelevant, he's out of it if he was ever in it because after he was elected you never heard anything from him.

[bensherman]

Switzerland has had a referendum on whether to continue with its deal with the EU where they have free trade and free movement.
Looks like keeping it has a majority of about 65-35

[silver fox]

Switzerland has had a referendum on whether to continue with its deal with the EU where they have free trade and free movement.
Looks like keeping it has a majority of about 65-35

Our Brexiteers don’t want any of that, for some strange reason they think we can keep the good bits of the EU without contributing or participation, it was, is and always will be a pipe dream, but sadly we all get dragged into the mess.