Saturday, October 11, 2014

You Just Can't Pander Enough

A short reminder here, for people who have allowed the UKIP nonsense to distract them: notice, that the only time that we're ever lectured about how we must all indulge the "concerns" of parts of the electorate, is when chunks of it are all het-up with cretinous right-wing dickishness.

We are not generally urged to put ourselves in the shoes of low-paid people who would like bigger paycheques, nor those of the recently unemployed.

British political parties, papers and columnists do not much pander to the whims of those who think, to pick a few random examples, that higher education should be free, or that the NHS should not be privatised, or that we should desist from fighting quite so many insane wars.

Hell, about half the voting public of Scotland just upped and announced that they wanted out of the United Kingdom entirely, largely because they don't consider the modern British state to be a congenial place to live, work or raise a family, and the resultant attention to those people's "concerns" lasted the sum total of, what, five days?

And yet, a few tear-streaked wallopers announce that they're still very upset about immigration, and the entire country has to suddenly drop everything - yet again! - hunker down, and listen to the Kippers' very urgent democratic demands.  Every media outlet and politician in the land rushes to stroke their tiny, wrinkled gonads and utter soothing platitudes into their hairy little earholes, as if their complaints were forever and tragically unattended rather than constantly stoked and encouraged from the loftiest peaks of power and influence.

Well.  Fuck.  That.

Has it been ten years, or twenty, or fifty that we've all spent being constantly trolled about our compatriots' dislike for the foreigns?  I don't recall, but the topic has been front-page news for almost the entirety of my lifespan, and I'm thirty-six.

Isn't it odd, how certain issues merit near-unending sympathy, and yet others must dangle for all eternity?  Scotland, for example, is a near-tenth of the total population and our almost-secession, plainly sparked by contempt for decades of unstoppable right-wing dickbaggery, has incited bugger-all by way of a response*.

The current UK-wide laser-focus on this bunch of whining, girning dickheads' grievances tells us all manner of things about what is and isn't a respected political issue in Britain; what is and is not considered to be worthy of attention by men and women in positions of power.  Really, it shows us exactly where power lies and who wields it and damn, isn't it an amazing coincidence that the only electoral uprising in the entire country that merits serious attention is far out right-wing dickbaggery?

An amazing coincidence.

Who would've thought it - a supposed insurgency of anti-establishment revolutionaries, who are miraculously indulged and coddled by actually powerful people.  Why, you'd think that that would tell us something, wouldn't you.

And let's remember, after years and years of non-stop boiling, high-profile rage about the issues that this small but vocal section of the total populace considers its most urgent problem, their complaint is still that they're being ignored.  

Ignored.   Well, you have to laugh, because it's plain that you just can't pander enough to some folk.

*I'm not all that concerned that Scotland's obvious displeasure has sparked dick-all response - I think it's resulted in about the appropriate level of concern in the corridors of power.  Naturally, that's less than a few Home Counties bawbags kicking off like wankers in a by-election but again, this teaches us lots of very clear and unambiguous lessons about where power lies in this nation.


Ken Eadie, the Prince of Strikers said...

Many have laughed at Nige leading a self proclaimed revolution in British politics considering his pampered, moneyed, elitist background. But y'know- Burgess, Blunt, Philby, Maclean...

BenSix said...

Scotland was not ignored. The politicians prattled on about how understanding and empathetic they were until the vote was over and they had no need to feign comradeship. Similarly, the next months will be full of concern trolling but if, as I suspect, UKIP gain no more than the odd provincial MP I doubt that policy will change to a significant extent. It never has before.

Anonymous said...

"The next months will be full of concern trolling but if, as I suspect, UKIP gain no more than the odd provincial MP I doubt that policy will change to a significant extent."

In general the link between political rhetoric and policy is indirect. There are a lot of significant policy directions that you don't hear much about. And there is a lot of political hot air that doesn't get translated into policy. However, having said that, I think that we are going to continue to be on the receiving end of lectures about the concerns of those parts of the electorate supposedly attracted to UKIP and, I think, there is a risk that both Labour and the Conservatives will put foolish policies in their manifestos as a result.

The contrast with the attitude to the Green Party and Respect is striking. Both have an MP and both control a local authority or two. Both represent parts of the electorate that have deeply-felt concerns that aren't represented in mainstream politics. Yet one rarely hears demands for the mainstream parties to listen to those concerns. Most of the Westminster Bubble has difficulty getting their heads around the type of concerns represented by the Green Party or Respect but can relate to the Poujadisme of Farage. Perhaps that is because the Westminster Bubble would have to engage their brains to understand why there are sections of the electorate who think that we should rethink how we relate to our environment or orientate our foreign policy.

(And we shouldn't forget that UKIP's only MP isn't against immigration!)


parkenf said...

There is a serious debate to be had about teh immigrants. First point on the agenda will be how we prevent this rapidly aging permanently moaning terminally unproductive country from going bankrupt WITHOUT the near constant influx of eager determined and youthful fodder from overseas. Once we've worked that out we can decide if we can still afford the openly racist political discourse that counts as population management today.

Anonymous said...

I'm not quite sure what point is being made here. There are poll-based predictions that UKIP may win some 25 seats at the next General Election which, combined with the possibility that the LibDem vote may collapse, could put them into a deciding position in a coalition government.

That's a game-changer, and I'm not at all surprised by the intensity of current media coverage.

And, yes, it's true that for decades the media has been reporting the indisputable fact that the people of Britain are concerned by immigration. So when you say that this is only an issue for a "small...section of the total populace" you're just plain wrong. And your point that the issue has been prominent for decades years is surely evidence that the political establishment has, broadly, disregarded the issue and is in your words "being ignored".

No wonder, then, that angry voters are flocking to UKIP.

For the avoidance of doubt, I myself think that UKIP's policies (insofar as they can be identified) are barking mad. But I can't agree that their current success is down to some sort of establishment bias or conspiracy, as you seem to suggest.