View Single Post
Old 04-04-2016, 05:43 PM   #9
Senior Member
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 26,740
Likes: 13,667 (7,885 Posts)

SNP politician Mhairi Black said in her inaugeral speech in the commons that there were two types of people in politics...there were signposts and there were weathervanes

The signposts were people of principle who were guided in their actions by their principles and the weathervanes were people who would flipflop depending on what they wanted to get out of any given situation. This is true of life also and not just of politicians. I mentioned the issue of what is the 'national interest' earlier in the thread and this ties into this issue of weathervanes and signposts

Different people will have different ideas of what the 'national interest' is. Some will see it as being what is in the interests of the general public whilst others will see it as what is in their own best interests. The latter will claim to be acting in the 'national interests' whilst actually doing what is in their personal interests even if that is not what is in the interests of the general public

There was a clash in the clips above between people who believed that the public had a right to know things and those that felt everything should be a secret that only a few privileged people were privy to. This is the constant tug and pull in society between the many and the few. The few argue for authoritarianism which is to say that they should manage everything and everyone should leave everything to them to take care of and just trust them that they will do the right thing by them!

This leads onto the next big issue which is what the 'crown' is that is at the heart of the british system and as Benn says in the clip it is a state within the state. It is a core of powerful people and groups including the intelligence services and civil servants who are always there regardless of which governments are voted into temporary office. So those within the crown see the 'national interest' as what is in the best interests of the crown and that might not always coincide with what the best interests of the british public is

So the crown can often persecute who it deems to be 'subversive' but effectively their definition of what is subversive will be anything that does not agree with their definition of what the 'national interest' is at any given point! If you disagree with the crown on anything at any time then you can be labelled a 'subversive'!

Obviously the people within the crown believe that all their actions should be 'secret' and that the public should have no right to any 'privacy' of their own. This is a clear double standard and has no basis in what is moral, right or fair; it is a purely political position based on might is right realpolitik

The publics view on these matters however might be that better transparency and accountability would lead to a more healthy democracy where people are able to make better informed decisions and where there would be less scandals because there would be less places for such skullduggery to occur
when the people in power want you dead, just existing is a revolutionary act

Last edited by iamawaveofthesea; 05-04-2016 at 08:52 AM.
iamawaveofthesea is offline   Reply With Quote