Tories will, quite rightly, be delighted by the win of Boris Johnson in London, but for me it is a sad indictment of the state our politics is in.
When you look at what Boris stands for, privilege, Oxbridge, private schooling, the Bullingdon club, does he really speak for London ? Perhaps parts of Chelsea yes, but Hackney ? Putting aside what might viewed by some as class prejudices (at least I don't refer to picaninnies or slag of whole cities like Boris), perhaps he has got something to offer. I hope so for Londoners sakes. The problem is that people didn't seem to vote for him on the basis of what he has to offer.
His other more public faults be they not being a full time MP (how does that square with his commitment to working full time for London), his penchant for slagging various parts of the UK, people from different cultures, his inability to keep his trousers on, and a host of other issues seem to have been brushed aside because "he's that guy off the telly with the scruffy hair". So what does that tell us about politics ?
We seem to have entered a realm of politics where it does not matter what you do, it matters little about how you treat your wife and family, it matters not who you insult, and nobody cares what your policies are or if you have any at all. But if you are on the telly, that makes you okay. Is that right ? Is that good ?
Even Boris' supporters were damning him with faint praise this morning. Amanda Platell describes him as not being good with detail but he would be god at delegating. Wow, what an endorsement. It's like saying "He can't do the job but he knows a man who can". So why the hell didn't Londoners elect a man who can ?
The answer is, of course, because the man who can is not a celebrity. How sad.
13 comments:
That someone we pay to teach our children should write "damning with feint praise" says something about the state our schools are in too. As does your pathetic class envy. Despising Boris for his background is just as feudal as despising you for yours would be (whatever it is and please don't bore us with it)
Do try to be a good loser. It's a key skill for a LibDem. And don't worry about not understanding the value of delegation. I am sure it's a skill you will never need.
Your class hatred is as bad a racisam. You want the best man for the job, and you cannot judge a man without giving him a chance. I think your remarks about Boris are offensive and and ill judged.
As a teacher of children You should not talk about people in this way, You should set a better and more balanced example of your position in the community. I did not ask to be born how I am or where I come from nor did Boris or you.
I am afraid to say that your attitude represents all that is wrong in Britain in the way you have spoken about Boris.
I think the class issue is irrelevent in this case. I agree with your final comment however.
Pick on one small asepct of what I say Tom and agnore the main point why don't you. Wow, a typo. Call the police !
I don't like toffs telling me what to do. Is that a crime ?
It's nothing to do with being a bad loser either. I made the point that the Tories should be pleased with their win and rightly so.
The issue is one of celebrity over substance. You obviously care about the win and not the prize.
Considering some of the venomous bile that emanates from Johnny Twat, I think he has a nerve criticising anyone else.
Never mind the class prejudices of those in the Tory Party who judge people by their school ties.
The bigot finds ever more idiotic things to say to shore up his own discredited beliefs. Livingstone was a racist obscenity. Fatuous class hatred is no more acceptable.
With Boris and Cameron we are likely to have London and the rest of the country being run by two men who have had the best education money can buy. Is that really such a bad thing?
Note: I'm very working class and I'm from Barnsley so please don't think this is just another toff speaking.
Do stop to this class war nonsense.
John Prescott.. ships steward made deputy leader
John Major, which school did he go to again? Eton, Harrow or was it Rutlish Grammar School.
Your man lost. He lost because he was poor and the lib dems did a poor campaign in the wrong areas with the wrong focus, without a strong message.
Boris won In spite of his celebrity and gaffe prone nature and the lack of a man of the people tag to wear.
you need to get over it, or you will be like the Democrats who won't let go that George Bush stole the election. In both 2000 and 2004
What they and you should look at is why you didn't get enough support for your views and enough votes to render any rigged/spoiled or postal fraud votes moot.
Boris, quite clearly did.
"does he really speak for London ? Perhaps parts of Chelsea yes, but Hackney ?"
The inverse is equally true. Ken didn't speak for Chelsea, or the majority of Londoners.
That's why he lost. It's why he knew he would probably lose IF the real popular vote could be mobilised.
The London election is a triumph for politics.
And in the end it IS always about the personalities.
Just ask Tony Blair if you don't believe me.
Sorry but that's democracy for you it shouldn't matter whether the winner of any election is oxbridge or university of life as long as they are the best man for the job and Ken was patently past his sell by. Coming from a council house background I think Boris is great he can communicate on multiple levels and I feel that class envy is as bad or even worse that racism
Don't be so down-hearted NB... endangered species like the Great Crested Newt are found mainly in central and south-east Norfolk, although there are clusters in north and west Norfolk... so there's plenty of things to occupy Ken in his forced retirement.
I would agree with Norfolk Blogger. What in God's name has Boris got in common with real people, especially multi-cultural London people.
It's clear to me that people weren't voting for Boris. They were voting to get Ken out, and they succeeded.
I don't think it is class racism to attack Bumbling Boris. I just don't think there's any place in modern day politics for any of those upper class hooray Henry twits. This is not Britain in the 1930's, 1940's or 50's when the ruling classes ran our country. Voters want people they can identify with.
Oh those Tories. They make my blood boil.
Nich
Serious question: what do you (or anybody else) mean by "privilege, Oxbridge, private schooling" - what constitutes "privilege", and where do you draw the line?
I don't think that getting at Johnson (or Blair, or Brown, or Clegg, or Balls, or Davey, or Ken Clarke, or Cameron, or Hoon etc) for their background or education is any better than asking John Prescott for a gin and tonic because he worked as a steward.
Cheers
Post a Comment