I have often wondered (like many people do) how some politicians can do obvious, unbelievable U-turns and take totally contradictory stances to what they might have espoused at a different time or in a different place. This behaviour is observed (and constantly criticised) by ordinary people, but politicians themselves don’t even seem to notice it. And the politicians that are most adept at it appear to be those who get into positions of power and influence!
Some of this behaviour can be explained by election promises made during the frantic race to get into power at all costs (confirmed by the wily old fox that I mentioned at the bottom of this post) but from my observations it goes a lot deeper than that.
There is an old saying that the first casualty in war is truth, and the same, I observe, is often true of politics.
Almost daily, we are plied with with vague justifications and half-truths to either defend something that is indefensible, excuse something that is inexcusable, or else to get us to agree to something that, if we were told the whole truth we’d be totally against.
The day-to-day conduct of some of our political leaders leans so far towards what people often call trick o’ the loop type behaviour that it is impossible to ignore.
As a substantial part of my work is concerned with addiction and addictive behaviour I began to wonder about similarities that I notice between active addiction and politics. Of course, maybe only I notice these similarities, and others might not see any. So to check that out – permit me to offer another little quiz.
And remember, addiction isn’t confined to drink and drugs. We can be addicted to gambling, smoking, shopping, sex/porn, work, eating, prescribed medication, money/saving, exercise, people-pleasing and more besides. Also, not all addicts are on skid row, some people can hide their addiction very well, and hold down a steady job, own businesses and become very wealthy.
Now; a little warning – this quiz is very judgmental; it’s just to get us thinking!
In the list 1 to 20 in the Table below, I invite you to think of what you know about active addiction – and then think of political life in general. If you think that an addict has a particular trait, put a tick in the A box. If you think that a politician might have the same trait, tick the box under P. (If you don’t print out the page, you will have to remember them in your head).
For example, 1, Denies Reality is so common among active addicts that it is probable that almost everyone would put a tick in A. Would you put a tick under P? Whereas in 2, Very Charming, P might be ticked but some people might give A a tick and some might not.
Think carefully now, and try to be objective, because this is a very subjective exercise. (For example, if you are either a politician or an active addict – or both – you might not see any similarities at all).
Now I know – not for the first time – I am being a bit provocative. I am just asking you to have a look at the list and make up your mind from your own experiences and observations throughout your life.
And, as is plain, anyone in any walk of life can have some, many or all of the above traits. The reason why I am picking politicians is that they have so much influence in society – which is the reason that I am including this Sub-Chapter at all!
And what sparked me to include this post is that every time I listen to a talk show on the radio or watch one on TV, and hear politicians talking across each other, taking standpoints that are impossible to reconcile, speaking loudly, decisively and with an authoritative tone, and using terms like ‘Let me be absolutely clear about this’, or, ‘I can state without fear of contradiction’ or when I read about decisions that are made that everyone knows make no sense, or when I hear a politician defending a decision that he had been totally against a short time previously, I pick up a few similarities.
I will give three examples here:
1): When I was writing parts of the website there were many World War One and Easter 1916 commemorations which many politicians attended. All the commemorations had this mixture of solemnity, calmness, serenity, nostalgia and, here and there, a hint of glory. The atmosphere at the commemorations bore no resemblance to the realities experienced when killing other people and being killed oneself. Those realities are terror, abject fear, brutality, cruelty and a degree of acute physical and emotional pain as well as mental torture that we’d never want our loved ones to experience. At the same time as all these commemorations were going on we were being softened up by our politicians to join some sort of European military force to protect ourselves against some imagined enemy. This is a kind of 1, (denial of reality).
Why?
Because if the powers that be (European politicians) wanted to promote peace and truly commemorate those who died needlessly in 1914-1918 they would be actively encouraging the ending of the arms industries throughout Europe, giving good example to the World in general instead of seeing those industries as opportunities for making vast profits from others’ misfortunes – and endangering ourselves as well.
2): The housing crisis is one of the biggest crises facing our country in my lifetime. Every political party states that solving the housing crisis is their number one priority. It is happening because of the ideological stance of Governments since the late 1990’s when they ran down public house building. (Public house-building, that is, not the building-of-public-houses). It seems to be impossible for the Government to have any more than a totally meaningless role in the housing market. A house now costs so much that it is (in most cases) impossible for a mortgage to be granted by a bank on one average wage. For a couple with children, this denies the opportunity for one parent to stay at home – if that is their wish – and choose full time child-rearing as would have been possible even a few decades ago. Also, it widens the gap between rich and poor. This is because cash-rich people can now buy houses and rent them out to people desperate to get a roof over their head – where the only object is profit. This manifests in a mixture of 10 (distortion of others’ objective experience) – i.e. that the private sector can meet the housing needs of a population – when ordinary people can see it can’t) and 20 (promise more than can be delivered).
Why?
If successive Governments – this is going on for more than 25 years – wished to truly solve the housing crisis they would set up a publicly owned housing agency that would actually build houses with proper (once again publicly owned) facilities for people who will live in them.
3): The Troubles in Northern Ireland are not really over but great progress has been made over the past few years. A substantial amount of talk now concerns which flags to fly, what streets can be used as marching routes, how we will incorporate Gaeilge, and, latterly, the fall-out from Brexit. However the principal issues that are still a long way from being resolved are the poverty and disempowerment in communities that have been neglected for generations – which were, (on both sides – actually) significant causative factors in the Troubles anyway. This is manifest in 8 (using conflict to avoid issues).
Why?
The politicians of most influence in Northern Ireland cannot see beyond the one-up-man-ship that feeds into the disconnect that assists in keeping them in power. Coming together to really hammer out a solution, together, that would significantly alleviate the poverty and disempowerment that were contributory factors in the Troubles in the first place appears to be beyond them.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I hope that you don’t think that I am being unduly harsh here – it might make sense to some, it might not to others. In the next post I will develop the theme further when I explore what I call the smokescreen.
Just as an aside, I know many people in politics who play the minimum of games, promote responsibility, challenge the above, and try to have a long term view.
But, I will ask, from your observations, do you think that they form critical mass among the body politic?