I’ve been thinking about the subject of deceit in politics and the sad idea that the voting public ‘expects’ a certain amount of spin and marketing (BS) in its political diet.
I posted this comment in discussion about my musings about tribalism ‘National’s desperados get perfervid about Peters‘ before last year’s election:
I usually enjoy politics as a sport — it’s one team’s turn to win, then another’s and that’s OK … but after a while I feel nauseated by the ghastly inauthenticity of the sectarian antics of Party loyalists like those I refer to above.
When I see someone engaging in shabby, venal grasping for ‘power’ and influence, or engaging in ‘the politics of personal destruction’, I think it should almost disqualify them
… but of course, that’s not how democracy works.
Now when I wrote that, I wasn’t aware of this, from Douglas Adams of The Hitch-hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy fame …
It is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it. To summarize the summary: anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job.
OK, so that’s droll. But thinking about it some more …
When the ACT Party’s David Garrett almost pulled down the temple (well, he certainly loosened a few pillars) with the gradual revelation of misdeeds in his past, I remember quoting NZ Herald political columnist John Armstrong at his most black-and-white:
“An MP’s words must be able to be trusted. Garrett’s have been rendered worthless.”
And really, I think THAT is the measure — that’s the ‘disqualification’ — whichever Party or politician is at issue. Rather than law-breaking (technical or blatant) or loyalty, or ambition.
Tribalism obscures arguments
As noted before, a theme of this blog is the nonsensical tendency for human beings to suppose Continue reading →

















