Look, I realise that you have deeply held beliefs, that these things are very precious to you. I realise that you may even have built your sense of self-identity around them, but frankly I’ve got to the stage where I don’t care.
We have politicians. You appear to be devoted to one lot and to kneel in awed wonder at their feet whilst abominating ‘the other lot’ as evil destroyers of all that is good and decent in society.
Yet further down my Facebook feed there is a post from somebody else who shares exactly the same deeply devout regard, only it appears that they give their worship, their loyalty, to ‘the other lot’. (Who are also worthy of awed wonder, whilst the lot you worship appear to be evil destroyers of all that is good and decent in society.)
Now then, it may be that you genuinely believe that the leader of ‘the other lot’ has sex with pigs, copulates with demons, bites the heads of kittens or whatever. This profession of faith you cling to might possibly tell the rest of us who don’t share your fascination with politics rather more about you than it tells us about ‘the other lot’.
Now I realise that the ‘the other lot’ are wicked evil people who are striving to destroy civilisation, but isn’t it time you just sat down in a darkened room somewhere and chilled for a while.
Right, let’s start from the beginning. We might have one of the least corrupt political systems in the world. (Somebody even wrote an article http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science/science-news/12189003/Britain-has-most-honest-citizens-in-the-world…-because-politicians-are-less-corrupt.html) and the nice thing about it is that we, as the British people, are the decent honest lot we are, partially because our politics isn’t corrupt. So in reality, we’ve got a lot to the thankful for. Yes we had MPs fiddling expenses, but we jailed them. That doesn’t happen in most places.
Right and let’s look at the individuals. I will take Jeremy Corbyn as an example. In reality he is not the antichrist, nor is he the one honest man in politics. The fact that he’s frantically removing blog posts written in the past that recommended we got out of Europe is almost touching. Firstly that he’s as naive as to believe that merely removing a blog disposes of the evidence. But more importantly he’s starting to show political maturity, perhaps for the first time in his life he’s accepted that as a member of a political party, elected on the party ticket, he really ought to bend his opinions to fall in with the party line on major issues. The fact that he was probably right previously and is now wrong merely adds to the pathos of the whole situation.
So look, I realise you have your deeply held beliefs, but be a good boy or girl and try to understand that for a large part of the population your tribal and cultic posturing is merely a source of irritation. Not only that but it’s counterproductive.
Think about it, you’re slagging off the political leaders of ‘the other lot’, saying they are evil etc.
‘The other lot’ are slagging off your political leaders telling us they’re evil etc.
So for those of us who are agnostic in this debate, all we learn is, frankly, the two lots are both tarred with the same brush.
Now in an earlier, wiser era, politicians used to treat each other as if they were honourable (if possibly mistaken) individuals who could be relied upon to see reason. Indeed on many occasions MPs from all spectrums have worked quietly together for the good of their constituents, away from the sectarian howling of their supporters.
In this, our ancestors were wise. Because they realised that if you build your politics on hate and contempt, for the vast majority of the population, this just means you end up holding all politicians in contempt.
As you were.
Anyway, don’t believe me, ask the dog.
As a reviewer commented, “This is another collection of blog posts from Jim Webster, farmer and philosopher. The first collection, Sometimes I Sits and Thinks, featured a great deal about the animals, particularly the border collies, that Jim has worked with over the years. This seems to me to be a more eclectic selection, a little more wide-ranging and political even, but nevertheless it shows a fascinating slice of rural life.”