THE PARALLEL UNIVERSE OF WESTMINSTER ‘DEMOCRACY’
Being an MP is not compulsory; one can therefore presume an aspirant MP finds the post personally desirable – unless, of course, they claim altruism of a high order, and a drive to serve; serving being their only reward. Some may claim – it is not evident.
The candidate uses speeches, personal and indirect canvassing, and leafleting (flyers) to try to persuade the voter to gift them a seat in Westminster – it is a clear quid-pro-quo; the aspirant, directly or indirectly, offers some advantage to the voter, in exchange for their perceived advantage in the Westminster seat.
Up to this point, though undetectable deception is already a possibility on both sides,
the contract being made, is between two individuals, and the usual need for assessment – each of the other – applies, if deceit is to be minimised.
ENTER: PARTY POLITICS and the party MACHINE.
Immediately the aspirant MP splits into two – never again to be without duplicity.
The individual candidate ‘goes under’ the rosette. They ‘take the colour’ of their chosen/adoptive party, whose machinery (machination/chicanery) underwrites and -over-stamps - their every heartbeat. They loudly espouse, and profess, every clause of the manifesto, when challenged, and distribute leaflets, composed by ‘HQ’ with party advantage in mind, over that of the candidate. The aspirant ‘progresses’ the high street, followed by fawning party acolytes holding party balloons, in the authorised colour, or toting totem-poles, with the aspirant’s name – heraldic – on the dominant party background hue.
It should be noted (both here, and when encountering this charade) that the aspirant individual is - in law – just an ordinary member of society; previous MP-ship, party affiliation, and current party backing, notwithstanding. Paradoxically, as far as I have been able to ascertain, to date, the candidate’s party, has no existence in law (unless it so chooses). Thus we have the spectacle, within a supposed ‘democracy under rule of law’, of an individual, living under social constraints, closely bound to an ephemeral entity (where law is concerned) yet doing its will, in a duplicitous pact.
ENTER PARTY POLITICAL ‘MORALITY’ and ELECTION ETHICS.
It only takes a moment to register that the typical Westminster Creature is, at best, amoral; and another moment to realise this is no accident: they are selected. Ordinary voters only get to choose between pre-selected (by party panels) individuals marked out by potential Westminster Creatureness. Collectively, they comprise the Westminster Ethos in all its base affront. In adversarial politics, immorality will always win out over scruples; parties have no time for scruples, and when a General Election is called: even less. It is against the Election backdrop, that parties put their most Machiavellian minds to work on duping the electorate; vast war chest being previously amassed (from donors expecting later favour) and now expended on false advertising, liar-flyers, and rank, abject seduction, in selected (‘marginal’) constituencies. This is not democracy. It is D MOCK CRASS Y!
Y?Y?Y? WHERE ARE THE VACLAV HAVELS OF ENGLAND?