| Unhealthy state |
 |
 |
| Written by Philip Salter | |
| Saturday, 17 May 2008 | |
|
On the first point, the criticism of Gordon Brown is nothing new. Public figures have always come under intense criticism deep into the annals of history as well as in more recent history. For welfare loving socialists, Margaret Thatcher was, for instance, the devil incarnate. John Major was mocked mercilessly. Now it is Gordon Brown's turn. The press and public work symbiotically in developing a personal dislike of for a leader. After all, those in the press are members of the public too. Criticism for Brown is near unanimous across the press only because it is so across the public at large. That's why there is a good chance that the traditional Labour supporters of Crewe and Nantwich will likely vote against their Party. The vitriolic attacks would certainly not be so harsh if the public felt at ease with Brown at the helm of the country. Regardless, the freedom to criticise those that control our lives is a vital part of living in a free society. As Winston Churchill rightly pronounced: Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfils the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things. Comments (4)
Unhealthy state
written by David Williams, May 17, 2008
"Criticism for Brown is near unanimous across the press only because it is so across the public at large."
Do you think it could possibly be the other way round?
...
written by Sam Knight, May 17, 2008
I think it could be a bit of both. Media reports bad news - public doesn't like bad news - starts to hate - Media pick up on hate - report more - even more - excessively more - whole country hates.
Thats my thought anyway. samknight4labour.blogspot.com
re. Patrick Vessey written by QuestionThat, May 19, 2008
"The simple truth is that the public recognise that those in power over us are, virtually to a man (and woman), a group of self-serving, mendacious individuals."
Some of the public, maybe even a majority, may recognise this, but a lot of statists don't seem to. Indeed some are so locked into two-party statist thinking that they assume that if you criticise a politician of one stripe, that must be because you are in the other lot's camp! Write comment
This content has been locked. You can no longer post any comment.
|
Friday's Times featured an op ed. article 
Subscribe to this comment's feed
About the ASI
The Adam Smith Institute is the UK's leading innovator of free-market economic and social policies. Politically independent and non-profit, the Institute promotes its ideas through reports, briefings, events, media appearances, and its website and blog. For further information, click here.Join our email list
Keep up-to-date with the latest events, reports and information from the Adam Smith Institute by joining our fortnightly email list. It's free and you can unsubscribe at any point. Just enter your email address here:
A classic case of argument by inversion. The simple truth is that the public recognise that those in power over us are, virtually to a man (and woman), a group of self-serving, mendacious individuals.
What many find difficult to understand is how this situation came to pass. Looking around society as a whole, we see that yes, there are deeply unpleasant individuals amongst us, but their numbers are relatively small. How could so many in politics seem to be drawn from this small group? The answer is that politics is a self-selecting occupation, and one that gives those involved carte blanche to indulge their own pathologies.
This theme was explored in a recent article (http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2008/05/beware-the-psychopath-my-son/) by Clinton Callahan, where the author seeks to answer his own question of: "Why, no matter how much intelligent goodwill exists in the world, is there so much war, suffering and injustice? It doesn’t seem to matter what creative plan, ideology, religion, or philosophy great minds come up with, nothing seems to improve our lot. Since the dawn of civilization, this pattern repeats itself over and over again."
And this pattern will repeat itself over and over again whilst our politicians have the ability to exercise power over our lives. Only when "politics" as we currently know it is removed from our daily lives will we be able to live within a truly free market economy, and only then will this cycle of destruction be broken