Elections in the UK: League of losers

The Economist published an article that, in fact, in concentrated form gave the impression of experts and analysts from the election campaign and election results.

Experts in particular say, it was impossible to observe the General elections and not to suffer the question-exclamation: did the Brits can’t be better?! In their opinion, the most successful player in the election campaign was the leader of the labour party Jeremy Corbyn (Jeremy Corbyn) is a 68-year-old cryptocommunist, which, as the authors put it strongly — “never ran anything other than his own language.” Analysts do not skimp on compliments and other participants in the race, and write that the leader of the Tory Theresa may (Theresa May) was trying to focus the election campaign on the self, but in the end showed that her personality wasn’t worth it. And the leader of the liberal democratic party Tim Ferrone (Tim Farron), looked more like a schoolboy playing the role of politics in the formulation before the start of the vacation than as a potential Prime Minister. No more, no less.

British experts note that to complain about the quality of leaders is an ancient English tradition: elder contemporaries of William Gladstone (William Gladstone), without a doubt, complained that he does not go to any comparison with William pitt the elder (William Pitt the Elder). Former Finance Minister George Osborne (George Osborne) got a kick out of the election, ridiculing Theresa may from the chair editor-in-chief of the London newspaper “Evening Standard”. But just four years ago the same publication mocked Osborne for his “failure” of the state budget. Thus the problem of the British leadership pale in comparison with what is happening in the US, where Donald trump, they say, suffers one disaster after another.

Sometimes, however, the decline is really a decline. As Mae and Corbin want to expand the already considerable powers of the government. The leader Libdemov campaigning for a major expansion. However, both agree in one. They promise to take Britain out of the European Union, and it is an extremely difficult task. Experts Economist writes that the candidates have shown themselves, flawed leaders and flawed teams. Experts believe that Theresa may has made a number of unforgivable errors. In particular, it violated the most important rule of politics: don’t kick the teeth to their loyal voters, unless there is a serious reason. And Jeremy Corbin was, according to experts, is very weak team: the day before the election, citing illness, left the scene of his “shadow” Minister of internal Affairs Diane Abbott (Diane Abbott), which managed to give a series of very bad interviews.

Experts Economist remember the outstanding politician of the twentieth century, Winston Churchill, in 1922 dubbed the coalition government of Bonar law (Bonar Law) “team spare”. Then “the best political players”, including Lloyd George (Lloyd George) did not want to be part of this forced Union. Today, both major parties bring to the field “replacement”. On the left flank three quarters of the labour party in Parliament came to the conclusion that the Corbin for the party leader, neither in personal nor in political terms, and ruining their chances to form a government. On the right flank of the party emptied Brakcet. Several large figures in favor of maintaining British membership in the EU (including David Cameron (David Cameron) and George Osborne), left field, and at the same time, a number of leading supporters of Breccia such as Boris Johnson (Boris Johnson) and Michael Gove (Michael Gove), severely weakened. According to the Economist, the Conservative party chose to Theresa may because she didn’t make categorical statements on the most important issue of his time.

There are more profound reasons. For most of the twentieth century, British policy had enjoyed the excessive wealth of choice. Competing with each other, the British elite were sent to the Parliament of their best offspring. The landed aristocracy gave to the policy of Winston Churchill and family of Seelow (Cecil). From among the merchants came Harold Macmillan (Harold Macmillan) and the dynasty of Chamberlain (Chamberlain). The trade unions have put forward Bevin Ernest (Ernest Bevin), Aneurin Bevan (aneurin is (Nye) Bevan) and James Callaghan (James Callaghan). The meritocratic elite gave politics a large number of intellectuals — is so great that the composition of the labour government 1964-66 years was the seven best students of Oxford and Cambridge. Experts sarcastic notice that Jeremy Corbyn passed school exams with two estimates. It is not known how he studied all the other political figures that had an impact on British politics of the last 15 years…

And brilliant for British policy time, of course, there was enough gold dust MPs, the conservatives, who did not care about nothing other than shooting badgers, the labour party from the trade unions coming to Parliament, to drink beer. But the gold shone brightly. And it is evenly distributed among the major parties: the tories mobilized power of the wealthy class and the labour party — the workers and intellectuals. Analysts disappointed to state: today, the British elite, as if by agreement, ceased to send their best people to Parliament. In their joint opinion, the public opinion was formed that today is much harder than before, to “sell” to the voters of these land aristocrats. Even the trade unions have become a shadow of herself from the past and this is the explanation. Over the past 30 years, the policy simply became a profession. To replace yesterday’s crowd, or at least the leading groups came to the professionals for whom politics means earnings. However, as it turns out, politics is not a very attractive profession.

As expressed by the experts of the Economist, all working on a “slippery field”. Most people tend to two types of reward: financial (money and security) and psychological (respect and satisfaction). Policy, the authors of the publication, not get theirs either. Their wages are lower that get their University friends who work as bankers, consultants and lawyers. They have to cope with a staggering load at work: meetings with voters, speeches and, if they are Ministers, management of huge government departments. Moreover, these managers from politics in constant tension, because I live with the idea that their well-being can suddenly end as a result of defeat in the elections or some unexpected scandal. When it is necessary to recognize, as the Economist writes that the public belongs to a political class with a mixture of suspicion and contempt. According to the survey, in 1986 the government did not trust one in ten Britons today — every third. Experts bitterly notice that those who are willing to tolerate this state of Affairs, will have only a very slim reward: the feeling that you are part of the cycle where the story is going.

The Economist experts believe that in the current situation there are several things that can slow down this apparent decline of the political elite. British experts believe that, first, in the selection of members of Parliament should largely be guided by the age and experience of candidates — in the Parliament today, too many young ex-helpers who are not highly qualified and simply do not have enough political experience. According to experts, it is necessary to select people who managed to achieve something professionally. According to the authors, today it is clear there is a need to expand the talent pool. At the time, Margaret Thatcher (Margaret Thatcher) very effectively used the House of Commons to bring to the public service of successful entrepreneurs such as David young (David Young). Former Prime Minister Gordon brown (Gordon Brown) did essentially the same thing and created his own “Cabinet of talents”. Experts believe that the empowerment of municipal administrations, may well open the road to the political scene capable people. According to experts, if the UK will take these and other ideas, the next vote will be able to provide voters with a more inspiring choice. The authors of the article in the Economist sums up the disappointment: trying to get my Affairs in order in the current situation it is too late: the team that UK put up against Brussels, it will inevitably be one of the weakest in decades.