The British Politics Thread - The Bear and Badger

mistercrayon

Brooks wrote:

Patel is like the gold standard instance of how demographic variety is fucking worthless if the system and your politics remain grotesque.

Yes.

Remember the presented about such diversity is usually to be an inspiration or some such. But what if anyone who gets promoted on this basis is a grade A dickhead?

Here’s your inspiration brown folk, a mean vicious selfish person.

Ironically those who trumpet the diversity of this cabinet will bit the first to rail against it in other context.

Of course the other other real point is that to an extent in a real sense there is zero diversity in this government in all the important things.

davyK

As far as I'm concerned demographic variety is better for only one reason - a larger pool of talent. That's a damn good reason - the best in fact. To assume anything else is counter productive.

acemuzzy

I don't think that's the only reason it's better

RedDave2

davyK wrote:

As far as I'm concerned demographic variety is better for only one reason - a larger pool of talent. That's a damn good reason - the best in fact. To assume anything else is counter productive.

I will go one more on this - demographic variety can be a fantastic influence on future generations coming up. It shows that people can have a voice in government or show that they can achieve just as much as anyone. I used to think the role model thing was just talk, but I've known people who because of their background have no idea how far their talent can take them so I do believe that demographic variety can help this situation. I guess I'm approaching from a perceived class identification over a racial but I think it applies to both.

I'm not speaking on behalf of anyone here by the way - just from having my own eyes opened so often in my career when you see what can be possible. It can inspire even more when you see people from your own area, or your own school achieve in ways you didnt even think was possible.

poprock

There are many reasons why diversity is super important, and especially so in positions of power and influence, but for me two reasons stand out.

Representation and experience.

Representation is about kids looking at a leader and knowing ‘someone like me can do that’.

Experience is about bringing different viewpoints into the decision-making space. Diversity of backgrounds and priorities – which I suppose ultimately is another form of representation.

(With all of that I’m talking about diversity in the broadest sense – race, gender, age, economic, etc.)

nick_md

Need some of that inclusivity to go with your diversity ofc, once folk are in/hired. Being diverse is only half the job really innit.

(I had training on this recently, I hadn't really separated the two in my head before).

acemuzzy

I agree with those three takes

davyK

The point about its ability to inspire younger kids in ethnic minority groups in a good one; provided of course the example is a good one. I don't think our Home Secretary is in that category.

It is also a vital ingredient if a piece of work directly related to a community is commissioned - but I presume that goes without saying.

However , having the larger talent pool is by far the greatest long term benefit - assuming of course that the appointments process is based on merit - rather a large assumption sadly.

b0r1s

I think everyone is looking at Priti wrong. She is clear example of diversity. It shows anyone, from any ethnic group or gender, can be a cunt.

hunk

A fine example of right-winger I am alpha (thus cunty) mentality breaking through ethnic and gender barriers.

GooberTheHat

When was the last time we had a minister that didn't have a home counties/public school accent?

Kazuo

Even if she eventually gets the boot, she'll be in the running for the party leadership next time it comes up.

AndCallMeCharlie

GooberTheHat wrote:

When was the last time we had a minister that didn't have a home counties/public school accent?

I can’t think of a cabinet mister with an accent since Prescott / Brown many moons ago

Escape

Brown's quite posh. Mhairi and the Lauras — Pidcock and Smith — are the most recent ones I can think of.

davyK

b0r1s wrote:

I think everyone is looking at Priti wrong.

I know I look at her wrong. I have impure thoughts even though she is a bad girl.....

Paul the sparky

Arse like a hoose end

davyK

Aye.

AndCallMeCharlie

davyK wrote:

Aye.

Is that a smiling aye or a reconsidering aye

poprock

Bet you she’s one of those ones who thinks she’s an irresistible domme but actually has fuck all imagination.

Escape

We all know you go to May for red lines.

LivDiv

poprock wrote:

Bet you she’s one of those ones who thinks she’s an irresistible domme but actually has fuck all imagination.

Definitely this. Confuses dom with selfish and dull.

davyK

AndCallMeCharlie wrote:

davyK wrote:

Aye.

Is that a smiling aye or a reconsidering aye

appreciative.

dynamiteReady

More than one source suggests that Priti Patel will lose the home office commission in a reshuffle. Probably in the New Year.
Rumours about her being 'demoted' to party chairman, or chief whip, which would be a perfect application of her skillset.

The sources I had read were the Times and the the Daily Mail, so take that as you will.

I don't read them for affirmation of my political views.

mistercrayon

Party chairman is how they shuffled off Warsi without the optic of removing a brown person from cabinet. It’s also where they moved leadsom I think. So it’s quite a demotion.

Funkstain

What a shit show. Johnson spends political capital like it's going out of style.

Cummings breaks the law at height of first lockdown: gives him the rose garden to non-apologise, forces his lackeys (sorry, cabinet) to defend him repeatedly in public, backs him to the hilt. Sacks him anyway a few months later.

Patel clearly breaks ministerial code. Report which states this unequivocally, rests on his lap for more than half a year. When it finally gets out, he once again dismays the entire civil service, by forcing other resignations by defending Patel to the hilt, getting his lackeys (sorry cabinet) to once again defend a confirmed BULLY during motherfucking NATIONAL ANTI-BULLYING WEEK. Sacks her anyway in the new year.

The only explanation is this hyper partisanship stuff that's doing the rounds everywhere: better to look like fuckers than to admit being wrong, that the OTHERS / ENEMIES were even in any small way right.

davyK

One could be charitable and say that Johnson is loyal.

But that's a stretch to say the least.

She needs to go.

Funkstain

It...as I say above he’s clearly not. He’ll fuck you any way he can if it helps him one iota. But apparently not at the cost of having to admit the “other side” (that’s everyone else, anyone who has ever criticised you or “your side”) could be right about anything at all

davyK

yeah.... I certainly wouldn't want to be relying on his integrity that's for sure.

Roujin

Still, at least we spent the last 3 years running a sustained media campaign calling for stamping out all that antisemitism in the opposition party and making the leadership of the opposition party go away and not come back because very bad allotment man is bad.

poprock

Funkstain wrote:

… not at the cost of having to admit the “other side” could be right about anything at all

Indeed. And that childish attitude is perfectly in tune with the vast majority of people in the UK, US … and wherever else, I guess. Sometimes feels a bit like we have the leaders we deserve.

I think I still blame the shitty level of public discourse for the kind of leaders we now have … which is ultimately the fault of a cynical and desperate populist media.

When I look at it that way, it feels natural that our PM would be an ex-tabloid columnist.

Howdy, Stranger!

Categories