Paul Evans (who?) political writer reckons that the ballot box allows politicians to treat voters like dummies while not allowing us to tell our government what we want them to do – and, in this regard, he is quite correct. Unfortunately, what follows is, in my opinion, total spheroids being completely unworkable coupled with being unmanageable. In fact, bearing in mind his occupation, it is possible that many would hold him and his views in contempt.

On the subject of contempt, we read that Keir Starmer is suggesting David Davis may be ‘in contempt of Parliament’ after the government handed over heavily edited analyses on the impact of leaving the EU to a select committee. Never mind ‘contempt of Parliament’, how about ‘contempt of the electorate; something of which MPs in Parliament are guilty on a daily basis.

Just saying………………………..

Addendum: I suppose my dislike of our political class – that includes ‘Quangos’ and journalism per se – is not that they try do make us think as they do, but they try (and succeed) in making us do as they think; whilst continuing to act and enjoy what they wish to do. To say I despise the lot of them would be an understatement.

One thought on “Contempt

  1. Like you, I don’t have the foggiest who Paul Evans is, and, agreed, his recipe for democratic renewal is simplistic to say the least.

    “Contempt”, especially for the people, seems to be well represented by various writers; another example (below) who believes that the UK Parliament is somehow separated from the people – a three-party stitch-up in Westminster that can impose EU treaties = good, and the largest mandate from ‘the people’ = bad.

    As with all good (EU) propagandists though – information out, and none in: “comments are closed”

Comments are closed.