Democracy vs Apathy

I sometimes get the feeling that many people in the West don't deserve democracy. It's become part of the furniture and is mostly taken for granted.

It was with interest then, that I read Daniel Finkelstein's article in The Times today, 'Which Queen? Which Speech? Who Cares?' in which he bewails the lack of interest in politics by most people. They simply, he says, don't care. At all.

It's not even that they've become disillusioned recently. They never been interested. What people notice is results - cleaner hospitals, less vandalism, better schools. The rest is just tuned out as 'noise'.

For anyone who fought for democracy, this is either a sorry state of affairs, or proof that it works so well that people cease to notice it. Unfortunately, when you stop taking notice, you leave the situation open to abuse and it's only when the results start hurting - unemployment, too much immigration, too much surveillance, restraints on free speech, political correctness, excessive human rights laws, elfansafety lunacy, over-taxation, financial crisis that people sit up and realise a lot's been happening behind their backs.

Then there's uproar and the papers have a lovely time digging the dirt and analysing ad nauseaum until everything settles down to be quickly forgotten.

In France there is a much higher turnout for elections and peope are continually complaining about the government. It helps that Sarkozy concentrates minds wonderfully as people moan and whine about the changes he was elected to implement. Because there is so much to do and most of it not pleasant, large swathes of the (mass) population detest him and enjoy being bad-tempered amongst friends at the threats to their avantages acquis.

As with Brits, they are especially virulent when results of policies affect them adversely. What politicians believe is that their policies will affect the way people vote, but it's not that at all, it's what everyone's personal situation is on the day of voting that affects the way they vote. Consider this from the last British election:

For two months in the run-up to polling day, voters were asked: “Has there been anything in the news about what the Conservative Party has been saying or doing that has caught your eye this week, whether on TV or radio or in the papers?”
Most of the time the proportion who could think of nothing hovered around 90 per cent.

Scary? Comforting? It does help to know that all that last-minute political posturing passes most people completely by and makes no difference to the way they vote. If they vote at all, that is...

So do we deserve democracy? I have a nasty feeling that one day so much will have been going on behind our backs that it'll be too late to stop, and then we'll rue the day we took democracy for granted.

Look after democracy,

Cherish it with care;

For you never know its value

'til it's gone, and then you'll care!

Low Down Brown

Poor Gordon Brown. It's his anniversary - one year at the Top. One year in the position he yearned for, bargained for, and schemed for, and now that he has it, and has had time to prove himself, he's shown to have been promoted to his level of incompetence.

I have a friend here who is a fonctionnaire. He's a Director of some administrative something or other at the university. He told me that fonctionnaires are regularly promoted to their level of incompetence which is why so much functions so badly. They are not considered for a job based on their expertise, but on their 'ancienneté' - how long they've been in their previous job. Who you're pally with counts too, and how well you did (to some extent) in your previous job. It seems that your capacity to cope with the next level is ignored, and once there of course, you cannot be removed.

Not so with our Gordon, however. He can be removed, and undoubtedly will be at the earliest opportunity. The Telegraph asked various people to contribute to his first year report. The poor guy did not come out of it very well (no surprises there). The best comment came from my favourite philosopher, Alain de Botton:

Brown has spent his whole life as a politician talking about creating a society where everyone should be allowed to explore their ambitions to the full. His personal and now the national tragedy is that he has been able to do precisely this - with terrible results. He is a reminder that we often need to be saved from our own dreams.

The poor guy just isn't a leader. He's lacking that fateful ingredient which would transform him from dour doer to inspirational leader. These are hard times. The UK needs someone who can rally the nation to stand behind him. Sarkozy got the French inspired at the last election - he's a leader. Brown is not.

Self-delusion when you're the head of a nation is so dangerous, as has been devastatingly proven by that other self-delusionist - George Bush.

Gordon doesn't have the power to ruin the world but he can successfully bring the UK to its knees, and is doing. He's in way over his head, poor guy.

Election Apathy

"Who are you going to vote for, mummy?" asked my eldest today.
"No one," I had to reply, "I can't vote."

He was quite stunned and well he might be. I might be able to vote in European elections (big deal, I'm sure that's just because the voting numbers are so dismal that they are desperate to involve the bottom of the pilers - foreigners) but I cannot vote in the one that counts. The election to choose the President of the Republic is not for me. I am not French. End of story.

However, the Republic is perfectly happy for me to pay my taxes and social contributions; they insist, in fact, but prevent me from adding my voice to how all my tax euros are to be spent, despite my being part of the happy, inclusive Euro family, as a Brit.

So, I can barely drum up any enthusiasm for the election at all. I have no voice, cannot influence the outcome, so why should I care? I can't do anything about it, there'll probably be no big changes that affect me anyway as there hardly ever are (except the 35hr week - yippee!), so I'm pretty apathetic about Sego and her white jacket, or Sarko and his hyperactive bouncing about.

I'm deeply suspicious of politicians, especially those on election campaigns. We hear words and promises, rallying calls to the population etc. etc. and it's all empty. Empty words, empty promises. The best liar wins. You just have to look at Blair to see how empty his words are, and Gordon Brown is even worse. He's a thieving, lying, manipulative, smug piece of shit, and that's being generous.

Chirac is rotten to the core as was Mitterand. They are all out for themselves; their self-aggrandisement, enrichment and rapacious political ambition come what may. Will Gordon Brown resign over the pensions fiasco? I doubt it. Has his pension or any other minister's been affected by his thieving grab? Yeah, right. He's all right, Jack. Stuff the public, they're all worn down by over-taxation, over-work and excessive surveillance anyway; they won't fuss for long... Slap another tax on them (preferably green to take the moral high ground), that'll shut them up.

A parent would have been proud that their child become Prime Minister, or President in days gone by. Today, politicians have to show such dastardly characteristics that frankly, I hope my two steer well clear of politics.

Free Lunch?

There's no such thing as a free lunch, they say. Unless you are a locally elected official in France, it seems.

Perhaps it is the threat of not dishing out subventions that gets them invited everywhere for nothing. What we have found during our preparations for the Promo'Arts charitable evening is that expecting them to pay is greeted with shock. Ca ne se fait pas, chère amie!

Logically, however, someone has to open their cheque book at a charity event. It is, afterall, the aim of a charity event to earn money for charity (in this case, La Ligue Contre le Cancer). We are not putting on an evening's entertainment out of the goodness of our hearts. I'm not sure this concept has quite sunk in.

At previous events, not organised by us, guests have considered the evening as a soirée mondaine, have stuffed themselves silly on the sumptuous buffet, drunk themselves under the table on the wine, and contributed not one cent to the charity in whose name the event was organised. Call us stuffy old FrAnglo-Saxon pedants if you will, but that is not what charity is all about.

Our art auction involves about 18 paintings. That means a maximum of 18 people can buy one. They may only pay peanuts if no one else is bidding on that particular painting, which means the whole evening's financial success rests on the whim of a small group of potential bidders. Everyone else would be busily stuffing themselves, getting drunk and then going home, their wallets intact.

But, we have a cunning plan...

Guests will have to buy their glass if they want a drink. To obtain a glass they will have to cough up a minimum of ten euros; more if they like, or if they are persuaded that being generous would be a really good idea... Then they can drink as much as they like and eat.

This idea is causing much mirth and evil chuckling amongst the sponsors (themselves exceptionally generous people), and much shock and disbelief amongst the representatives of locally elected officials. If they want to drink, they will have to pay. I'm not sure it's ever been done before here. We aim to shock and to get people thinking and acting. Word is spreading in the town that we are not sucking up to politicians, not asking them for money, and expecting everyone to participate at what is certainly going to be one hell of an evening.

It's causing such a stir but who was it who said that there's no such thing as bad publicity? Where we had been ignored before, we are now being solicited for invitations. Dontcha just love politics?