There is something bothering me about politicians…
Surely not everyone who goes into politics is corrupt – yet that seems to be the general opinion. What happened to the person who was so determined to help the lives of himself/herself and fellow citizens? So much so that they dedicate themselves to public service? I refuse to believe that every one of them fell foul of some mystical spell that turned each of them into self-serving , corrupt individuals.
We citizens are not stupid; explain what you (politicians) are trying to do, why and how – and we will get it! We may not support every policy as an individual, but if you explain the background – we will be able to compute what you are saying (and argue intelligently if necessary).
This works in international politics as well.
Politicians are not a breed or animal any different to homo sapiens – there is no barrier except one that is perceived or projected.
So why do we find it so hard to communicate? Why are we more content identifying and vilifying the one rotten apple, thereby brushing aside the fact that we need to understand and support the earnest intentions of the rest of those politicians who are determined to make some sense of the management of this country?
The job I choose to do is around enabling this explanation to happen, but I am increasingly frustrated by the reluctance to listen. I can enable communication until your ears bleed, but if there is no willingness to listen then there seems little point.
Democracy relies on the intelligence and candidacy of the community – should we not start taking account of our own actions?
It is too easy to lay blame at the door of corruption – pour sugar into sachet… we need to wake up.
Emma Mulqueeny 
I’m reminded of a question an old politician used to ask all new entrants to the Commons – I’m paraphrasing here, so no direct attribution without researching my facts – “What are you here for – for self-aggrandisment, or to make bad law good?” My impression is that there is so much patronage required to get in a position ‘to make bad law good’ it is very easy to lose sight of that laudable original objective.
I’m also reminded of Churchill’s ‘Democracy is the worst form of government except all the rest’. The people do not rule here – an oligarchy does.
Linking these together with your frustrations over listening, the apathy many of us feel towards politics, especially the young, is that it is all about confrontation rather than collaboration, arguing rather than getting on with things, factoids rather than facts, soundbites rather than reasoned arguments, and (half-) hearing rather than listening.
Apathy is hopeless for everybody. Social networking sounds like a way of arousing that faculty of common sense which is there in all of us, and also giving us a voice which politicians have to listen to and communicate with.
Final reflection – on the other side of the law, if we end up being tried by jury we absolutely rely upon that faculty of common sense.
We’re lucky – it does not have to be like this. Maybe we need some more corruption like Italy which gets >80% of people voting in the same pleutocrat for the third time?……….
Jeremy, this is a superb point:
Apathy is hopeless for everybody. Social networking sounds like a way of arousing that faculty of common sense which is there in all of us, and also giving us a voice which politicians have to listen to and communicate with.
Thank you