It has been a while since I have written an electoral or governance style post. I guess during these times, I've not really had enough time during the day with the kids around to adequately form my thoughts and start putting those ideas on the screen. However, today marks the first day of the kids going back to school (for half the week) in The Netherlands... and that means that I had time to write up a job application and then start thinking about various things that I would like to write about that weren't about the daily grind of life during the Coronavirus times.
Anyway, despite the fact that I live in The Netherlands, I still follow quite closely the Australian political scene... which, despite it's various ups and downs, I still think is one of the best implementations of liberal democracy in the world. I do wish that the rest of the world would keep their ideas of "freedom" and "inclusiveness" away from our shores, our democracy works fine without having the stupidly tribal natures of other countries trying to make a mark. That said, our system isn't perfect, but we have been partly shielded from the worst of interesting developments that have infected other liberal democracies.
However, this particular news story crossed my news feed today: https://www.abc.net.au/news/2020-05-11/david-leyonhjelm-defamation-case-appeal-sarah-hanson-young/12234094
Basically, at it's core, it is a legal battle between two Australian senators over something or other that is not of that much consequence to me. The two protagonists are David Leyonhjelm (Liberal Democratic Party, a libertarian leaning minor party) and Sarah Hanson-Young (Australian Greens, a left leaning minor party).
Now, before I go any further, I am just going to declare my own political leanings... I lean to the right on some things and to the left on other things, there is no single one party that currently encompasses all the things that I hold dear on their party platform. I prefer scientific data-driven approaches (not economic story telling) even when it does lead to some uncomfortable re-thinking of my own gut instincts. I am decidedly non-partisan and someone who is quick to change my mind given concrete proof and evidence.
As for the two protagonists in this particular legal case... I dislike both of them.
I find David Leyonhjelm to be the stereotypical parody of a libertarian, espousing personal liberty over everything else without considering the impact on other members of society (something that is relatively easy to do when you belong to a privileged group) and sort of the real-life equivalent of an internet troll, saying things for shock value, just because he can.
Meanwhile, I have heard Sarah Hanson-Young on various podcasts and interviews and most recently I have found her to be a bit hypocritical and not quite as idealistic when it comes to personal actions as her public opinion would suggest. However, prior to that, I didn't quite find her to be genuine... of course, that was just a personal opinion based on nothing more than public interviews, and so it could be quite a wrong impression.
However, there was one line from the defence (David Leyonhjelm) which seems to encapsulate the problem of modern day politics for me.
"The purpose of politics, as far as I can tell, is to use any means whatsoever within reason, and that's the question, what is within reason, to raise your party and denigrate the other party."
Dr Gillian Dempsey (lawyer for David Leyonhjelm)
Ok, these are not words direct from the senator but from his defence team... and they could pretty much apply fairly equally to any political party in the modern Western liberal democracies.
However, they really serve to highlight that politics as seen by modern day politicians and the public is more akin to a team sport. A place where it is more important to play the system and WIN THE GAME rather than being a contest of ideas. A place where rhetorical debating tricks are used to win the day rather the shaping and implementation of ideas about what constitutes a society and nation.
For me, this is the biggest problem that has infected the modern day political parties. They are run and controlled these days by people who are intent on power and winning, with little ideological or philosophical conviction. They are driven by a career and personal glory rather than by old school notions of service and duty. This is most apparent in the number of ex-politicians who go into service in the private sector as "consultants" rather than hanging up their gloves and basking in the knowledge that they have affected society for the better (of course, there are many versions of a "better" society... but very few of them involve being able to get a better paying job at the end of public life!).
Trouble is, the people who were visionaries and interested in something better were never the "in-crowd" at school. Now, as politics becomes more of a showground and illusion, it is better to appear visionary rather than actually having the substance to back it up... partly it is the fault of the politicians, but the more painful truth is that is our own fault... when the public thinks that "reality TV" is actually a representation of reality rather than artifice and illusion, well... we shouldn't be surprised when we are so easily fooled!
Upgoats by ryivhnn
Account banner by jimramones
The classical music community (Subscribe at Steempeak and Peakd) at #classical-music and Discord. Follow our community accounts 
