Monbiot weighs in this time - a head-to-head (actually, her head to around his knees) interview. Compelling, unless you have little stomach for mechanoids.
Monbiot's getting better at these interviews, really very interesting to see a politician interviewed about their beliefs, it also raises questions about the political system. In order to be a cabinet minister you have to make compromises about your beliefs and tow the party line so that the system functions, but how far do morals get pushed out? Do you just end up with immoral people in government because everyone else has dropped by the wayside at that stage?
Hazel says that at no point has she felt her views deviate sufficiently with either prime minister that she felt she had to resign over an issue. When Monbiot pressed her on what issue would make her resign, and she said something that would make things worse for her constituents in terms of access to education, healthcare and their general prosperity. Monbiot came back with the 10p tax band abolition, and she said that at the time she believed that the compensation measures would be sufficient to make up the difference.
This has to be bullshit. Anyone with the simplest understanding of maths and the tax system could see that that policy would make low income people worse off. Those people working part time on low wages, in particular, saw a massive cut in their income. Also weren't the compensation measures brought in afterwards when backbenchers kicked up a stink.
There's a theory called cognitive dissonance. A researcher in the fifties infiltrated a group which believed aliens were going to land on a particular day. When they didn't, they adapted to this by predicting another day - and on and on, so that they could fit reality round their beliefs, rather than the other way round.
I don't know if anyone's done this study with politicians, but I presume the same thing would result. The thing with Hazel is that it's even grubbier than that. She has no beliefs (other than in herself). She is merely determined to stay in power. As for all that crap about democracy: being given an incredibly safe seat in a poor, tribally loyal constituency isn't the same as facing a balanced electorate and persuading them of your views on a number of topics.
2 comments:
Monbiot's getting better at these interviews, really very interesting to see a politician interviewed about their beliefs, it also raises questions about the political system. In order to be a cabinet minister you have to make compromises about your beliefs and tow the party line so that the system functions, but how far do morals get pushed out? Do you just end up with immoral people in government because everyone else has dropped by the wayside at that stage?
Hazel says that at no point has she felt her views deviate sufficiently with either prime minister that she felt she had to resign over an issue. When Monbiot pressed her on what issue would make her resign, and she said something that would make things worse for her constituents in terms of access to education, healthcare and their general prosperity. Monbiot came back with the 10p tax band abolition, and she said that at the time she believed that the compensation measures would be sufficient to make up the difference.
This has to be bullshit. Anyone with the simplest understanding of maths and the tax system could see that that policy would make low income people worse off. Those people working part time on low wages, in particular, saw a massive cut in their income. Also weren't the compensation measures brought in afterwards when backbenchers kicked up a stink.
There's a theory called cognitive dissonance. A researcher in the fifties infiltrated a group which believed aliens were going to land on a particular day. When they didn't, they adapted to this by predicting another day - and on and on, so that they could fit reality round their beliefs, rather than the other way round.
I don't know if anyone's done this study with politicians, but I presume the same thing would result. The thing with Hazel is that it's even grubbier than that. She has no beliefs (other than in herself). She is merely determined to stay in power. As for all that crap about democracy: being given an incredibly safe seat in a poor, tribally loyal constituency isn't the same as facing a balanced electorate and persuading them of your views on a number of topics.
Post a Comment