|miss_s_b (miss_s_b) wrote,|
@ 2012-04-18 10:08 am UTC
... which is an unofficial Paddick supporters' vid, the first half of which attacks Boris and the second half bigs up Brian. And the bit that stuck in my mind was
a joke's only funny the first time around.
Londoners have a choice on May 3rd between a joke that's not funny any more, an apparently corrupt hasbeen who keeps rising like Zombie Mr Grimsdyke, an environmentalist, and a former police chief who knows what he's doing and loves the city he wants to be mayor of. And the media keep talking like the fight is between the first two and not the last two. In any sane political system this would not be the case: the fight in any election ought to be between the most competent candidates, not the least.
Why is our political system so utterly fucked up that all we hear about in the London mayoral race is Ken V Boris and Boris V Ken, certainly up here, when I want to hear what Brian and Jenny have to say? Mainly I'd like to hear what Brian and Jenny have to say because they are the two who seem like they might have a cat in hell's chance of not totally cocking everything up the second they take office like Ken or Boris would/will.
Argh. I don't know. Our political system is so frustrating. All my training at school and uni pushes me towards scientific method: an idea should be evaluated on it's merits by examination of evidence and careful study. Our political system does not reward this approach. Our political system rewards diatribe, hysterical screaming, hyperbole, totally ignoring evidence, paying off the media, throwing money at a campaign rather than ideas; and joining a party not because their ideals accord with yours, but because they are the best route to power.
Changing the electoral system might have made a dent in that, but the London Mayoral Race is not run on FPTP and the campaign still seems to go the same way.