The improper behaviour of Mr and Mrs Brown is now on public display. The behaviour of neither of them is appropriate in a democracy. An essential characteristic of democracy is election not just to office but to public role.
The lack of democratic sanction to the roles the pair of them have taken up both within the Labour party and within government is offensive. Mrs Brown has put herself forward into the political role of chief cheer leader and public expiator of her husband's behaviour in office. And in the office. She introduces him at the Party Conference with a speech normally reserved to the elected Deputy Leader of the Party; she appears in the media resolutely advancing the theory of the lovableness of Gordon; she acts inappropriately, indeed mannerlessly, at official dinners (to which she is invited only as a courtesy, as a spouse) making political points through sending back dishes of which she disapproves.
Brown has now confessed that there was a prior arrangement outside both Party consultation and electoral consultation with the country that he should 'take over' the premiership at a time to be agreed between him and the elected prime minister. Despite the elected prime minister standing on the assurance of serving a full term, he was driven from office by a Brown putsch followed by a refusal to go to the country and obtain his own electoral mandate. And the political brutality used to achieve this is enacted too in personal brutality displayed towards staff who serve in the prime minister's office. While Mr and Mrs Brown weep on television working people are so distressed by their individual treatment in Downing Street they are frightened to go to work.
Both of them need to go and be 'passionate, 'emotional', and 'caring' in their own private context. Such behaviour has no place in our democratic representation or in the roles it creates.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
It's mincreasingly noticeable that Brown and his supporters have no private independent lives. They can only exist as parasites sucking the blood and money of real people. None of them show much ability or inclination to earn an honest income by doing things that other people are willing to pay for. They exist as a rent-seeking political class who have imposed themselves on the public, not only directly as politicians, but indirectly as over-paid quangocrats and heads of fake charities and media people and lobbyists. At best they use their access to their pals to function as influence peddlers to those who hope to profit at the expense of the public. In a more honest society and open economy where the state had less influence there would be a much smaller environmental niche for such forms of life. Their success is evidence that our society is very sick. It is being consumed by it's parasites. They do nothing but weaken us and create more rules and unnecessary bureaucratic jobs for their followers to enforce to weaken us still further.
They have made themselves our ruling class, and feel free to behave with arrogance towards us. The fact that they are allowed to get away with it merely proves to them that Marx or Darwin has given them the right to do as they please. Naturally their natures are as distorted as they are deluded - but they may prove to be our destruction.
Post a Comment