Do Politicians Involve To Pander To Myths?

About Great Britain politics, but raising about full general issues nearly politicians as well as pop prejudices

Paul Bernal has a powerful post (HT Chris Dillow) where he says Labour lost the election long earlier 2015, yesteryear pandering towards iii big myths: the myth that Labour created a huge deficit which required austerity inwards the midst of a recession, the myth of the ‘scrounger’, as well as the myth that Labour made a fault inwards allowing excessive immigration. I patently concord nearly deficits, I’m appalled at the hostility to welfare recipients stoked yesteryear the correct fly tabloids as well as the damage done yesteryear inept reform, as well as I’m dismayed that politicians shy away from putting the positive instance for immigration. For that argue I should concord that inwards England at to the lowest degree ane of the iii major parties should last standing upwards against all these myths. The Conservatives as well as Liberal Democrats helped industry the outset myth, as well as the Conservatives contributed to the minute as well as pander to the 3rd (although about of their supporters would non favour costly immigration controls). Labour failed to fighting all three.

The media have, predictably, reached a consensus nearly why Labour lost: it was likewise left wing, it was anti-business, it failed to last aspirational (it wanted to heighten about taxes on the rich) blah blah blah. But every bit Peter Kellner as well as others stimulate got pointed out, at that spot is no clear prove for these assertions. Instead, they post (HT Chris Dillow) where he says Labour lost the election long earlier 2015, yesteryear pandering towards iii big myths: the myth that Labour created a huge deficit which required austerity inwards the midst of a recession, the myth of the ‘scrounger’, as well as the myth that Labour made a fault inwards allowing excessive immigration. I patently concord nearly deficits, I’m appalled at the hostility to welfare recipients stoked yesteryear the correct fly tabloids as well as the damage done yesteryear inept reform, as well as I’m dismayed that politicians shy away from putting the positive instance for immigration. For that argue I should concord that inwards England at to the lowest degree ane of the iii major parties should last standing upwards against all these myths. The Conservatives as well as Liberal Democrats helped industry the outset myth, as well as the Conservatives contributed to the minute as well as pander to the 3rd (although about of their supporters would non favour costly immigration controls). Labour failed to fighting all three.

The media have, predictably, reached a consensus nearly why Labour lost: it was likewise left wing, it was put it, he would non die elected inwards whatever constituency every bit a result.

It is tempting at this bespeak to blame the media for this state of affairs. In ane feel I agree: I mean value newspapers should stimulate got a responsibleness to enjoin the truth, rather than pander to prejudice when it suits their owners to produce so. But inwards price of practical politics this does non die you lot rattling far. One of the depressing conclusions that volition last drawn from the election effect is that it is fatal to stand upwards up to Rupert Murdoch. [1]

Is it also truthful that cutting the deficit is widely popular? Here I mean value post (HT Chris Dillow) where he says Labour lost the election long earlier 2015, yesteryear pandering towards iii big myths: the myth that Labour created a huge deficit which required austerity inwards the midst of a recession, the myth of the ‘scrounger’, as well as the myth that Labour made a fault inwards allowing excessive immigration. I patently concord nearly deficits, I’m appalled at the hostility to welfare recipients stoked yesteryear the correct fly tabloids as well as the damage done yesteryear inept reform, as well as I’m dismayed that politicians shy away from putting the positive instance for immigration. For that argue I should concord that inwards England at to the lowest degree ane of the iii major parties should last standing upwards against all these myths. The Conservatives as well as Liberal Democrats helped industry the outset myth, as well as the Conservatives contributed to the minute as well as pander to the 3rd (although about of their supporters would non favour costly immigration controls). Labour failed to fighting all three.

The media have, predictably, reached a consensus nearly why Labour lost: it was likewise left wing, it was the evidence is less clear. I concord alongside post (HT Chris Dillow) where he says Labour lost the election long earlier 2015, yesteryear pandering towards iii big myths: the myth that Labour created a huge deficit which required austerity inwards the midst of a recession, the myth of the ‘scrounger’, as well as the myth that Labour made a fault inwards allowing excessive immigration. I patently concord nearly deficits, I’m appalled at the hostility to welfare recipients stoked yesteryear the correct fly tabloids as well as the damage done yesteryear inept reform, as well as I’m dismayed that politicians shy away from putting the positive instance for immigration. For that argue I should concord that inwards England at to the lowest degree ane of the iii major parties should last standing upwards against all these myths. The Conservatives as well as Liberal Democrats helped industry the outset myth, as well as the Conservatives contributed to the minute as well as pander to the 3rd (although about of their supporters would non favour costly immigration controls). Labour failed to fighting all three.

The media have, predictably, reached a consensus nearly why Labour lost: it was likewise left wing, it was evidence suggests differences inwards social attitudes betwixt Scotland as well as England is not that great. The enquiry Labour (or at to the lowest degree somebody) should last shout for is why the SNP tin ship away avoid pandering to these iii myths as well as win decisively, when the consensus is that doing the same inwards England would last electoral suicide.   

[1] Some people who comment on this weblog tell that when I vocalism concerns similar this I’m existence a fleck passé, but on other occasions I’m defendant of existence anti-democratic! Somehow a pol choosing to delegate macro policy to experts reduces democracy, but allowing rich media barons to command the data that much of the electorate receives, as well as every bit a effect stimulate got a considerable influence on politicians, is simply fine.