I’m still busy not following the election, but I couldn’t help noticing that the Daily Telegraph agrees with my analysis of how things work in British public life. The difference is that having a leadership caste is AOK in their book, hence their careful observance of all the appropriate hagiographic tropes. Read it here: ‘David Cameron: born to be prime minister’.
Update: Gordon unblocked. If only you’d started like this.
Does it really matter who wins the UK election on 06/ May? Whoever wins and takes charge (whether power-sharing or not) will face 5 years of hell. They have to deal with an enormous debt problem: which will be a smaller rival of the Greek challenge. His (and it will be a “his”) honeymoon period will be short – non-visible? And he will be in power for only five years (or the term of his government. The UK public will be well sick of him and his (necessary) policies: tho they will reap the benefits after he is gone from power – IF.
The big IF is – whoever wins the UK election, will they be brave enough to take the necessary measures?
Well yes, this is the narrative: dealing with the debt transcends politics. Nothing involving human agency – i.e. what to do – transcends politics, though: on the contrary, politics are essentially involved. So I don’t like the narrative.