Election Note 1

Another election looms in the U.K. While I don’t intend this blog to promote any particular political view, I will be voting and I would urge anybody eligible in the U.K. to vote. It DOES make a difference; you CAN make your views known and take action in many other ways, but you have no right to moan if you haven’t voted. (More on this at a later date. If I get round to more election notes.)

Election notes 1One strange phenomenon of which I was first aware during the last election and which has appeared again this time is the staged meet-the-public photo-opportunity. All the party leaders and other prominent characters have been in these. They appear to be speaking to a group of the public; of course, this group is a group of their party members and supporters, all carrying supportive placards and cheering on their leader. In one recent such occasion you could spot the constituency candidate smiling awkwardly behind the main man. (There’s a clue.)

I was musing on this today when a news item appeared on the TV which struck me forcefully with its similarities to the U.K. situation. It was a short clip of the North Korean leader, Kim Jong Un, beaming as he walked along being applauded by a group of his generals.

Now I’m not for a moment suggesting that our political parties and their leaders are in any way like Kim Jong Un and the North Koreans. However, such staged and artificial situations are not worthy of our democracy.

In case you are wondering, I have not yet finalised the Oblique election manifesto. Chocolate may well feature. I am consulting my supporters. Certainly baseball caps worn back-to-front will be banned. The Fashion Police may be given increased powers of enforcement.


A Quick Word: Populist

How is it that ‘populist’ is a derogative word? What does it mean, anyway?

It appears to me that it currently is often used to describe a “view that is held by a large number of people but is however wrong”. (This is my middle-class, middle of the road, moderately well-educated understanding of the current situation; and please note that I am still sitting so resolutely on the fence as regards matters like Brexit that I have, as MSC would no doubt agree, got splinters embedded in my rear.)

My admittedly old print dictionaries (Collins and Oxford) do not have it. My Kindle dictionary (Oxford) gives the noun as a “person who supports or seeks to appeal to the concerns of ordinary people”. Hence the adjective. This is hardly derogatory and hardly my received impression from the 2017 media. So I went online to find out more.

Wikipedia says that populism mobilises “a large alienated element of a population against a government which is seen as controlled by an out-of-touch closed elite that acts on behalf of its own interests” and that it is often used pejoratively. (Wikipedia populist)

Other websites (there were over 12 million hits for populist) see populism as alarming (300 000 hits for populist & alarming) or a danger (500 000 hits for populist & danger).So it has presumably become a pejorative word. In what way?

Jeremy Corbyn, quoted on Sky News, criticises the populist right. (Sky News article) I found 615 000 hits for populist & left wing, with only 50 000 more for populist & right wing. Not a huge difference. Mr Corbyn, according to the Independent, is to be relaunched as a left wing populist. (Independent article) So it seems to be used for either left or right wing views, often in a negative way.

Obviously there is some confusion about a definition and, perhaps sadly, some misappropriation by left and right of the word “populist”, on its own, as a derogatory term to suit particular agendas. I find the definition of “supporting or seeking to appeal to the concerns of ordinary people” to be clear and useful; it would be nice if it were always to be used this way, if necessary linked to either “right wing” or “left wing” for clarity.

However, I don’t control the media……

Couldn’t think of a picture…..