Random Note – Types of UK Prime Minister

This post (and site) is not about being partisan ‘political’ in any way. (It’s about people, some of who do ‘Politics’ .. which has ‘disproportionate’ amounts of influence over many other peoples’ FundQoLs, so they’re obvs. going to pop up).

(Also, the future of Democracy lay in a departure from governance identities and credos, such as left or right, tory-labour-liberal, etc., while also simultaneously accommodating, within the various political governance formations, the Value and needs of each of the millions of, our now vocal and intra-communicating, Individuals of society).  However …

Is it a rare and lone view amongst Britons to feel very positively appreciative and grateful that we have had, for these past few years, a Prime Minister who is / is perceived (from much media at least) as boring, ‘indecisive’ [probably not accurate], robot-Maybot (although is that more to do with her public Self-projection traits, rather than her being a ‘brainless person operating mechanically according to externally given instructions’ ?), lots of attention-to-detail-but-not-Getting-Things-Done!, a ditherer, as (therefore?) weak?, or any of the other such less-than-dazzling descriptives of her person, and performance in role?

Starting with Thatcher (‘s Time) – who got everyone going, and Going-For-It, ‘cos We’re-Worth-It .. as our eyes hooked on to glistening horizons, and we learnt to become addicted (as a society, not only individually) to the high-glitz lure of loadsamoney (and the things it buys) .. and so commercial capitalism became embued / embeddded into our everydaily Self-identities (increasingly more defining how we choose and do, throughout our life , including how we treat all other people encountered during it. Certain successful capitalist commerce-smiths realised that if you abused other people(‘s FundQoL) you could gain extra loads of cash. Abuse of their faith and abuse of common Trust, in your Self-projective (and plotted) interactions with them. This is one reason why we need to regulate with serious Law the concept of free-market capitalism(and apply it with the same ambition the law is applied to common people, with the same (or rather better perhaps, going by recent police crime reports) conviction rates and [and proportionate I’d say] penalties .

.. But which really got going within our political culture and attitude with Blair, then the baton was handsomly-handled, with aplomb, by Cameron (and his fiends), and is surely peaking with such as Trump in the US ( “.. eh? .. yikes, surely .. eh??!” ), politicians – or at least the Prime Minister types – transformed themselves from the established fusty old 20th Century identity and became (or were trained, primped and primed to parade) .. er, vital .. vibrant important making things happen, honest and straight up, types of people – politicians were no longer boring! They mixed and ritzed with the ‘exciting’ people of our societal culture, the artists stars and celebrities (when there weren’t nearly as many) – they were just like you (though, ‘truly humbly blessed’ btw, by having a far higher IQ, education, experience of ife, skill, talent and the necessary nouse than you) .. sorry my friend, you just wouldn’t be able to do in such an extraordinarily challenging job .. like I can.  So then they get snooty? think that they / their brains can’t gain from the genuine wisdoms of their citizens? Thsy become, of their Self, super-Important (not just another human). << gone off track.

Drama. Headlines of the positive PR type. Hero. The strongest. The Best. The one to trust more than all others. I dunno what – at times – goes through the heads, or streams through the subliminals, of a politicians with (effectively) vast and immense power over many people’s one-body lives on Earth. When they authorise war, ignoring so much common sense, and do it in good faith based on their facts at the time etc etc .. and the stuff which (common) people were saying would happen, did. And it wasn’t / isn’t good.

Within the high impacts of Progress, as it is @ mo, in our world, and the volatility of societies and geo-politics, religion, etc etc., the high risks and Dangers with which our societies and governments are having to handle in these times, the last ‘type’ of PM would be any of those flash boys (we know what Blair did, and Cameron-Osborne did some of that too (tho’ wilfully not making the same mistakes as Blair – that would’ve been political suicide!) but added their own versions (of ‘mistake’) with, e.g., the nearly losing the Scottish referendum, then having the arrogant gall (they’d thought it was Balls) – to put up the hugely ignorantly formed / presented / played out / then badly prepared so for the British public it was ignorance filled, as he put his gamble on an EU referendum – and which, whichever your in/out preference, has left us, and the current politicians, a massive mess.

Lots of national resource, money, being spent on the aftermath of Dave’s spin – and disrespect for his public; he thought he knew better and that we’d do what he said .. i think at some point he even said “Trust me” and vote to ‘stay in’.

These past couple of years, we’ve had a PM  who, with all the opportunities arisen in this time to create a centre-stage situation for herself / her chums, seems to have remained focused and committed to the raison d’etre of her job – trying to do, within the democratic systemics of our parliamentary governance – the (dare I say, ‘for-human-‘?) best she can to sustain (or enhance) the QoLs for the ‘whole’ populace (and as surely should be any Prime Minister of Britain’s primary remit?) via being a full-time ‘working’ politician. (This is not commenting on the success or otherwise of those endeavours).

[However, i was a bit concerned at the swift accusatory response to the Russians in the Salisbury poisoning thing, when it was known (apparently) that there were at least 5 or 6 other possible sources for this particular novochik poison in the world (i.e. although they might’ve been prime suspect, it might (as easily) not have been them, yet she was publicly quick off the mark to categorically accuse another nation’s government). So she easily might not be as suggested here].

I’m not sure being gung-ho hero (the other lot often define that as, ‘Getting Things Done!’) is any part of her Self’s motivation for doing her job. And diligence, the attainment and proficient processing of accurate and comprehensive facts, the accommodation of the appropriate wisdoms of others, speculation as to outcomes for not only now but (or especially) in the future, and so on, all before decisions are made for the life-changing actions (and ‘on the behalf of’ all Britons), all takes more time .. than for a prime minister who is more of a gut-instinct-Player, who looks (disproportionately) to short-term gain ( .. other people’s mess later) and glory, and likes the adrenaline hit from taking a punt (on their picking the right number), but who places disproportionate value on (their own Self’s wisdom, along with their Gambler’s Instinct .. i.e., they’re delusionarily arrogant)  and disproportionate value on ‘projected-Self-assertion’, forcefulness or aggression .. and Speed (which all adds up to, ‘ Being Seen to Be Getting Things Done ‘).

Albeit from scant research of her publicised performance to date .. it seems that Theresa May’s Self ( -glory seeking) doesn’t come higher than than the effects she has .. on the people in her remit – the British population and nation within the World .. via her public-servant-politician-work – and which is oft times extremely boring and, sorry but much of probably it is, fusty (the topics and documents they must read and engage with are not going to be their personal pick’n’mix preferences for a start, yet to be waded through they must).

And that’s surely something to be grateful for?

Do we need or want a prime minister who loves a dramatic platform .. when our world throws up so many opportunities for creating / enhancing / fuelling them?

 

– – – FIN – – –