It appears political parties require not that the most enterprising and qualified people exhibiting modesty, intelligence and a history of hard work be promoted within the hierarchy but, that the most conceited, greedy, lazy and self-serving, rhetoric rich and substance challenged should rise to the top echelons of the group. It appears from observation the worst examples of candidates are presented with party backing while those possibly more qualified are disallowed the financial support and backing necessary to prevail.
The purpose of the party is to create a credible facade of efficiency more than about developing any actual achievements. The more senior the party member, the greater the ego and the more imposing the charade he or she puts across. Under close inspection they regularly reveal an unusual incompetence that should disqualify them from positions of authority. These party members have an ability to create a good impression, even though the reality is somewhat different.
The community forced to witness the posturing and positioning of the combatant political parties are harangued to the point of distraction. There are speeches, public service announcements, radio and television commercials and internet advertising to distract and cajole the citizen to accept the party’s positions on issues. The chosen candidates, those most loyal though suspect concerning their talents and abilities use a specific tactic most often chosen for its overwhelming success – obfuscation.
The word itself is an example of the tactic sufficing in the field of battle. It would be easier to simply say they confuse the issue in question. No; that won’t work for them. They must mystify the audience with their vocabulary. They say many words but the speech carries no clarity or explanation as to where the candidate stands on issues other than he’s against what his opponent does.
To quote Atkinson: “Communication is becoming increasingly long winded while conveying shrinking meaning; "At this moment in time" instead of "now", and "The state of the art" instead of "Latest". Words like "situation" are added to pointlessly extend the text, with "A riot" becoming "A riot situation". The emphasis on communication is now shifting from the meaning to the manner, in line with contemporary preference for appearances ahead of reality.” It’s become hackneyed and not politically correct to use words implying gender. “Spokesman, chairman, salesman” have become replaced with: “spokesperson, chairperson, salesperson” et al. People use more syllables but say less with them. Failure to comply with this trend brings down the wrath of the “PC Police” and charges of racism, sexism, fascism are bandied about to silence the non-compliant and brand them as such.
This form of articulation creates a subtle form of censorship sacrificing clarity on the pagan altar of obsessive diplomacy. Don’t be blunt, be judicious and guarded. Don’t say anything forces you to defend your premise. Dance around the issues and disguise your meaning like a burlesque dancer working her concealing fans.
The purpose of speech is to be understood. Comprehension demands short, simple, clear words, not multi-syllable, all embracing, neutered nicknames eroding understanding. Verbosity for the sake of hearing your own voice isn’t the same as addressing issues and positing solutions before the voters.
It’s a matter many find personally repugnant in the undeniable nonsense paraded as truth. It’s upsetting to observe the lies and distortions going unchallenged, in contrast to the few words of sanity that are scorned from all sides. The media is now guilty of an abysmal lack of quality of reporting and steadily shows its absurd bias. This trend is recognizable as the media’s political correctness. In this placement in the societal program, the power of the press directs the thoughts of the society by presenting only those perspectives they choose to support.
Our political system has been co-opted by blundering selfish incompetents, whose influence is destroying public reason and causing our nation to sink into chaos. One merely needs to look at the performance of the presidential administration as it applies to their inability to work in a bipartisan manner with the “loyal opposition” and the administration’s inability to lead in foreign policy to better understand the concept of “false advertising”.
This recognition that incompetents rise to the top of the political realm is becoming more obvious because of the political society’s removing itself from contact with and the influence of its electors. Politicians have established themselves as a class above all others. In this sense it’s not the cream rising to the top as much as it is the scum settling on the surface.
Thanks for listening
