Having a hard time taking elections seriously.Now I'm reading this speech on bus subsidy reform, and just realising why it's so hard to get my head into elections - or a lot of "reform" and "policy".
— Scribe (@6loss) May 3, 2013
"Better Bus Areas". "Portas Pilots". "Big Society". "Pasty Tax". Oh God, the list of
Democracy - or rather democratic discourse (which is a different thing, but includes speeches, media coverage, and general efforts to increase enthusiasm) - has become a boring hamster-wheel of phrases and symbols.
Taking a lead from the private sector, it feels like politicians are wont to sell society in more ways than one - not only in the practical terms of outsourcing, but also (and perhaps more irritatingly and dangerously) with regard to how
Yes, there's some kind of thought-process going on behing all of these, some kind of "actual" attempt to solve the real-world problems we do need to address. I appreciate that, really.
But by the time this thought-process has become a "programme", it's been so tarred with political context, existing decisions, and PR "acceptance" efforts ("What's the hashtag for this new policy?") that engaging is about as engaging as a Microsoft sales chat. (And sure, some people like that. Some people enjoy politics too.)
The interesting aspect of this is whether such a technique is to entice people in with a brushing of faux-simplicity, or to discourage them, leaving the nitty-gritty to people with the time and background to understand the real talk and consequence behind the symbols.
Should policy be a user-friendly, read-it-on-the-loo affair? Or an academic, know-what-you're-talking-about conversation? Both have advantages.
Maybe I'll just carry on grumbling when the price of a single bus ticket goes up again.