What we could REALLY do with, by way of psephological analysis (and this amenity please year in, year out), is a breakdown of the income-sources of people who campaign for the Greens.
Are very many of them comfortably placed with nice pensions; or in a state-funded job (where it is almost impossible to be sacked and you never get your pay docked)?
If so, this would help explain their readiness to make energy bills soar and cars unaffordable to most &c, because – as with most measures of governance nowadays – the people making the rules never have to live with the painful parts of the sharp-edged consequences. [E.g. they get the benefits of mass immigration – cheap nannies, cooks, gardeners, cleaners – without suffering the downside costs (huge pressure on job opportunities, school and health and social housing places).]
I agree with your theme, but I only wish the steam-manifestation would occur. That would mean they were having to connect the dots of their policies and perceive, however imperfectly, their loopy logic.
My fear and strong suspicion is, that they are (like hardline Remainers and chronic EUphiles) absolutely armour-plated in their minds against absorbing any factual point or rational remonstrance that stultifies their phony religion.
On reflection, you’re right. I actually tried out the above line of reasoning on Molly Scott Cato, who was the Southwest’s Green MEP until Brexit. This particular Oxford PPE graduate was sadly incapable of engaging with my argument on any rational level. The cognitive dissonance was deafening.
How can anybody have been through a rigorous intellectual discipline and acquired important knowledge from a 3-year degree course which combines Politics, Philosophy and Economics?
It’s like some fanciful idea of a preposterous European Languages degree which gives its students smatterings from each of those tongues but no deep engagement with any single one.
[“Can you actually speak Italian, Spanish, German, French and Dutch, Miss Higginbottom?” “Well, I know how to say ‘Hello’ and ‘Goodbye’ in each of those languages.” “Great. Become a Cabinet minister. Most of them have this sort of training.”]
Unfortunately, a career in politics does not require any specific skills or aptitudes. There are no job descriptions, no requirement to match oneself against a detailed person spec and no psychometric tests. Imo, Oxford Uni is vastly overrated, especially when it comes to PPE. Its tutors seem to teach groupthink and deference above all else.
Graduating in PPE should certainly constitute an automatic disqualification from standing for any elective office. Almost as bad as graduating in gender studies.
At the very least, no sane woman will be voting Green. So if they gain on one side, they owe on another. Conservatives better move over and make room for a lot of women who’ve had it with the toxic and vicious sexism of the modern leftists.
What we could REALLY do with, by way of psephological analysis (and this amenity please year in, year out), is a breakdown of the income-sources of people who campaign for the Greens.
Are very many of them comfortably placed with nice pensions; or in a state-funded job (where it is almost impossible to be sacked and you never get your pay docked)?
If so, this would help explain their readiness to make energy bills soar and cars unaffordable to most &c, because – as with most measures of governance nowadays – the people making the rules never have to live with the painful parts of the sharp-edged consequences. [E.g. they get the benefits of mass immigration – cheap nannies, cooks, gardeners, cleaners – without suffering the downside costs (huge pressure on job opportunities, school and health and social housing places).]
Well said. Also, try pointing out to a Green the environmental consequences of their open borders advocacy:-
More housing, more roads, more offices, more factories, more schools, more hospitals, more prisons, more airstrips, more concrete.
Then sit back and watch the steam coming out of their ears.
I agree with your theme, but I only wish the steam-manifestation would occur. That would mean they were having to connect the dots of their policies and perceive, however imperfectly, their loopy logic.
My fear and strong suspicion is, that they are (like hardline Remainers and chronic EUphiles) absolutely armour-plated in their minds against absorbing any factual point or rational remonstrance that stultifies their phony religion.
On reflection, you’re right. I actually tried out the above line of reasoning on Molly Scott Cato, who was the Southwest’s Green MEP until Brexit. This particular Oxford PPE graduate was sadly incapable of engaging with my argument on any rational level. The cognitive dissonance was deafening.
Oxford PPE is in my book a DISqualification.
It stands to reason.
How can anybody have been through a rigorous intellectual discipline and acquired important knowledge from a 3-year degree course which combines Politics, Philosophy and Economics?
It’s like some fanciful idea of a preposterous European Languages degree which gives its students smatterings from each of those tongues but no deep engagement with any single one.
[“Can you actually speak Italian, Spanish, German, French and Dutch, Miss Higginbottom?”
“Well, I know how to say ‘Hello’ and ‘Goodbye’ in each of those languages.”
“Great. Become a Cabinet minister. Most of them have this sort of training.”]
Unfortunately, a career in politics does not require any specific skills or aptitudes. There are no job descriptions, no requirement to match oneself against a detailed person spec and no psychometric tests. Imo, Oxford Uni is vastly overrated, especially when it comes to PPE. Its tutors seem to teach groupthink and deference above all else.
Graduating in PPE should certainly constitute an automatic disqualification from standing for any elective office. Almost as bad as graduating in gender studies.
Greens are largely innumerate as well as finding it difficult to join the dots.
Perhaps Starmer could kneel before a wind turbine. That’ll fix it.
by taking his head off?
At the very least, no sane woman will be voting Green. So if they gain on one side, they owe on another.
Conservatives better move over and make room for a lot of women who’ve had it with the toxic and vicious sexism of the modern leftists.
No as they are both rubbish