O/T. The Government's handling of Covid

[Andy_Faber]

rA mine and AF's differences stem from the fact he is generally Ok with this sort of thing, he doesn't think it matters because from his narrow personal perspective it doesn't impact on him.

No I'm not (necessarily) OK with it, I bloody hate people not answering questions directly, I'm observing that its become so ubiquitous that most folk now just shrug their shoulders and move on. I disagree that it doesn't impact me, the behaviour and abilities of those in charge (and those holding same to account) impact everyone to some degree, I'll admit to relative prosperity sheilding me (and no doubt you) from the greater impact of it

People also move on when commentators repeatedly use catchphrases like 'narrow perspective', 'dog whistle' and 'gammon' by the way, because they they see in that behaviour the inability of the originator to put forward a strong enough argument

'

[swaledale]

No I'm not (necessarily) OK with it, I bloody hate people not answering questions directly, I'm observing that its become so ubiquitous that most folk now just shrug their shoulders and move on. I disagree that it doesn't impact me, the behaviour and abilities of those in charge (and those holding same to account) impact everyone to some degree, I'll admit to relative prosperity sheilding me (and no doubt you) from the greater impact of it

People also move on when commentators repeatedly use catchphrases like 'narrow perspective', 'dog whistle' and 'gammon' by the way, because they they see in that behaviour the inability of the originator to put forward a strong enough argument

'

I think you may have missed the fact that I was addressing your agreement that there were more important things to deal with than blatant rule breaking by members of the government who make the rules? On the other hand you may be acting true to form and deflecting criticism by being opaque about the point you were trying to make.

I disagree that as you put it "whining" about such things is pointless, if it were so then why do authoritarian regimes such as China, Russia, Burma and the like clamp down on such "whining"?

Indeed there are signs that the hypocritical stance of the government is "cutting through" with voters.

On the subject of a failure to answer the question, yes your right that is and has been the way of politicians of all colours for a long time, though tbh, when politicians do give straight answers, they tend to get flack, especially if the answers are not what the voters want to hear.

Which is where those voters who want simple answers to complex issues, who are unable to see a bigger picture in things and who actively support politicians who are proven lairs, bull ****ters and break the promises they make are part of the problem.

I would think that the same also applies to those who see phrases such as "dog whistle", "narrow perspective" and "gammon" indeed it is entirely possible that they are some of the same people. After all if one can't recognise a "dog whistle" - example blaming immigrants and asylum seekers for society's ills, been used by disreputable politicians for aeons, it appeals to base instincts.

"Narrow perspective" - making repeated comments about BAME people appearing in the media and BBC and saying "its not reflective of the world I live in". Maybe not but the world you live in, but it might be for a large proportion of the population and anyway surely its the ability of the person that should be judged, not their ethnicity?

As for gammon, as an older, sometimes pink faced white bloke myself, I can only think that those upset by this term are those who think it applies to them, now what vaguely sentient, reasonable minded older white man would think that?