It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!
Subscribe to our Patreon, and get image uploads with no ads on the site!
Base theme by DesignModo & ported to Powered by Vanilla by Chris Ireland, modified by the "theFB" team.
Comments
Add to that the fact that those complaining are necessarily always the loudest (on social media, in the press, in the pub etc), and it's easy to see why people conclude that all PMs are a complete disaster.
The thing is...Cameron has been branded the same, for example, but he's left the country (not necessarily individuals) doing much better than it has at any point this century, he's pulled us out of the unwinnable wars the previous government dragged us into and the Tories are arguably stronger than they've ever been, particularly when viewed relative to the opposition.
I'm not saying he's been perfect, and I'm certainly no supporter of any politician, but my point is that those are things that don't get shouted out in the press and on Facebook, and that's why any analysis of such things would always conclude that every PM has been a failure.
Indeed.
The same is true of healthcare. I remember a study revealing the UK had the best end of life care in the world, and just a few weeks later the news were reporting that reform was needed because its awful and below par.
So what's the truth? Sadly, people don't want to hear the good bits.
I'd like to think someone, someday would fancy a crack at running this country for the benefit of all of it's people.
I honestly think Cameron was a disaster. I thought Gordon Brown was too. Blair even more so. John Major and Margaret Thatcher likewise.
I wish for better. Not just for myself, but for everyone. Or at least for as many as possible. Call me a fool, if you like.
Give me a good Prime Minister and I'll happily say "they're good"
Winston Churchill and Clement Attlee seem the only real candidates...
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
Tribalism has evolved. Some of the old hands at the Revolutionary Communist Party started up Spiked and embraced a form of libertarianism. Breitbart versus the left wing activist groups like Occupy and BLM are tribal in nature.
Part of me is starting to think that the focus on race and gender is there to divide the lower and middle echelons of society. Keep them arguing about gender neutral shithouses, the glass ceiling for women, and men's rights, and stop them becoming united and demanding better rights for all workers who aren't at the top of the tree.
Given that all of the people have mutually exclusive requirements in order to be pleased...I suspect the best that's possible is to change the exclusive definition of "disastrous" as "being nuked from the face of the planet". Avoid that, and I suppose you can count it as a job well done.
I'm just speaking of my own personal experience...I was 11 when Mrs Thatcher came to power...I didn't want to comment on what I didn't live through as an adult.
Feedback
For what it's worth I was 11 when Thatcher came to power as well - but I was 23 when she left, so I don't feel unqualified to have an opinion on her.
"Take these three items, some WD-40, a vise grip, and a roll of duct tape. Any man worth his salt can fix almost any problem with this stuff alone." - Walt Kowalski
"Only two things are infinite - the universe, and human stupidity. And I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
I generally don't feel particularly warm about the idea of a Labour government given the economic damage they tend to do, but as Cameron said recently...the country does need them to be effective, or at the very least a strong opposition.
Attacking the most vulnerable of our society with the bedroom tax and the plan to cut disability benefits for 600,000 people. Well he had to make savings somewhere eh?
If he took us out of two unwinnable wars, he then flew head first into Libya, (another wonderful example of Western intervention) making the same mistakes as said unwinnable wars, but without the decency to even try and stick around to help with the aftermath. Not to mention foaming at the mouth, desperate to arm some rather dubious Syrian 'rebels' in order to look the big statesman on the world stage.
If the Tories are stronger, it's certainly not because of Cameron. The Lib Dems getting into bed with the Tories was a disaster for the party, Labour was never going to happen with Miliband at the helm and as for the Corbyn situation... It's almost like Cameron has tried to see how much he could fuck up his party and still keep power...
Oh I forgot... the EU Referendum.
I think the above is enough to call his tenure a disaster.
However, if he has done anything of merit, I would like to hear them and will gladly adjust my appraisal of him. However I hold him in the same contempt as the other PM's of my politically conscious lifetime, so it might be wasted on me :-)
This is exactly my point, though; viewed through any narrow lens, it's possible to draw any desired conclusion from current or recent circumstances. That narrow lens is almost always personal prejudice - for example, your contempt for all the other recent PMs. In other words, cognitive bias.
Not that there's anything wrong with that, of course, because it's human nature Doesn't change the fact that it exists in all of us, though, and at least recognising it leads to getting closer to a balance.
You are quite right, we don't know the implications for Brexit and we may not know them for quite some time. I was a reluctant remainer, but I'm willing to see what happens as this is the situation we find ourselves. But I wasn't projecting the consequences of Brexit for the nation at all, I was discussing the consequences for Cameron personally. What is known and was widely talked about at the time was the massive political risk for Cameron to force the referendum so soon after winning power. That is not the narrow lens of personal prejudice. He paid the price, it was a disaster for him that reflects poorly on this tenure.
Although to contradict myself on reflection, in a perverse way perhaps the Tories are stronger now. But I stand by my opinion (ok, personal prejudice ya got me there ;-) ) that he didn't make them stronger by his political acumen, unless the joke really is on the rest of us...
Hindsight is a wonderful thing (or a bitch). After Iraq, any PM will always be judged retrospectively on military intervention, in a negative light and that can come across as personal prejudice I agree.
But it's not personal prejudice to criticise the intervention in Libya for example. I thought it was a bad idea at the time and it's been proved to be the case. It's learning the lessons of history and it was clear that Cameron wanted his pound of flesh at any cost. The Kosovo conflict is seen as a successful military intervention under Blair's watch that brought stability to the region and saved a lot of people from ethnic cleansing, many of whom joined me at high school until hostilities calmed. Who am I to argue with that (i don't), even though my own 'personal prejudice' is to oppose military intervention more often than not. But then Blair did Iraq...
Personal prejudice is disliking Cameron because I'm working class and he went to Eton which isn't the case. I only dislike him because of his policies and I feel the bad things far outweigh the good. If you think I need a more balanced view on Cameron, please share some things that will broaden my perspective because I'm not too proud to change my opinion. But I need something a little more solid than being told I look through a narrow lens, so broaden it ;-)
They say history is written by the victors, and objectively speaking I just don't think Cameron will get to write his own entry.