The People Have Spoken

On election day, while making his victory speech, our new Prime Minister used the favourite quote of politicians, when he said,

The people have spoken

This statement has several flaws.

1. The people have spoken; past tense; completed action. They have completed their speaking for three years when they will get to speak again at the next election. In the interim they have handed all authority of to the new Prime Minister and his team. He has authority to keep on speaking and he has the power to do his will. They have finished speaking.
2. Only half of the people who spoke were head. Less than half of the people voted for the new government. They will feel that they have been heard. The other half spoke for losing parties. They spoke, but their voice will be ignored, because they did not pick a winner.
3. The truth is that the people did not speak. They only ticked. They could only choose between various politicians and parties and tick the ones that they preferred. They could not speak what was on their hearts. They could speak about what they believed. They could not speak about the laws that they wanted to change. All they could do was tick. Ticking is not speaking.

Politicians love the idea of the people speaking, because it authenticates their position and authority. The idea that they embody of the voice of the people warms their hearts, but it is a nonsense. The people can never speak; they only get to tick; and then suffer in silence.

Political Theft

The auditor general Kevin Brady has released his report on spending by political parties during the last election. He found over a million dollars of illegal expenditure.

The total value of the breaches I identified for the 2004-05 financial year was $443,462 (including GST), and the total value of the breaches I identified for 2005-06 financial year was $730,136 (including GST). Overall, $1,173,598 of unlawful expenditure was incurred.

Well done, Kevin! You are a brave and honest man.

Meanwhile, the politicians have reluctantly agreed to pay the money back. However, they are not repentant, but claim they have a different interpretation of the law.

Why do we trust people who are so cavalier with other people's money?

I wonder if the new excuse for thieves will be: I have a different interpretation of what stealing means, or No one complained the previous time.

Another Delusion

Politicians like to think that they are generous people, but this is just another delusion. When they spend tax revenue on helping people in need they feel really good about what they have done. They feel generous and good.

They forget that they are just given away money that they have stolen from other people. Giving away other people's money is easy, as it costs nothing. All thieves are generous, but their generosity does not make them good.

Political Delusions

Politicians like to think that they represent the people, so when they make a decision, they are making the decision that the people would make. They think that what they decide is what society as a whole wants.

They are deluded. If everyone agreed with what they decide, then a decision would generally not be needed, because everyone would already be doing it anyway of their own free will. In fact, most of the decisions of politicians benefit some people and harm others.

Sombre Somme

Celebrations of the ninetieth anniversary of the Battle of the Somme are currently being held in France. The number of casualties during this five-month battle at the end of 1916 exceeded 1 million. More than a quarter of a million men were killed or missing in action.

The First World War was a war without purpose. It was started by kings and politicians, who were too proud, stubborn or stupid to admit that they had made a mistake. Jesus told a parable about counting the costs of war.

Or suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Will he not first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace (Luke 14:31-32).

I cannot imagine what sort of benefits would justify a million casualties or a quarter of a million deaths.

Nevertheless, when the command was given for the soldiers in the trenches to go “over the top”, they would climb out over the bodies of their fallen comrades and run as hard as they could through the mud until they were cut down by a hail of machine gun bullets. Those who were injured quickly were the lucky ones.

What sort of military commander would order men to die in this way? What sort of political leader could believe that such a waste of life was justified? What I cannot understand is why the men did not refuse to go. Why didn’t they walk a way saying “Fight you own stupid war!”

What caused sensible young men to choose to die for such a pointless cause? What madness swept over them that made them willing to die in such a terrible way. Why were they able to be used as cannon fodder for the foolish plans of politicians and generals? The military commentators say that the soldiers believed that they had “proved themselves”. But what had they proved: that politicians can whip up support for foolish causes?

We should remember the sacrifice of the million men, but we should never glorify such a terrible waste of life. We should also remember that when politicians make terrible mistakes, they still get their statues on Whitehall. Those who died in the mud at the Somme paid the price for the blunders of the politicians. There is very little glory in dying in the mud in a pointless war.