[ZeroGravitas]

One less conspiratorial but more pernicious angle, is that attacking things that are good but complex is a great strategy for troll politicians who don't care about the success of their country but just like the attention.

See Brexit, and free trade in general.

It's a good way to get "the establishment" to gang up on you and defend something complicated while you present simple but wrong alternatives and promise the world.

I also think he's up for sale (as are all the other similar politicians) to a multitude of buyers, foreign and domestic.

[vintermann]

For Brexit in particular, it seems clear to me that EU politicians, but the UK ones in particular, used EU as a scapegoat for unpopular economic policy that they themselves actually want, but can't justify effectively to their constituents. "We can't help it, it's an EU requirement" when leaving out that in the EU, their guys totally supported it.

That was bound to backfire at some point or another.

I think you're right that politicians prefer not to defend complicated (and possibly good) policy to the public. But if they choose easy ways out to avoid it (and they do!) then they're to blame too when it collapses. To blame the public for not blindly trusting them won't do.

[0x3f]

The public is almost fully to blame, and gets the government it deserves. I only hedge a little because education is in control of the state, so to some degree people don't choose whether to be educated on the relevant matters.

It may be familiarity breeding contempt but I find members of the British public in particular very myopic in obtaining benefits for 'their group'. There's very little interest in society as a whole.

Politicians simply bend in order not to upset any of the key voting blocs. But you understand that's a selection bias: you wouldn't exist as a successful politician if you didn't do this. All those who go another path are doomed to obscurity.

[throw0101c]

> The public is almost fully to blame, and gets the government it deserves.

Which has been a popular argument against democracy since at least Plato: just look at the average voter/person and their intelligence, understanding of the world, and their character.

[dijksterhuis]

> The public is almost fully to blame, and gets the government it deserves.

I'd frame this another way -- the public are largely responsible, but we put all the blame on politicians/government. we vote for these people while we all know they're all talking complete and utter nonsense just to get past the job interview. it is the game. i wish it wasn't. i wish i could stand in the house of commons during PMQs and point out every BS line every single one of them says. stand up during question time and shout at all the idiots on the panel, disproving every single bullshit line they've fed the audience with stats and analysis and data [0]. but then we'd probably end up everyone in the country showing up to PMQs/question time shouting over each other all at the same time... which wouldn't really work lol.

the system is not perfect, but it's what we've got.

> I only hedge a little because education is in control of the state, so to some degree people don't choose whether to be educated on the relevant matters.

> It may be familiarity breeding contempt but I find members of the British public in particular very myopic in obtaining benefits for 'their group'. There's very little interest in society as a whole.

yeah, like, i'm kind of lucky that i don't have children or any other dependants and i went to posh schools, got a decent academic education [1]. i can afford to sit around, pontificate and moralise about what the large scale right or wrong way of doing things should be. i earn enough and don't have kids. hell, i'd be happy if they increased the rate of tax in the top bands. more money to spend on public services for everyone else who actually needs it. seriously, take my spare disposable income! i'm only gonna spend it on expensive food and cigarettes that's gonna make me overweight and have lung cancer and become a drain on the nhs anyway!

my mate with three kids doesn't have the time for that. she just wants the school to give her daughter the help she needs and has to fight through a bunch of bureaucracy to get there. bureaucracy which exists because the system is under strain because lots of people are asking for the same resources and they've got to figure out some way of apportioning out the resources. same with my mate who is a single parent to a son with pretty hefty ADHD. it's no wonder they fall into the "my group first" attitude and/or rhetoric with, for example, immigration. they're constantly told there's all this money is being spent elsewhere on "some other people" and then they look at their kid's school struggling with one support worker for hundreds of kids and it's like ... well, wtf. same thing with income taxes etc. "we need money for our kids, why on earth is my tax money being spent on X, Y, Z" etc.

to be clear: i don't agree with the political views of my friend, and i don't really care to debate the politics either. i'm responding to the "myopic" comment from my own perspective, having previously noticed the interesting differences between myself and my friends. they're really lovely people! really nice and kind and loving folks. but they have a selfish/fear-based-protectionist side to them, like all humans do.

that last bit is the important bit for me. fear leads selfish behaviour. people are worried, the "system" is unstable and constantly under strain. and that makes them act in their own selfish interests because they're having to jostle for position within the "system" :shrug:

> Politicians simply bend in order not to upset any of the key voting blocs. But you understand that's a selection bias: you wouldn't exist as a successful politician if you didn't do this. All those who go another path are doomed to obscurity.

this has always been the critical problem from where i sit. like, we're forced to vote for people who, ultimately, may only be in the job for a maximum of 5 years total. we don't get to vote on the next 30 years cos the next lot could just undo it all. just look at upcoming negotiations with the EU apparently might involve us moving back towards the single market again, which was the whole "once in a generation" brexit vote thing. turns out it's not quite so "once in a generation" [2]

the trouble for me is that the commonly implemented "long term" model for governance tends to be stuff like authoritarianism, dictatorship etc. ... so...

--

i wrote way more for this than i thought i would lol

[0]: yeah! let's properly hold them to account! i can finally use my autistic powers of calling bullshit for the benefit of all! instead of getting into trouble with my boss at work. again. o_o

[1]: the non-academic parts were really damaging though. expensive doesn't always mean good. highly rated academically doesn't always mean good.

[1]: thankfully lol

[AngryData]

As a side note if you did just get fat and smoke you wouldn't be a drain on the NHS because being fat and smoking disqualifies you from many procedures and you are likely to die right around retirement age, after you paid most of your lifetime taxes but before you start consuming the very expensive age-related healthcare.

Ironically it is the unhealthy that are overpaying and the very healthy who are underpaying because age related care is such a huge proportion of lifetime medical costs, and that is still before adding in potential sin taxes paid.

[rwmj]

The alternative is everything falling apart at home and our manufacturing industries declining dramatically. Maybe the "unpopular economic policy" wasn't such a bad idea after all.

[simmerup]

The people that voted for Brexit aren't affected by any of that.

In fact, they're so protected they'd probably prefer a recession.

[rwmj]

It's true, pensioners are very isolated from the problems of working people.

[pjc50]

Well, that's the brexit outcome.

[sph]

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong."

The issue is that the stupider the politician, the more likely they are unable to understand why their clear, simple answer to the ills of the world is also wrong.

Brexit, whatever is happening in the US, is caused by narcissism (a common trait among politicians) paired with a great deal of stupidity and ineptitude, not only among politicians, but among the populace as well.

[duskdozer]

the politician doesn't necessarily have to be stupid, just know that there are enough stupid voters