5 ms·

> Thatcher loved because it suited her ideology She liked it because she could laugh at herself. It might have given a voice to her ideology sometimes, and rig

> Thatcher loved because it suited her ideology She liked it because she could laugh at herself. It might have given a voice to her ideology sometimes, and rightly so because it was prominent at the time, but none of the characters giving voice to anything are sympathetic. They’re portrayed as tragically ridiculous players vying for power and positive public image who’ll drop their “principles” at the drop of a hat if it suits them. If pundits are worried about this or that argument given by a character on the show they’re just revealing their own insecurities about their political opinions.

nsajko 5y ago
You're entirely missing what the parent is talking about. Your point that "none of the characters giving voice to anything are sympathetic" is irrelevant. On the other hand: > They’re portrayed as tragically ridiculous players vying for power and positive public image who’ll drop their “principles” at the drop of a hat if it suits them This is exactly what the parent pointed out. To make this even more clear, I made excerpts from the quote by Jay (creator of Yes Minister): > this was reflected by showing that in any [episode] in the programme, in Yes Minister, we showed that almost everything that the government has to decide is a conflict between two lots of private interest [...] > And that's why public choice economics, which explains why all this was going on, was at the root of almost every episode of Yes Minister and Yes, Prime Minister. So both series ("almost every episode") were clearly conceived and executed as propaganda, whether you like it or not.
- Veen 5y ago
  Do you consider Armando Ianucci’s shows to be following the same ideological agenda as Thatcher too. He ridicules politicians just as much, but I think he’d find the comparison surprising.
  - nsajko 5y ago
    You seem to have misunderstood me: I'm not talking about any specific politician or ideology, I'm talking purely about the quote by the creator of the two shows.
- raffraffraff 5y ago
  Perhaps the whole thing was just propaganda. I'm not entirely sure what the goal of this propaganda was. Many episodes parodied real events. I think that the show was wonderfully written. It did a better job of showing how government works than the 6 o'clock news, and yet it was constantly funny and thought provoking. The acting was superb.
  - nsajko 5y ago
    > I'm not entirely sure what the goal of this propaganda was. See Jay's quote. The goal was popularizing the ideas behind "public choice" theory, more specifically the idea that individuals that form the government are necessarily self-interested, without working for the public good. > It did a better job of showing how government works than the 6 o'clock news, and yet it was constantly funny and thought provoking. The acting was superb. That makes it effective propaganda. In case it's not clear, I'm not of the opinion that no one should watch Yes Minister, rather my position is that the specific propagandistic nature should be made clear upfront.
Barrin92 5y ago
>They’re portrayed as tragically ridiculous players vying for power and positive public image who’ll drop their “principles” at the drop of a hat if it suits them And that cynical portrayal of politics is itself part of the exact ideology that Thatcher tried to promote, so I don't really see why you think that contradicts OPs point. It's like the joke that Reagan used to repeat "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help". It wasn't an actual self-demeaning joke, the intention was to demean governance itself at every moment possible.
- linksnapzz 5y ago
  What a tragedy. Lese-Majeste towards civil servants and politicians. Of all the things to be less cynical about, we must be less cynical about the motivations of those that seek temporal power!
  - Barrin92 5y ago
    >we must be less cynical about the motivations of those that seek temporal power is there anyone not seeking temporal power? Are private sector shareholders on a quest for spiritual enlightenment or something? Is the board of Facebook filled with Zen Buddhists? The notion that competing for petty status and power is somehow unique to administration and government is one of the consequences of shows like Yes, Minister. And actually yes, we should be less cynical of civil servants and politicians. A pathological disregard of them has, for example, significantly worsened one of the worst public health crisis in decades.
    - linksnapzz 5y ago
      Jay and Lynne had the remit to make a show about Whitehall. Skewering private enterprise was/is very much doable (Scott Adams has been doing that daily, for decades), but that doesn’t negate the premise of YM. And actually yes, we should be less cynical of civil servants and politicians Donald Trump appreciates the support. A pathological disregard of them has, for example, significantly worsened one of the worst public health crisis in decades. Please let us all know which ones to pay attention to-I’d like to heed only the ones that can make testable predictions, and agree to quit if they get enough of those wrong.

nsajko 5y ago

You're entirely missing what the parent is talking about. Your point that "none of the characters giving voice to anything are sympathetic" is irrelevant. On the other hand: > They’re portrayed as tragically ridiculous players vying for power and positive public image who’ll drop their “principles” at the drop of a hat if it suits them This is exactly what the parent pointed out. To make this even more clear, I made excerpts from the quote by Jay (creator of Yes Minister): > this was reflected by showing that in any [episode] in the programme, in Yes Minister, we showed that almost everything that the government has to decide is a conflict between two lots of private interest [...] > And that's why public choice economics, which explains why all this was going on, was at the root of almost every episode of Yes Minister and Yes, Prime Minister. So both series ("almost every episode") were clearly conceived and executed as propaganda, whether you like it or not.

Veen 5y ago
Do you consider Armando Ianucci’s shows to be following the same ideological agenda as Thatcher too. He ridicules politicians just as much, but I think he’d find the comparison surprising.
- nsajko 5y ago
  You seem to have misunderstood me: I'm not talking about any specific politician or ideology, I'm talking purely about the quote by the creator of the two shows.
raffraffraff 5y ago
Perhaps the whole thing was just propaganda. I'm not entirely sure what the goal of this propaganda was. Many episodes parodied real events. I think that the show was wonderfully written. It did a better job of showing how government works than the 6 o'clock news, and yet it was constantly funny and thought provoking. The acting was superb.
- nsajko 5y ago
  > I'm not entirely sure what the goal of this propaganda was. See Jay's quote. The goal was popularizing the ideas behind "public choice" theory, more specifically the idea that individuals that form the government are necessarily self-interested, without working for the public good. > It did a better job of showing how government works than the 6 o'clock news, and yet it was constantly funny and thought provoking. The acting was superb. That makes it effective propaganda. In case it's not clear, I'm not of the opinion that no one should watch Yes Minister, rather my position is that the specific propagandistic nature should be made clear upfront.

Barrin92 5y ago

>They’re portrayed as tragically ridiculous players vying for power and positive public image who’ll drop their “principles” at the drop of a hat if it suits them And that cynical portrayal of politics is itself part of the exact ideology that Thatcher tried to promote, so I don't really see why you think that contradicts OPs point. It's like the joke that Reagan used to repeat "The nine most terrifying words in the English language are: I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help". It wasn't an actual self-demeaning joke, the intention was to demean governance itself at every moment possible.

linksnapzz 5y ago
What a tragedy. Lese-Majeste towards civil servants and politicians. Of all the things to be less cynical about, we must be less cynical about the motivations of those that seek temporal power!
- Barrin92 5y ago
  >we must be less cynical about the motivations of those that seek temporal power is there anyone not seeking temporal power? Are private sector shareholders on a quest for spiritual enlightenment or something? Is the board of Facebook filled with Zen Buddhists? The notion that competing for petty status and power is somehow unique to administration and government is one of the consequences of shows like Yes, Minister. And actually yes, we should be less cynical of civil servants and politicians. A pathological disregard of them has, for example, significantly worsened one of the worst public health crisis in decades.
  - linksnapzz 5y ago
    Jay and Lynne had the remit to make a show about Whitehall. Skewering private enterprise was/is very much doable (Scott Adams has been doing that daily, for decades), but that doesn’t negate the premise of YM. And actually yes, we should be less cynical of civil servants and politicians Donald Trump appreciates the support. A pathological disregard of them has, for example, significantly worsened one of the worst public health crisis in decades. Please let us all know which ones to pay attention to-I’d like to heed only the ones that can make testable predictions, and agree to quit if they get enough of those wrong.