7 ms·
I think it's dangerous to assume they fail to understand. These are smart people with good advisors. They just want to do it anyway. Which puts them in the cate
by hkon 3y ago
I think it's dangerous to assume they fail to understand. These are smart people with good advisors. They just want to do it anyway. Which puts them in the category of evil.
Who would you rather be in the public eye, evil or stupid?
- kmlx 3y ago> They just want to do it anyway. some background here. the opposition in the UK is accusing the government of dragging their feet over this law, and are pushing them to adopt it sooner. they are also criticising the government for watering it down. various NGOs are also attacking the government for watering it down and not moving as fast as possible. basically the whole political spectrum is not only for this law, but wants it strengthened even further. there are also calls from the public for the government to go even further. this is why there is no real backlash against this law. everyone no only wants it, but wants it to go a lot further than what the government has proposed.
- jen20 3y ago> These are smart people They really are not. The current crop of UK politicians of all stripes are thick as they come - intellectual lightweights who can bullshit their way through a media appearance thanks only to an abject lack of shame. No one can look at people like Mark François, Liz Truss or Dianne Abbott (just to take three) and think “ah, there’s someone playing dumb for the camera”! Unfortunately, the current crop of journalists are largely ineffective if not broadly enabling if this kind of behaviour, and politics is not a field anyone not already independently wealthy can afford to be in (a junior developer in the Bay Area can easily make more than the Prime Minister) so it does not seem likely to self-correct.