2 ms·
> Because in the UK, Johnson and Truss were genuinely exceptional in how bad they were. How are you measuring that though? What about the politicians that mana
by roenxi 2y ago
> Because in the UK, Johnson and Truss were genuinely exceptional in how bad they were.
How are you measuring that though? What about the politicians that managed to set the British Empire into terminal decline? In hindsight they must have been a bit below average. It isn't crazy to say that the least competent politicians turn up at the nadir of the UK's international importance, but logically speaking the people who mucked up at the peak were probably making worse decisions.
- ben_w 2y agoFair point, but I'd counter two things: First, that most of that decline is relative power rather than absolute: the UK is no longer astride the world, but because so many others have gained power to kick my parents and grandparents' generations out of their countries, not (in all cases) because the UK became objectively weaker. Second, that the politicians who caused the decline were doing a lot of smaller mistakes over a longer period. Those other politicians probably were indeed as you say below average, but Johnson and Truss weren't just scraping the bottom of the barrel, they were the wood of the barrel itself and the floor underneath it.