Let’s talk about….Cameron

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/22/ashcrofts-cameron-biography-day-2-what-we-learned

Good afternoon ladies and gentlemen. Ooh…It’s been such a long time since I saw the PM with such a …… face. That reveals he really feels he is in trouble. Not even when he was asked why he accepted to partake the refugee crisis in such a meagre proportion (2,000) in the press conference. Not even being recorded making fun of the Yorkshire men. The thing I have been appreciating most of him is that, regardless how bad a trouble he was in, his face his countenance, his posture, was always like he didn’t know he was in trouble. A dumb confidence. That’s why I coin him as Dumb Cam.

Not so this time. His facial expression captured by the media shows he really feels that he is in trouble.

The piggy? Nah…. not a problem at all. Like his peer says in support, youthful nonsense can do no harm at all to his reputation, which has been shown by the election result, that people in Britain keep in faith in him as a capable leader. Afterall, as the guy who studied Uni in Hong Kong. In comparison, what he did, or was rendered doing, was at least a “plug-in", a “ritual of corpulation-lite". It was softer (literally) and more humane than the Hong Kong Uni’s elite one, the “Happy Corner" in which the gamer would be rendered “hard on" fencing with cod/rod things like posts, trees, column concrete, etc. It only serves to show the same antithesis between Brutal Orient and Benevolent Occident.

The real problem of his should be, he lied to the public in 2010 that he was “just informed of his billionaire mates" having offshore devices to dodge their non-dom contribution to the Coffer, while that “just" actually means “a lot of years ago". An outrageous and outright lie, plus a naked favouritism towards elite classes at the expense of those dead pigs (this time figuratively) being screwed on for the years to come. It is immoral and the public who have trusted him is justified to be angry at him. But…..I think he was a bit too worried and overreating if he really did feel any concern about it. People as far as I know are not going to follow up on your mischief and absolute loyalty to your peer. They are not going to kick you out.

One woman was asked by BBC in the street after the May election dishevel (for Labour and Liberals only). She gave only one sentence: “because people are selfish." When you read some articles about why most of the constituents were shy of giving votes to the Left, one word you always heard of was skeptical of the future under Labours’ economic proposal. When you read the clip about Tim Farron, Vince Cable talking about post-Corbyn possibilities for the centre, one word you always heard of was ‘left over/behind’, meaning that people in the centre would then be left behind by the Left. Skeptical, Left over…..why didn’t they use a more simple word with just the same connotation? Yeah….Scare….The left have scared the people to the right! The left would scare them more after Corbyn! Scare!

OK…..scare, or fear, in combination with selfishness, would stop people from kicking the incumbent out of throne, as long as the incumbent remains the best one of indulging their selfishness and fear. What can you make of that? How are you supposed to explain that? NHS? Zero Hour? Immigrants? Child Benefit? Disability Check? Nah….I don’t talk about them. I know just a little about them. I always talk about something personal. So I give you two scenarios based on my personal experience:

Scenario One – you are already in your high school, and you have a brother who is going to study in high school. You are middle class family exactly at the middle point, or slightly skewed towards to the right. Your parents are getting 45 of age. And, one day, your mother tells you she has been pregnant for a month and consults the family what she should do. That means you can choose to prepare for a new baby as your sister, to share the burden of having one more member who will in the coming years suck the resources (mainly financial as high school guys don’t value the affection of their old uns).  Or, you can choose to disuade your mother from having those burden the size and extent of which you cannot clearly estimate at the stage. It means to persuade your mother to have abortion, short pain, but the impact is comparatively determinable and manageable. And most of all, you suddenly are pretty sure the burden would be 90% certain safe and entirely taken by your mother. What would you choose?

Scenario Two – you have had about 2 years relationship with your girlfriend. You always tell yourself she is going to be the one. And suddenly she told you her mother and father are going to have divorce, and there would be financial dispute and legal procedures. She asks you what you can help. You can promise you will offer help, even financial one, if that will be what they need. Or you will abstain from giving any advice because of fear that if you give such promise, you will take on a burden which is after all not your business and the extent of which you are uncertain at the stage. Or you will say what about we stop the way you and your girlfriend are having, getting rid of any encumbrance right on. What would you choose?

I am not going to tell you what I used to choose. But I am going to tell you I did choose, and in due course I realise how selfish I am and how scared I would be in lieu of something unknown yet to come. Life is a repetition of making such decisions. The more uncertain the future will be, more fear you feel. The closer the burden is coming to you, the more anxious you will be to kick it out, even cognizant that you usually kick it to somebody so affiliated to you.

In politics, the number one intrigue is always that every one knows what is good for the society, while the same every one knows it’s not always good to himself/herself when that common good is to be pursued. People either don’t want to sacrifice even a heck for the common good, or tend to feel they haven’t sacrificed enough while thinking of having sacrificed all they could. It would be more so if they are uncertain how long and how far the pain they are going to collectively take to get that common good. That’s why we like to have someone to tell us that we don’t need to give anything. Just stay put. Cameron is the guy!

Put it that way, Hebrews, after the rescue by great tidal movement in Egypt, didn’t say anything, but one question, ‘why did you kill me like this? Why did you rescue me from servitude to lay bare to death here in this fucking desert? why did you put me in such peril? I didn’t ever ask for freedom! I didn’t ask you to rescue! God! would you just fuck yourself off?’

People just don’t want it. Why give ye such?

廣告

發表迴響

在下方填入你的資料或按右方圖示以社群網站登入:

WordPress.com Logo

您的留言將使用 WordPress.com 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Twitter picture

您的留言將使用 Twitter 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Facebook照片

您的留言將使用 Facebook 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

Google+ photo

您的留言將使用 Google+ 帳號。 登出 / 變更 )

連結到 %s

%d 位部落客按了讚: