If you believe most of the national newspapers and pre-election polls, with the exception of those lucky enough to escape scrutiny by the Murdoch media machine, the nation faces the likely prospect of a (at least part-) Cameron premiership starting this Friday. However, this is by no means set in stone, or in this case, the finest Afghan marble - after all, the new black (or grey) gold of the East... could it be a reason for our troops taking a little longer than expected?
The reasons for the leap in attention devoted to tomorrow's elections are wide-ranging: the first-ever string of live televised prime ministerial candidate debates (unfortunately, one of these was exclusively aired on the fee-charging, non-terrestrial... you know where) has meant that personality politics has taken centre-stage in this celebrity-obsessed TV nation (long live that great Anglo-American copycat alliance!) - but did these three-party discussions by the good old school boys really widen nations' democratic landscape?
A combination of the will to escape the biggest economic recession to hit Britain in 70 years, newly re-discovered grounds for optimism in light of the real possibility of change (despite overkill of the word 'change' by all parties), and the resulting likely increase in voter turnout by all those caustically apathetic or unwilling to accept the status quo [UK records indicate a continuous slump from just under 84% in 1950 to a risible 61.4% in 2005 - two percent higher than in 2001 (Source 1), yet still lower than the 62% in Iraq's March 2010 elections (Source 2), where openly casting your vote involved a real risk of being assassinated by those opposed to democratic reform], could all be harbingers of a true electoral hurricane, tomorrow! Let's just hope we won't see similar bloodshed spread to the streets of Britain if real parliamentary reform and the abolishment of the houses of Lords are introduced...
Not unlike in the US, the nature of our democratic system and, indeed, the strength of arguments put forward by the politicians, could be brushed aside as dedicated donations dictate the electorate's mindset at the ballot box, massaged by the last stretches of partisan persuasion rallying for support.
Let's just hope the Queen herself won't be outed as having been a secret supplier of campaigning capital (the thought of Her Majesty slipping Cameron a cheque under a Buckingham Palace banquet table! - priceless, quite literally), or even funding the detonation of council house blocks after a forced inverse exodus of 'non-EU natives'. Months before the 2005 elections, the, then, unsurprisingly jibing anti-Murdoch Times newspaper went into minute, time-lined details about the 'true blue' royal lineage of the tory leader, bickering about how he was 'related to the Queen, through an illegitimate royal child' (Source 3).
Now, even though this is hardly a policy-based critique of any party agenda, it does speak genealogical volumes about the characteristics of the typical Tory voter... Especially, since in the whirlwind of personal digs at all three contestants (and let's be honest, there aren't any surprise stallions catching up any time soon in this three-horse race, yet - sorry, George Monbiot) over the past weeks, the Murdoch-muffled mouths have been keeping awfully quiet on this issue.
Well, at least Cameron has an excuse to be in a bigot-free bubble, floating high above that chippy he ordered a round of its finest with 'salt and vinegar all around' for everyone whose support he needed (Source 4), to get through a last-ditch, all-night campaigning cod-fest!
Source 1: http://www.ukpolitical.info/Turnout45.htm
Source 2: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/8556065.stm
Source 3: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article745903.ece
Source 4: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/election_2010/8662442.stm
Wednesday 5 May 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
