(no subject)
It's probably a blessing that The West Wing is finally over. Perhaps now I might venture out a little more often on Saturday nights, as I have been known to feign illness or concoct other social engagements all to allow me the private, if high volume, pleasure of my own nirvana that is The West Wing.
Obviously it's not the kind of nirvana that Buddha was thinking of, but a fantasy all the more tantalising because of its achievability. The parallel world to our own that occurs when, dare I say it, politicians and those who support them seem a lot like some of my friends and me, if a fair bit older and with a heap more experience.
I wonder about how the popular view of Kevin Rudd compares to the fictional presidential candidates Matt Santos and Arnie Vinick, or even to the not so fictional past presidential candidate Al Gore. I've learned in the last 2 Australian electoral cycles that I am entirely out of touch with the popular view when it comes to politics, so I can only use my imagination for these kinds of comparisons. I wonder whether Rudd is to others what he is to me - someone who hasn't stuffed up in any significant way, who is inoffensive, a decent public speaker without any obviously annoying mannerisms, who is at least taller and less ugly than Howard, and who is unlikely to engender as much hostility in me as Howard has managed to (though I admit I probably hate Ruddock even more than Howard). Rudd doesn't fill me with confidence or passion, he doesn't stir within me my long dulled patriotism or fascination with politics, he does not inspire me to act, in great ways or small. He's just better than the other guy, as really - no one could be worse.
A week or so ago while having lunch with a new work friend (they're all new really, given I'm just approaching my 2 month anniversary), she suddenly asked me if I would be likely to go into politics. I was quite shocked by her question, and still don't really know why she would have asked me that. We were talking about relationships, so it was hardly on topic. Anyway, I explained that long ago I had ideals of such a thing, and had partly gone into law with politics at the back of my mind. But then I learned more and understood less and realised enough to know that I would have to sell myself out for a party. As no party has ever fostered enough faith in me, I long ago dismissed such an idea.
"You wouldn't have to join a party", she said.
"But an Independent never..." I was about to say, "gets anywhere". And then I realised that politics has changed a lot since the 2 party days when I put my dream away in a small box and placed it high up on a dark shelf.
I realise now that effectualness in politics is not only about the Prime Ministership but also about being a public figure in a position to effect change, and more importantly, lead by example. And this is actually a lot more like what I originally thought politics was meant to be about.
I wonder if I should find that box again, and have a look inside it, just to be sure it still belongs up high on that dusty shelf.
Obviously it's not the kind of nirvana that Buddha was thinking of, but a fantasy all the more tantalising because of its achievability. The parallel world to our own that occurs when, dare I say it, politicians and those who support them seem a lot like some of my friends and me, if a fair bit older and with a heap more experience.
I wonder about how the popular view of Kevin Rudd compares to the fictional presidential candidates Matt Santos and Arnie Vinick, or even to the not so fictional past presidential candidate Al Gore. I've learned in the last 2 Australian electoral cycles that I am entirely out of touch with the popular view when it comes to politics, so I can only use my imagination for these kinds of comparisons. I wonder whether Rudd is to others what he is to me - someone who hasn't stuffed up in any significant way, who is inoffensive, a decent public speaker without any obviously annoying mannerisms, who is at least taller and less ugly than Howard, and who is unlikely to engender as much hostility in me as Howard has managed to (though I admit I probably hate Ruddock even more than Howard). Rudd doesn't fill me with confidence or passion, he doesn't stir within me my long dulled patriotism or fascination with politics, he does not inspire me to act, in great ways or small. He's just better than the other guy, as really - no one could be worse.
A week or so ago while having lunch with a new work friend (they're all new really, given I'm just approaching my 2 month anniversary), she suddenly asked me if I would be likely to go into politics. I was quite shocked by her question, and still don't really know why she would have asked me that. We were talking about relationships, so it was hardly on topic. Anyway, I explained that long ago I had ideals of such a thing, and had partly gone into law with politics at the back of my mind. But then I learned more and understood less and realised enough to know that I would have to sell myself out for a party. As no party has ever fostered enough faith in me, I long ago dismissed such an idea.
"You wouldn't have to join a party", she said.
"But an Independent never..." I was about to say, "gets anywhere". And then I realised that politics has changed a lot since the 2 party days when I put my dream away in a small box and placed it high up on a dark shelf.
I realise now that effectualness in politics is not only about the Prime Ministership but also about being a public figure in a position to effect change, and more importantly, lead by example. And this is actually a lot more like what I originally thought politics was meant to be about.
I wonder if I should find that box again, and have a look inside it, just to be sure it still belongs up high on that dusty shelf.