Why does EVERYTHING get politicised?

[Kermit power]

I've just read about Liz Truss' phone apparently being hacked and the first thing that jumps out at me is the other political parties seeking to make political capital out of it, just as the Conservatives would if the situation was reversed.

Now fair enough, if a politician is found, say, meeting with a foreign power and the PM suppressed it for political reasons, then scandal should ensue, but in a case like this, surely you'd expect the security services to want it kept secret whilst they figure out how the breach happened?

This isn't designed to be a conversation about the specifics of this particular case, btw. Just in general wouldn't our politics be a much healthier place if our political parties didn't fell the need to try and make capital out of absolutely everything?

[Monkeylegend]

Because that's the nature of politics.

[bitchstewie]

Well the short answer is because it's their job to do so.

I do sort of take your point to be honest but using your example of Truss's phone when you've had years of being told Corbyn was a risk to national security would you honestly blame them for taking advantage of a Conservative Foreign Secretary allegedly being targeted by Russians due to her seemingly improper use of personal devices?

[glazbagun]

I think Truss' phone is a poor example as the way it has been handled is poor

But in general, it's social media IMO. More people have opinions on politics than ever before. And now, rather than being the weird guy in the pub or student who's just discovered Communism but has no outlet because his mates aren't interested in it, we now have twitter to rant at your enemies/find supporters.

This gives measurable feedback on popular topics so the MSM pile in with more sensationalism for fear of being out of touch and the result is a kind of social sepsis.

[Teddy Lop]

Beacuse our political representation is so utterly devoid of any quality of character, leadership or ideology that all they really have is squabbling with and muckraking each other and hoping enough of us keep being useful idiots enough to keep buying it to keep this sh!tshow afloat.

[abzmike]

So how did the phone hacking get into the public domain? I could be wrong, but I don’t think it’s the opposition that have leaked to the media.

[Dingu]

Look at any thread here on politics. It is 99% childish point scoring. That’s the audience the parties are then addressing.

[E63eeeeee...]

In the particular case it goes to the perception that the Tories are careless and think the rules don't apply to them, see Braverman, Johnson's entire career etc. Which seems like a valid political attack, when you know they're going to be asking people to make sacrifices they have no intention of sharing.

Contrast it to when the Labour MP recently found out he'd been working with and having his office funded by a Chinese agent. There was much less politicisation of that, because it's not really part of an existing narrative, and I suspect a lot of the people who might otherwise have criticised were more concerned about how well their own arrangements would stand scrutiny. Similarly the various sex offenders on both sides don't get a party political response.

More generally, there's a reason the term ad hominem is Latin. It's an ancient and effective political strategy to attack the person either as well as, or instead of, attacking the policies. Most voters don't follow or debate this stuff in detail. It's far easier and quicker to persuade people to not like Corbyn, for example, than to go through the Labour manifesto and argue against the policies.

[Kermit power]

bhstewie said:

Well the short answer is because it's their job to do so.

I do sort of take your point to be honest but using your example of Truss's phone when you've had years of being told Corbyn was a risk to national security would you honestly blame them for taking advantage of a Conservative Foreign Secretary allegedly being targeted by Russians due to her seemingly improper use of personal devices?

It may well be her using the devices improperly, but every company I've worked for has always clear in our Infosec training that if you think you've clicked on something you shouldn't have, you won't get penalised for reporting it to the Infosec team. My concern with the way the opposition are baying for blood here is that it's likely to make an MP in the future even less likely to come forward, and the damage could be much greater.

[Kermit power]

abzmike said:

So how did the phone hacking get into the public domain? I could be wrong, but I don’t think it’s the opposition that have leaked to the media.

I think it was the content of the calls that got leaked, presumably by whomever arranged the hack.

Personally I think the better approach would've been for the opposition parties simply to state that it was clearly an attack on our democracy, and that they're not going to comment further.

[nikaiyo2]

bhstewie said:

Well the short answer is because it's their job to do so.

I do sort of take your point to be honest but using your example of Truss's phone when you've had years of being told Corbyn was a risk to national security would you honestly blame them for taking advantage of a Conservative Foreign Secretary allegedly being targeted by Russians due to her seemingly improper use of personal devices?

There is a massive difference inst there, Corbyn was a threat to national security because he idolised the most evil politicians and political ideology. Let’s face it anyone who allows his number 2 to espouse Mao is clearly an idiot and a evil person.

Let’s face it he was a racist old man who had no place being allowed into let alone lead a mainstream political party. A failure at everything he did, the worst type of career politician.

When truss invites a known enemy spy into the commons then there might be an equivalence. Comparing Truss to Corbyn is like comparing and ingrowing toe nail to lung cancer.

[bitchstewie]

Kermit power said:

It may well be her using the devices improperly, but every company I've worked for has always clear in our Infosec training that if you think you've clicked on something you shouldn't have, you won't get penalised for reporting it to the Infosec team. My concern with the way the opposition are baying for blood here is that it's likely to make an MP in the future even less likely to come forward, and the damage could be much greater.

If the Government have a policy that personal device usage is allowed and Truss has followed that policy to the letter the questions seem to be more about the policy than the politics.

If the Government policy is that personal device usage is not allowed but Truss has decided she knows best and has ignored the policy and used a personal device that goes entirely towards her judgement and at that point it becomes political.

Seriously Kermit if this was Corbyn the Conservatives and people on here would be saying "told you he couldn't be trusted" they wouldn't be saying they were concerned other people wouldn't come forward if they made too much of a fuss or he was made an example of.

Politics always comes into it for some people (see nikaiyo2's post above).

[E63eeeeee...]

nikaiyo2 said:

There is a massive difference inst there, Corbyn was a threat to national security because he idolised the most evil politicians and political ideology. Let’s face it anyone who allows his number 2 to espouse Mao is clearly an idiot and a evil person.

Let’s face it he was a racist old man who had no place being allowed into let alone lead a mainstream political party. A failure at everything he did, the worst type of career politician.

When truss invites a known enemy spy into the commons then there might be an equivalence. Comparing Truss to Corbyn is like comparing and ingrowing toe nail to lung cancer.

Well, I think that proves my point. Probably the most successful ad hominem campaign in recent British political history.

[Monkeylegend]

........................and we're off.

[voyds9]

To me the most annoying thing is the double standard

Oh look the opposition did xxxx they should resign

We did the same but it's different because.........

[Brave Fart]

I think the binary nature of our politics is the root cause of 'everything is politicised'. It isn't simply Tory versus Labour, it was (still is, really) Brexit versus Remain, or Nationalist versus Unionist, and so on.

People take sides, and want their side to win, and support almost any tactic to get that win. Rather than arguing the issues, the desire to win results in insults ("Tory scum" anyone?) and/or bending the truth (yes you, Boris). It also reduces politics to three word soundbites such as Get Brexit Done. There's no room for sharing ideas, intelligent discussion or - heaven forbid - acknowledging that the 'other side' might have a good idea.

That said, some of the sneering and downright rude replies on here are no better.........

[valiant]

abzmike said:

So how did the phone hacking get into the public domain? I could be wrong, but I don’t think it’s the opposition that have leaked to the media.

Leaked by their own side for political purposes.

Truss is yesterdays news and no one cares about her anymore so is used to deflect away from people and stuff they do care about like Braverman.

The media is an important tool in the political toolbox and can be just as effectively used within your own party to defect or score points as it can be by the opposition to embarrass.

[Murph7355]

Adversarial stbox politics where the total lack of ideas and competence throughout the House of Commons means the only angle the opposition have is to throw mud, and the only thing the government are competent at is giving the opposition a massive feckin target that is unmissable.

It would be very nice if it all stopped tomorrow, and rather than casting st around, the opposition simply took a positive view and noted how they would make things better.

Sadly, we're a million years away from this.

[roger.mellie]

Murph7355 said:

Adversarial stbox politics where the total lack of ideas and competence throughout the House of Commons means the only angle the opposition have is to throw mud, and the only thing the government are competent at is giving the opposition a massive feckin target that is unmissable.

It would be very nice if it all stopped tomorrow, and rather than casting st around, the opposition simply took a positive view and noted how they would make things better.

Sadly, we're a million years away from this.

To be fair I quite like when the opposition oppose and when they don't fear troubling the media consensus. It's a balancing act that I think Starmer walks on the wrong side of. A good example in my limited opinion would be how there's no dispute on the BoE interest rate rises.

But everything isn't politicised. I think when your head is stuck in politics you think it is. I'm of that leaning as are a few on here so it's easy to think all think that way. But in real life, most people I know are not very political and wouldn't even know or care what many on the internet are getting heated about. It's important to realise how your perspective is filtered.

[rover 623gsi]

Brave Fart said:

I think the binary nature of our politics is the root cause of 'everything is politicised'. It isn't simply Tory versus Labour, it was (still is, really) Brexit versus Remain, or Nationalist versus Unionist, and so on.

People take sides, and want their side to win, and support almost any tactic to get that win. Rather than arguing the issues, the desire to win results in insults ("Tory scum" anyone?) and/or bending the truth (yes you, Boris). It also reduces politics to three word soundbites such as Get Brexit Done. There's no room for sharing ideas, intelligent discussion or - heaven forbid - acknowledging that the 'other side' might have a good idea.

That said, some of the sneering and downright rude replies on here are no better.........

https://api.parliament.uk/historic-hansard/commons/1943/oct/28/house-of-commons-rebuilding

During WWII when the HoC needed to be repaired Churchill was keen to ensure that the combative nature of British politics was maintained