John Prescott in Bertiesque humiliation

Sand

I just saw this ad on TV. I hadnt seen it before, but I guess I wasnt watching enough TV.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWpW_5X2EYE

I think this is a very demeaning, much as the Bertie-In-The-Cupboard ads were. Part of the reason for offering *exceptionally* generous pensions to public figures is so that the nation is not humiliated by the sight of their former leaders sitting in a gutter begging for change.

What Prescott is doing here is trading on his political career, cheapening himself, and more importantly cheapening the democratic process. Hes the former deputy PM of the UK, not Jedward, or a washed up actor. Hes inviting contempt on the political system. Its no wonder respect for politicians is so low, when their own self-respect is even lower.

Whilst public pensions in general require decisive reform, its got to be said there ought be a specific clause whereby the pension is forfeit if the politician engages in dubious ad campaigns for private institutions, like some crappy insurance company.

Its probably doubly ironic that John Prescott campaigned to shred the pension of the Sir Fred Goodwin of RBS, on the grounds he was arrogant.

later12

I havent seen the Bertie in the cupboard advertisements, but I dont have a problem with this sort of thing.

Many politicians are quasi-celebrities in their own right. Personally i thought it was slightly surreal that one of the most significant figures in global politics, Barack Obama, was signing autographs and posing for photographs like a rock star on College Green a few weeks back, sharing a stage with Jedward. Surreal, but not necessarily bad - certainly not cheapening for democracy.

I do not agree thatoing one step further taking a monetary benefit from political status, after one is retired, is at all degrading to democracy either. I just do not see the rationale there, maybe I am missing something. Was it wrong when Gorbachov was photgraphed by Annie Leibovitz for Louis Vuitton? Or does it depend on the status of the product?

Why not go one further and suggest that the enchanced status provided to ex politicians, which allows them to engage in speaking tours and events for private companies, also cheapens democracy?

It seems to me that there are lots of ways to cheapen democracy in the 21st century, and lots of examples of it, too. But no, I wouldnt really consider this a significant problem at all. I literally do not see the harm.

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

Sand wrote: »

Part of the reason for offering *exceptionally* generous pensions to public figures is so that the nation is not humiliated by the sight of their former leaders sitting in a gutter begging for change.

I'd say many people would be heartened to see members of this countries last government in the gutter.

Sand

later10 wrote: »

I havent seen the Bertie in the cupboard advertisements, but I dont have a problem with this sort of thing.

Many politicians are quasi-celebrities in their own right. Personally i thought it was slightly surreal that one of the most significant figures in global politics, Barack Obama, was signing autographs and posing for photographs like a rock star on College Green a few weeks back, sharing a stage with Jedward. Surreal, but not necessarily bad - certainly not cheapening for democracy.

I do not agree thatoing one step further taking a monetary benefit from political status, after one is retired, is at all degrading to democracy either. I just do not see the rationale there, maybe I am missing something. Was it wrong when Gorbachov was photgraphed by Annie Leibovitz for Louis Vuitton? Or does it depend on the status of the product?

Why not go one further and suggest that the enchanced status provided to ex politicians, which allows them to engage in speaking tours and events for private companies, also cheapens democracy?

It seems to me that there are lots of ways to cheapen democracy in the 21st century, and lots of examples of it, too. But no, I wouldnt really consider this a significant problem at all. I literally do not see the harm.

The harm is the absolvement of responsibility.

Our leadership are not ordinary like you and me. They are given exceptional wages, exceptional privledges, exceptional powers and exceptional authority over their fellow citizens. They are by extension held to exceptional standards, and are expected to set those standards. They are leaders, not followers.

This was drilled home in previous, non-democratic regimes. Noblesse oblige was the theory that nobility ought to conduct itself in a manner that conformed to ones position, that linked power to responsibility. This was a very important concept which was an important progressive force, "civillising" the feudal warlords, instilling a sense of duty or care for the less well off - however imperfectly.

What we have now in the modern, democratic era is the concept that our leaders are just like you and me. Ordinary people. Out earning a quid like everyone else. Nobody special. And if they earn a few quid pawning their credentials as a political leader, so what?

The so what is that the link between power and responsibility, noblesse oblige, is being broken. Hence we devolve to a situation, common especially in Ireland, that exceptional wages, privledges, powers and authority that our leadership hold over us can be exercised without any particular sense of responsibility. Afterall, its a democracy...theyre nobody special, and shure wouldnt we all do the same if we had the chance?

Thats why the demeaning of public office, politics and public service in the manner that Bertie and John Prescott have pursued it is so dangerous.

@Duffy

I'd say many people would be heartened to see members of this countries last government in the gutter.

True, very true. But then, those former members of government exercised their power and authority without any sense of responsibility or civic pride. Theyre symptoms of the problem, not the problem itself.

Son Of A Vidic

Does this really surprise us? It is 'two jags' Prescott after all.

rodento

No more damaging than his puching a protester than the ad refers to

Gael

At least Prescott comes across as a bit self-deprecating and taking the piss out of himself in that one, which I can respect in any public figure. Bertie just came across as a smug self-important prick in the ad he did.