May 11, 2015
Politics, Creativity, Miliband and the Blink Test
It turns out that politics is not unlike creative direction. Great Creative Directors are great, not just for the work that they do, but also for the work that they don’t let out of the door. They have a sixth sense about work that won’t fly. As Malcolm Gladwell might have put it: they only have to blink at a bad idea, and they can see that it is bad. They are paid to say “no” as much as to say “yes”.
And so it is with politics.
As is now becoming clear, many people possessed of a Sixth Political Sense knew, deep down, that the Miliband Strategy did not pass the Blink Test. Worse, they knew that he himself did not pass the Blink Test. He just did not feel like a Prime Minister in waiting. Had he become a Creative Director, he would have been the type who mistakes his own passion for an idea for proof that the idea is a good one. He did not understand his own market and its dynamics. Inevitably, he lost the pitch.
The question, at least for this blog, is not: why did he lose? The question is: why was the interview process for the job so flawed? Why did everyone blink and miss it? Or – more accurately – blink and let it happen?
7 Comments
The problem is that the Unions who put him in place are more concerned to have someone at their bidding at the head of the party, than they are that he or she becomes prime minister. They know that once someone is elected into power, the realities become dominant and they (the Unions) can’t maintain control anyway. The Labour Party needs to change its selection process. And by the way, David would have won.
Phil – incisive as ever. I won’t say too much as yet, awaiting other opinions. Hint: I might agree with you. Hope to see you soon. M
I think the issue with the Miliband recruitment process is that the Labour party selection process was driven by 3rd party (namely union) agendas and dogma. In turn that drove the election agenda which created a proposition that had no resonance with people in 2015 Britain. So how come they blinked and missed it? Well, the party machine is geared to ensure that narrow-minded dogma drives policymaking rather than ensuring policy is made around real people and real issues in 2015 Britain and informed and shaped by genuine Labour values. Played out against the backdrop of the most almighty backlash against Blairism, those driving the machine didn’t stop to think whether the Great British public would buy their dogma or not; it was what they wanted to sell and they believed if they said it enough we would buy it! Hell yeah! Sadly for them the Great British public isn’t easily fooled and we made up our own mind. But we’re all still losers in this election. In fact democracy is the biggest loser: thanks to the lack of resonance and relevance of Labour and the Lib Dems, we find ourselves with no effective opposition in Parliament. And a weak opposition is as bad as no opposition. Regardless of the colour of your politics, democracy relies on there being a robust opposition to keep the government in check – a rudder for the people, our core values of decency, fairness and tolerance and for good old fashioned common sense. It’s true that it doesn’t always get it right, but it steers the right course far more often than not. With Labour finding itself a cultural irrelevance, the LibDems soul searching after near wipeout, it’ll be the disproportionately large cohort of Scottish Nationalists whose voice we’ll hear the most often on the opposition benches and they have already made it clear their agenda is to divide and frustrate. And the one thing I’ve learned from the referendum and from the election campaign is that the nationalist agenda brings out the worst in all of us. It focuses us and the political narrative on what divides us; it makes us introspective and defensive by feeding a tribal, destructive mentality. It’s shameful behaviour for a civilized society.
What is truly staggering about this election is that Labour was unable to create a narrative that spoke to and brought to life the biggest challenge we face as a nation for a hundred years. Inequality in our country is as great and as wide today as it was before the outbreak of WW1 in 1914. We absolutely need a political voice that speaks for fairness for all, for opportunity for all, for achievement for all, to deliver on aspiration for all and close this immoral gap. However the backdrop to this narrative is now powered by technology not steam, by knowledge not labour, by globalisation not nationalism. And fairness cannot be achieved by crude redistribution; just as aspiration is not a right for the few but the duty of everyone. So if Labour (and by proxy, the Unions) is genuinely serious about making equality a reality for everyone, they have to re-invent themselves against this backdrop, embrace the whole of society and lift us all up if they are to be fit for government once more. And for the sake of democracy, fairness and equality, let’s pray they take their time to think this through before they blink.
Wow – thanks Maggie. I thought you might find this interesting. Thanks for such a thorough response… Mark
Easy. “Traditional Left-wing party competes with traditional Right-wing party, with the traditional result.”
Say what you like about T Blair, he knows about winning elections.
Thanks Calum – that explains why he lost. The question was why was he chosen? Although, to be fair, a consensus seems to be building on this point…
Oops sorry, failed to read the question properly!
Because Labour is hard of learning?
Leave a comment
Brand refreshment is probably overdue:
3 years ago
© 2023 manwith3heads. All rights reserved.