Chris Dillow explains our incompetent political culture

When the centenary of Margaret Thatcher's birth was marked last month, the consensus view on Bluesky was that she had made everything in Britain worse. Not only that: it was all down to her personal wickedness.

Whatever happened to the left having a knowledge of the tides of history that is denied to the rest of us?

One writer who offers a more sophisticated analysis is Rutland's own Chris Dillow. In his latest post he looks at the travails of the government and the BBC asks why so much of our political culture is fundamentally incompetent.

Here's the crux of his argument:

Good politics recognises that public opinion is not a fixed entity but is malleable, not necessarily by rational debate alone. Labour likes to present itself as businesslike. But decent businesses advertise their products, respect their customers, and don’t shout about the merits of their rivals. ...

Good politics also requires something else - a healthy public sphere, in which at least the most egregiously bad ideas and bad actors are subject to sufficient scrutiny that they are weeded out. Which is what we don’t have. Instead, we have a system which often selects for rather than against charlatans and incompetents. And, worse still, neither politicians nor the media are interested in why this might be or how we might change it.

You can read the whole article on Chris's Substack.