Happy families
- 9 Jan 08, 05:30 PM
One of my favourite Christmas presents this year was an excellent, highly readable, biography of by the American academic RJQ Adams (Read ). Not only was Balfour Conservative Prime Minister from 1902-05, he was still in Cabinet more than 24 years after leaving Downing Street, and 鈥 little known fact this 鈥 Vice-President of Manchester United. He was also responsible for the phrase 鈥楤ob鈥檚 your uncle!鈥, a reference to his promotions from the Tory leader Lord Salisbury, whom Balfour succeeded as PM, and just happened to be Balfour's uncle.
, and Jeremy鈥檚 interesting exchanges with the 19-year old Bhutto heir yesterday (watch it here), got me thinking again how about importance families still are in modern politics, even in the democratic age. If Hilary Clinton reaches the White House, and goes on to complete a second term, then America will have been run by either Bushes or Clintons for the whole 28 year period from 1989 to 2017 (with Bush Senior also Vice-President from 1981 to 1989).
In Britain, Gordon Brown鈥檚 Cabinet has Hilary Benn, of course, the son, grandson and great-grandson of MPs, (and the father of one, too, in all probability, given that his daughter recently became a Labour candidate at the age of just 18). Then we have Ed Balls and his wife Yvette Cooper; the Miliband brothers; and Douglas Alexander, the brother of Wendy, Labour鈥檚 new leader in Scotland. Indeed, a Cambridge academic has recently argued in the that the Brown administration is a real 鈥渇amily affair鈥 and reminds him of the era of the Pitts (Elder, Younger and various relations) in the late eighteenth century. (Runciman should know something about political genes. He himself comes from one of Britain鈥檚 most distinguished families, and is heir to the Runciman viscountcy - the first viscount sat in the cabinets of Asquith, Lloyd George and Stanley Baldwin).
In some ways it鈥檚 obvious why family relationships should be so important in political careers 鈥 it鈥檚 in the blood, one meets important people at a very early age, one has the benefit of family advice, experience and wisdom, and there may be the odd bit of string-pulling too.
But there鈥檚 another factor, as well, I think, particularly in conservative societies like America and South Asia. Human beings seem to like dynastic government. Hence the prevalence of monarchies throughout history. Maybe there鈥檚 something psychologically comforting about being ruled by people who are related to each other. Perhaps we value genetic continuity.
It鈥檚 worth exploring. I鈥檇 love to do a TV or radio programme on it one day, but so far my bids have all been rejected.
Comments Post your comment
Fascinating analysis and observation
Like the Grade and Delfont family were all in Telly.
The Richardson's and Redgrave's are actors
Judith Chalmers son is doing "Wish you were here" retracing her steps..
Amazing concept indeed
Complain about this post
Fascinating analysis and observation
Like the Grade and Delfont family were all in Telly.
The Richardson's and Redgrave's are actors
Judith Chalmers son is doing "Wish you were here" retracing her steps..
Amazing concept indeed
Complain about this post
>>Maybe there鈥檚 something psychologically comforting about being ruled by people who are related to each other. Perhaps we value genetic continuity.<<
only if you are a doormat? Psychologically defeated by an inferiority complex?
genetics should not decide ANY public office.
or maybe all judges should come from a couple of families... and all tax collectors.. and all police officers, and all newsnight presenters. Is there a Son of Paxo or daughter of Crick waiting to take over as the 'natural choice'?
Complain about this post
Fascinating analysis and observation
Like the Grade and Delfont family were all in Telly.
The Richardson's and Redgrave's are actors
Judith Chalmers son is doing "Wish you were here" retracing her steps..
Peter Snow Dan Snow list is endless
Amazing concept indeed
Complain about this post
it's scary how the influence of multiculturalism is slowly but surely tempting all the haves away from our previous ethos of public and good and towards the ancient ethos of family and dynasty.
have you noticed how nowadays it is common practice for african and muslim spokespeople simply to refuse to answer a western jounalist's questions? we are returning britain to a time when the poqwerful families were above the law and accountability.
the new layer of media families is just one aspect of this and i expect to see a lot more leisure time being diverted towards the more meritocratic web.
Complain about this post
That would be a very interesting programme Michael. Perhaps it's just that politicians normally come from families who are political- from an early age they are taught about the necessity and value of politics and so naturally want to go into it.
Complain about this post
Sadly, it still really is more a case of 'it's who you know, not what you know' in politics as elsewhere and anyone with any experience who says otherwise is not to be trusted.
But how any perrson with integrity, in any civilization claiming to be democratic (given the known normal distribution of cognitive ability and its largely genetic basis) can seriously find anything comforting about nepotism is lamentable. It's all in the numbers Michael. If and when one finds family/group ties in public office which are at odds with the laws of probability it's the the duty of those in the media to draw attention to POSSIBLE corruption of the democratic process.
I appreciate that one has to play one's cards right as a political correspondent if one wants to keep one's contacts, but you should keep annoying them nonetheless...
In the recent Bhutto/PPP press conference we saw the PPP hoist itself by its own petard, illutrating and reinforcing, in just a few moments, all of the charges that we've heard in the past about corruption in Pakistani politics. Sadly for the PPP, Bhutto's entourage saw this far too late......
Complain about this post
Sadly, it still really is more a case of 'it's who you know, not what you know' in politics as elsewhere, and anyone with any experience who says otherwise is not to be trusted I suggest. It's certainly become worse over the last couple of decades.
How any person with integrity, in any civilization claiming to be democratic (given the known normal distribution of cognitive ability and its largely genetic basis), seriously find anything comforting about nepotism is lamentable. It's all in the numbers. If and when one finds family/group ties in public office at odds with the laws of probability it's the the duty of those in the media to draw attention to POSSIBLE corruption of the democratic process.
I appreciate that one has to play one's cards right as a political correspondent if one wants to keep one's contacts, but you should keep questioning them nonetheless...that's what the press is for.
In the recent Bhutto/PPP press conference we saw the PPP hoist itself by its own petard, both instantiating and reinforcing, in just a few moments, the charges which
we've heard so often in the past about corruption in Pakistani politics. The reason why Pakistan is 'in flames' is because its elite is prone to behave in this brazenly audicious manner. Sadly for the PPP, Bhutto's entourage (and co-chairman Asif Ali Zardari, his father) they saw this far too late......Any hope that the press conference might have serve as a wake-up call would, however, be sadly misplaced for reasons that I've given elsewhere, i.e. this is a scotoma which has profoundly deep biological roots.
Complain about this post
It's a shame your bid to make a programme about this hasn't been accepted yet. Perhaps it cuts a bit too close to the bone at the 大象传媒, and without admitting it goes on there the programme could be called hipocritical if it takes a negative line on the matter.
It's hard to say whether some societies are more comfortable with 'dynastic' rule than others, or if the influence and advantage gained by being part of a rich and powerful family has more weight in certain countries, but part of the issue, in America at least, is that you don't seem to need to have a fantstic track record as a politician coming up through the ranks to be voted as leader by your political peers before you can go for leadership of the country. You just need pots of cash and the attention of the media. Easy, if you're the son of the president and thus from a very priviledge, high profile background. Perhaps countries that are conservative, like the US, but without a royal family enjoy the comfort of these little dynasties that bring some kind of continuity to the country's leadership.
Complain about this post