Photo credit: Janet Donovan
We’re not sure what our friends across the pond think of our politicians or the Presidential campaign process, but we love the Brits….particularly the rowdy bunch in Parliament……and figured they could pass along some tips. We have The Art of the Deal, they have The Art of the Insult which we may want to adopt here in the US. MPs are forbidden from using language that might ‘offend the dignity’ of Parliament. “This commonly covers swearing, personal insults and, most seriously, accusing an MP of being dishonest,” according to historians. “Many words have been deemed unparliamentary by House Speakers over time including ‘coward’ – ‘guttersnipe’ – ‘hooligan’ – ‘liar’ – ‘traitor’ and ‘git’.” Here’s the kicker: “Many MPs have perfected the art of insult whilst avoiding reprimand from the House Speaker and enjoy mocking their rivals with stock phrases such as being ‘economical with the truth’ when lying or ‘unusually fatigued’ when drunk.” Just sayin’.
Steve Hilton, author
Hollywood on the Potomac sat down with British conservative Steve Hilton, author of More Human: Designing a World Where People Come First at a book launch in his honor at the Kalorama home of Juleanna Glover, co-hosted with Niki Cristoff, Josh Ginsberg, Tammy Haddad, Susan Molinari and Steve Schmidt.
We asked Hilton, who worked in the government with Prime Minister David Cameron on Downing Street, to describe the difference between the conservative party in Great Britain and in the US. “There are many differences,” he told us, “because of the different heritage and the different histories of the two countries, but I think that the thing that unites the conservative movement – if I could call it that generally and it’s very much a theme of my book – is this belief that if you trust people and give them responsibility then you tend to get better outcomes than if you try and determine things according to some centralized bureaucratic master plan. So I think that is something that the two versions of conservatism definitely have in common. I just think it tends to be the case that those on the left of politics tend to have greater faith in the ability of a centralized authority to deliver the good society whereas those on the right tend to be more skeptical of that and prefer, instead, to disperse power and put power in people’s hands directly. That’s not to say that they always deliver on that when they’re actually in government.”
“I’m talking about the theory, if you like,” Hilton added. “We certainly in government in the UK try to act according to that approach and put power in people’s hands over the schools and the way their neighborhoods are shaped and the way public services are delivered and so on; but in the UK there’s a lot further to go and even here in America where it’s a much more, in many ways, a much more decentralized country where you have different levels of government and authority residing in different parts of the system. I still think there’s a lot more that we can do to put power directly into people’s hands. That’s what I mean by trusting people and sharing responsibility. To me, that is a more human way of organizing things where you actually empower people to work out their own solutions to their problems – with support when necessary – but you give them the power and the responsibility to do that. And that is going to lead to a better outcome than if you try to impose things on them. So that’s the theme, really, that runs throughout my book; which is this idea of doing something about the way, I think, the modern world, the systems and structures that we’ve built, are designed to run the modern world. I think they have become too big and bureaucratic and distant from the human scale. So what we need to do is shake those things up and break them up and that’s true in government and that’s also true in the economy where you have giant corporations. I believe in the people. I want to put power directly in people’s hands. I want to do that.”
C-SPAN was on the scene.
“And I think, honestly” he continued, “a lot of the frustration that you’re seeing here in America that’s being expressed in various ways in the selection campaign, whether that’s in support of Trump on the right or Bernie Sanders on the left, is this feeling that people have that they have been ignored. They don’t have enough power. They don’t control the things that matter in their lives. They are distant decision makers whether that’s in government or in giant corporations who determine what goes on and they have no way of controlling that. I think that frustration is what has led to this incredibly interesting revolt against the systems and structures that we use to run the modern world, which you’re seeing in the election.”
Ok, so you’ve got Sanders on one side and Trump on the other: What is the difference between the two of them? We asked him to explain since the followers on both parties are sick and tired and ‘not going to take it anymore.’
“I that you’re right that there’s a lot that they have in common, in terms of the critique of what’s going wrong,” he answered. “Sanders and Trump are both making the same arguments about the corrupting influence of big money in politics and the role of centralized collusion, if you like, between big government and big business. So to that extent, they’re making the same argument.” Hilton doesn’t see any particularly strong detailed policy proposals from either candidate, just more of a set of ideas. “I think the plans themselves are pretty thin, if I’m honest. I don’t really see how they would address the fundamental underlying causes of the malaise that America seems to be experiencing.”
Steve Hilton and Juleanna Glover
“It’s great to be here,” he said at the reception. “It’s great to see such an illustrious crew. It reminds me of something I wrote in the book and I’m just going to read you a little snippet. I wrote it down. Here we go. It’s from the first chapter on politics. ‘When the corporate lobbyists, the politicians, the journalists, and the authors of books like this all go to the same parties, all live in the same neighborhoods of Washington, New York, and San Francisco, ruling elite precipitates. Regardless of who’s in office, the same people are in power,’ and it’s great to see you all here tonight.”
