This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/oct/14/we-shouldnt-trust-orators-visionaries-and-dreamers-to-lead-us
The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
Previous version
1
Next version
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| We shouldn't trust orators, visionaries and dreamers to lead us | We shouldn't trust orators, visionaries and dreamers to lead us |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| If there’s one thing we could say for sure about Tony Abbott’s replacement by Malcolm Turnbull, it is that we’ve gained an orator, and lost a prime minister whose inability to make anything like a memorable speech was legendary. | If there’s one thing we could say for sure about Tony Abbott’s replacement by Malcolm Turnbull, it is that we’ve gained an orator, and lost a prime minister whose inability to make anything like a memorable speech was legendary. |
| Abbott’s voice as prime minister had no tone to it. He was unable to sear any phrase into the national consciousness – perhaps with the exception of “stop the boats”. | Abbott’s voice as prime minister had no tone to it. He was unable to sear any phrase into the national consciousness – perhaps with the exception of “stop the boats”. |
| Related: ABC culture wars likely to ease under Malcolm Turnbull, says Sarah Ferguson | Related: ABC culture wars likely to ease under Malcolm Turnbull, says Sarah Ferguson |
| Turnbull on the other hand is surely the most gifted communicator to occupy the Lodge since Paul Keating. His facility with words, his wit, his ability to invent a turn of phrase, his lightness of touch, his pleasant speaking voice – all of these together are a stark contrast to his predecessor. | Turnbull on the other hand is surely the most gifted communicator to occupy the Lodge since Paul Keating. His facility with words, his wit, his ability to invent a turn of phrase, his lightness of touch, his pleasant speaking voice – all of these together are a stark contrast to his predecessor. |
| He has yet to make the memorable speech – his “Redfern speech”, if you like – but there is little doubt that when the time comes, he will be up to the task. The words will be found, we can be sure. | He has yet to make the memorable speech – his “Redfern speech”, if you like – but there is little doubt that when the time comes, he will be up to the task. The words will be found, we can be sure. |
| Despite recent experience, I think we should beware golden-mouthed orators in politics. In fact, my suggestion would be that we mostly choose the least accomplished, most boring, most inept communicator to lead us. | Despite recent experience, I think we should beware golden-mouthed orators in politics. In fact, my suggestion would be that we mostly choose the least accomplished, most boring, most inept communicator to lead us. |
| The proviso has to be, of course, that they are competent in government. Their incompetence or dullness at the microphone should not be matched by their incompetence in the actual business of governing. | The proviso has to be, of course, that they are competent in government. Their incompetence or dullness at the microphone should not be matched by their incompetence in the actual business of governing. |
| Nevertheless, a dull speaker is far less likely to make us believe that government actually has the ability to make us happy, fulfilled people. A flat, cliché-ridden talker won’t disappoint us by giving us a utopian vision of the nation, for which we’ll make all kinds of questionable sacrifices. The uninspiring prime minister won’t make us hope where hope is dangerous. | Nevertheless, a dull speaker is far less likely to make us believe that government actually has the ability to make us happy, fulfilled people. A flat, cliché-ridden talker won’t disappoint us by giving us a utopian vision of the nation, for which we’ll make all kinds of questionable sacrifices. The uninspiring prime minister won’t make us hope where hope is dangerous. |
| A flat, cliché-ridden talker won’t disappoint us by giving us a utopian vision. | A flat, cliché-ridden talker won’t disappoint us by giving us a utopian vision. |
| The grand style of oratory, exemplified in such political disappointments as Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, and Barack Obama, uses two important techniques to entrance us. | The grand style of oratory, exemplified in such political disappointments as Bill Clinton, Tony Blair, and Barack Obama, uses two important techniques to entrance us. |
| Firstly, it evokes the great ethical concepts of our time: freedom, liberty, hope, destiny, fairness, justice. These ideas fill our dreams. By touching on these motifs, the great orator makes us believe that here is a powerful vision of what is good – and we are drawn to it. | Firstly, it evokes the great ethical concepts of our time: freedom, liberty, hope, destiny, fairness, justice. These ideas fill our dreams. By touching on these motifs, the great orator makes us believe that here is a powerful vision of what is good – and we are drawn to it. |
| The second technique is storytelling. The grand orators tell us a story about ourselves. They are able to tell us who we are, and by assuming the role of the prophet, who we could one day be. The illusion – and it is an illusion – is that the speechmaker knows how history is going to turn out, by some privileged access to higher knowledge. | The second technique is storytelling. The grand orators tell us a story about ourselves. They are able to tell us who we are, and by assuming the role of the prophet, who we could one day be. The illusion – and it is an illusion – is that the speechmaker knows how history is going to turn out, by some privileged access to higher knowledge. |
| Usually this is the domain of the progressive side of politics, with the assumption that “history” is progressing in a certain direction, and that human society is achieving greater and deeper enlightenment year by year. | Usually this is the domain of the progressive side of politics, with the assumption that “history” is progressing in a certain direction, and that human society is achieving greater and deeper enlightenment year by year. |
| We love it. This kind of speechmaking encourages us to believe that government is the means by which justice, hope, freedom, liberty and destiny will be achieved. | We love it. This kind of speechmaking encourages us to believe that government is the means by which justice, hope, freedom, liberty and destiny will be achieved. |
| “Yes we can,” said Obama. Well, no we can’t – not like that. We hear the visionary speak and are seduced into thinking our personal and societal aspirations will be achieved by this leader, via the means of the law and the economy. | “Yes we can,” said Obama. Well, no we can’t – not like that. We hear the visionary speak and are seduced into thinking our personal and societal aspirations will be achieved by this leader, via the means of the law and the economy. |
| And there’s a number of problems with this. One of them is that we transfer onto the visionary leader our responsibility to think about and talk with each other about the great themes of human existence. But because government actually turns out to be a blunt instrument, our public conversation about these things becomes completely unable to deal with what actually might be the right thing to do. Governments wield power by shaping the economy, and by the law. But these are essentially negative powers. | And there’s a number of problems with this. One of them is that we transfer onto the visionary leader our responsibility to think about and talk with each other about the great themes of human existence. But because government actually turns out to be a blunt instrument, our public conversation about these things becomes completely unable to deal with what actually might be the right thing to do. Governments wield power by shaping the economy, and by the law. But these are essentially negative powers. |
| Another is that, if the orator-politician is actually given the power to make their vision a reality, we should run for the hills. Very few great political speeches in history were not made in the cause of war. | Another is that, if the orator-politician is actually given the power to make their vision a reality, we should run for the hills. Very few great political speeches in history were not made in the cause of war. |
| The danger that nationalism will become a substitute for religion is very great, and is not far from us here in Australia. Talk of “Australian values” and “Australia is a peaceful country” is as dangerous a myth as any jihadism. | The danger that nationalism will become a substitute for religion is very great, and is not far from us here in Australia. Talk of “Australian values” and “Australia is a peaceful country” is as dangerous a myth as any jihadism. |
| For visionaries, we are better looking to artists, writers, poets, and musicians; to sportspeople, scientists, and religious leaders. The great blessing of looking to them is that they mostly cannot enforce their ideas by legal means. For this reason, Peter Garrett the singer is much to be preferred to Peter Garrett the politician. | |
| Governments aren’t for telling us how to dream. They aren’t there to tell us who we are, and what our story is. And so we shouldn’t choose visionaries to lead us. |
Previous version
1
Next version