Mass reverse pshycology

The Kingy Report.........Vol 1.

I'm just going to have to try this again.

Problem is my satirical bents with first person reference often leave me right open to comparison with another artistic young hippy from times gone by.

"Und ve vill juz printz de deutchmarks for ze crazy dreamers."

"Ah luken. Derr iz Poland. Schnell"

Unfortuatley the economic policy was nowhere near as successful as the group map reading lessons.

But rather than it being all about me. Lets take a look at the true masochists of democracy.

The voters.

A society of potential reality television show contestants.

Far too many atop the plateau that this dream is based upon.

With millions more gazing longingly at the prospect of fame regardless.

So hoping that their ability to look great on CCTV, totally unscripted and accompnied by a transvestite, a surfer dude and a scientologist is to be their righteous path to elevation.

Taking their meaningless exsistence all the way to the microphone.

Call me a traditionalist but it used to be the ones with the talent got to the microphone.

Reality TV has reversed that civil expectation to the point that we now believe those who get to the microphone have the talent.

Odd, how did that happen?

The answer most truly, and sadly is. Political Polling.

Politicians invented this. For two reasons.

Firstly there was inconsideable inconvenience caused when actually waiting for the voters to do their jobs.
Particuarly if it looked like going good for someone else.

The early bird gets the worm.

Or in this case, a place of implied importance just long enough gets an outrageously generous state funded pension. 

We of course can't talk too much about that. Everybody just ends up wanting one.....then one day ooooppps.

Whack that navy up on ebay will ya chief.

Politicians need plenty of hard core, old school warrior types nice and close. Makes them seem so caring and sensitive.

Polling is responsible.

In comparison do you see the current politician as a more caring individual than ghengis kahn?

Which brings us to the next important validity in political life. How to justify, or not, using increasing government funds to pay themselves more.

They tell us this all the time. Its not fair. James Packer's bookie makes more than I do.

Do we the electorate see value in our nations leaders being paid a pittance of their corporate counterparts?

Not really.

As long as you have data on how many low level union lawyers and diplomatic corp rejects ended up becoming CEO of BHP.

Bring me that data and we will talk.

That was a pretty base line example.

Its never hard to get an elecorate to agree in unison that politicians are overpaid recidivists and lacking potential for a real job.

Secondly, the political ego. Its larger than the Orion Nebula itself.

Although it must be said, not near as bright that many times a year.

In order to fulfill this insaitable ego, politicians are like.......

Like deparate lovers.

And most probablly stalkers.

So they invented many a variant on meaningless questions to which the only correct answer could be "I Love -insert correct meglamaniacs name here-"

The process became so refined that ito has undergone a basic reversal in premise.

Polls are now more often used as the big gun in informing the elecorate how we think.

I'm sure we all agree a more efficient use of resources than finding out what we think.

This has the added by product of statistically enhancing any mistruth or non fact into actual policy. Regardless of relevance.

This method is keeping policy twitterable. Like petitions of the new world.

And constricts wording to of the time paramater of current attention spans. If this isn't a fair comment, then can somebody tell me why A Current Affair rates so well.

With nobody having to talk about that nasty substance.

Unless it's substance abuse.

Then most politicians will be guided by whom is using what where, and perhaps just how. This will dictate their reaction. Well more their position. The reaction will always be outrage.

We could have a baseline societal expectation in place about this sort of behaviour.

However, traditionally and historically this has not worked out well for the elected.

Most politicians agree with the sentiment that laws are no fun to be making when your expected to follow them.

So succesfully has this been done that they have us believing up is down and that we should be pissed at the guy not in government for the stuff up.

Its government. It had to be done.

This was the perfect ruse. Using polls to convince everybody that the politician was an interesting and engaged unit.

A becon for the people.

Who with absolute delight and giddyness is happy to pass everything on in the context of polling so basically nobody would notice them screwing us senseless while being truly useless representatives of anything worthwhile.

Brilliant stuff. A marketing dream.

You know marketing. The philosophy employed to get people to buy garbage they neither need nor want.

Absolute perfection in the ongoing primary role of modern government.

How to get our money and make it their money.

The media were right onto these tactics.

In fact it came to a time, way past when the legaslative usefullness of government had expired.

The media knowing full well that good news never makes a paper sell, adopted wholly the polling concept.

Not so much to find out what news interested us.

But more to cunningly detirmine the news.

Allowing base questions to put us at either ends of the outrage spectrum so we can hate each other.

Outrage and hatred sell.

So do titty girls.

Given the current governments popularity I am going to have to assume that Kate Ellis said no that.

Thank god for sexist factional thugs though.

I hear there were many expressionists willing to do this. They just wern't as pallatble in marketing terms.

Sex sells but not every tit will work for that tat. Nor indeed every tat for that tit. Natural law.

As completley irrefutable in fact as the imaginary religous friends of millions. But notice this. That just does not matter.

The answers are in the polling. So much so that by any modern standing voting is, in all but name and invalid intent, redundant.