Is she delusional?

Looking at the absolute havoc that this government has wreaked over the lives of many people, including children, I don't believe Theresa May and her colleagues are caring and compassionate people.

I don't think She is delusional. I think She's a fairly centrist political thinker, one who, to quote Bo Winegard in an essay about political centrism in the online magazine Quillette, "believes that political and cultural progress is best achieved by caution, temperance, and compromise." It's not easy.

I think all governments cause 'havoc' of one kind or another if I've interpreted that use of havoc upthread to mean "things I don't like". All the governments of my lifetime have anyhow. Repeat, all.

PS It is a very good essay. Do read it before you slam what's in my post .

do you know what is really getting to me is the TV adds that show celebrities begging us to send £3 ,or £5 or even £19 ,a week ,these so called celebrities are getting paid enormous sums to head these things ,on one channel there was one of these every break ,! if i were to donate to every one ,(some get our government aid anyway ) i would not be able to feed myself let alone them ,some of the adds are heartwrenching ,yet mostly the top people running them are grossly overpaid ,also i read that Nestle get the water on our government money ,then SELL it back to the villages they get it from ? whats that about ?? my question is why dont these oh so wealthy celebrities put their money where their mouth is ,perhaps then i would feel more like giving ,i support a local charity as much as my pension allows ,so why oh why do i feel so guilty that i cannot do more ????

Hey, thanks Baggs! I’m a Centrist!

I agree about the ads barbara although I believe a lot of celebs are quite generous.

This video on relativity by a brilliant young student can be viewed as a way of looking at people's political outlooks.

Quillette’s readers see themselves as inheritors of the western tradition of dispassionate, boring debate instead of what they likely are: people trying to kill time at work by sounding off in the comments. They hate “leftist identitarians” and “corrosive marxists” who ruin this dispassionate, boring debate by deigning to have an emotional stake in the subjects they study. They resent writers who inject politics and ideology into fields that should be studied objectively, like neuroscience and classical studies, because after all, there is only one objective truth and those shrill social justice warriors should just accept it. They love using really big words, because really big words make you sound smart.

You said it all for me nigglynellie TM is struggling with all sorts of crises and is criticised whatever she does. Thus it ever was for any party leader I would think, a thankless task.

So wrong to call someone in a political party one doesn't support -evil. I abhor the falseness of Corbyn and McDonald but do not see them in anyway evil.

They address issues rather than denegrating people, oldmeg. You forgot that bit.

And addressing an issue is to be applauded Baggs as there is far too my political hysteria out ‘there’ but, oh my, do I find their articles lacking in soul. Yes, for sure.

Far too much political hysteria.

What a good post OldMeg. Soul is what makes us human! (Although I believe animals have souls too, so maybe soul is what makes us alive).

I suggest that you don't recognise some kinds of soul, om.

I agree about political hysteria which, btw, I don't count as soul. More like an illness.

"I think all governments cause havoc of kind or another" how true, it would be disingenuous to claim otherwise.

Yep....political hysteria all right, and it seems an infectious illness!

Never thought political hysteria was soul Baggs. How could it possibly be?

You are correct that I don’t recognise a soul as defined by religious bodies. However I do recognise other meanings of the word.

Baggs It appears you take issue with my use of the word "havoc" to describe the current state of many people's lives in this country. You, imply that my comment is merely a reflection of my irrational dislikes (havoc = "things I don't like").

I stand by my statement that this government has wreaked havoc ("widespread destruction, damage, depredation") in the lives of many people. I think you will find that this is not merely a personal reflection based on my own impliedly knee-jerk reactions and prejudices but is a view supported by many (not necessarily especially radical) people who see the day-to-day effects of government policy on education, health, the justice system, housing, etc. etc.

The Bo Winegard article you provided a link for suggested that centrism is about applying caution, temperance and compromise to achieve political and cultural progress. BW suggests that the great achievements of Western civilisation - free markets, equal treatment under the law, admiration for open inquiry - should inspire reverence. And so they should - where they are in evidence. But he goes on to give as an example:

"In the US, the notion that all people are equal under the law and should be treated as individuals is a sacred value".

In seeming disregard of this "sacred value" I can recall from my childhood seeing young black people being manhandled and attacked by white mobs who opposed the de-segregation of schools, and many police officers not being over zealous in their efforts to protect these young people. No doubt some people on here will also remember there were many amenities (diners, public toilets, public transport, etc. etc.) to which black people were forbidden access or had access restricted. Of course, the situation in the US is nowhere near as terrible now as it was then but it is still far from ideal and I guess many black people will laugh mirthlessly at the idea that they have fair and equal access to the justice, health, employment and housing systems.

It seems to me that BW, whilst making a plea for centrism (and who exactly defines what the "centre" is?), spends very little time criticising the right and radical right but instead concentrates his attention on the left and radical left.

In his mentionof the Charlottesville situation, for instance, it is left groups (some of which no doubt deserve to be criticised), which receive all his attention, whilst the right groups, including some openly neo-Nazi groups, do not appear to get much of a mention. Yet it was the violent protests and murders committed by right wing individuals and groups that initiated all the subsequent public disorder.

I agree there are times when compromise is necessary, but there are also times (as happened in 1948) when mere "notions" of equality and justice are not enough and material efforts need to be made to provide for the health education and general wellbeing of a country and to combat unfair treatment and discrimination.

I don't think she's delusional and I suspect she has faith in God too. But my thoughts on TM are different to what's been said. I believe that she's agreed to be the fall guy/fall women for the Tory party during the Brexit process. I think she took on the job because she was an ambitious woman who thought she could make a difference to how the country is run. I don't think she anticipated just how difficult getting anything done because of the various factions in her party, etc. She's found herself in the position of having to compromise and do deals to an extent not experienced by other PMs. So many times I thought she would resign - sometimes being pushed and sometimes jumping - but it never happened. That's when it occurred to me that she's staying until Brexit is a done deal. Then someone else will take her place as the saviour to her notoriety of being the PM during Brexit. Immortality for TM.

There's nothing irrational about not liking things that one regards as undesirable, eloethan. You are worrying unnecessarily about my use of the word havoc. I'm sure there are havoc-like conditions in some people's lives. I'm sure there always will be. I think where we differ is that I'm not convinced Theresa May's government is setting out to make things worse for people. Their law changes may make things worse for some people but I don't think that is the intention behind what they're doing. In short, I think TM is genuine about what she wants to achieve socially. She may be wrong about how she goes about it. You seem certain of that already. I'm not.

wilma, I quite like that overview. Not sure I totally agree but I get the idea.

I agree with you on TM staying until Brexit is done Wilma.
If it's perceived as a success, the next leader will be building on her achievements.
If it's perceived as a failure, the next leader will make a clean sweep and have a couple of years to bed in and make their own mark.
I think that's the real reason there was an election this year. Not for a mandate for Brexit at all but to give a better chance for a win in 2022.
Just my personal opinion.