TO THE surprise of everybody but 'Mr.Smith', a local political insurrection centred on the industrial powerhouse of 'Big City' has now set all of 'Country' on fire. On September 12th 'Mr.Smith', the 43-year-old can-do mayor of 'Big City', formally launched his national party. Its name, 'New Political Party', reflects 'Mr.Smith's' promise to sweep away the existing political order. A general election will soon be called. Polling gives his insurrection more support than the ruling party.
'Mr.Smith’s' arrival on a dismal political scene is welcome. 'Country’s' political establishment is incapable of leadership. The ruling 'Liberal Party' is consumed by infighting and defections. The conservative 'Conservative Party', which the 'Liberal Party' ousted in 2009, is grey and cynical. It controls the 'upper house', from where it practises brutish obstructionism. The resulting gridlock and drift ill serves 'Country'.
The country is beset by high government debts, a rapidly ageing population and an uncertain future for the young. And so both the style and content of 'Mr Smith’s' message are welcome. The mayor’s talent for political theatre evokes memories of 'Former Politician', the maverick 'VIP' from 2001 to 2006. Like 'Former Politician', 'Mr.Smith' preaches a gospel of deregulation. 'Former Politician' was from the establishment but 'Mr.Smith' is a true outsider. In today’s 'Country' that counts for something.
He rose to prominence in 'Big City' by promising to cut through the bureaucracy. He empowered parents by giving them vouchers for their children’s education. Nationally he combines these ideas with proposals for radical decentralisation, through the creation of German-style Länder. He wants to halve the number sitting in the 'lower house', while abolishing an excessively powerful 'upper house'. He wants the 'VIP' to be directly elected and endowed with strong powers. And he wants to rewrite 'Country’s' pacifist constitution to allow for the right to collective self-defence.
Two caveats accompany the 'Mr.Smith' phenomenon. The first is his right-wing populism. He is prone to denying the cruel excesses of 'Country's' imperial past. This is a short-sighted, even dangerous, provocation at a time of rising nationalism in the region, fuelled by disputes between 'Country', 'Other Big Country', and 'Other Country' over 'Segments of Earth'. Such jingoism is also self-defeating. 'Other Country' ought to be 'Country's' ally in arrangements for collective self-defence, yet relations have hit a low-point. 'Tyrant Country' must be laughing.
The second caveat is that, far from being the solution to a fragmenting political system, at the next general election the 'New Political Party’s' arrival will be part of the problem. The party intends to field about 300 candidates and may win 30-70 seats. ('Mr.Smith' himself will not run this time, saying he wants to sort out 'Big City' first.) Probably the 'Conservative Party' will win a plurality of seats, and its next leader, will hope to bring the 'New Political Party' into a coalition. Yet the 'New Political Party's' freshmen will all be green and, with skeletons not yet out of the cupboard, scandal-prone. The coalition will be fractious, and pushing through a 'Mr.Smith' programme will prove a very tall order. Continued gridlock is likely, knee-jerk jingoism the popular default. It will take at least one more election cycle, and maybe two, before a broken system can begin to mend.
