I think that in democratised affluent western societies the people always get the government they deserve.
Whatever your idealogical problems with the liberal government are, they don't present a series of shambolic polices, they don't engage in oblivious compartmentalisation of social and economic policy and they don't spend two terms of government fighting incessantly amongst themselves like the last labour government did.
> the people always get the government they deserve.
I wish that unintelligent idiom would die, because it's absurd on its face, and falls into the neo-democracy trap of assuming that you can treat a citizenry as a faceless whole. I'd even question whether the ability to choose between two very similar parties qualifies as democracy.
Like it or not, parties are elected by themselves, then governments are chosen from these parties indirectly by the media. The number of citizens that actually engage with policy directly to make a self-informed choice are a statistical anomaly.
I would suggest that in democratic affluent western societies the corporate lobbyists influence the government that you get every single day, whereas the people only influence it at election time.
I think you are hallucinating my "idealogical problems with the liberal government". Where did you get that from? No partisanship in my comment.
Whatever your idealogical problems with the liberal government are, they don't present a series of shambolic polices, they don't engage in oblivious compartmentalisation of social and economic policy and they don't spend two terms of government fighting incessantly amongst themselves like the last labour government did.