“Bleached Blonde, Bad Built, Butch Body” – Representative Jasmine Crockett from Texas's 30th congressional district

 Around 27-years ago, back when my baby-brother, Christopher was a five-year-old, I made the mistake of calling him “Fat Face.” He was at that time still “baby-cute.” I guess after a few too many squeezes from his much larger older brother and being called “Fat-Face,” he looked me and said “Well, at least I’m not bald.” My mother who was in the car when this happened, just looked at me and said “Well, serves you right, who asked you to call him ‘fat-face?’”

When I look back at this moment, I realise that my relationship with my much younger brother sums up the relationship that exists between ethnic or religious majorities and their minority counterparts in most fairly benevolent places. I love my baby brother, but it took me quite a while to have “serious” conversations with him, which only happened much later in life. The reason was simple. He’s always been the baby of the family and it took me a while to understand that he was growing up the way I was getting older. At that time, I was 23 and he was five going on six. So, as far as I was concerned, I could call him whatever I wanted, and he’d accept it because I was, well his big-brother and there was nothing he could do about it.

Majority-minority relationships are complex than that. Sometimes the relationship often turns nasty, as Jews in Europe, Indians in Africa and Chinese in Southeast Asia can attest to. However, if you leave aside the extremes, most places with ethnic and religious minorities have managed to create a certain sense of calm and stability. However, even in the places where there is “stability” there are certain tensions and “colour blindness” doesn’t quite exist when it should.

Take Singapore as an example. We are a fairly diverse place where Chinese, Malays and Indians have co-existed quite well for 59-years. We’ve not had a major racial riot since the 1960s. Yet, and yet, there still remains a certain tension, which, while not “malevolent” shouldn’t exist. Take, for example, the common refrain that Singapore, despite 59-years of schemes to promote racial harmony, remains a place where “the public will not accept a non-Chinese as Prime Minister.”

Why is that so? I’d look at it through the prism of my relationship with my much younger brother. We, the ethnic majority love our brothers and sisters from ethnic minority communities but we’re the “older” sibling and they’ve got to take whatever we dish at them. They, the younger siblings should aspire to be like us Hence, the Indian chap has to accept dark skin jokes when he goes out with his mates and he’s not supposed to come back with something snappy about the majority. If an HR department comes up with something “racist,” trust you me, a member of that said ethnic community will be the one defending it.

So, we in the ethnic majority, sometimes forget that the minority can come back and give as good as it gets. Let’s look at the “At least I’m not bald” moment in American politics, when America’s favourite lunatic, Marjorie Taylor Green (MTG), decided to patronise a colleague from Texas who happened to be educated and black.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSWQa8ZzLQ0

 

 If you watch the video closely, you’ll notice that what set Ms. Crockett off was not so much the remark about her “fake eye-lashes” but the fact that MTG refused to apologise for her remark. Call it the “I can say whatever I want remark to you and you should be thankful I’m calling you names,” attitude if you like. What made matters worse is that the chairman of the committee, a Republican member of the house, didn’t lay down the law on MGT for the “fake eyelashes” remark.

You could say that the “Bleach Blonde, Bad Built, Butch Body” (B6) was well deserved. Its like my brother’s “At least, I’m not bald,” retort to being called “Fat-Face.” Actually, that remark is even better because she never aimed it at MTG and framed it as a question to the chairman. Whilst the comments were not made directly to MTG, one will note that she’s now freaking out and demanding that the B6 comments get struck from the record. In short, MTG is perfectly good at dishing it out but can’t take it when its dished back her. She is a bully and given that the B6 remarks have not only gone viral but spawned merchandise. Meanwhile, MTG has been sulking in the corner like a small child:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nlVsy9AWJP4

 

 Look, we can’t be sensitive about everything or so terrified of offending that you can’t say or do anything. However, one has to learn that certain types of banter should go both ways. This is especially true if you’re from a group that holds power and you’re cracking jokes at the expense of groups with less. It’s “harmless” when both sides can crack jokes at each other’s expense. Its not when only one side can do it. As a Jewish family friend said to me once “I’m perfectly fine with Jewish jokes but you should accept Chinese jokes.”  

How Old is Too Old?

 

One of the things about life past 40 is that you start to think about getting old. Its like this, when you’re 20, 40 is a long way away. However, one you reach 40, you realise that 60 isn’t that far off.

Modern science has made getting old quite common. Back in the dark ages, being an “Old Man” was something that got you venerated. Think of the Arab monarchs who call themselves “Sheikh,” which roughly translates as “Old Man.” Why were old people venerated thus? It was simple – it meant that you had the ability to survive. This was a venerated skill in an era where many didn’t survive past adolescence.

However, its different in today’s world. If you live in a country with a reasonable amount of peace and stability, its almost a given that you’re to see your 80^th birthday at the very least. Think about it, around two hundred years ago, anyone over 50 was considered an antique. Today, life effectively begins at 50, when the body is still functioning and you have developed enough experience to be confident about most things.

Modern science is has done a great job at preserving our functionality. As an example, I used to do the PR for Alcon, which sold “Intra-Ocular Lenses” (IOL), which had the ability to give a 60-year-old better vision than they had in their 20s. There are more examples of the miracle of modern science.

So, getting “Old” isn’t the deteriorating experience that it used to be. However, as the withdrawal of US President Joe Biden from the 2024 election shows, there’s such a thing known as “Too Old.” Throughout the campaign, Mr. Trump’s team hammered Mr. Biden for being “too old” and “too frail,” to run things. Now that Mr. Biden’s most likely successor in the 59-year-old Kamala Haris, the same is likely to be done to the 78-year-old Mr. Trump.

The two grandpas who were running for the most powerful office on the planet have been caught looking old and doddery. They’ve showed us that getting old doesn’t just mean physically weaker but there’s also a mental decline. Whatever is said of Singapore’s first Prime Minister, Lee Kuan Yew, one has to credit him for acknowledging his facilities would eventually decline and stepping aside whilst he still had his marbles with him.

However, as my Neurotic Angel likes to point out, “What is the cut off point for Old?” If Biden and Trump are “old” at 81 and 78 respectively, what does that make Dr. Mohamad Mahathir, Malaysia’s never ending political leader who is 99 and showing no signs of frailty. Dr. Mahathir first became Prime Minister in 1981 at the age of 56. He remained there for 22 years and left office at 78. Instead of retiring quietly, he continued to be active and was back in his old job at the age of 93. So, whenever a politician around the world says they are old, there’s an inevitably a meme involving Dr. Mahathir.

 

 If there ever was a poster boy for active aging, it’s definitely Dr. Mahathir. Unlike his contemporaries, Lee Kuan Yew and Suharto, Dr. Mahathir remained active and has outlived both in style.

You have the example of the frail Mr. Biden at 81 and the sprightly Dr. Mahathir at 99 and it remains a challenge to come up with a cut off point for what defines “Too Old.” Age in many ways is a number but its arbitrary.

As someone who had to take up regular exercise in his late forties, I would say that there are two aspects of aging that we need to acknowledge.

The first is that aging involves a physical and mental decline. Generally speaking, once you reach a certain age, you get set in your ways and somehow more resistant to change. You fail to realise that the things that made you successful are now the things that are bringing you down.

The second point is the counter to the first, which is the fact that one can has depository of knowledge and experience, which can be utilized. Whenever I tell Kiddo that I’d love for her to support me instead of me supporting her by my 50^th, her inevitable reply is “Oi, people at 50 are still strong.”

So, how do you get the second from happening without the risk of the first? There are organisations, like General Electric (GE), what pair up the old and young in teams. The idea being that junior gets wisdom from senior but senior also stays active and gets new trends from junior.

There are also “mandatory” retirement ages for top people, which usually around 65. However, at an age where people still have their wits about them in their 70s and 80s, one might say this is a waste of talent.

In Singapore politics, the way of managing this has been for every Prime Minister to become a “Senior” Minister in their successor’s cabinet. A case of letting making sure the old man has no actual power to screw things up but still able to contribute the benefits of experience. There is, however, one major problem. Everyone assumes that the Prime Minister takes orders from the Senior Minister. Lee Kuan Yew, who was both Senior Minister and Minister Mentor would keep telling people he was no longer in charge and the more he said it, the less we believed him. Now that Lee Hsien Loong is “Senior Minister,” we all assume that he’s telling Lawrence Wong what to do.

So, how do you make things work? One would be to ensure that the “retained” old guy is not actually a member of the management committee or cabinet so that while the Old Guy remains useful, its clear that he or she is not an “Authority figure”

Then, there’s the possibility of working on the principle that behavior rather than age should be a trigger point for mandatory retirement. A case of keep the guy there until he or she start to show signs of obvious decline.

It’s a challenging issue. However, its an issue worth addressing, especially if you consider the fact that most advanced countries are rapidly aging. The obvious point being, if you don’t have a lot of talent, how do you make the most of what you have?

That Was a cute boy. What Happened to the Cute Boy?

 How a Cute Boy turned into an Obese Middle Aged Man  

Ended up clearing up the flat and in the process of clearing up the flat, I ended up locating a photo of a time when I had hair, wore glasses and considered being 75 kg an instant membership to Weight Watchers. I was, if memory serves, 17 at the time and I turned this into a TikTok video. A lady friend whom I sent this to replied, “That was a cute boy. What happened to the cute boy?”

https://www.tiktok.com/@tang.li0/photo/7391046086569299217?is_from_webapp=1&sender_device=pc&web_id=7274292816955999746

 

Well, the answer is that the said “cute boy,” discovered that it was pretty easy to skip compulsory games lessons and since the said “cute boy” had access to a credit card paid for by Daddy and there was Waitrose nearby which sold Hagen Daz “Cookie Dough” ice cream, he’d spend his time hiding in the dorm eating a tub a week instead of running around.

With the exception of two and a half years of National Service and a few stints in remedial training, the said “cute boy” stopped cute and slowly but very surely, he became, what his loving mother could only describe as “Gross Looking.”

How did it happen? Well, I guess you could say that the transformation started when the “cute boy” realized that he had a precious commodity that very few “cute boys” had – Daddy’s credit card. So, instead of sticking to school food (not that it was particularly great), he became the favourite of the local Chinese restaurant. Add to that, there was cookie dough ice cream and that was just on the calories in side of the equation.

It helped that “cute boy” did Karate on a regular basis, which didn’t turn him into Bruce Lee but it was exercise and this was in addition to regular games session, where he did play rugby and hockey at house level. However, when the Karate Club closed down and he could avoid playing games, the said “cute boy” realized that, well, exercise was something the other sods did.

Whilst National Service stints did help maintain some “cuteness” for a while, the said “cute boy” rather enjoyed his food and drink. Somehow, he had the knack of finding himself invited to certain places where food was in abundance. Beer was also good to have too. Exercise was limited to the odd session of regular prancing in a club.

The eventually Middle-Aged Obese man believed that sleeping was for wimps. Thought it was cool to stay up at night drinking and then going for a meal (way past dinner) and then sleeping for a few hours before repeating the process of eating more.

So, it goes without saying that “cute boy” become “uncute man” and I guess you could say, it took a very fierce Vietnamese wife to push him into taking his health seriously enough. Better eating habits and regular walking helped reduce the obvious signs of obesity.

However, the killer for the now Obese Middle-Aged man was a visit to the doctor and being told that his sugars at unhealthy levels. The doctors offered a flurry of pills and so, the Middle-Aged Obese man realized that regular exercise (daily walking as well as sprint session and push ups on alternate nights) were no longer negotiable if he had any ideas of being employable in his later years. There was a mother in the background telling him “Won’t let you live off your siblings”

However, the most important part was enjoying having that bit more energy just to do things that have kept the Obese Middle-Aged man trying to test limits of physical endurance in his daily life.

 

 

 

 

 

The Exit

 

A Good Actor needs to know when to Leave the Stage  

The big news of the day is that the current US President, Mr. Joe Biden has withdrawn from the election that is to be held on November 5 of this year. If you exclude Presidents who were assassinated or forced to resign, Mr. Biden is the first President in the post-world-war era to have not run for election. More of the story can be found at:

https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c1e5xpdzkd8o

 

What makes this story so particularly sad is the fact that Mr. Biden was effectively pushout of the race by his own party and supporters. In a way, it’s a sad end to a long career of public service. Whilst Mr. Biden did make some horrible mistakes like his blind support for Israel and the shambolic withdrawal from Afghanistan, he can claim credit for returning a sense of competence to government and the economy after the near collapse of America during Covid 19, when the US had by far and away the worst Covid casualties. Mr. Biden’s performance in government was at such a state where the Democrats actually held onto the Senate and lost the House by a slim minority, when its normal for the president’s party to get a drubbing.

So, why would the Democrats dump a man who had done a reasonably good job at restoring order? The answer is simple. Mr. Biden looked like a loser at crucial points. In the Presidential Debate, he looked and sounded incoherent against an opponent who consistently lied. That on its own would not have been so bad, had he appeared sharp and energetic in every other public appearance. That didn’t happen. Mr. Biden proceeded to prove the critics right, making a series of gaffes like calling his vice-president the same name as his opponent (“Vice-President Trump).

The good side of Mr. Biden withdrawing is that the Democrats might actually find a candidate with a chance of winning. However, whatever way you look at it, this is the sad demise of Mr. Biden’s long political career. What’s even sadder is the fact it didn’t have to be like this. Back when he ran in 2020, Mr. Biden had the perfect idea – which was to promise that he’d be a one term president. He described himself as the “bridge” between generations, whereby he’d offer stability (a valued commodity after the chaos of the Trump years), which would then step aside to let someone younger and more dynamic run the show. Think of Nelson Mandela who became President at 75 and acted as a figurehead who kept things together and allowed Thabo Mbeki to find his feet running the country as “Deputy President” until he was ready to take over from Mr. Mandela.

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/03/09/politics/joe-biden-bridge-new-generation-of-leaders/index.html

 

 Had Mr. Biden stuck to being a “Bridge,” chances are, he may have achieved more. Call it the “what do I have to lose” theory, which works on a similar principle of “powerful number two” theory, where deputies are given an extraordinary amount of power because they have no ambitions to take their boss’s job (think of former Vice President Dick Cheney or former Deputy Prime Minister of Singapore, Goh Keng Swee).

When a leader, working on the “What do I have to lose” theory can do certain things that may not be popular or even painful, because, well, they’re not worried about staying in power, they’re not keeping an eye on the poll numbers in the same way that someone seeking his reelection might.

Mr. Biden won in 2020 for one very simple reason. He was everything Mr. Trump was not – calm, collected and his statements about being a “bridge” between generations gave him the biggest differentiator – he looked more interested in serving the public than himself (compare that with Mr. Trump’s constant complaints that things were rigged against him even when he won in 2016).

However, Mr. Biden didn’t really like he had nothing to lose and by the time 2020 came along and the incompetence of the Trump Administration’s handling of Covid 19 forgotten, Mr. Biden looked worn out but still keep to hold on. His obvious gaffes made him a vote loser and his party had to do the necessary. If only Mr. Biden had chosen to go before he was pushed.   

The Disney Version of History

 

If you ever wanted to know how far Singapore has come, you’d have to look at our latest scandal, which evolve around a mural of a “Samsui” woman. Someone complained that the mural of a samsui woman smoking. Someone didn’t like the fact that “smoking” was being promoted. More of the story can be found at:

https://www.todayonline.com/news/smoking-samsui-woman-mural-be-retained-full-building-owner-fined-not-seeking-approval-2455811

 

Yes, we all agree that smoking is bad. We can all agree that it’s not good to promote smoking and nobody sheds tears when more regulation is imposed on the Tabaco companies.

However, the issue shouldn’t be about the evils of smoking which are well known. The samsui women are an integral part of our history and played a role in making Singapore what it is today.

However, everything about the mural and the controversy surrounding it has been a sign that we’re living in what a friend of mine might call as “de-lu-lu” world where history is a Disney series.

Let’s start with the fact that the Samsui woman looks fairly young and pretty – so pretty in fact that people complained that she looked like a prostitute. To be fair to the people obessed with whether she looks like a prostitute, the fact remains is that she looks like she’s never been out in the son.

If we are to understand history, we have to know that the “Samsui” woman, were women who came over from China to do the rough jobs. They looked after children and more importantly, they formed the backbone of the construction industry.

In short, the Samsui women were a combination of today’s Bangladeshi workers and Pinoy maids. They were tough and sturdy ladies doing jobs and living in conditions that would age one quickly. I’m sure some of the young things coming down to work as Samsui women were pretty but after doing the work that the Samsui women did, they’d probably be less so.

Should we be surprised that many of these ladies smoked? Should we be surprised that many probably took opium? Like it or not, smoking and opium was common place at the time. Sure, nobody wants to promote smoking let alone opium but trying to use white-wash the Samsui women as not using them would be false.

I get that the government wants to use history to inspire the population. However, we need to be realistic about our history. It gives us a perspective of how we’ve ended up where we’ve been.

Then, here’s the other thing. Can you imagine how many of us would probably look at today’s Indian and Bangladeshi workers if we could see our “ancestors” going through the same thing?  

How Do Devils Work?

 

Since I ended up in a church yesterday and the topic of sin was brought up, I realised that it might be an idea to see if we could get any clarity on the “devil” or the character that defines and brings evil to the human world. Ever since the human race have tried to understand the world through the divine, they’ve always done it through the prism of good versus evil. Just about every religion has a divine being who defines “good” and an evil one. Think of God versus Satan in the Abrahamic faiths or Ahura Mazda versus Angra Mainyu in the Parse faith. So, given the prominence of the “evil” being in our understanding of the world, isn’t it time we tried to understand the nature of evil.

Well, let’s start with the obvious – what does evil look like? Well, the most common depiction of the “evil” one is that he looks evil and nasty. This character we call the “Devil” who lives in a place called Hell, is portrayed as something that is meant to scare us:

 

 Copyright Freepix

We like to think that “evil” is easy to recognize. If the devil really looked like what we like to portray him to be, we’d all very well behaved as the idea of spending eternity with him would simply be scary.

The sad truth is that the Devil is not ugly and frightening at all. He usually takes “human form,” and we’re bound to think of that human form as being the guy who looks the most menacing:

 

 Copyright PBS

 

 Copyright Rand.

While the menacing people are menacing for a good reason, the truth is not only does the devil look human, he’s usually very appealing to us. Somehow, when the Devil speaks, we’re bound to listen because there’s just something within us that says “Ya, that’s telling it as it is,” or “he’s, our guy.” Devils look good and we want to be like them. There is, as they say, a very good reason why the phrase “lead us not into temptation,’ is written into the Lord’s Prayer.

Think of America’s favourite Presidential candidate who decided to label an ethnic group known for producing good lovers to be “rapist.” Instead of getting upset, a good number of people, specifically the type with an IQ higher than their body temperature, started defending him. As one Chinese girl in Singapore said, “I mean, he didn’t express it very well but….”

 

 This guy actually got people to believe that (Copyright WSJ)

 

This guy need to rape women (Copyright Disolve)

 

 All because the girls preferred him to these guys (Copyright Shortform)

Here was a classic case of Satan at his best, getting a good number of otherwise decent people to believe the worst in their neighbours because it made them feel less adequate. What’s probably the most interesting phenomena, is that a good number of Men of God, decided that the devil was doing a good job and proceeded to throw their political muscle. Apparently, Angels were summoned from Africa and Latin America to help him win the last election, which thankfully didn’t happen.

Now, the problem here is that the devil doesn’t work on his own. When you had the guy in America picking on people who got laid more often than they did, you had a bunch of little devils sprouting all over the European continent promising to save nations from hoards of poor people who wanted to work and set up small shops:

 

 Copyright Politico

 

 Copyright CTGN

 

 Copyright Sky News

 

 They’re going to save you from ending up like him (Copyright My Christian Daily):

 

 

 

By blaming him (Copyright Liverpool Echo).

The Devil, as they say, is good at his job in getting you to bring out your worst instincts. Your fears and greed are part of someone else’s fault. You start to think that you need to do bad things to other people before they do bad things to you. When he gets to work, things like logic and common sense go out the window. You think of irrational fears and if you’re really good, you start to get other people to believe you.

Think of the devil sitting in the land that many people call Holy. Someone hurt him and instead of hunting them down, he managed to slaughter a group of people and convinced the world that he was defending himself when he ended up killing far more than were killed on his side. What’s more interesting is he managed to get an otherwise “nice” guy to encourage him in his slaughter:

 

 This guy has convinced (Copyright Jerusalem Post)

 

 This guy and the rest of the world (Copyright CNN)

 

 That these guys need to be protected from:

 

 This guy (Copyright Daily Sabah)

The devil may speak well. The devil may look really good. What they’re saying may appeal to you in a strange way. However, let’s remember that just because something sounds good, it doesn’t mean that it’s the right thing or the good thing. Being good does require work but let’s remember that all good things need to be worked for. There is a reason why heaven is considered a reward.

Paying You with Your Money

 There’s a great story in the world of boxing which takes place sometime in 2003. It involved a physical altercation between Mike Tyson, who was at the time one of the most feared boxers on the planet and Don King, the most famous boxing promoter.

The story is simple. Mike Tyson was at the time, in heavy debt. He was financially challenged at the time and when Mr. King called him to talk about some fights, which meant more money, it seemed exciting. However, after doing some cocaine, Mr. Tyson has the realization that Mr. King is screwing him, using money “stolen” from Mr. Tyson to treat Mr. Tyson to luxurious ride on the plane. The story as told by Mr. Tyson can be found below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrmZOWrql7A

 

In a way, the relationship between Mr. King and Mr. Tyson is the parallel of the relationship between ordinary folk and the “elite.” As dominant a force that Mr. Tyson way, the real power in the world of boxing was Mr. King. In fairness to Don King, he did make fighters like Mike Tyson very rich. However, he also exploited them. They had to fight who he told them to fight and more importantly, he had a talent for shortchanging them. One of the saddest examples was in Mr. King’s relationship with Tim Witherspoon, who two heavy weight champions before Mike Tyson. Mr. Witherspoon was promised and won large purses. However, Mr. King had tied him up in so many contracts that obliged him to give most of his purse back to Mr. King.

In a way, you can’t begrudge Don King his money. He’s the guy who takes the risk and comes up with the audacious fights and promotes them to the paying public – just think “Rumble in the Jungle” and “Thrilla in Manilla.” He was the one who brought these classics and made them happen.

If you think of Mr. King as being like the start up founder that proves successful, its hard to begrudge him making more money than the workers. He was the one who came up with the idea and made it happen. He’s the one who took the risk and so should be rewarded for the success because he could have easily bore the brunt of failure.

However, in where Mr. King’s relationship with all his fighters’ turned sour was that he wasn’t just making money from promoting boxing matches. He was exploiting them by making them sign all their rights over to him and using his power over the regulators to ensure that they had to do whatever he told them to do. Take his relationship with Mr. Witherspoon as an example. Mr. King arranged for a fight with British boxer, Frank Bruno, which Mr. Witherspoon won. Whilst Mr. Witherspoon was supposed to have collected in excess of a million dollars, he only received $90,000 because Don King had charged him for all sorts of fees, whereas Mr. Bruno who wasn’t promoted by Don King earned ten times the amount.

So, here’s the point. Whilst nobody denies the “elite” a larger share of the pie, especially if they had a role in creating the said pie, there is a resentment that builds up when the “elite” earn their status by screwing over the ordinary workers or the guys doing the actual work.

In the case of boxing its obvious who is doing the work. It’ the boxers whom people are paying to see. Unfortunately, this isn’t limited to boxing. Take construction as an example. If you look at Singapore’s construction industry as an example, you’ll realise that for many companies, the real money in the construction industry isn’t in building things. It’s in labour exploitation, where you pay third world wages to the construction workers but then charging for things like accommodation and selling them insurance policies. In the meantime, you justify it by saying that you’re paying them more than what they’d dream of back home in the same way that Mr. Don King would always argue that he was making fighters like Mohammad Ali, Larry Holmes and Mike Tyson very rich.

All this is well, as long as the ordinary folk are distracted. However, as in the case of Mr. Tyson’s epiphany moment, the ordinary folk, do, from time to time wake up and do their sums. Its at this moment, where the power elite that its in their interest to share a little more of the pie or lessen the abuses as the ordinary workers have a way of hitting back if they feel they’re being screwed over in the same way that Mr. Tyson lashed out when he realized he was being screwed over.

Losing It

 If electoral politics was a combat sport, the British election of 2024 would have been a bloodbath. The Conservative Party or Torries, which had run the show for the last 14-years were effectively wiped off the map, as the opposition Labour party ended up with 63 percent of the seats in parliament or 412 of the available 650 seats in the House of Commons. The Labour Party had already reached the mark needed to form a majority (326 seats) way before the Torries passed the 100-seat mark.

 

 It wasn’t just the Labour party that took seats. The traditional third party of British politics, the Liberal Democrats had a good night too and unfortunately, the “reform” party of Nigel Farage, the populist politician who champions the sods who won’t work to bash the people who want to work, also had a pretty good showing.

The nicest thing that could be said of the whole evening, was the fact that the defeated Prime Minister, Mr. Rishi Sunak, gave a very eloquent concession speech, where he graciously acknowledged defeat and took responsibility for the loss. Mr. Sunak came into power as the first Prime Minister of Indian Origin, leaves it as the leader who brought about the party’s worst ever electoral defeat:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hPdpemrGmg8

 

 

 While Mr. Sunak’s speech was graceful and eloquent, it couldn’t help erase the fact that his party and government had proved the old adage about elections true – “Opposition parties don’t win elections – Governments lose them.” Mr. Sunak was to all intents and purposes doomed to lose this General Election. Each and every one of his four predecessors had found ways to tank the economy to levels where British people ended up facing choices one associates with third world backwaters rather than citizens of a G7 economy.

Brexit was a form of Jingoistic suicide, where the UK threw away its greatest advantage of being the entry point for foreign investment into the EU. Furthermore, goods and services which had once traveled across national borders with ease, started cramming up at borders.

While Brexit captured the headlines, there was also a slew of austerity measures, which ended up cutting funding from those who needed it most and somehow enriching those who didn’t need it.

Mr. Sunak was not blameless in any events. He was the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the man in charge of the money under Boris Johnson. Whilst he acted to produce measures that helped lessen the impact of Covid, his schemes came about it in such a manner than ended up creating that most wonderful of third world problems – graft.

As a communicator, Mr. Sunak was often out of touch. His wealth was often a subject of controversy and whilst he was graceful enough to acknowledge mistakes during his defeat, one can only say that he might have gained far more sympathy from the public had he acknowledged past mistakes at the start of his tenure.

In a way, the tragedy of Mr. Sunak is that he was a symbol of the good things about the country. He is the son of migrants who made good. He’s been educated in the world-class institutions that not only produced great minds in the UK but from around the world. In his personal life, the man has steady marriage and family life or as my youngest brother said – “remarkably boring.”

Yet, instead of being the “aspirational” story, Mr. Sunak proceeded to pander to some of the worst qualities of his various predecessors. Mr. Sunak was smart enough to see that his predecessor, Ms. Liz Truss was on the verge of tanking the economy with “fantasy economics.” Yet, instead of coming in with a “clean” team, Mr. Sunak proceeded to keep some of Ms Truss’s worst performing members, or specifically returning Ms. Suella Braverman to the Home Office. Instead of getting to the root of the migration problem, an administration filled with children of migrants went to war against people who like to work, thus benefiting illegal people smugglers.

Mr. Sunak had the good fortune of coming in when expectations were low. In fairness, he did calm the bond markets with his reputation for knowing economics. However, instead of trying to undo some of the worst mistakes of his predecessors, Mr. Sunak chose to continue them, thus compounding reasons for the electorate to send his party into the political wilderness and ending his life in politics. Perhaps, now that he’s out of power, Mr. Sunak, could do well to write books acknowledging his mistakes thus creating a legacy.