While Blair-Brown watchers were having an exciting weekend, thanks in no small part to Charles Clarke apparently describing the chancellor as a joint prime minister, I was learning a new word courtesy of my Museum of Spam: psycheocracy (I reckon it should be psychocracy, but I didn’t make it up).
Apparently, it means selecting leaders on the basis of their personality, something I think there’s far too much of already. The spammer advocating it reckons parliamentary candidates from all parties should undergo scientific testing before we, the people, get to vote. This would ensure all MPs had the ‘right personality’, that is, were anti-EU. Quite bizarre… it’s my favourite piece of spam in the whole museum. Psycheocracy.
Meanwhile, Brown’s promising to make speeches well beyond his brief, starting with a hard-line take on terror. This does make it look like the much hyped handover is entering a near final crucial stage, but at the risk of sounding facetious: so what?
It’s clear that should Brown become prime minister there will be no Earth shattering change in direction. Nor would there be if Charles Clarke or one of the ‘skip a generation candidates’ won. They’re all where they are because, bar a few tweaks, they subscribe to same political philosophy and the next leader’s job will be to enable that philosophy’s continued evolution. That’s as it should be because in the end, ideas are bigger than any individual personality.