So I was on the move again. I had a few days of traveling to do, a friend had just got back from Hong Kong as was going to be in London for a few days before jetting off again. Jammy git.

As there was nothing else to do while on the train, I turned on the radio and decided to listen to a talk show. On this particular program they had two opposing politicians in, debating the then upcoming election.

I listened for a while, wishing I could get a decent music station, or had bought some CDs with me. The debate was getting boring, and was essentially becoming a right/left conflict: Give up your social freedom for more economic freedom, or give up your economic freedom for your social ones.

Damn, that was stupid! I found myself thinking. So basically, I have to give up some sort of freedom, in order to gain another? Looking closely, there wasn’t even that much of a choice. To take benefit of the "economic free market" of the Right means you have to have the money in the first place. And on the left, without economic freedom, social freedom was nothing, as money is a large part of the social structure.

So was there really a choice? To be sure, there are some differences. Certainly among the personalities involved. But the basic philosophy was the same. Almost all our current politicians come from the "Oxbridge elite", those lucky few without enough connections or cash to get into those 2 universities. This is pretty much the same for the leadership of both parties, whether right or left wing. And either way, it basically benefits them, as they are richer than their constituents who they supposedly represent.

It’s a two man con. Or rather, a two ideology con. They say (this "they" presumably being the same "they" who are the everyone in "everyone knows". And quite possibly make up "the community", whoever the hell they are) that you can’t con an honest man, often to make themselves feel superior to some poor schmuck who just lost a lot on what seemed a fair gamble.

However, you can con an honest man, if you do it with two men. Make them look like opposing teams, like a "thief" getting caught at a jewelers and a "copper" taking the stolen goods as evidence. But in reality, they are both working ultimately for their own benefit. That’s the way politicians keep conning the public. We get the same old guard year after year, being moved by their party from safeseat to safeseat. That’s modern politics.

Keep voting yourself pay rises and make sure there aren"t equal taxes applied to the rich. And people wonder why fringe parties and apathy are on the rise.