Election patterns

Authenticity and new player in. The story of Czech parliamentary politics.

I’ve watched the elections which happened this week. And there are two patterns that I’ve observed from apart.

I wasn’t really into it. I’ve dropped there as of a surprise. I didn’t know they are having a parliamentary election. But they did. (It’s not my country of origin.)

And the first thing that I’ve noticed, was a presence of a new party.

The new party

Each election there is a new party or two, coming into the mix of the established ones. They come, with some backing and get into the 4% pre-election barrier, really fast.

I quite liked the leader, from what he was talking about. But, as my friend told me. He might have been an ally to an old, most successful party everybody was trying to get rid of.

So each election, wait for the one newcomer into the mix.

The tactic of getting rid of the old

There was one party, that I've known from my studies there. And I was a fan of that party. But I must say, I didn’t like their TV presence.

They weren’t talking about their plans, or their ideas what they wanted to do. They got into some weird: “Let’s defend ourselves from those false accusations and attack back” game.

When I hear 5 times, that the party is lying, and the main guy in the party is lair. I don’t think I need to hear it 6th or 7th time. I already know it. Please, tell me something new.

Don’t waste your precious time on their mistakes, and how bad they are, or defending yourself. Just tell me, what you are gonna do.

So this mistake is of a getting lost in battles, and forgetting, why did you get into it, in the first place.

Bonus point: I want to reach more people.

You know, the party I was a fan of? They are called Pirates. I don’t know them that well, but they resonated with my value structure. Before the elections, it started to look like they would be the most popular party.

And I saw how the party leader started to want other people, in. People that they may not resonate, right from the get go, and vote for them.

At that moment you are getting into some trouble. Or at least I think so. They weren’t per se inauthentic. But they started to go into those fights, whereby nature, they aren’t good.

I mean, some parties can make their marketing upon, the others are bad, we are good, this is why. But they aren’t that party. They were based upon stuff, upon logic, and trying to make something out of the situation. And because they got entangled into those fights, and defending themselves. They almost look like all other old parties. And lost, the presence, of what they actually want to do. What they are.

And it’s sad.

They did get in. It ended up not great, but fine for overall presence of democratic forces in the country. However still, I was unhappy.

I know that first time, (first election) when they wanted to play clean, and didn’t defend, or attack they got in. They didn’t win, that’s true. But at least the core of the party, or a person who voted for them, knew who they are. (It might be even be second time.)

And here is where I think the party make a mistake. Second time, they get corrupted, or swept into thinking that if you don’t play dirty. If you don’t defend, or attack a bit. You don’t win. They get corrupted by those thoughts.

And when the second term comes around. They use all those rhetorics, tactics and forgets about the authenticity that broad them there, first time.

I hope a similar party in a similar situation in my country, that even didn’t get over the 5% line, would not do the same. Would not get aggressive, because of the other saying: “You wouldn’t win if you ...” Then maybe we shouldn’t win. If we compromise who we are.

Yeah. Some youngster naivity there. But, I don’t even think that is true. I think they are naive who say, that only by attack, and defense one can win. It might be true, but for what price.

Luke