…but what is he talking about? 

In the beginning, he sounds like a summary of a “help yourself”-book which is supposed to give you the confidence to do…anything you want, which actually sums up very much of the populist movement today. Be strong, you can do it…too. Like those guys who have been in politics all their lives, who are born into it. Yeah. Let’s go.

Some people have been left out of…the political discussions, and they really want to participate. This is a…short summary of many politicians’ attitude today, polticians with the label populist.

Their words are often actually not that interesting, to me, but democracy is made so that actually everyone can participate. 

I also don’t always know what the problem may be for people that I don’t know. It may come out as something, and I may believe I know what that is, but hey, I may be wrong in judging what is their actual problem. It may be something important, or not. One doesn’t always know.

But you regularly have to listen for a long time, at least I do, and think a lot, to find out what some people actually want, and some politicians have to be judged more by their actions, what they actually do, than by what they say, because words and ideas…are not really their domain.

I am not saying that everything they say is nonsense, but to me…sometimes a lot.

Many things are at least regularly out of context. Too much emphasis on actually – to me, again, small things, and they sometimes become big because the words spoken are wholly rejected by other people in the discussion.

This has happened regularly here in Norway.

And to discuss with hard-headed people who don’t move a millimeter is difficult too.

In the end, sometimes, the discussion ends, actually also because of non-communication, and the right-wingers simply do what they wanted to do all along.

This is Norway, maybe not Britain.

But the new voices in politics generally comes from unfamiliar quarters, compared to what used to be on the public scene, and this means not only that the thoughts can be confused, this happens, but also, the lives of those who speak are different than those who used to dominate the scene, which gives different experiences and different thinking. Not always with a good effect, and often with really little knowledge of society, sorry, this is often the case.

Still, some problems are real, in a way, but they may grow instead of shrink if you simply state this and then make no real effort to solve them, just go on saying how bad things are.

I’m certainly not saying that everything the…old society, the old establishment, was doing, was right either, but who are actually the right ones to make a…revolution?

Do we need one?

How much change is actually needed, and how much and what changes are actually happening and what is only talked about?

Many things are in play today, to put it mildly, and I think we just have to consider whatever is said and suggested, to take it seriously, we meaning everyone paticipating in the discussion, political debates etc.

But sometimes you are in need of kickin someone in the ass, because they do the same and don’t really respond normally to a normal argument.

You shouldn’t do it too often, because this habit has entered public duscussion really too much, but I think you have to have this tool in the toolbox as well, in addition to normal arguments. They don’t work all the way, but should be used as far as it is possible.

Still, you can’t ignore what is being said, because, sorry, this is also democracy, and some of what is said may be right even if it comes from a foggy mind, foggy in certain ways or in general when the talk is about the world. I’m not talking of anyone in particular – but in general, there is much confusion in politics today and in society, at least where I live and see what I manage to see.

Some of what is said…may be wrong. Some may be right.

Both possibilities go for descriptions of a situation, politically or otherwise, parts of them too, not only the whole thing from someone, and suggestions to solve what is seen as problems.

The discussion after Johnson’s introduction is becoming gradually more sound than the introduction itself, I think.

To use Churchill as a figure, dead, but arguing Johnson’s own case…well…

You don’t experience things the same way in all positions in society, these can be real differences, and you don’t necessarly think the same way, which may be I guess just about everything from almost creative nonsense to actually interesting ideas.