Is there any more damning legacy for your ideas than having to come back and repeat them over and over?by Julia Blunck / March 15, 2018 / Leave a comment
This is an age of reboots, remakes and sequels—to the point that even saying this sentence is practically a remake of other statements of our current crisis of creativity. It should come as no surprise that this trend has finally reached politics, that place where fresh ideas supposedly matter a lot more than everything else.
Together again for one last more mission, former politicians rise from retirement to solve what they see as a world gone askew, begging them for intervention. This is exemplified by Tony Blair and John Major’s recent interventions on Brexit, but as the swirling rumours about Obama involved in a possible Netflix series show, it is not contained to Britain; the idea of leaving the spotlight has become less appealing across the world.
The problem with sequels, of course, is that a lot of the time nobody really wants them. Beyond a few who might see in these actions the glimmer of nostalgia politics—a return to a simpler and admittedly less fragmented times—there is something unhealthy about seeing old faces back. Politicians are defined by their legacies; they should not get to have post-scripts.
It’s easy to criticize yesterday’s men for being so; it’s harder to explain why they shouldn’t interfere.