• Dave@lemmy.nzM
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’m thinking more like having a 2IC acting as the boss, giving orders, all the henchmen think they are the leader when actually he’s got the real leader whispering orders to him in secret.

    Maybe I’ve been watching too much TV!

    • RaoulDuke@lemmy.nzOPM
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I’ve never heard of that. But if they did it right, I guess we’d never know.

      • Dave@lemmy.nzM
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        In theory it wouldn’t matter. There are only so many people you can have able to act as the leader. If you took out the 2IC and another took their place so you got them as well, etc. Then you’d likely disrupt the organisation even if you didn’t get the true leader - and one of the 2ICs might sell out the boss for a deal so you’d probably find out about them eventually.

        • flambonkscious@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think it’s probably worth a go given how ineffectual we’ve been…

          Certainly worth assessing or experimenting with the constraints/requirements to focus how it can be applied

          • Dave@lemmy.nzM
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Yeah, after having this conversation I’ve wondered why parties aren’t promising this.

            I think National want to be seen to be tough on crime. If they remove crime then they lose a voterbase.

            If Labour do this then it might be seen as a National-type hard on crime move, which could lose voters.