In politics what remains unchanged is the value of change.
All politicians are in favour of change, even if they don’t know what that means in actual fact.
This leads to a rhetoric gimmick, which tries to convince others, that the pretense of change, is itself equivalent to changing.
And this is assumingly sufficient.
Whereas, in reality it is a conformal depiction.
In other words, the alteration of the form, which does not alter the substance however, and as per such, is a conformal depiction, is presented as a substantial difference.
In actual fact, the new communicational form, is based on this idea, in order to promote a new image, which has no representation whatsoever, but nevertheless plays its teleologic role.
The most incredible is that most voters believe it.
Therefore, even after an objective defeat, a political party can be presented as a new version of its old self, even though it obtains exactly the same elements and the same structure.
A hairstyle is enough to change the man.
But we don’t compehend that, at call, it returns to its initial form, once there is a need for it to occur.
So now we hear the same all over again, but in a different manner, because you have learned the intertemporal elements from before, however, you realize that nothing has changed, except of course for the physics subject, of minimizing mass, but the core is the same, and wants the same, even if we don’t want it.