Tuesday 17 September 2019

Making Decisions

First, I want to establish a ground rule (ironic, as you will see). Politics has come to be characterised as falling into two and a bit camps; Left, Right and Centre. This has been disrupted and corrupted, as it is supposed to represent polar opposites in ideas. But if we go to extremes, Stalin, a murderous authoritarian is seen as Left. Hitler, a murderous authoritarian is seen as Right. So that's not working.

Clearly, we can agree that people who want to tell you what to do (and possibly engage in a bit of murdering) are Left. The opposite then, would be people who want you to be free and don't go around killing other people.

State control, nationalised industry, high taxes, lots of rules and regulations, conformity. This is the Left. Small government, low tax, light regulation, liberty and personal freedom, that would be the other end.

Clearly, we have a solid candidate for the Left today in Corbyn and his cronies (no suggestion of murdering, but very keen on people who do), but we don't have anyone brave enough to stand up for the Right. Oh, we get a bit of it, but then they run scared and apologise for saying something sensible. Terrified of what the Left might say.

The Left have created a 'narrative', which is their version of the truth. They opted for a narrative as it doesn't actually have to be the truth. They explained this away by saying that there is no such thing as absolute truth, just your truth and my truth. To which someone said, 'kick a rock and you'll see what's true'.

Consequently, a child born a boy, doesn't have to be a boy, if he chooses not to be (although the activists of the Left will help him choose). Rape victims must be believed, regardless of evidence and a hate crime is a crime if the victim says it is.

George Orwell's book 1984 was lampooning Left ideology, pointing out its dangerous stupidities. It wasn't supposed to be considered a manual of how things should be.

'Woke' is supposed to define people in the know, but in fact describes the opposite; sheep, repeating the most obvious falsehoods. Very Orwellian.

'Safe spaces' are no such things, they are hideaways for people who are so lacking in understanding and social skills, that they cannot contemplate a contrary opinion. Common in universities, you have to wonder just how people, supposedly there to learn and debate, have such narrow views and are unable to accept other views exist. Perhaps it's something to do with the input of their Left ideologue lecturers.

And of course, the greatest demonstration of the dangers presented by Left ideology currently, is Brexit. For some, maybe we can call them traditionalists, it is the result of a democratic vote that has decided we should leave the international organisation that, for some reason we asked to run our country. Pretty much the ultimate outsourcing.

But for others, the losers, it is not that simple. So a litany of reasons as to why the democratic result has to be ignored have been unleased, including, that it isn't democratic. The whole reason that parliament is in a mess is because the losers won't shut up and act like adults, but are a majority in parliament. Plus the little twerp Speaker breaking the oath of his office.

410 constituencies voted Leave, 240 Remain. 148 Labour constituencies voted Leave, 84 Remain. 247 Conservative for Leave, 80 Remain. But in parliament, only 160 MP's are for Leave, out of 650. An outrage of course, but why should they care? Are they not better than us? Certainly seems to be their opinion.

Then there is Political Correctness. Invented to stop anything being debated, as Left ideology doesn't stand up well to scrutiny.

Or Climate Change. There is absolutely no science at all to support the assertion that we, through emissions are affecting the climate. The theory is sound, but we understand so little of the way climate works, that it is impossible to predict. But our emissions, seemingly huge, are inconsequential compared to the size of the 'system'. All the alarmists have is their crooked computer models, which have already been proven to be hopelessly wrong.

But 'the science is settled' and must not be debated, or further investigated. Why would that be!? Why, for the first time in history, should we not apply the scientific method to a problem of science?

Because Left ideology doesn't stand scrutiny.

The next time someone tells you something, think about it. Is it true? Because, if it has some benefit to the Left, it's probably a lie.

No comments:

Post a Comment