I think we ought to bring a little honesty into the discussion of politics. The people who seek to form the framework of political debate have suggested that there are two opposing ideologies in play and they represent the two extremes. So far so good. However, these extremes are then explained as being from Stalin, for instance, on the Left to Hitler on the far Right.
This has been the accepted logic for a long time and it has been massively successful for the Left. Because Stalin was 'correct' in his thinking, people of the Left such as Ed Milibands' father and Eric Hobsbawm have absolutely no problem with all the killing. Well, OK, they would rather it wasn't publicised.
But good grief, the horrors of that nasty Right wing bloke and all like him. Have you seen what they get up to? And it is all aimed at you!
Problem is, these are not two opposing points of view. When you talk about teaching a child the difference between right and wrong you are trying to pass on something important and pointing out that one is unhelpful and socially unacceptable and the other is much better received by everyone.
Hitler and Stalin are very much at the same end of the scale. They were totalitarian and they fall at the Left end of the scale. This scale balances the realities of human life and experience. Whether someone else runs your life and tells you what to do on pain of death or at least punishment. Arbitrary and at the whim of a faceless 'state'. Or whether you have personal freedom as long as what you do is not to the detriment of others, or cause them harm.
All Left ideology believes in dehumanising society for the benefit of better controlling it. This ideology believes that the state exists as if it were a living organism and needs to be served by the people. In return it will provide (by imposition) order and safety. Obviously, when you get to the level of the elite who make the rules then things like wealth, luxury, personal freedom and such like will come back into play. They do the difficult bit after all, making it all work!
At the other end of course is a loose society, held together by mutually agreed and acceptable limitations. A state exists but it is seen for what it is, an invention to serve an end and that end is to do as little by way of control as is necessary for the good order of society. There will be some rules, but the absence of overt rules exerts an influence of its own, that of individual responsibility.
People must accept their place in society and participate. At the simple level of the policemen, a citizen in uniform operating only by the consent of the people, will be assisted by the people in the apprehension of an offender, for instance. They will see it as their duty and understand that their right to freedom is upheld by their responsibility in maintaining it. The policeman will not fear the community and will operate freely and openly because he is a part of it.
This free society will have its problems and it must face them by introducing laws to point in the right direction, but still allow as much freedom as possible. The biggest danger such a free society faces is if (when) people who wish to have without giving agitate for power. Due to the nature of a Right wing, free society it will allow these people to speak and the gullible will be drawn in.
The totalitarian has little problem with lying of course and operating apart from the 'society', merely seeking to undermine it from within.
Today, Britain finds itself heavily influenced by the totalitarians and is some way down the path to giving in to them completely. There may never have been a 'golden age' when everything was better, but it is tangible and self evident to those old enough to know, that politically and in societal terms this country is very much worse now than it has been for a very long time.
Once socialism had done its good work (mainly riding on the backs of the rich, philanthropic Victorians) it was subsumed as the first useful tool of the Left and strangely became associated with the Left.
A structured and technological society is an easier one for command and control ideology to grasp of course, but it only requires a small effort to fight it off. You have to think for yourself. So put down your iPad a moment and consider. Do you want all that you have and the ability to do what you want when you want, how you want (within the rules of a civilised society, not harming others), or do you prefer the route being taken now of being instructed by politicians on the how, where, when of life?
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label politics. Show all posts
Friday, 7 March 2014
Tuesday, 15 January 2013
Common Wealth?
Her Majesty is the titular head of something called the Commonwealth. It is a loose collection of countries who have a shared experience of the English language. We can forget the empire bit it is irrelevant to everyone except trouble making lefties, for whom comprehension is itself an alien country.
This commonwealth is spread right across the globe and represents a fantastic diversity. What we as a nation should have done after the end of WW2 was to honour these fellow nations, who helped in the fight against totalitarianism. Instead, a new breed of weak politicians took hold of power in Britain. Politicians who sought solace from near neighbours, who saw their duty as being to prevent future European war.
To this end they decided that the warlike nations in Europe, France and Germany should tell us what to do, should take charge of all Europe. What could go wrong? Whilst Germany settled down to become a peaceable nation, gratefully accepting the US funds to rebuild and prospered, France continued with their traditional, baseless arrogance. And so the EU was formed, a French empire that the Germans want to run.
Meekly accepting that Britain had lost the war to a non-combatant and Germany, we surrendered whatever reparations they asked for, to be allowed to join their club. Part of this was that we must turn our backs on the commonwealth. This betrayal by Britain was essential for the Empire in Europe as it would be an advantage to Britain always, and a safe haven if (when) the French plans fell apart.
Edward Heath was the traitor who so spectacularly failed in his duty, actually choosing to lie openly and blatantly to the people he was elected to serve, in order to get his way. No less than a tinpot tyrant would do, but then of course, the object of his desire was a totalitarian regime.
Naturally, at this time of crisis, people are coming to their senses and realising the damage the EU does. Some vested interests (politicians and company bosses who do well personally out of the EU) shout loud warnings of impending peril, but look at what they say and you will find no detail. There is no substance to their claims.
At this point we should be rejoining and reinvigorating the commonwealth, making it clear that we are humbled by being allowed back in. Then we should build it up as a mighty trading organisation, for mutual benefit. Plans should be laid for richer commonwealth countries to grow the weaker, not by giving them money or by subsidy, but by encouraging them, by buying what they produce. We should make it clear, 'build it and they will come' will be honoured in our commonwealth and that it will be common wealth.
This is no socialist Utopia, which is why I say not to give things, but by generosity of spirit and through a collective will to see them grow and meet their challenges. Then wealth truly is shared, with the satisfaction that it is earned. Proud nations, whose pride is not a false one like the preening Eurocrats with their commitment to corruption. And the commonwealth will be a group of like minded, English speaking, common law nations not some centralised bureaucracy run for the benefit of an elite.
The fundamental question is not why should we leave the EU, it is why did it ever exist? It is a disgraceful slap in the face to all those who have died trying to keep Europe free of tyrants, only for Edward Heath to sell us to them, as soon as he could. The strength of Britain, ultimately based on the commonwealth has countless times saved Europe from itself. But, because we always did the job and walked away these countries have returned time and again to their ambitions.
The Napoleon complex never leaves a French politician. Britain should exit, completely all the constructs and agreements of the EU, immediately and seek constructive and imaginative schemes with our actual friends around the world. No empires, no hatred or cabals but definitely no EU. And then France should be recognised as the perennial danger that it has proven to be over so many centuries. When their standards come up to those of others, let them join the world community again.
Ironically, being subsumed in the EU empire has neutered our politicians; none of them now think like, let alone have the stature of world statesmen able to take on grand schemes to better the lot of people on a worldwide scale. They are mere pen pushers awaiting orders. And they tell us to stay in the EU, because they cling to nurse for fear of something worse. We need a grown up politician and soon.
This commonwealth is spread right across the globe and represents a fantastic diversity. What we as a nation should have done after the end of WW2 was to honour these fellow nations, who helped in the fight against totalitarianism. Instead, a new breed of weak politicians took hold of power in Britain. Politicians who sought solace from near neighbours, who saw their duty as being to prevent future European war.
To this end they decided that the warlike nations in Europe, France and Germany should tell us what to do, should take charge of all Europe. What could go wrong? Whilst Germany settled down to become a peaceable nation, gratefully accepting the US funds to rebuild and prospered, France continued with their traditional, baseless arrogance. And so the EU was formed, a French empire that the Germans want to run.
Meekly accepting that Britain had lost the war to a non-combatant and Germany, we surrendered whatever reparations they asked for, to be allowed to join their club. Part of this was that we must turn our backs on the commonwealth. This betrayal by Britain was essential for the Empire in Europe as it would be an advantage to Britain always, and a safe haven if (when) the French plans fell apart.
Edward Heath was the traitor who so spectacularly failed in his duty, actually choosing to lie openly and blatantly to the people he was elected to serve, in order to get his way. No less than a tinpot tyrant would do, but then of course, the object of his desire was a totalitarian regime.
Naturally, at this time of crisis, people are coming to their senses and realising the damage the EU does. Some vested interests (politicians and company bosses who do well personally out of the EU) shout loud warnings of impending peril, but look at what they say and you will find no detail. There is no substance to their claims.
At this point we should be rejoining and reinvigorating the commonwealth, making it clear that we are humbled by being allowed back in. Then we should build it up as a mighty trading organisation, for mutual benefit. Plans should be laid for richer commonwealth countries to grow the weaker, not by giving them money or by subsidy, but by encouraging them, by buying what they produce. We should make it clear, 'build it and they will come' will be honoured in our commonwealth and that it will be common wealth.
This is no socialist Utopia, which is why I say not to give things, but by generosity of spirit and through a collective will to see them grow and meet their challenges. Then wealth truly is shared, with the satisfaction that it is earned. Proud nations, whose pride is not a false one like the preening Eurocrats with their commitment to corruption. And the commonwealth will be a group of like minded, English speaking, common law nations not some centralised bureaucracy run for the benefit of an elite.
The fundamental question is not why should we leave the EU, it is why did it ever exist? It is a disgraceful slap in the face to all those who have died trying to keep Europe free of tyrants, only for Edward Heath to sell us to them, as soon as he could. The strength of Britain, ultimately based on the commonwealth has countless times saved Europe from itself. But, because we always did the job and walked away these countries have returned time and again to their ambitions.
The Napoleon complex never leaves a French politician. Britain should exit, completely all the constructs and agreements of the EU, immediately and seek constructive and imaginative schemes with our actual friends around the world. No empires, no hatred or cabals but definitely no EU. And then France should be recognised as the perennial danger that it has proven to be over so many centuries. When their standards come up to those of others, let them join the world community again.
Ironically, being subsumed in the EU empire has neutered our politicians; none of them now think like, let alone have the stature of world statesmen able to take on grand schemes to better the lot of people on a worldwide scale. They are mere pen pushers awaiting orders. And they tell us to stay in the EU, because they cling to nurse for fear of something worse. We need a grown up politician and soon.
Monday, 30 July 2012
Politicians
The reason our country is in a mess is because the politicians do too much and too little. As most power now resides with Brussels, UK politicians don't have much of a real job to do, so they fill in by making stuff up.
They pay no attention to things that need doing, probably as it would entail much complicated work, restricting themselves to pointless or dangerous initiatives. The most important things required today are the protection of the people from predatory, monopolistic companies and councils, shrinking the size of the state and reducing taxation.
Instead the concentration is on vested interest politics, subsidies for 'renewables' due to non-existent Man Made Global Warming, homosexual issues and 'aid' (by which they mean payments to corrupt regimes). A long time ago it was realised that the West would see a threat rising in the form of developing nations. Much has been done, particularly by the EU to stunt their growth, but it is happening anyway.
What we didn't perhaps, perceive was that the West would be gripped by institutionalised stupidity at the same time. Naturally both the EU and the rest of the West has been in thrall to Left ideology for decades and this is what seeded the lack of ability and the crazy ideas. It is as if the West is now run by the same kind of person who ran Unions in the UK in the Seventies.
All of the madcap schemes and ideas which strangle our country and the West's economies, such as all those listed above as things politicians actually work on, are ideologically of the Left. They are communist in essence and designed only to undermine Western civilisation. How would you say they are doing?
They pay no attention to things that need doing, probably as it would entail much complicated work, restricting themselves to pointless or dangerous initiatives. The most important things required today are the protection of the people from predatory, monopolistic companies and councils, shrinking the size of the state and reducing taxation.
Instead the concentration is on vested interest politics, subsidies for 'renewables' due to non-existent Man Made Global Warming, homosexual issues and 'aid' (by which they mean payments to corrupt regimes). A long time ago it was realised that the West would see a threat rising in the form of developing nations. Much has been done, particularly by the EU to stunt their growth, but it is happening anyway.
What we didn't perhaps, perceive was that the West would be gripped by institutionalised stupidity at the same time. Naturally both the EU and the rest of the West has been in thrall to Left ideology for decades and this is what seeded the lack of ability and the crazy ideas. It is as if the West is now run by the same kind of person who ran Unions in the UK in the Seventies.
All of the madcap schemes and ideas which strangle our country and the West's economies, such as all those listed above as things politicians actually work on, are ideologically of the Left. They are communist in essence and designed only to undermine Western civilisation. How would you say they are doing?
Friday, 30 March 2012
Navel Gazing Fails
It has been apparent for some time that modern politics is just about the political class talking amongst themselves and trying to publicly score points over each other. It is more playground antics than anything connected to the real world. Cameron is not detached because he is rich. He is detached because he lives in the world of Westminster politics.
Just how this inward looking cabal would fail us is now becoming abundantly clear. Whilst Blair used the insularity of 'the bubble' to hide himself from proper scrutiny, Cameron is just disconnected. Hence they plot and plan 'strategies' for how to present things and how they can 'catch the others out', without any realisation that their childish pranks affect a nation.
If the theory was that by telling people to keep their tanks topped up, so any tanker drivers strike must fail, as people are perpetually able to cope with one, it has itself failed. Having created a nation that can't tie its own shoelaces, the politicians really shouldn't have been surprised when they told everyone to buy petrol that people did just that. Maybe politicians also don't realise how commerce runs on this fuel stuff.
That every time they turn the screw on fuel tax, the nation suffers and loses a little more of its ability to cope in the world. This disconnect, this political navel gazing is taking us down very dangerous roads, whilst enemies gather strength.
A clearly unhinged Scotch person has been elected to run an enclave where it seems a large number of deranged people have gathered. A fifth column exists in Britain. It is not the colour of their skin that worries us, but their supposed culture (one the cultured would call culture less). Of course, Galloway has to scuttle around the country looking to be 'elected' where people are as stupid and unprincipled as him and where vote rigging is 'cultural' and easy.
Galloway would love to be Britain's Hitler, or Stalin or Gadaffi. He dreams of power and wealth and oozes malicious harm. He is not the conniving, money grubbing Blair, he is not the oleaginous Mandelson, slimy and deceitful. Galloway is much more dangerous. He is Gollum pretending to be Smeagal.
Just how this inward looking cabal would fail us is now becoming abundantly clear. Whilst Blair used the insularity of 'the bubble' to hide himself from proper scrutiny, Cameron is just disconnected. Hence they plot and plan 'strategies' for how to present things and how they can 'catch the others out', without any realisation that their childish pranks affect a nation.
If the theory was that by telling people to keep their tanks topped up, so any tanker drivers strike must fail, as people are perpetually able to cope with one, it has itself failed. Having created a nation that can't tie its own shoelaces, the politicians really shouldn't have been surprised when they told everyone to buy petrol that people did just that. Maybe politicians also don't realise how commerce runs on this fuel stuff.
That every time they turn the screw on fuel tax, the nation suffers and loses a little more of its ability to cope in the world. This disconnect, this political navel gazing is taking us down very dangerous roads, whilst enemies gather strength.
A clearly unhinged Scotch person has been elected to run an enclave where it seems a large number of deranged people have gathered. A fifth column exists in Britain. It is not the colour of their skin that worries us, but their supposed culture (one the cultured would call culture less). Of course, Galloway has to scuttle around the country looking to be 'elected' where people are as stupid and unprincipled as him and where vote rigging is 'cultural' and easy.
Galloway would love to be Britain's Hitler, or Stalin or Gadaffi. He dreams of power and wealth and oozes malicious harm. He is not the conniving, money grubbing Blair, he is not the oleaginous Mandelson, slimy and deceitful. Galloway is much more dangerous. He is Gollum pretending to be Smeagal.
Friday, 16 March 2012
Friday Feeling
What is going on with Cameron and Obama? Obama is issuing a seemingly endless stream of platitudes about Cameron and Britain, best mates etc etc. He flies Cameron to a basketball game! Janet Daley has speculated on her blog that maybe an agreemnet is being reached over Iran.
But now we have this bizarre notion of releasing oil reserves to bring down the price of oil (as opposed to reducing tax, which is what a Conservative would do). Mind you, Iran likes high oil prices so maybe there is something in it.
I have always said that it would be a great idea to develop a technology to replace oil, if only to stuff the regimes in the Middle East, who since they became wealthy on oil revenue have acted very much like spoilt children. Complete with tantrums.
When you see them all lined up for the photo shoot, Samantha Cameron seems genuinely unhappy to be in the limelight and Michelle unhappy that people think Barack is the President. I'm sure she gives her husband a sense of perspective away from the cameras.
Don't you just love the display of disconnection when Cameron, talking to US students said that the price of filling up a car in Britain would make them faint. Luckily, it doesn't particularly concern the ferried-around Prime Minister with a multi million pound cushion, who seems completely unaware of where much of the eye-watering cost to the motorist comes from.
Does Cameron the PR man know how he comes across? I mean an honest version of him, confronted by an old lady freezing to death because she can't afford to heat her home, due to his love of the Green scam, would say 'I don't care'. Because that is how he appears; stupid for believing such dumb ideas as wind farms and Global Warming and careless because he never does anything to help the people of Britain. He is completely and utterly wrapped up in being a politician, as if it were an end in itself.
But now we have this bizarre notion of releasing oil reserves to bring down the price of oil (as opposed to reducing tax, which is what a Conservative would do). Mind you, Iran likes high oil prices so maybe there is something in it.
I have always said that it would be a great idea to develop a technology to replace oil, if only to stuff the regimes in the Middle East, who since they became wealthy on oil revenue have acted very much like spoilt children. Complete with tantrums.
When you see them all lined up for the photo shoot, Samantha Cameron seems genuinely unhappy to be in the limelight and Michelle unhappy that people think Barack is the President. I'm sure she gives her husband a sense of perspective away from the cameras.
Don't you just love the display of disconnection when Cameron, talking to US students said that the price of filling up a car in Britain would make them faint. Luckily, it doesn't particularly concern the ferried-around Prime Minister with a multi million pound cushion, who seems completely unaware of where much of the eye-watering cost to the motorist comes from.
Does Cameron the PR man know how he comes across? I mean an honest version of him, confronted by an old lady freezing to death because she can't afford to heat her home, due to his love of the Green scam, would say 'I don't care'. Because that is how he appears; stupid for believing such dumb ideas as wind farms and Global Warming and careless because he never does anything to help the people of Britain. He is completely and utterly wrapped up in being a politician, as if it were an end in itself.
Thursday, 15 March 2012
The Corruption Of Politics
Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That is a self-evident truth and we know it. The absolute power of people like Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Kim Jong Il meant suffering and death for tens of millions of people. Yet these people always claim to be 'socialist', of the people.
We are conditioned to see the Left as Communism and state control and the Right as fascist, moneyed, elitist and er, state control freaks. So it is clear; they are both actually the same and only one ideology can lead to this state of affairs; the Left.
The real Right is a way of thinking that applauds achievement, that allows all to aspire and all to achieve better things by their own efforts. Naturally, it also has to have a government which, whilst promoting these things doesn't allow an over-mighty organisation to appear with an ability to crush competition.
Today's politics has been corrupted by the Left. They have infiltrated the institutions and control the Establishment. You think senior judges are idiots because they don't punish criminals? That is because they are in thrall to Left ideology. Your children uneducated? The Left indoctrinate teachers at University and they pass on the ridiculous creed to children (and also ensure they are not taught anything -an educated population asks things of its leaders).
The police, the Unions, your local council, Heath and Safety zealots, hate crimes. Do you wonder how these things now crush us and let us down? Because the Left has corrupted them. The upshot is a population that accepts what it is told, that is basically supine and cannot function without Big Government.
But we are still notionally a capitalist country and the other side of Leftist destructiveness is coming into play. The Left likes Big things, big government, big projects, big buildings, big warehouses and big companies. Big companies can tell you a lot about their market sector all at once, without having to ask 4,000 little companies the same question. Both share the same market percentage, but with one, you can have just one conversation.
Whilst chatting, the politician might ask if a political donation is a possibility, or perhaps a Directorship available. The company might ask if a little laxity in planning law might be allowed. So all in all, for a politician in power, a big, rich, powerful company is an attractive entity. If, as Industry Secretary you receive two invites, one from an electronics company in Cambridgeshire, who want to talk expansion from 50 people to 80 over a cup of coffee in a paper strewn office, and one from a chap who wants to chat about subsidies and wind farms on a yacht in the Med. which one do you go for?
Though the important thing here is not the type of corruption, but that all of it, even the seemingly innocent is corrosive. Do you think the guy in the corner shop has any say in legislation affecting his store? Cameron wakes up one day convinced that binge drinking is caused by cheap alcohol, so he wants to set a minimum price. The local guy shouts as loud as he can and prays. Tesco rock up with a threat or two; unemployment, affect on business, profits, tax, any angle as long as the politician gets the idea that they don't want it.
Surely though, the small guy benefits when Cameron loses interest and concentrates on some other dream state inspired crusade? Not when Tesco get to maintain their stranglehold and price to destroy the competition. If we are not careful, the Big State will engulf us with Big Supermarkets and Big Energy being a part of Big Government as surely as if we were a Stalinist state.
And it is not just our identikit politicians here, the EU absolutely loves big companies. In fact, they promote the evolution of ever larger entities, controlled, ultimately by them, through favours and legislation that ensures their success. Wind farms? As an idea it couldn't get off the ground, as a project of the Left they are literally guaranteed success; planning laws ignored, subsidies introduced, higher bills passed on, and legal obligations to buy their over-priced product enforced.
We are conditioned to see the Left as Communism and state control and the Right as fascist, moneyed, elitist and er, state control freaks. So it is clear; they are both actually the same and only one ideology can lead to this state of affairs; the Left.
The real Right is a way of thinking that applauds achievement, that allows all to aspire and all to achieve better things by their own efforts. Naturally, it also has to have a government which, whilst promoting these things doesn't allow an over-mighty organisation to appear with an ability to crush competition.
Today's politics has been corrupted by the Left. They have infiltrated the institutions and control the Establishment. You think senior judges are idiots because they don't punish criminals? That is because they are in thrall to Left ideology. Your children uneducated? The Left indoctrinate teachers at University and they pass on the ridiculous creed to children (and also ensure they are not taught anything -an educated population asks things of its leaders).
The police, the Unions, your local council, Heath and Safety zealots, hate crimes. Do you wonder how these things now crush us and let us down? Because the Left has corrupted them. The upshot is a population that accepts what it is told, that is basically supine and cannot function without Big Government.
But we are still notionally a capitalist country and the other side of Leftist destructiveness is coming into play. The Left likes Big things, big government, big projects, big buildings, big warehouses and big companies. Big companies can tell you a lot about their market sector all at once, without having to ask 4,000 little companies the same question. Both share the same market percentage, but with one, you can have just one conversation.
Whilst chatting, the politician might ask if a political donation is a possibility, or perhaps a Directorship available. The company might ask if a little laxity in planning law might be allowed. So all in all, for a politician in power, a big, rich, powerful company is an attractive entity. If, as Industry Secretary you receive two invites, one from an electronics company in Cambridgeshire, who want to talk expansion from 50 people to 80 over a cup of coffee in a paper strewn office, and one from a chap who wants to chat about subsidies and wind farms on a yacht in the Med. which one do you go for?
Though the important thing here is not the type of corruption, but that all of it, even the seemingly innocent is corrosive. Do you think the guy in the corner shop has any say in legislation affecting his store? Cameron wakes up one day convinced that binge drinking is caused by cheap alcohol, so he wants to set a minimum price. The local guy shouts as loud as he can and prays. Tesco rock up with a threat or two; unemployment, affect on business, profits, tax, any angle as long as the politician gets the idea that they don't want it.
Surely though, the small guy benefits when Cameron loses interest and concentrates on some other dream state inspired crusade? Not when Tesco get to maintain their stranglehold and price to destroy the competition. If we are not careful, the Big State will engulf us with Big Supermarkets and Big Energy being a part of Big Government as surely as if we were a Stalinist state.
And it is not just our identikit politicians here, the EU absolutely loves big companies. In fact, they promote the evolution of ever larger entities, controlled, ultimately by them, through favours and legislation that ensures their success. Wind farms? As an idea it couldn't get off the ground, as a project of the Left they are literally guaranteed success; planning laws ignored, subsidies introduced, higher bills passed on, and legal obligations to buy their over-priced product enforced.
Monday, 5 September 2011
The Way Of The World
There used to be a simple notion. The people elected politicians who, generally did what was expected of them or they were voted out. Industry was given the incentive to do things by the mass of buyers choosing their product. Today things are rather different.
Big money attracts the attention of politicians and elections are some kind of ritual farce. Retail policy is derived by asking big retail how the sector should look; strangely it favours big companies. Turkeys are asked their views on Christmas. The people pay for what they get (or if it is a government service, that they often don't get) not what they want.
Man made global warming is a scam; the scientists who back it are either ideologically locked in or support the theory because their funds rely on it. But we should be earnestly looking for replacement energy sources, different ways of doing things. The emissions may not be doing what the idiots think, but aren't good anyway. But can you say that any real effort is being expended? Not if the pathetic 'electric car' is the best we can do.
These things wouldn't have been considered working prototypes years ago, but so depleted is our knowledge that car manufacturers churn them out as if they are viable and on the whole, we seem to believe them. An electric car with a 100 mile range. Whoopee! Except, what if it is night time and I need the lights on? And winter so I also need the wipers and blower on and where do I get heat from? I'm guessing we could now perhaps manage a couple of hundred yards.
We need politicians who think the electorate are their masters not the money of big business. We need a complete reversal of current warped thinking and to do that we need finally to get the left liberal monkey off our back.
Big money attracts the attention of politicians and elections are some kind of ritual farce. Retail policy is derived by asking big retail how the sector should look; strangely it favours big companies. Turkeys are asked their views on Christmas. The people pay for what they get (or if it is a government service, that they often don't get) not what they want.
Man made global warming is a scam; the scientists who back it are either ideologically locked in or support the theory because their funds rely on it. But we should be earnestly looking for replacement energy sources, different ways of doing things. The emissions may not be doing what the idiots think, but aren't good anyway. But can you say that any real effort is being expended? Not if the pathetic 'electric car' is the best we can do.
These things wouldn't have been considered working prototypes years ago, but so depleted is our knowledge that car manufacturers churn them out as if they are viable and on the whole, we seem to believe them. An electric car with a 100 mile range. Whoopee! Except, what if it is night time and I need the lights on? And winter so I also need the wipers and blower on and where do I get heat from? I'm guessing we could now perhaps manage a couple of hundred yards.
We need politicians who think the electorate are their masters not the money of big business. We need a complete reversal of current warped thinking and to do that we need finally to get the left liberal monkey off our back.
Tuesday, 2 November 2010
Misunderstanding politics
When I was growing up, the general understanding appeared to be (certainly as I picked it up) that politicians ran the country. It was their job. They had to organise the big stuff and handle relations with other countries. I don't doubt that games were played, but not really out in the open. Today of course, politics is about politicians and running the country takes such a poor second place that (as we saw spectacularly under Blair) they make an absolute hash of it and not least that they are delighted to have someone else do it for them (the EU).
Even journals that believe themselves serious talk about politics solely in relation to personalities, personal point scoring and 'how things look'. It is all so much gloss that it seems they have all taken their lead from Hello!. Of course the popular opinion is that people are disengaged from politics because the politicians don't make it 'relevant'. Well, Labour increased taxes massively to pay for their bloated bureaucratic state, which I think is relevant to most people. No, the bit people don't care for is how politicians go about their business, which naturally is all politicians can think about. Also, whilst the last Conservative administration got us back to prosperity (and Brown kept the dream alive by incessant borrowing) people, as is the tradition, ignored politics as everything seemed to be working OK.
Now, once a lack of care from government has resulted in banks stuffing up and needing giant dollops of cash from their friends in Westminster, the attention of the people has refocused. But on what? Blair only ever wanted power and money, he didn't give a stuff for the business of government and nor did any of his cronies. They all lived in a bubble in which real jobs and real people didn't figure. The Conservatives, accepting Blair's view of them as nasty, decided they needed to change in order to be 'electable', by which they mean, be able to kid the people to vote for them. It is amazing that, after the most disastrous government in living memory, the new Conservatives couldn't even gain a majority of the vote (accepting the numerous corruptions introduced by Labour creating a client class etc). And why not? Because Cameron looked and sounded like Blair, and Clegg looked and sounded like both of them. What choice did we have, but to try to pick the least stupid.
Why, if there is a groundswell against this cosy Westminster bubble politics, didn't some other party come to prominence? For the simple reason that politics is now pretty well stitched up by the gang we have and that is also why they are melding into a single ideology. If I decide I want to be an MP and stand as a Conservative, basically the Party has to approve of me. And generally that means I support what they support and will do what I am told. Clearly this undermines democracy, but it is great for Party machines and that is the point. Your MP doesn't trot off to Parliament to represent you. He/she is a number, an element of a voting bloc. It has led to the near impossibility of a debate in that great debating house at Westminster, as all MP's must support their Party and the Opposition must disagree with the ruling Party as a matter of principle (and the good of the country can go hang).
There is a chance that this system would fall apart under its own inertia, except for the fact that most of the governing of Britain falls to the EU, an institution most of our politicians don't even pretend to understand. It has become vogue to talk of an 'heir to Blair' as if this terrible human being had started something. In fact Blair, as a corrupting influence, as a liar was preceded by Heath, who can really be seen as his mentor. This egotistical and useless Prime Minister signed away the sovereignty of this nation, an act of immense hubris bearing in mind he did not have the power to do this. Parliament runs the country for and at the express behest of the people. This temporary power is one way; we control them. But in modern times it has come to seem to politicians that they own the country and the people are there merely to support it. This of course is the Continental pattern, the Code Napoleon where everything is illegal unless the State deems it legal. Here of course, we used to have the very free system, one that works for the people, where everything is legal unless, by general consent it is made illegal.
So it is clear, not only must the power of the Party system in the UK be broken up but that we need to get away from the dangerous and enslaving regime of the EU. The structures, both, are not undemocratic they are anti-democratic. They cannot survive where the people have a say, evidenced by the need to keep repeating referendums until the people get the answer 'right'. The time for navel gazing is over.
Monday, 13 September 2010
TUC
Is it just that I am paying more attention now than in earlier decades, or are the Unions talking even more palpable nonsense? The public sector has been bloated for no reason, but at enormous cost by a Labour government desperate to build a client class and to increase central, state control. Now all the money (and a lot more besides) has gone, we have to cut back. This is simple economics, but most of the public sector are make-work's anyway and should have been cut even if the finances were sound. I am sorry that this threatens the livelihood of these public sector workers, some of whom will have no culpability (as opposed to those who have chosen to occupy positions they know are just detrimental), but Tony Blair and Gordon Brown have let down and robbed more people than just them.
The Union bosses however are foaming at the mouth, salivating that this Labour created crisis being cleaned up by a Conservative coalition allows them, in their warped world, to launch nationally damaging strikes. Mind you, if they only get those at risk to strike, we will probably get absolute proof that these people not being at work makes absolutely no difference to the functioning of the country. All the Tories have to do, is make sure that front line staff are basically protected for the services we need, but also that not only the people but the stupid bureaucracy they support is removed. I say only, but obvious though these things are, we are seeing a distinct lack of leadership and of Conservative values. All we get is something that smells way too much like Labour-lite.
If the Unions paid a bit more attention to the needs of their members and less to communist influenced politics we could live with them. But their only interest in their members is the wealth it creates for Union bosses and the power it gives them to disrupt the proper functioning of a civilised, democratic state. Not a state they want.
Friday, 7 May 2010
Scotland
Scotland is a great country and my father was Scottish, it has a magnificent history and has contributed massively to the success of Great Britain. Today however, this country cannot produce the genius of the past, the great designers, engineers, scientists, thinkers. Its education system was superior and envied. Scotland has been dragged down and its morale destroyed to become a country of no aspiration or ability, by politicians who as intellects are the minnows of this once great land. These poor human beings have done nothing for Scotland but sought advantage for themselves and turned Scotland into a welfare dependent nation. Whether it is the ludicrously puffed up Scottish politicians or those they have exported to Westminster, the entire UK has suffered from this disastrous loss of confidence. We have all let Scotland down by allowing these people to take control, who have then gone on to wreck the successful institutions.
Monday, 19 April 2010
Lib-Dems? Really?
In the usually complicated world of British politics, it seems Labour getting the least votes could still mean the most useless Chancellor/Prime Minister ever, could get back in. So, do the Tories attack the Lib-Dems to try to steal their share? Or would that backfire and give them more voters? As is customary, Brown's fate lies in others hands; he doesn't have a role to play in this campaign so should just keep quiet. He won't though, because he has no understanding of the real world.
Acknowledging that there is also leakage to independents and minor parties, it is the irritating habit of the British people as a herd that is causing the problem. In '79 the Tories managed to get the country to elect a woman and despite being more educated and serious times, it was clear someone had to clear up the mess Labour (as ever) had got us into. But all too often the British think 'oh, let's give the other lot a chance' in a spirit of fairness. It clearly is what happened in '97 as the Tories had been in for 18 years and although the ERM debacle (that any party would have gone along with, being European politics of course) caused a recession, the Tories had more than got us out of it by the time we, apparently, thought a snake-oil salesman was the best thing for Britain. And it was clear he was a conman from the off. Now however, 'the other lot' is the Lib-Dems as Labour and the Tories get lumped together, or possibly, hopefully, Labour are being written off. Do I mean Labour, New Labour or the Trades Union Party, which is what I think Brown has signed up to?
I'm not convinced by Cameron I have to say, but I don't think Clegg isn't up to it and Brown has proven he isn't.
Friday, 16 April 2010
Leadership Debates
Well, hardly a debate. All arrived with soundbites and put them in. Brown developed a talent for giving his opponents something to beat him with and Nick Clegg relished his role as 'the one with no chance of being PM'. I may be biased, but I still think there was only one of the three who could credibly be Prime Minister and that was Cameron (and I include in that statement the incredible fact that Brown is the PM).
This was pointless TV and yet you had to watch, just in case someone lost it; Cameron could have laid into the bottomless pit that is the ineptitude of New Labour and Brown in particular. Brown could have dropped the facade and become the angry, incoherent imbecile he is away from the cameras you suspect (and hear) and Clegg could have said what he would really do as Lib Dem PM and scared people witless.
What was disappointing (viewed through the lens of QT later) was the depth of the lack of understanding in the general public. Now, the BBC may be reckless with regards impartiality in selecting the audience (and it does seem clear they allow Labour to place activists, who then get to speak), but even normal people seem to have become statists. I think it is almost a refusal to think maybe more than conditioning, which is what I used to suppose, but this bovine attitude and behaviour seems to be everywhere. The common herd has become convinced in the god-like power of experts. Any mention of science and people switch off their brains and wait for instructions. Hence the AGW scam. Doctors, teachers, judges all are 'experts' and must have their way. Judges in particular have adopted the left-liberal stance of considering themselves, because they adjudicate the law that this in some way elevates them above the lawmakers. They ignore their impact on society because they are above society.
So, when Cameron mentions voluntary effort, he is suggesting something that works on many levels. It could in fact be a very strong force in society, to cancel out the selfish, me,me,me that arrived with Tony Blair (and he and his left-liberal cronies have successfully convinced the unthinking was Thatchers child, instead of the increased opportunity she really brought). But the audience at QT seemed unnerved at the prospect of volunteers and John Sargeant very eloquently undermined it with his belief in the innate goodness of 'experts'. Eloquently that is, until someone queried it. Our society has multiple fractures and its ability to hold together is in no way assisted by Browns immigrants and the undermining of British culture they bring and Brown forces upon us. People like Victoria Coren talk about Britain's historic tolerance and use that to justify immigration. But unfettered it destroys that culture, Derr!
To sum up, Brown has to go and Cameron is the only alternative. Here is what is basically the problem with Brown. He had £10 and wanted to buy a £10 cake to eat. The problem was he wanted to keep it as well. The solution he came up with was to borrow £10 and buy two.
This was pointless TV and yet you had to watch, just in case someone lost it; Cameron could have laid into the bottomless pit that is the ineptitude of New Labour and Brown in particular. Brown could have dropped the facade and become the angry, incoherent imbecile he is away from the cameras you suspect (and hear) and Clegg could have said what he would really do as Lib Dem PM and scared people witless.
What was disappointing (viewed through the lens of QT later) was the depth of the lack of understanding in the general public. Now, the BBC may be reckless with regards impartiality in selecting the audience (and it does seem clear they allow Labour to place activists, who then get to speak), but even normal people seem to have become statists. I think it is almost a refusal to think maybe more than conditioning, which is what I used to suppose, but this bovine attitude and behaviour seems to be everywhere. The common herd has become convinced in the god-like power of experts. Any mention of science and people switch off their brains and wait for instructions. Hence the AGW scam. Doctors, teachers, judges all are 'experts' and must have their way. Judges in particular have adopted the left-liberal stance of considering themselves, because they adjudicate the law that this in some way elevates them above the lawmakers. They ignore their impact on society because they are above society.
So, when Cameron mentions voluntary effort, he is suggesting something that works on many levels. It could in fact be a very strong force in society, to cancel out the selfish, me,me,me that arrived with Tony Blair (and he and his left-liberal cronies have successfully convinced the unthinking was Thatchers child, instead of the increased opportunity she really brought). But the audience at QT seemed unnerved at the prospect of volunteers and John Sargeant very eloquently undermined it with his belief in the innate goodness of 'experts'. Eloquently that is, until someone queried it. Our society has multiple fractures and its ability to hold together is in no way assisted by Browns immigrants and the undermining of British culture they bring and Brown forces upon us. People like Victoria Coren talk about Britain's historic tolerance and use that to justify immigration. But unfettered it destroys that culture, Derr!
To sum up, Brown has to go and Cameron is the only alternative. Here is what is basically the problem with Brown. He had £10 and wanted to buy a £10 cake to eat. The problem was he wanted to keep it as well. The solution he came up with was to borrow £10 and buy two.
Tuesday, 13 April 2010
Conservative Manifesto
Very light on the real problem facing us, debt and like all the main parties no mention of helping rid us of that debt by getting the monkey of the EU off our back. However, overall the message is a strong one and I really like the idea of giving power back. It fits with their well known schools strategy and could offer hope to the likes of doctors who might be able to concentrate on medicine and patients, instead of Labour apparatchiks and their targets. Which should mean fewer state sponsored deaths, thank goodness. Could have been stronger i.e. more Conservative and so more supportive of people who contribute and those who would like to.
Brown's response was brilliant. He talked about the need for central control of your lives. He said you would be abandoned by a Conservative government not interfering. Brown realises that no-one feels that the state intrudes too much with too many stupid laws. That driving the NHS to become a killing machine, to push police to pursue only motoring and political crimes (but not politicians of the left) is something the nation craves more of. That he is completely detached from reality is undoubted, but do his constituents realise? Would be nice if they would think of the United Kingdom and Scotland for a change.
Brown's response was brilliant. He talked about the need for central control of your lives. He said you would be abandoned by a Conservative government not interfering. Brown realises that no-one feels that the state intrudes too much with too many stupid laws. That driving the NHS to become a killing machine, to push police to pursue only motoring and political crimes (but not politicians of the left) is something the nation craves more of. That he is completely detached from reality is undoubted, but do his constituents realise? Would be nice if they would think of the United Kingdom and Scotland for a change.
Monday, 12 April 2010
Labour Manifesto
Much as they have hated having to do it, Labour have put down on paper a manifesto to hold on to power, which is very different from a manifesto to govern. You can tell that Labour do not intend these words to last beyond May 6th, even if they win, in the way they have left so much out. Launching this fabrication, Brown talked extensively about what he speculates a Conservative government would do. Naturally for a fiscal incompetent, he is also happy to lie where need be. What he wont address, even when asked, is what he will actually do to get the finances straight (something he still says he can do in the short term, taking only 4 years to halve the deficit). Alan Johnson was asked about why he wont guarantee not to raise VAT , despite vilifying the Tories. All he could say was that the Tories were the party of raising VAT. Does that mean Labour wont? He wouldn't say, so that's a yes they will raise it.
Brown talked about the future, emphasising that looking back is a bad idea. Well, yes because if you do you realise the person telling you the country is safe in his hands, spent the last 13 wrecking it. Darling gives the impression of being the only one who recognises reality when he sees it, but has been seriously gagged. He let slip earlier that, basically it will be the private sector and its taxes that will get us out of the mire. Brown says the economy is the public sector so he mustn't stop spending on his client voters (well, not before May 6th). Remember, Brown said no increases in income tax, then raised NI, followed by the 50p rate and now he is back for more NI.
For 13 years we haven't had a government. New Labour came to power to enrich themselves and to impose central control over everything. We now have thought crimes and extensive criminalisation of people who should be seen as bulwarks of society. Difficult to avoid the (often wrong) attentions of the state these days and almost no way to correct them. It sounds dramatic, but Britain has become a nation of oppressed people.
Brown talked about the future, emphasising that looking back is a bad idea. Well, yes because if you do you realise the person telling you the country is safe in his hands, spent the last 13 wrecking it. Darling gives the impression of being the only one who recognises reality when he sees it, but has been seriously gagged. He let slip earlier that, basically it will be the private sector and its taxes that will get us out of the mire. Brown says the economy is the public sector so he mustn't stop spending on his client voters (well, not before May 6th). Remember, Brown said no increases in income tax, then raised NI, followed by the 50p rate and now he is back for more NI.
For 13 years we haven't had a government. New Labour came to power to enrich themselves and to impose central control over everything. We now have thought crimes and extensive criminalisation of people who should be seen as bulwarks of society. Difficult to avoid the (often wrong) attentions of the state these days and almost no way to correct them. It sounds dramatic, but Britain has become a nation of oppressed people.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)