Elections

Brexit and the British State

/ Duncan Whitmore / 13 Comments

Brexit and the British State

By Duncan Whitmore

Following the drama of the past two weeks which culminated in the embarrassing behaviour of opposition MPs blocking the Speaker’s chair in the moments of Parliament’s prorogation (pictured above), we can hope for some dying down of the recent hysteria now that they have been royally booted out for a month. At least, that is, until October 19th, when Boris Johnson must either pull a new Brexit deal with the EU out of his hat or ask for an extension to the October 31st deadline.

In the meantime, we can enjoy the comedy value of the Labour Party trying to square the circle with its Brexit policy. Trapped between a rock and a hard place by its support coming from both working class Leave voters on the one hand and middle class, liberal Remainers on the other, their aspiration is to negotiate a new deal with Brussels in order to show their Leave credentials. But they will then call a second referendum in which they will campaign against their own deal in favour of Remain. Such absurdity has driven even Remain-biased journalists to barely concealed sniggering. On Wednesday of this week, deputy leader Tom Watson chimed in by suggesting that Labour should campaign for a second referendum ahead of voting for an Autumn general election (the conditions for which Labour has already shifted several times since they backed the Brexit delay bill last week). Given that Labour is the official opposition and, by far, the second largest party in Parliament, whatever it chooses to do is likely to carry more weight than whatever the likes of Little Bo-Swinson and the disproportionately mega-mouthed Ian Blackford have to offer. So, amidst the hyperbolic outrage at the Scottish Court of Session’s finding that the prorogation of Parliament was “unlawful” (strange how there were no screaming headlines when the first instance judges drew the opposite conclusion) as well as at the release of the worst case scenario no-deal planning documents this will probably be the only thing to keep much of an eye on for now. Continue reading →

The Manifesto of the Live and Let Live Party

/ Neil Lock / 60 Comments

(Author’s Note: Tom Rogers recently made a comment, on a thread about the forthcoming UK election, asking for “plausible and realistic ideas that can be put into action and that will appeal to ordinary working people.” Despite my strong aversion to politics as it exists today, and to politicians of all stripes and all parties, I thought it might be good to set down my best stab at exactly that. Hence this draft outline of a “party manifesto,” intended to spark thought and discussion.

I thought of several possible names for the party – the Good People’s Party, the Sanity Party, the Peace and Justice Party, perhaps even the Zero Agenda Party. But I eventually settled on the “Live and Let Live Party.”)

Continue reading →

Why I Won’t Vote on May 5th (or is it 7th?) – and Nor Should You

/ Neil Lock / 18 Comments

(Neil’s Note: This essay is from my archives. The date stamp on it is April 28th, 2005.

Ten years on, I could write almost exactly the same essay again… – except for two things. One, I would be far less kind to both the Lib Dems and UKIP than I was a decade ago. And two, I would raise the question: “Who do I vote for to get all the bureaucrats sacked with their pensions cancelled, and all the politicians lined up and shot?”)

On the fifth day, of the fifth month, of the fifth year, of the century that would have been the fifth if the calendar had started in 1601, every adult in the islands called Britain is invited to take part in a charade. That charade is called a general election. It’s that time of the decade again, when the politicians offer us a chance to rubber-stamp their system. They ask us to select, from among a field of candidates, which best represents our views. Such selections, totted up in more or less complicated ways, are to determine which of two (or perhaps three) criminal gangs is to be granted licence to rule over us against our wills for the next four or five years.

Democracy, say the pundits, brings power to those who represent the will of the majority. Oh, yeah? Let’s look at the record. Last time this charade took place, in June 2001, just 24 per cent of eligible voters voted for Labour. 76 per cent of us didn’t. 40 per cent of us – only one per cent less than Labour and Tory voters put together – did the honourable thing, and refused to engage in the farce. Did the will of the majority prevail? Not a chance. The lying, thieving gang that call themselves Labour were awarded another licence of all but absolute power to bully and rob us all.

Continue reading →

Empowerment and Democracy

/ Neil Lock / 8 Comments

Neil Lock

(Neil’s Note: This is a small part of a larger essay on the subject of bottom up versus top down thinking. I’m re-publishing it here because it makes a point about an event happening in a few weeks’ time…)

The bottom up thinker wants to empower everyone. That is, he wants each individual to have maximum possible power over his own life. He sees peace, honesty, justice and respect for human rights as the only valid reasons to restrict anyone’s freedom in any way. Beyond this, he desires government of each person, by that person, for that person.

In contrast, top down thinkers advocate and admire a charade they call democracy; or in US-speak, Demahcracy. They like to set democracy up on a pedestal, and to make of it an idol to be worshipped.

Continue reading →

I see that Gold is quite rocky, today…

/ David Davis / 2 Comments

David Davis

One of my pet achievements is to have been able to paste “widgets” such as the excellent Kitco charts that you see beside you on this sidebar. Not being a tech-guy, and not knowing even the square-root-of-effing-all about something called “HTML”, or even “cascading style sheets” (search me, guv!) I gave myself a pat on the back for these being on here at all.

It is an interesting and fun exercise to watch them, even down to the hour, as they react to what the loliticians on the MSM are saying and doing. Gold seems especially rocky today, I am not sure why, but it has not really tested the heights of the last week or fortnight or so. I wonder why it’s so jumpy, and yet not stratospheric? Can anyone enlighten us?