Denial of the Labour Kind. Chapter 3. Descent into Madness and Delusion.

Okay, this should be the absolute final chapter but I suspect the results of the Labour leadership election will provide at least one more chapter on the Labour party's reaction to losing the election.

Today I'm talking about delusion. Dangerous delusion.

Already Labour supporters on the far-left are having discussions on whether the "idiots" who voted Tory should be allowed to vote.

"Allowed" to vote?? Do they not understand the concept of one person, one vote? Do they not understand the fights and struggles common men and women had through history to attain that outcome?

It seems the far-left consider voting (as with many more of their "considerations) something that can be changed to suit them. Only allow those with the right way of thinking the ability to vote. Give it to foreigners and new immigrants instead. In fact only give the right to vote to people who will vote the "correct" way.

Totalitarianism, in fact: For the party, of the party, Nothing against the party.

It's this delusional group-thinking, this mass hysteria that drags countries down into the depths of Madness. It's the mass hysteria that pulled Germany into Nazism, it's the sort of group-thinking that enabled the purges in Stalinist Russia, it's the thinking that facilitated the millions killed by Mao, the killing fields of Pol-Pot.

That is where the far-left are at the moment. In a state of madness. The state of madness that denies reality.

The mindset that says they won the argument but lost the election.

The mindset that says there are more than two genders.

The mindset that says that genders are in fact a social construct.

The mindset that wants to facilitate mass immigration and doesn't think there will be consequences.

The mindset that wants to remove the right to vote from those with wrong-think.

The mindset that thinks taxing the rich is the answer to everything.

The mindset that says you can work less for more money without increasing productivity.

The mindset that says men and women are exactly the same physically and mentally.

Time and time again, I see on twitter these people, these dangerous people talk and my mind boggles. You cannot debate these people. They refuse to discuss alternative viewpoints.

They are in fact, mentally ill, locked in some form of mass hysteria, wishing for a better place and see
that force coercion, bullying and denying rights are a means to gain that goal. Whilst campaigning against coercion and bullying.

The latest is the delusional arch-remain-losing-denier, the king of black-is-white refusal to accept reality Keir Stamer is the lead contender for leader of the Labour party.

Despite him being the arch remainer in the cabinet, the guy that most wanted to go against the democratic will to leave the EU, the guy that almost certainly cost Labour thousands of seats and undoubtedly the guy the Northern "Red Wall" would least vote for.

He's in Prime position for Labour leadership and another decade of Labour political irrelevance.

Despite Labour's protestations for more equality, no female in the lead role than I see.

No Northern candidate in the running. More Islington/Chelsea middle-class-Marxists.

Bye Labour, condemn yourself to more years in the wilderness.

Priviledge

As I get older, I tend to connect more and see more. Despite the old grey matter failing me at times, I can still spot trends and make associations.

The more I see of politicians and the media, the more I see a cabal, a clique of people. On the screen all you see is a group of apparently unrelated individuals.

Time and time again, I hear back stories that someone knew someone else's parents, or they worked for someone, or were a friend of the family way before they became famous, or got a high-flying job, or got into politics. I very rarely hear a back story where someone with no previous connection to anyone else made it to the top in media or politics.

This is where the matter of privilege comes in.

No matter what field you are in, you cannot get ahead without some form of privilege or patronage.

This is the unseen ceiling to true equality.

Denial of the Labour Kind. Chapter 4. A Case Study.

Guido has a good clip from the today program here.

Labour MP Claudia Webbe was asked the question "In what way was the Labour Manifesto Popular when you went down to your worst defeat in decades?"

True to type, she started to revert to spouting rhetoric, rather then answer the question. When (with some difficulty) pressed further, she then started to rant about the media, Brexit and anything else she could use to blame on Labour's failure. Rather than the Labour party leadership and by extension their policies and manifesto.

Yes, it's a laudible aim to house the homeless, it's a laudible aim to take in genuine refugees, and all the rest of it.

But only in the Leftist Labour Twitter bubble does rhetoric win elections.

Policies need to be credible, costed and above all they need to be rooted in reality.

Labour's manifesto was all rhetoric and nowhere was there an accurate description of how it would be paid for. Stealing companies and putting them back into public ownership is not a credible policy.

Nor is the open borders policy. Not without a massive surplus of cash in the exchequer to cover the cost.

Nor is a plan to build millions of houses without the money or permission to build. Unless the green fields of the home counties are to be replaced by shoddily-built Soviet-style concrete apartment blocks.

Claudia Webbe's appearance, her lack of engagement, her inability to listen and instead spout rhetoric rather than answer a direct question, is the epitome of why Labour lost.

They are doing too much talking an no listening. They are plucking policies from thin air that their Twitter bubble likes, but everyone else can see would bankrupt the country.

It's frightening that a constituency would elect an MP like this to Parliament. At the very least after the biggest party defeat in 70 years or more the least you'd want is your MP to be reflective, humble, understanding, able to listen and accept change.  Not to be dogmatic, blame everyone including voters for the losses. That's a bold strategy to win votes right there.... and yes, I'm being sarcastic.

Denial of the Labour Kind. Chapter 3. Labour Party Reflection and Reform?

Reform? HaHaHa, don't make me laugh. It's not Labour's fault they lost the election, it's everyone else's.

Certainly not the Labour leadership (according to the Labour leadership that is).

It's interesting to read from reports that Labour candidates were given support from the party apparatus based not on the marginality of their seats or just a plain need for some promotion in the face of withering voter support, but instead based on their ideological purity. That's the sort of Labour party we have at the moment. A microcosm of Socialist dictatorship, with un-personing and removal from the benefits of the party for not toeing the exact party line.

In essence the Labour party would rather cast off those MPs that don't toe the ideological line than support them and win an election.

Such is the slavish adherence to Socialist doctrine in the higher ranks of the Labour party. Yes folks, it's actually worse than we thought.

Comrade Corbyn and his acolytes would even un-person their own Party members just on the basis they don't toe the extreme socialist ideology of the Momentum movement.

Just think what that sort of government would be like if they got into power? Yeah, we dodged a bullet there, that's for sure.

I'm quite sure that within the life of a Corbyn government, given a decent majority in Parliament we would have gone from democratic choice to little red books, boiler suits and socialist dictatorship. With Corbyn the "dear leader" installed in power in perpetuity.

Think it's preposterous? Think again.

Of course now that the Labour party lost so badly, you'd think that there would be a want, a desire to move away from the rabid Socialist doctrine that lost them the election.

Sorry, don't make me laugh again.

No, they will double down with the rhetoric. Those not ideologically pure in the party will be purged and Labour will slip further into a Socialist swamp. The pressure in Labour at the moment is not to blame the leadership, but the poor thick fools in the country that didn't envision the sunny socialist uplands that awaited them under the beneficent dear leader.

IF Corbyn does trigger a leadership contest, I suspect the replacement(s) for him and/or John McDonnell will be cast from the same extremist socialist mould. I say If, mainly because I think that Corbyn will be persuaded to stand in any leadership contest or his bully-boy momentum mates will force it to happen. It could just be that Corbyn and McDonnell get re-elected by the extremists and Labour continue as normal. Such is the way with extreme Socialists.

I predict within 5 years the moderate Labour MPs and party members will have moved away and formed a more moderate party. This is like the early Eighties all over again, with Michael Foot's Labour party sparking the formation of the SDP.  Last time, the Labour party moderates clawed the party back from the extremists under John Smith. This time the Momentum bully boys won't be removed from the party quite so easily.

The one certain fact of this, is there is no party that truly reflects the working class in this country. Labour are not that party.

Denial of the Labour Kind. Chapter 2. Labour's 2019 Election and future

Okay, so in my previous blog I pointed out the decades where Labour either ignored the lot of the working class, or just plain ignored them and sided with the big corporations (as during the Blair/Brown years).

"By ye deeds shall ye be known" is exactly how Labour failed. They in effect lied: saying they would respect the referendum result, but effectively campaigned for remain by blocking the Conservative's Brexit plan even when the Irish backstop had been removed by Boris Johnson's team. Voters are very canny and you can't lie to them for three years without being found out. The mixed messages from Labour MPs just convinced the voters Labour couldn't be trusted. There were times when two Labour MPs on two different TV channels were saying exactly opposite things. Nor are the people happy when political parties block legislation they ask for just for political purposes.

The voters are not fools. By Labour not ruling out remain, the voter knew that remain was the real focus and the pseudo-Leave viewpoint was just a smokescreen to try and con Labour leave voters into voting for them. The working class Labour leave voter had been conned during the 2017 election. They wouldn't be conned again.

That's effectively where Labour stood: diametrically opposed to their Northern Labour heartlands.

No amount of freebies promised by Labour would have changed that. The people know that someone has to pay for the freebies. Whether it's in the form of higher taxes or their children paying off the national debt in the future, the people are wise to false promises. The WORKING class, the poor that work and pay taxes are the ones that always get hit worst by Labour's schemes.

And they paid the price. Labour lost 50 seats and handed the Conservatives won a landslide majority.

Labour seats that had always voted Labour, switched to the Tories, such was the depth of feeling. Labour-voting wards that the party had taken for granted for two long, had been ignored by Labour for too long, voted Tory.

Quite clearly the policies included in the Labour manifesto were seen as a threat to the living standards of the working class.

How did the Labour leadership respond to this major defeat? Denial.

Really? At first glance you'd have to think "how could the Labour leadership be so thick?", but the Socialists do have a habit of denying reality.

Yes, Brexit was a festering sore that needed lancing in the Labour heartlands. But also spunking trillions on freebies for those out of work paid for by the working poor, or saying you'd pay for it by taxing corporations whilst conversely saying you'd vote remain so they can offshore tax to Luxembourg, is just ludicrous.

Corbyn laughingly came out with a speech that said they needed a period of reflection. Which I take to signal he's not going anywhere soon and takes no responsibility for the crushing defeat.

Immediately after the general election, Labour leaders were also saying it was Brexit that had caused the problem and not their policies or the leadership of Jeremy Corbyn.

It's even been said that some Labour MPs have called their constituents thick for voting Conservative.
Way to go guys, blame the people you ignored for decades for giving you an electoral slap.

No, you need to start supporting the working classes whose votes you rely on and you have been consistently ignoring for decades.

The working poor understand that unfettered unskilled depresses their wages and also increases competition for job places. That's why they voted to leave the EU. They want immigration limited to people with skills we need. No more cheap labour for the big corporations: lets start improving wages and living standards for the working class.

They don't want (as Labour voted to in this year's party conference) to give illegal or undocumented immigrants the automatic right to settle.

They also don't want those immigrants to have automatic access to welfare, the welfare that the working poor pay for in taxation.

They don't want immigrants to have automatic access to education and housing and all the other things that taxation pays for. The working poor are burdened with enough tax, they don't like other people that haven't paid to get things for free.

They also don't want anyone in the world to have access to the NHS they pay for.

The working class believe in fairness and equality. They saw that Labour's 2019 manifesto was unfair, unjust and unequal.

Despite the delusions of the Labour leadership, the working class rejected their manifesto wholeheartedly. They are not put on this earth to slave away for the rich for a pittance, neither are they put on this earth to pay for everyone else in the world to get free education, housing and health care. They want their country to be fairer, more just and more equitable.

Deliver that  Labour, and the working class will vote for you without hesitation.

What of the Labour leadership that brought them to such catastrophe? I predict nothing will change.

Not the policy, nor the leadership. I predict Jeremy Corbyn and his supporters along with bouncer McDonnell will strive to stay at the helm. The cult of Corbyn and the Momentum acolytes will see to that.

After all it wasn't the dear leader's fault they lost, it was the media, the J*ws, Twitter, YouTube political bloggers, the weather and a vast number of other excuses including the thick, gullible Northern voters.

No, no, no, it wasn't dear leader Corbyn's fault. He is sainted and above reproach. If only the voters would listen to him....

Denial of the Labour Kind. Chapter 1. History (Laying the seeds of failure)

Okay, so here's my reflection on Labour's crashing election defeat, their response and where I think they will go from here. A bit of a different layout, I need to sectionalise this blog.

So, in this chapter let's lay out the background for Labour's defeat.

Chapter 1. History.

Labour was borne out of a necessity for a political force to represent the people. Those in the mills and factories that were exploited by rich owners. Labour's ideals were better living conditions, working standards and a requirement for equality.

Initially, with the support of the Unions Labour became strong enough so that it could win the General Election of 1946. Almost immediately it went to work improving living standards. The main thrust of this being the inauguration of the NHS in 1948.

Since the 1950s however, there has been a sad decline in the standards of the Labour party. The party gained a elitist core, just like previous Socialist institutions. The "Intelligentsia" who think themselves better than the common working man they are supposed to represent. For decades the Labour party moved from their primary focus.The low point being the 1970's where Labour were held to ransom by the all-powerful unions. Finally bringing the country to it's knees in 1978/79 and hurting the very people it had striven to help way back when it was formed.

The Socialist experiment of the late '70s brought forth the mighty Margaret Thatcher. A thorn in the socialist side and a very bitter adversary of the unions. She effectively smashed and Neutered the unions to an extent that they could only play in their own paddling pool. The Labour party consigned itself to irrelevance for a decade of more. All the time moving further away from their original goal of bettering the lot of the working man. After all if you're not in power, you're not making the rules.

During the Thatcher years, Labour circled the drain, failing to find a credible solution to the initial prosperity that the Tory government created by using oil revenues and selling assets like nationalised industries. All the while wages in real terms fell like a stone. After the massive unemployment of the early eighties, the working poor would take anything. Wages were massively depressed and did not recover in step with the economy.

John Smith started the reform of the Labour party, by curtailing the extremist left-wing elements who essentially wanted a Marxist party. Unfortunately John died before he could reap the reward of a truly moderate Labour party being in power. Instead the Red Tories emerged out of the Labour party, led by Tony Blair. He looked and talked like a Tory. He was in link step with the big corporations.
He promised to BE the Tories, promising not to change things too much for the big corporations and thereby winning himself the support of the Murdoch media empire.

This "New" Labour party did little to increase living standards for the working poor. The only notable exception being family tax credits. By now wages had fallen so badly in real terms that it required the Labour government to step in an syphon taxpayer's money to prop up the wages of people with families. In the most convoluted and inefficient way possible: by paying the tax out in PAYE and then applying to a separate agency to pay some of that tax back.

As well as the decline in wages, the Blair years saw the housing price bubble start to inflate. As opposed to the previous Tory governments, the Labour government saw house prices as a way of (wrongly) making ordinary people feel more well-off by inflating house prices.

The Blair decade in power also fostered an elitist, entitled attitude, just like it had done with the Tories and their years of power. The deceit over the Invasion of Iraq brings into sharp focus the level of duplicity in the Blair government.

The sense of entitlement was best shown by Gordon Brown. The wannabe PM. The eventually manoeuvred Tony Blair out of the picture, only to be tripped up by his elitist attitude. His comments about Gillian Duffy during a tour of Rochdale, calling her a "Bigoted Woman" when she took him to task about the economy and immigration summed up the attitude of the Labour party at that time.

They were out of touch. They had allowed a huge influx of immigrants from Eastern Europe which depressed wages of the working poor even further. They saw the patriotic working class as right-wing (even though they still voted Labour). They failed to support the working class.

We had suspicions of where their allegiances lay,  but our suspicions were confirmed when Gordon Brown ordered the bailout of the banks. His chums in the Banks and the City of London had made a catastrophic financial error, but instead on letting them fail and mitigating the affects on the poor directly, Gordon Brown chose to support the bankers, propping up their six-figure salaries and their corrupt institutions.

Along with the Bigoted woman comment, the working class saw by their actions that the Labour party and the political elite had turned their back on them.

In 2005 the working class could no longer vote for Labour, but also could not decide who could best represent them, so brought forward a hung parliament.

In 2015 thanks to his promise of a referendum on EU membership, David Cameron's Conservative party were elected with a slim majority. Enough to push through the legislation for the referendum.

In 2016 the working class geared up to give the elites of the Labour and Conservative parties a bloody nose. They had been ignored for decades. Even the Labour party, the party that supposedly represented their interests had left them in the cold and instead had depressed wages and bailed out the bankers with taxpayers money.

The 2016 referendum was a chance to make a point. And boy, did we. The shocked faces on the televisions during morning of the 24th was to put it bluntly marvellous.

But then...… the machinations of Parliament, desperately trying the reverse the decision. The outright lies of the 2017 election, the promises of honouring the result, all fell apart when it came to the crunch.

MPs finally showed who they were working for.

So we waited for our opportunity... again.

Election Post Mortem.

Well, wasn't Thursday night a treat! One of the best election nights for decades and one certainly for the YouTube vloggers who streamed their opinions through the night.

I mean, where do I start?

First, it's quite clear the electorate has resoundingly rejected the remain option. That's rejecting the result of the referendum (the Lib-dem option) and also having a second referendum on the proposed plan with the option to remain (The Labour party option).

Like I've said before, it is REMAIN that should have been taken off the table by Labour and the other MPs in the previous Parliament, NOT the no-deal option.

The Lib-Dems, who proposed reversing the referendum decision to exit the EU, were given a kicking, even losing their leader Jo Swinson. I'm sure she thought that in remain-voting Scotland, she'd be safe on an anti-Brexit ticket. She was wrong.

The other good news from the night was that ALL of the MPs that left the parties they were elected under in 2017 and formed various independent factions, or moved to the Lib-Dems lost their seats. Quite right too. No-one likes a turncoat. All the bollocks about "I haven't changed, but my party has" (The most lazy excuse not to stand in a by-election) was absolutely rejected by the electorate. You can't get elected and then change sides without the voters behind you. If you change sides, then you test your position in a by-election. Period.

Finally, we come to the biggie, the really big news of the election: the collapse of the Communist-led Labour party. The so-ca;lled "Red Wall" of the Midlands and North lost a number of seats. Some wards having been staunchly Labour for decades. These wards didn't even vote Tory back in the Conservative high-water mark of the Eighties.

It's quite clear that the UK rejects Communism whether it's Corbyn Communism-lite, or the full on Maoist variety. It just isn't palatable to the British palate.

Wrapping it up in promises of free broadband, or anything else, just won't wash. The UK rejects the far-left lunacy that was the Labour manifesto.

The interesting thing is the complete denial of the reasons for Labour's losses. They blame the media, Brexit, the J*ws (just reinforcing the reports of Labour anti-Semitism), they even blame (drum roll...) the voters!

Yes, the gullible, racist, thick voters that couldn't see the promised land that Labour had ready for them...

I'm going to do a blog especially about Labour's denial to face reality and where I think they will go in future.

Anyway, I'm looking forward to Prime Minister's question time this week. Let's see what questions Corbyn comes up with. I see already in the press that there are reports of Boris wanting to make privatisation of the NHS impossible by legislation. I hope he does, although any new legislation involving the NHS needs to be scrutinised with care, because changes to legislation can provide back-doors to changes that are unwanted.

I can't see Corbyn doing anything but his usual soundbite special, where he provides a series of soundbites for his Twitter echo-chamber.

An Overwhelming Narrative. Propaganda by Omission.

I've signally refused to cover the election much, because I think all of those on the leave side of Brexit all know what they need to do. It's simple: get Boris back in (for all his faults) but also get the Brexit Party in Parliament to nudge the Brexit process in the right direction.

Anyway, today on Polling day, I want to point out something that isn't.

That's not a grammatical error, I'm talking about something that isn't in the news, isn't being reported online, isn't in the papers, it just isn't in the media at all.

I'm talking about citizen protests. Not just the Gillet Jaune protests and now general strike in France or even the Protests in Hong Kong and the massive amounts of unrest there, but protests in South America, in the Middle east and in Asia.

They just aren't being reported, so ask yourself why that is?

Why are we not being shown the daily struggles of people across the globe against tyrannical governments?

The reason is they don't want us, the great unwashed of the UK rising up against the  pressures from the big corporations. Pressures to allow cheap labour into the country, the pressure to allow corporations to book tax offshore at a cheaper rate, the pressure to allow big corporations to make the rules and stifle competition.

We are being fed propaganda, not overtly, but covertly. By omitting reports on these protests against lowering of working class standards across the globe, we are not getting the picture that this is a global issue, it's a problem caused by the big corporations. No, we get to think the lowering of wages and living standards is an entirely local phenomenon.

Lest we get a bit uppity and start to revolt.

I mean, you can't even criticise an MP in the street these days without getting arrested.

The working class are a majority in this country and we need to start flexing our atrophied muscles, we need to reclaim our country, our standards and our rights. We must not listen to the elite who say those goals are dependent on the whim of the EU. We have the power to claim those rights without the EU. We do not need their beneficence to bestow rights upon us. We were born with those rights, forged through centuries of struggle.

I suppose, in the end this post is about the election. We need to give the elite a wake-up call.

The Northern Powerhouse: How Northern Voters hold Sway in the 2019 Election.

With a week to go to the election, a very curious scenario is unfolding.

Northern voters, who predominantly vote Labour have so far been ignored by the Labour party. It seems Labour is just taking the Northern labour vote for granted.

But Northern Labour voters (who also predominantly voted Leave) have a huge amount of power in this election. They have the power to ditch Labour's remain policies for one election at least and give a huge boost to the Leave cause. By not voting Labour and instead voting for the Brexit party they have a colossal amount of power to upset the political Apple cart.

If the Northern Labour voters voted for the Brexit party, the Brexit party could gain a number of seats in Parliament. Even if it was a protest vote and only for one term, it would send a shockwave through the political establishment. An establishment that steadfastly refuses to acknowledge the working class Northern voter.

This is a chance to give Corbyn's Labour a swift kick in the goolies, grab their attention and hopefully make them mend their working class ignoring ways.

Only a handful of Northern seats turned over to the Brexit party will not only hurt Labour, but it will also send a message to the Tories. The DUP held quite a sway over the Tories for the last three years with only 8 MPs. If the Brexit party had a similar number of MPs, it could significantly change the outcome of Brexit and sway the Tories to a no-deal scenario and we can be free of Europe immediately, rather than the long drawn out Brexit in Name only that is planned for the next half-decade.

The Labour party are frightened of the Northern Labour voters understanding what power they have, that's why they've ignored them and left them to vote Labour as they assume they always have done. The sense of entitlement, the arrogance is palpable.

The best example of which is Barrie Gardiner. The smarm, the presumptuous attitude, the sense of entitlement that oozes from the man should put any working class voter off the guy.

Nope. If you live in the North, for this one time only, vote Brexit party instead of Labour.

Send a message to all the parties that you want a proper Brexit, send the people into Parliament to help get that done and finally send a message to the Labour party that you will not vote for a party that ignores you and assumes you will vote for them regardless how badly they treat you and how badly they work against your interests.

Do not be a useful Labour-voting idiot.

Beware False Brexit Idols...

It seems Labour are shit scared of the Leave-voting (previous) Labour supporters switching to the Brexit party, so they are now making more definite noises about Brexit policy and what Labour would do.

Let's be clear: a vote for Labour is a vote to remain. Just like a Lib-Dem vote. Maybe Labour aren't as clear on the subject, but let ME be clear:

Labour haven't taken Remain off the table, so it remains a viable option in any future referendum. Also, if they get into power, would negotiate a new, supposedly better deal and then the majority of Labour MPs would campaign during a second referendum campaign against the deal that they themselves negotiated, because they feel the UK would be better within the EU. As nonsensical as that seems.

What Labour's policy is, is a back-door attempt to remain.

The Lib-Dems, are quite clear that they would revoke article 50 without a referendum, instead relying on the mandate of the general election win to reverse the referendum result of 2016.

Labour instead would have a people's vote or second referendum, with options to remain and any number of leave options. Thereby splitting the leave vote and artificially generating a remain result.

Instead what we should be hearing from ANY party offering a second referendum is to offer a referendum on leave only. The LEAVE/REMAIN issue was settled in 2016: we voted to leave.

So now the issue should progress and move on: we voted leave, so what leave option do we prefer?  Do we like any deal that the government negotiates with the EU, or do we reject the deal and go for a clean break and sever ties with Europe immediately?

Instead of taking no-deal off the table, MPs should have taken remain off the table. The fact that all the actions of MPs over the past 3 years was exactly the opposite, tells you volumes on where the majority of Previous MPs stood. They all want to be tied to Europe and will negotiate the worst deal in order to make being in Europe appear better than being outside.

Preppers... Not so Silly Now?

The "Prepper" or "Bugout" community in the USA have had a bit of a reputation of being nerdy, redneck or just plain weird, but times they are a changin'.

The Chaos in California has highlighted a few issues regarding civilisation and what happens when large areas of a country are without power.

The power outages in California were supposed to ( not that successfully) prevent forest fires caused by lack of maintenance of the power grid in the hilly areas of the state.

The problem being that the trees haven't been cut away from power lines and in windy conditions they touch the power lines causing shorts and sparking, initiating fires. To stop this huge areas of California were switched off. I mean huge...as many as 3 million people were without power.

Only one death was reported as being caused by the power outage, but it's a lesson that needs to be learned, as we move away from the solid foundation of fossil-fuelled power to the uncertainty of renewable power generation backed up by gas-powered generators fuelled by foreign (Russian) gas.

Because I can easily foresee a scenario where we have a very cold high pressure system over the UK so there is no wind power. So we turn on the gas generators and then for whatever reason Russia starts to hike up the cost of gas as demand in Europe rises... to a degree that the energy companies can't or won't pay, so the gas taps get shut off.

It's not immediately obvious what sort of issues when a thousand square miles or more are without power.

No electricity means no working boiler (even gas boilers need electricity to work).

No electricity means no fuel pumped at petrol stations.

So no fuel for your car and no fuel for buses or other diesel powered transport.

No electricity means no trains.

No electricity means no communications, especially cell phones. But also the emergency services would soon be without communications as the backup systems at the communications towers begin to run out of fuel.

No electricity in the longer term means no healthcare. Certainly GP surgeries will cease to function immediately as they don't have emergency power supplies. Those parts of the NHS that do can only run them for a finite amount of time, not days on end.

No streetlamps and no power for alarm systems means more crime. So start sharpening that pointy stick as it's the only weapon you are allowed in the UK. Well, you can always say it's a stake for the garden, not a weapon because you're not allowed them any more.

One thing that does come to mind is: could you drive 50 miles to get fuel for your car? Do you have enough fuel tanks able to hold enough reserves to run a generator for days? Do you even own a generator?

Can you drive that same 50 miles to get food? Because without power, there are no fridges and there's no point delivering fresh, frozen or chilled products.

Do you have a number of days of reserve food stored so you can cope without shopping? Does that food have a long shelf life? If it doesn't has it been renewed recently?

These are questions we have to start asking as the power outage in California is a good indication on what the future could be like if large swathes of the country lose power. It makes interesting reading as there are a few surprises.

Luckily I own a generator for use on my boat and a second one in parts for spares, where there is no mains power. The ideal would be running the generator to a backup battery and then to an invertor for mains power to the central heating boiler and possibly the fridge. The only thing I don't possess in that circuit is the invertor. Something that will be addressed in future.

For communications, I have access to a couple of old CB radios (don't scoff!) that can at least transmit over a decent distance. I also have my old radio ham gear if I want to transmit over a wider range or in a more official capacity. I can power them off a car battery. If you have any of these, do get familiar with them again.

If the worst comes to the worst, I have a sailing boat and can leave the UK behind for sunnier shores. Being a small boat that would be a bit extreme, but it could be done if absolutely necessary. If I need anything bigger (say, to take the whole family) then that could cause a problem. But I do have the skills if necessary to pilot a boat to elsewhere.

It seems to me now,  the risk of the same scenario as California happening in another first world country has increased. The issue is only going to get more widespread as our so-called leaders make decisions which are not in the strategic interest of our countries and instead pander to small environmental interest groups and big corporations. At the end of the day it's Government's job to work with people and reduce costs for the country. But there comes a time when strategic interest and planning overrides environmental virtue signalling.

However, given that state of leadership in Western countries, it would be wise to start to prepare. At least keep a few tins of food in the cupboard to last you 2 - 7 days, to allow for the government and the electricity companies to sort the issue out if they can.

But certainly have a plan for a longer term outage just in case.

Nigel Farage Does the Right thing, Meanwhile, UKIP implodes.

Nigel Farage has stated he won't contest the 300-odd seats held by the Conservatives at the last election. and will instead concentrate on the Labour and Lib Dem seats.

This is a great move from a Conservative perspective, but I'm not sure whether the move will go down well in the Labour heartlands. mainly because Northern Labour candidates can brush the Brexit Party as the Faux Tory party.

Nigel now has to push an agenda and policy that differentiates him from the Tories and also dispels some of the myths about Brexit Party policy, especially regarding immigration, the NHS and benefits.

It's just not enough to shout Brexit and think you can get MPs into seats. Nigel has to start pushing policies.

With the right tactics, the Brexit Party can win a few seats in the North and hold the balance of power in Westminster. And this is what Nigel should be aiming for, as well as explaining to people the advantages of having a few TBP MPs in parliament. Mainly to supress the remain tendency in the Labour Party and Parliament as a whole at bay.

He should be out in the Media reminding the 17.4 million people and the 60-70% pro-Brexit margin in Northern constituencies how they have not just been ignored by their Labour MPs, but their MPs have actively voted against their wishes.

Hopefully with the right strategy, TBP can gain seats. The news this week of them not contesting Conservative seats is a step in the right direction. It's a shame though they didn't at least go up against any pro-remain voting Tories still in place and contesting seats.

In other news, it looks like UKIP is in it's final death throes. My local constituency group have called an EGM with the agenda of voting no confidence in the NEC and the Chairman. My local constituency Chairman has resigned in disgust at the antics of the UKIP NEC. UKIP party rules means that a significant number of constituencies calling for an EGM automatically triggers a national EGM and the automatic disbandment of the UKIP NEC. But I think that the UKIP NEC will hold on and refuse to go, against the wishes of the party members. It seems to be a trend in Politics these days. ;-)

To be honest, UKIP is as close to dead in the water as can be. No-one will go for leadership while they can't lead. Without a leader and with a membership at odds with the NEC and with the NEC and Chairman failing to realise they are killing the party, I'm convinced that if it doesn't fold up by the end of this year, by the end of 2020 UKIP will be no more.

It's a sad ending for a party that forced UK politics to change direction, won a huge victory and got 17.4 million people to vote to leave the EU and win the referendum.

It's a shame that those in the UKIP NEC could not work for the good of the party and not self-inflated ego. That they could not see what they were doing to the party, after successive leaders came an went. That the NEC were the problem and not the solution.

RIP UKIP.

Why as a Low-Paid Working Class Male I will not vote for the Labour Party.

First off, let me state I'm low Paid. Under 20 grand, which puts me way under the average wage. I'm not on minimum wage (although if the Conservative pledge to bump it up to £10.50 an hour happens, I may well be).

So, I'm working class, low paid. Yet I will not vote for the Labour Party, the traditional home of the low paid working class.

If there is anyone out there reading this that wants to attempt to convince me that voting Labour would benefit me, please do put it in a comment. I'd love the debate.

The reasons are many, but the overall reason is that the Labour Party and it's policies do not represent me. It does not champion the working class. It does not fight for us.

Instead it concentrates on platitudes and virtue signalling.

"More money to the NHS"... which means more taxation of my already meagre wages.

"Better Welfare"... which means even more taxation of my already meagre wages to pay benefits.

"Employers and the Rich should pay more tax"... which means there's a high likelihood that thanks to the already huge pressures on retail companies thanks to increased rates, higher employer N.I. or higher business rates or corporation tax will tip retail companies over the edge into closure. I high chance then that I'll end up jobless and on benefits then.

"Open Borders and Free Movement".... which means more competition for jobs, especially low-paid jobs. Which means there's a higher risk of me and other people like me staying on benefits.

"Free NHS treatment for non-UK nationals"... means that the NHS will not be able to cope as it tries to treat the world's sick and ill. The clamour to pay even more tax money to the NHS will increase and taxation of even low wages like mine will increase. The alternative is to borrow more now and then get the kids and grandkids to pay off the debt.

We had that with Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, that cynically borrowed massively to fund their supposed boom. The tax credits system or Tony Blair job creation scheme as I call it. The scheme that rather than reduce taxes at source, set up a huge administration to take a portion of tax to give back to working families and also pay the wages of the new administrators set up to administer it. So wasteful and so cynical as it allows companies to pay even lower wages to families while relying on taxpayers to make up the shortfall. Genius!

As it stands, I cannot see how the Labour party's policies would benefit me. Conversely, all I see is more negativity in my future if Labour get into power.

Nope, I will not vote for Labour.

Lib-Dems capaign for change... but is it for the better?

It's reported that Jo Swinson, leader of the Liberal Democrats said today that the election in December could deliver "Seismic Change" when a "New and different Politics emerges".

Indeed it could if you vote Liberal Democrat.

It could usher in a new politics where the biggest democratic vote in the history of the UK is totally ignored.

A new politics where despite 17.4 million people voting to leave the EU, the political party voted into power will instead keep us inside the EU.

It ushers in a new and different style of Politics where the democratic vote is ignored. It ushers in a version of politics where votes don't count.

It unwittingly a new authoritarian age.

It also unwittingly ushers in an age where political change is not facilitated by peaceful democratic means.

That's not a new and different type of politics I want to have in the UK.

The Corporate Takeover of the Environmental Lobby will Kill us All.

I posted a comment over at Sargon of Akkad's interview of Piers Corbyn (brother of Jeremy and climate specialist) here:

https://youtu.be/grtV811cURU

"I've blogged for years that the climate change business is a con. It's the biggest redistribution of wealth from poor to rich in history. All you have to look at is where the money actually ends up. tariffs are used to "offset carbon".

Sounds innocuous eh? But what "offsetting carbon" consists of is buying carbon credits on the stock market. The carbon credits are traded just like any other commodity by er, traders..those people who make millions on the stock market.

In essence it's making money out of thin air.

The money also goes directly to landowners to pay rent for wind turbines, even the Queen gets a bung from the offshore wind farms. Then the big corporations making the turbines get the money, and the power companies get subsidies.

It's a bloody good confidence trick getting the whole western world panicked into shovelling money to already rich people.

The only people not benefitting are the poor people that can't afford to pay inflated energy bills."

The corporate and globalist takeover of the environmental lobby is worth an article in the press at the very least, but the problem is the press or journalists do not investigate this kind of thing any more. The press is already in the hands of the corporates as is the internet. Dissenting voices are bing silenced and no journalist who wants to stay a journalist will dissent.

It's bad enough that science has been hijacked by the corporates: no science is funded without some payback for the corporation or academic institution doing the science. It's hard for anyone to do any science which pushes boundaries or goes against "settled" science. God forbid that someone goes against the current narrative.

That is not Science as I understand it. Science has to be open and ready to be challenged. The theories are there to be tested and if necessary defeated and replaced with better, more robust theories. But corporations don't like uncertainty, they trade in absolutes. They don't want to spend huge sums of money on new theories (that may lead to lucrative patents) only to find a decade later that someone comes up with "better" science.

So, science is already corrupted by the corporates. The most prominent field being climate science. Some bloke who majors in Statistical science (and we all know the old adage about statistics) brings together some disparate data and then produces the so-called "hockey-stick" graph that purports to show that carbon dioxide produces global warming and that the  increase in CO2 globally is increasing exponentially. The result of man's industrial efforts, so the consensus says.

But hang on... although there may be a link to CO2 levels and global temperatures, there has not been a provable scientific link that CO2 causes global warming: only that the two tend to mirror each other. It could be that warming causes an increase in CO2. It could be that something else is causing the warming. If something else causes the warming, it's especially bad if computer models rely in CO2 level in the atmosphere as the cause of warming. Because those climate models will miss the TRUE cause and result of any changes in the atmosphere and the scientists who are so cocksure of themselves could be leading us into a different sort of climate catastrophe.

The refusal to even converse with dissenting scientific voices and to call them "deniers" is dangerous.
Would you call scientists working to overturn Einstein's theories "relativity deniers"? No, the person provides a new theory and it is tested and if repeatable, it becomes the new doctrine.

Not so with environmentalism. The science is "settled", fixed in aspic and not debateable. But without the correct data being used in the climate computer models, we could be heading for an ice age, or a global drought or some other global event that we are not preparing for.

But science is not the only area the corporations have taken over. The likes of Greenpeace, once a worthy organisation has grown so big it now ranks amongst the biggest corporations. It has a corporate mentality and with it the corruption of ideas that corporatism brings.

It has swung fully behind the climate change pseudo-science.

Extinction Rebellion, notionally a "people's movement" is actually well-funded. Funded by whom? Well, the only people with the money to bring thousands of protesters into London (enough to almost close the city down) are the big corporations, or their beneficiaries.

Compare the numbers with a true people's movement like the pro-Brexit protesters and you can see the difference. The pro-Brexit protesters are financing their protest out of their own pockets.

The pro-Remain and climate protesters are well-funded and well-organised.

The object of all of this corporate activity is political control. In essence the corporates want no boundaries to their activities. They want political control of the population. They want to make the rules to suit them. The want consistent profits. They want no borders, so they can ship goods around the world with the lowest cost. They want to be able to make goods in the cheapest part of the world and sell it in the most expensive part of the world without any tariffs or hindrance of any kind that would affect profits.

They want a cheap workforce. Open borders allows them to ship cheap labour to anywhere in the globe without any regulations. If the indigenous population does not comply with open borders so they can't ship humans seamlessly into countries they need them, they will just replace the humans with the robots they are developing. It may take longer for the corporations to achieve their goal that way, but a worker who's initial outlay is fixed, who never asks for a pay raise and whose maintenance cost is predictable and who never leaves the company is the holy grail for the big global corporations.

You, squishy human, you are just in the way of the corporate steamroller.

Fight back now, while you can, while our political process gives you a mechanism to do so. The time is nearly upon us when the corporates have complete control. Brexit has taught us that we are almost at a stage where voting is useless.

We need to give the corporates another bloody nose at the election and claim back our country. For our children if for no-one else's sake.

Election 2019: Pro-Brexit Options not so clear.

Gina Miller, the woman that loves so much to use money to influence our politics, has set up a website so that remainers can strengthen their vote by tactically voting.

Really, that in essence means voting for the Lib-Dems as they are the only party with a clear policy to revoke article 50 and keep us in the EU.

Labour are so unclear on any subject, you can have two senior shadow cabinet ministers on two separate channels giving two separate policy statements. I've heard about having your cake and eat it, or being everything to everybody, but Labour are just so bloody ridiculous on anything.

So, the remain option is clear: ditch Labour and vote Lib-Dem. At least for this election. And many traditionally Labour voters usually don't have a problem handing their vote to the lib-dems because they're not the Tories. And at the moment those sort of voters will not vote for a Corbyn/Momentum-led Labour party anyway.

The Pro-Brexit option for voting is not so clear.

In Labour heartlands, I would assume that the clear winner in the pro-Brexit stakes will be The Brexit Party. Most people will vote for them as it's still not voting for the Tories. BUT the Brexit Party need to put up some credible working-class candidates. Anyone that looks and talks like a Tory will get slated and at best people will just abstain from voting. If they put up someone who has lived a working class life and talks from the same life experiences will attract votes.

In Tory-held areas, the issue becomes very unclear. A vote for The Brexit Party weakens the Tory vote, which in theory could allow a Lib-Dem victory in marginal TBP/Tory seats.

One thing is clear: the 17.4 million voters who cast their vote for Brexit back in 2016 need to get themselves on the voting register and VOTE!

The pro-Brexit candidates, whether TBP or Tory need an overwhelming majority of voters supporting them to get the pro-Brexit parties into Parliament and get Brexit done.

The thing not to do is bitch and moan and say you're not going to vote again because your referendum vote hasn't been taken seriously.

All I'd say to that mentality is: You have to hit a nail more than once to drive it home.

The Rise of the Corporates: Fascism in a Velvet Glove.

Very slowly and gently, over the past 5 decades or so, the big corporations have taken over the world. 

This is just not evident from the current debate about Facebook, Twitter, YouTube and Google manipulating the debating space, but it's been going on for decades with the big arms corporations, the petrochemical industry, the city traders and the banks.

Once the corporations attain critical mass and a percentage of the country becomes dependent on their industry, then governments become sensitive to their requests. It's a pretty damn obvious statement really: the corporation become big enough to influence a proportion of GDP, the government is going to bend over backwards to avoid losing that revenue.

And this is where the corporate power has risen from. Such that certain corporations can dictate to HMRC how much (if any) tax revenue they will pay to government. With us normal plebs, it's the other way round: HMRC tell you.

Now they have control of public debate in the form of the online tech Giants, the machinations of the big corporates is more public than ever. Yet government seem powerless to enforce some sort of moratorium or enact legislation to protect free speech.

In fact we're seeing a movement of young people cosseted by the corporate cabal that actively protest AGAINST free speech! They might think they are independent thinkers, but when you trace the tenuous lines back to the source of the money that props them up, it ALWAYS links back to the big corporations or their owners. The obvious name seemingly with fingers in dozens of anti-democratic corporatist authoritarian "peoples" movements is of course George Soros. Yep, the guy that almost bankrupted the UK during the ERM fiasco.

If only those independent thinkers would look up the dictionary definition of corporatism..

corporatism

NOUN

1. the control of a state or organization by large interest groups.

   "fascism was the high point of corporatism."

That last statement hits the nail on the head. The level of control the corporations have over the state, their ability to stand up against the democratically elected government, the influence they have directly over normal people, is tantamount to Fascism. Especially this new wave of authoritarian corporatism, encapsulated by the extinction rebellion and the push to prevent Brexit and gain freedom from the antidemocratic EU.

 

These are indications of the way the corporates want things to go in the future: no borders, no barriers to global trading, one world government, one currency, no dissenters, no free speech, no pointing out the strings being pulled around the world.

 

This is fair warning as to what awaits the young if they keep doing what they are told and don't start to think for themselves.

 

All those cosy benefit you get with Apple products, while surfing the web checking Facebook and posting YouTube videos while drinking your coffee from Starbucks whilst protesting that the government should have more control over what people do and calling for an end to hate speech....

 

All of those are leading you into an authoritarian, fascist world of the future.  Don't blame us oldies for ruining your life. We voted to leave the EU so we could get away from corporate control of politics and the appointed crony commission. We wanted freedom, you want the opposite.

 

 

 

 

Braime Out as Leader of UKIP. Toxic UKIP NEC strikes again

It looks like Richard Braime, the leader of UKIP has resigned, after the party's National Executive Committee vetoed some of his selections for various positions.

That's after the NEC wading into the leadership contest itself and refusing to allow previous leader Gerard batten to stand.

Before I joined UKIP, I said the NEC were the problem in the party. I said that they acted almost like plants from other parties with a mandate to kill off UKIP.

I think they have almost succeeded. Certainly I and others have decided not to renew our memberships after the dismal performance in the EU elections (were was the campaign?) and we saw the shenanigans around the leadership contest.

UKIP seem to be on a death spiral now and only the membership can save it by triggering an EGM and forcing the NEC to resign. Then just maybe UKIP can get some people on the NEC that will allow a new direction to emerge from the ashes of the old UKIP.

Or maybe that is the Brexit party....

Election: Pro-Brexit Party Strategy Needs to be Clear.

In an ideal world, Boris Johnson would do a deal with the Brexit party so that Conservative MPs are not contested by an alternative candidate to split the pro-Brexit vote.

Failing that, Nigel Farage needs to unilaterally stand aside in seats where there is a confirmed pro-Brexit Conservative candidate.

That way the pro-Brexit vote shouldn't be split and allow the Remainer Lib-Dems and Labour into what could have been pro-Brexit wins.

It's time to swallow some humble pie in order to get Brexit done.

Of course in labour and Lib-Dem seats, the Brexit party should go to town and put up some strong candidates. Preferably local candidates, so they can make good points about supporting the majority vote for Brexit in the North and hopefully fielding candidates the voters would feel happy voting for.

The absolute worst thing the Brexit party can do is to parachute Tory-looking middle-class candidates into working class wards. I know that Nigel likes his middle-class cohorts, but they won't work in Labour-held areas.

He needs to employ some good, strong identifiably working class candidates in those Labour heartlands in the North preferably with a local accent. That way he can hopefully sway those people that have voted Labour just for the sake of not voting anyone else.

Because let's face it, why would a working class person vote Labour today? A Labour party that has now gone out of it's way to signal it cares not for the poor working man in the UK, but instead for the poor of the rest of the world. By voting to have open borders and to give benefits and free NHS treatment to immigrants, including illegal immigrants, Labour have finally shat all over the poor working class. Those people struggling to make ends meet, those on minimum wage, those competing with the unskilled workers of Europe for scraps handed out by corporations that screw down the bottom line and would just like to have a free (read slave) workforce. Or a workforce paid for by the taxpayer.

We have to signal to the big corporations that enough is enough. Brexit has to be down to smash the globalist coprporatist conspiracy to put everyone on third-world wages. By voting for the Brexit Party instead of Labour, we get the double-whammy effect of doing the above and also hopefully shocking Labour into supporting the working class people of this country, like they were set up to do in the first place.

Brexit has to be done to force the Starbucks, the Googles and the Facebooks of the world to pay tax here in the UK and not some offshore tax-free haven. Then we can get the billions in tax revenue into the country's coffers and start spending it on helping those less well off. In this country.

Prevarication, Def: See UK Parliament.

Well, talk about mixed messages... last night Parliament said they liked Boris's deal, but.... then voted to delay implementing it until at least January.

And who among us believes that Parliament will agree to implement the deal in January?

Who amongst us believes that Parliament will instead request yet another delay if the EU haven't included the UK the new phase of the Lisbon treaty that comes into force in 2020?

Who among us are suspicious that the delay to January allows the full force of the Lisbon treaty to come into force and nullify article 50 and keep us in the EU indefinitely?

What I'm alluding to is the change that comes about in the Lisbon treaty in 2020. Instead of a country leaving unilaterally by implementing article 50, the method of exit changes to a country having to request an exit and the EU voting to allow the exit.

Despite the protests to the contrary by pro-EU websites, I suspect that this is the case and that the part of the backstop that removed the ability to exit unilaterally and instead required us to be subject to a unilateral vote in the EU was actually in place to align us with the Lisbon treaty post-2020.

It changes to being a permissive system: the country has to request permission to leave, which would almost always be refused.

Guess what? Although we have triggered article 50, we're still in the EU. Not only that, we are still in the EU well past the article 50 deadline of two years.

Now it can be argued legally that although we triggered article 50, we never (as a country) intended to leave, as witnessed by the multiple requests to extend and stay inside the EU.

So legally it can be argued that our article 50 request is null and void, thereby committing us to continued EU membership without a unilateral exit procedure.

Trans "Rights": The Male Takeover of the Female Space.

Right, I think it's time I addressed this timebomb of an issue. Lets see what sort of a hornets nest is going to be generated by this.

Back when I was heavily involved in the fetish scene (going to clubs etc.) something struck me about the male-to-female spectrum.

They always kept a male mindset whilst attempting to be female. Even the most convincing (as the personal ads always say) of cd or trans people always have that male "tell".

I'm talking not only about cross-dressers, but also full on trans people who have gone through a full transition including hormones.

In the case of the CD/trans submissives, the "tell" would be a not very submissive attitude. An example would be a very insistent attitude "dominate me now!" or "why won't you dominate me, I'm very convincing as a female?" which kind of mirrors the attitude we are seeing now in the wider Trans community.

Except now the cries are "Why can't I compete against women?" or "why won't you treat me exactly like a woman?" or "Why can't I be a woman even when I have a beard and/or a penis?".

From the trans side, all very legitimate requests, but they fail to consider the genetic female side of the argument. The trans side immediately becomes defensive and aggressive when you even try and bring up the question of what happens to the genetic females.

The "Trans Rights" movement has taken the very aggressive (and typically male) standpoint that it's their right to be treated exactly the same as genetic females, exactly as if they had been born female to start with. Which of course is not the case. Being born male confers with it some "issues" that the Trans community cannot merely sweep aside with ideology.

Ignoring the mere cosmetic differences like genitalia and the like, being born male gifts the owner of the male body a hormonal package that brings with it a different body structure.

It can be said that some women can end up with male-like physiques and can perform at a male level in sports, for instance the Williams Sisters and Semenya Caster. But they are the top 1% of females, and more likely in the top fraction of a percent. Of all the women competing in any sport, can you name any other women apart from those three that have male-like physiques? So that's three women, out of the thousands that compete in sports that have male-type physiques. That is the beacon that says they are not the average female competitor. They are at the extreme end of the female physique and it's quite easy for a male to look at that physique and think that that is the norm. After all, that's their life experience: most blokes are like that aren't they? Yes they are, but most women aren't.

And that "most" qualifier is where the contention appears in the question of trans females competing against "Cis" or genetic females.

An average male or previously male competitor has a performance advantage over an average female competitor, because most males have a performance advantage over most females. It's not a social thing, it's a physical thing. It cannot be erased by ideology.

The big question now is how the sporting organisations address the issue.

But the sporting community isn't the only contentious issue with trans rights. There's also the bathroom issue.

In the wider community, my personal opinion is that as long as trans "rights" don't impinge on the female experience, then fair play. But, when it comes to swinging dicks in the female bathroom or changing room, then that's not a right, it's more of a creepy sexual assault. Don't forget in your Trans Rights zealousness that females also have a right not to have a penis present in an exclusively female space. Or are you as a trans rights activist doing that typical male thing of ignoring female rights?

The typical female approach to the issue would be to come up with a compromise, for instance allowing those that have fully transitioned to entre the female space.

You want the right to freely enter a female bathroom or changing room? Then fully transition to a female. Then you have some sort of claim to use female facilities. That would be the common sense solution to the issue and probably one that most women would agree to.

But no, the extreme trans rights activists say that a bloke can be Bill one day and Brenda the next, without doing anything physical. Well, tough, you want rights, you have to work for it: nothing in this life is free, everyone (except it seems the trans rights movement) knows that. Go through transition and then get your rights as a female. Just don't try and compete with them in sports.

Without a Hint of Irony....

The SNP in Parliament yesterday tabled an urgent question asking members to condemn the jailing of the Catalan politicians who held an illegal (in Spanish law) referendum and tried to abide by the democratic result.

The same SNP who went to court and continue to fight in Parliament against the democratic result of a legal referendum in the UK.

Now what words would you use to describe such an action? Irony probably isn't correct. Hypocrisy maybe?

Nanny State: A Nicer Term than Fascist, but They're Both the Same.

It seems now that there's a suggestion that the consumption of food should be banned on public transport, in an effort to reduce childhood obesity.

The first point is, I'm 57. I resent being reduced to the role of a child. I stopped needing a Nanny at the age of 4 and I refuse to accept one now. Why should I be banned from eating by some Government Gaulighter when I'm on the bus or the train?

If we're really talking of childhood obesity, then be specific: ban junk food for kids, ban junk food adverts during kids TV programmes and have parents that feed junk food to kids hauled off to prison.

But to ban everyone including adults from eating on public transport smells to me of someone abusing their position and influence to eliminate a pet peeve.

But don't say the smokers didn't warn you, once smoking was banned, EVERYTHING is up for censure.

Up to and including I would imagine breathing for some sections of the public the middle-class Nannies would rather be rid of.

Because that's where this slippery slope ends: imprisoning people for invented reasons (or worse).

Welcome to the currently authoritarian and if not already Fascist state.

Brexit: the Uncrossable Chasm.

It seems ever clearer that there will be a no-Deal or "clean" Brexit.

It's not fair to apportion blame as the media and the Government are trying, but a more open stance from The Boris-led Tories shows that both sides of the negotiations have a large distance between them.

Boris wants what is best for his political career, which is to enact the will of the people and exit the EU, the EU want what works best for them, which is to keep the UK in the EU.

There is a large gap between the two positions.

The very least that the EU seem willing to accept is for the bulk of the UK to exit the EU, but at the price of  keeping Northern Ireland in. Not a position the UK is liable to accept.

It's interesting that Merkel wants N.I. as her pound of flesh for us leaving. As if the people of Northern Ireland are chattels to be bartered away.

It's interesting that Ireland is the only stumbling block. But Gibraltar isn't The channel Islands Aren't. Just Ireland, with the bogeyman if the IRA just waiting to pounce, helping project fear keep the UK shackled into whatever unfair option the EU requires of us.

The current posturing seems to be designed as a roadmap for any disgruntled Republicans that are prevented from crossing the Irish border, should they wish to start throwing explosives around. "Not us!" shriek the EU, "don't throw the bombs our way, it's entirely Boris' fault".

Yet Boris has proffered an entirely reasonable solution where the people of Northern Ireland make a democratic decision to stay aligned with the EU or whether to leave. Sort of Brext-lite every few years. Not that the EU could ever agree to a democratic solution, or the spectre of piddly little Northern Ireland sticking two fingers up to them and exiting the grand project. God forbid, anyone in their eyes that wants to exit must be insane. Such benefits and beneficence the EU bestows upon it's citizens. Largely bankrolled by the UK taxpayer, it has to be pointed out.

Anyhoo, UK Parliament reconvenes on Saturday to discuss the latest revelations.

I still think that Boris' best option is to ask for an extension (and therefore fulfilling the letter of the Benn act) whilst simultaneously refusing to contribute a penny to EU coffers whilst negotiations continue. Let the EU have a taste of what it would be like to not have the UK's money flowing into it's coffers, let's see if that focusses their minds.

Topsy-Turvy: Flipping the EU Debate on its Head Gives Clarity.

I've said before that all this turmoil over the Brexit referendum is better if we just for a second imagined that the result was 52/48 in favour of remain.

Would we still be talking about the result three years later? Would Parliament actively be working against the Government to secure an exit from the EU on behalf of the referendum losers?

No, absolutely not. The losing voters would have been told that the matter is settled, we were staying in the EU and a mere few months after the referendum, government process would have turned away from the question and life would have continued as before. The Status Quo would very much be in place.

Any losers would have been told vehemently to "suck it up" and just carry on as if nothing had happened.

Of course because the result was the opposite, we have had the opposite reaction: a Parliament that has time and time again conspired against the Government, and who is now taking about not settling the matter with an election, but going to the lengths of deposing the incumbent government and anointing the leader of the opposition as Prime Minister in order to defer the exit from the EU.

For three years we have had obfuscation, delay, chicanery and bending of laws and precedents in order to oppose leaving.

For what purpose? What sunlit uplands do those that conspire to keep us in the EU see in the UK's future as part of the EU? We know that remainers say there will be catastrophyThere is very little said about what a future for the EU looks like with the UK as part of it. All we hear is how bad exiting the EU will be, we never hear of the real tangible benefits of staying in the EU.

For instance, there is no mention of the stronger European Defence Force envisioned for the future of the EU, no mention of the harmonised income tax regimes planned for the future, no mention of harmonised national budgets. No one on the remain side is putting forward the positive effects of these at all. just that the status quo is better than the unknown quantity of change. I wonder why, is it possibly that those things are precisely what made UK voters vote to leave the EU? Are they net benefits after all or not? From the actions of the remainers and their reluctance to offer tangible benefits, I suspect not. All was talked about briefly during the referendum, but due to Brexit have been put on the back burner by the EU whilst we thrash out a possible deal.

And in that last sentence is the clue certainly to what a future EU would look like without the UK is a member. So frit are they of rocking the boat, the most ambitious plans of the EU have been put on hold for three years, with only moderate advances in those areas. Where before the referendum there were great and ambitious plans coming from Brussels.

Without the UK, the EU would collapse. So desperate are they to have us as a member, they are willing to forestall all major plans so that those in the UK that plan to keep us in the EU don't have anything adverse happen that could give ammunition to the leavers. Nothing that could allow a leaver to say "Aha! Told you so!".

THAT is the great tell, the thing that you look for in a Poker game when sizing up the hand of your opposition.

In another Poker analogy, the EU has a weak hand and they are bluffing.

The EU are busily working under the table to garner support. There are already reports of MPs working with EU representatives to table legislation in the UK Parliament. We already have reports of UK civil servants working with their EU counterparts as well.

Sadly Boris Johnson's government is too weak to propose legislation to outlaw this. But at least the civil servants conspiring against government policy and working with the EU should be removed from office. MPs will face their voters and be made to defend their actions.

But as the title states, by turning things on their head, you can see more clearly why the actors in the Brexit saga are playing the roles they do.

I suspect the EU has more to lose if we leave without any agreement. I suspect those that clamour for us to remain and the organised protests to do the same are a good indication that the EU and their supporters are desperate for us to stay not for our sake, but for the EU's.

As the clock ticks closer to the 31st of October, the lengths that the EU supporters in Media, Parliament and now the judiciary are stooping to is a great indicator if you can step back and see the big picture.

I suspect that things will escalate further as the month progresses without a capitulation to the EU.

I just wonder if so petitioned by the public, the Queen could announce the dissolution of Parliament instead of giving a speech announcing governmental policy. After all the government can request a dissolution and they are classed as the voice of the public in Parliament. Could the public have the power to petition the monarch directly I wonder?  It would be wonderful to see the massed ranks of members of Parliament be dismissed and told to put their case to the voters.

The Rise of the Emotional Human.

Just musing as I was this morning on the shitshow in the House of Commons, the Continuing Crapfest that is Politics in the USA, it struck me that the cause of all of this is emotion, or more accurately the triumph of emotion over reason and fact.

I've blogged before how News reporting has morphed over the years to something more akin to TV drama. Because 24 hour news is pretty bloody boring, the networks have to keep you hooked lest you switch to something more interesting like the paint-drying channel.

So the News networks caught on that "having an angle" or adding an element of drama to a news report keeps viewers engaged. Poor Johhny down the well... will he be rescued? That sort of thing.

It quickly spread to more mundane news and of course into the realm of political reporting. Invariably the TV station picks a side and then from then on that side wears a white hat and the opposition wears a black hat. More often than not, the TV stations tend to favour the left, because the Luvvies are more ideologically aligned to the left.

This explains the Tories bad/ Labour good dichotomy in the UK and the "Orange-Man Bad" bias in the US.

Even if the Tories in the UK came out with the most left-leaning policy in their entire history, you can bet that the BBC would report it as bad news. It could be open door for migrants and free cash for everyone, but it's onloy good if the Left do it. If the right do it, there must be a hidden agenda, cheap labour, buying votes, yadda yadda…

The thing is the shitshow in the Commons this week shows how the Politicians on the left have cottoned on to this and have started to exploit it. For instance Labour can be the nastiest, most racist ant-semitic bunch of people in the country, but they have learned to feign horror when the most minimal slight or bad word is sent their way.

Such was the sight in the Commons where even the word "Turkey" as in Jeffery Cox's comment "even these Turkeys won't vote for Christmas" referring to those in Parliament refusing to allow a General Election was taken as offensive.

If that's offensive to Mps, then we need more robust MPs in Parliament. Because if the word Turkey is offensive, God only knows what sort of vapours they'll display if they ever have to debate a subject of substance and offence, like child rape or murder.

This mock drama, the imitation offence has to stop. It adds nothing to the debate and is purely there to close down debate and speech.

What Now for Parliament?

Yesterday's pantomime in Parliament shows what a farcical decision it was by the judges to de-prorogue it. The remainers got their way, but are they happy of the spectacle before us yesterday? Are they satisfied of the performance of their MPs?

I wouldn't be. I'm pretty bloody disgusted at the whole shower of them. Like cowardly Hyenas sniping at the lion, they brayed and booed, but Boris stood as firm as he could.

Those that went to the Supreme Court spent all that money for this? Are they really happy with the outcome? Surely MPs having been given the time back, should use it wisely and watchers should not have to endure the spectacle we witnessed yesterday.

Quite rightly Boris called them out on their cowardice: Call for a vote of no confidence, agree to an election and lets settle this once and for all....

Now that the turncoat MPs have nailed their colours to the mast it should be easier for the electorate to vote for their preferred option. No hiding behind party manifestoes and the nonsense of having a different opinion (I'm referring to Soubry, Grieve et al). When a party has such a slim majority, then it's incumbent on the members of that party to stand with it, not against it.

Now have a proper, reasoned debate in the run up to the European Council in October, or have an election. One or the other. I DO NOT want to see the sorry shower of cowards braying like Donkeys.

Have the fucking faith in your position and go to the people with it and test your position in an election or shut the fuck up!

What options are Open to Boris Now?

After the catastrophic legal failure yesterday, Boris has really got to pull something out of the bag as the remainer walls close in on him.

He now has to abide by the Benn act, he cannot trigger a general election and get support, he cannot stop Parliament from sitting and tying his hands further.

He could use the executive powers introduced by Tony Blair, but he will risk another intervention from the Supreme Court as they have now established themselves as the ultimate arbiter of government policy.

I think the only avenue to the PM is to follow the instructions from Parliament: he WILL ask for an Extension and WILL accept any extension given, as ordered by Parliament. BUT he doesn't have to offer anything in return: I expect he will say there will be no further payments to the EU.
The EU may then refuse an extension, or allow gratis open-ended continual membership of the EU while negotiations take place.

It's then up to the EU to decide if the allow us free access to their markets and political machinery.

Back on my blog in September 2016, I posted this rather prescient blog in September of 2016.

I was talking of a Remainer Coup. Especially these paragraphs:

"Which is why we have to be wary against the stitch-up. If the political parties are aligning (or being aligned against their will) to weaken or even reverse Brexit, us, the public need to be on point, on guard and watching what happens over the next few months.

Sadly it seems that the way things are aligning, the Tories will deliberately botch things, UKIP will be weakened and unable to mount a controlling influence and the only true opposition will be a bunch of rabid socialists that no-one will ever consider voting for, thereby eliminating that threat to the destruction of the Brexit ideal."

We were back then, in the phoney war, just after the decision to Exit the EU and the media were going full swing into promoting every remainer march, tweet or meeting.

In it I said to be wary of the coup the establishment , the people of the elite that have the ear of government were plotting.

I never thought it would be this messy or take this long, but finally the elite I think, have got their way.

The judgement by the Supreme Court lays before us the mechanism of tyranny: the judges are supreme. and therefore sovereign. And there's us thinking it was us the people, or the democratically elected government, or even maybe Parliament as a whole that was sovereign. It could have even been the Queen herself. But no, it is 11 unelected judges that have sat in judgement on a democratically elected government. Judges sitting at the behest of millionaires and billionaires that have decided what government is and isn't able to do on our behalf.

Above Government, above Parliament, above even the Queen, the Supreme Court has established itself. It has established itself as the arbiter of government policy. It can second guess what any particular government was thinking when it made a judgement and enacted policy and if necessary quash that policy. It can now cancel any government policy the rich requires cancelling.

The judges have allowed the rich to overthrow the poor.

Just as climate change allows the transfer of money from the poor in energy tariffs to the rich who are trading in Carbon Credits on the Stock exchange.

Just as the Gordon Brown Government bailed out the richest in the country: the bankers. To the tune of Billions of pounds they propped up the banks owned by the rich.

Make no mistake, this the rich saying "stuff you" to the poor. There will be no Brexit worthy of the name. Parliament will keep this Zombie government in power just long enough to get their way and overturn the will of the people in 2016.

Hopefully the time will come where we are allowed our voice and we can elect a new government and Parliament. All I ask is you think very carefully who you vote for, who you think really has the interests of the people at heart, the person who truly has democracy as their priority.

As we did on the 23rd of June 2016, the ordinary people of the UK need to stand up and be counted.

We need to vote and vote as one voice. All 17.4 million people who voted to leave the EU need to vote once again. When we vote we will remember who it was that killed our vote.

We will not stand for this.

If Democracy is Dead, do Voters have a Legitimate Recourse to Violence?

Okay, so today the Courts overruled a democratically elected government on a point of law that was previously assumed not to be justiciable.

The Supreme Court has now ruled that they are above a democratically elected Government, they are above even the Monarch and  can rule that a government's motives have to be considered when proroguing Parliament. They have also ruled that the Monarch's decision to Prorogue Parliament is unlawful, because the motive for the advice she was given was in their eyes unlawful.

By extension this could also be applied to legislation. For instance if a government brought forth legislation that someone with enough money disagreed with, they could if they had enough money and time, run the Government's policy decision through the courts, to the Supreme Court and overrule the government.

So, democracy itself ceases if a Democratically elected Government can be overruled by the Supreme Court. We now have the law.

Democracy is the thing that allowed the UK to change in a peaceful manner for 1200 years. Maybe we've only had truly representative one-person-one-vote democracy for less than 100 years, but we still had accountability even way back at the beginning.

The Supreme court has no such accountability. If it now has, by dint of the law it has passed, primacy over the Government and the Monarch, then by extraction they should be voted in to office and also out of office by the people to keep them accountable.

So, given that democracy as we understood it to be, is actually not available and democracy is de-legitimised, does that mean the means by which we settled arguments before (violence) now re-legitimised?

I don't know. These are interesting constitutional questions. The one thing that does come out of this is that there is a lot of constitutional change that needs to happen so that this does not happen again.

Personally I think the Supreme court have overstepped their remit by overruling the Government and the Monarch.

In effect the Supreme Court have now given themselves the power to scrutinise and overrule any piece of legislation that goes before the Queen, irrespective of whether it is arrived at by a democratically elected Government. They have the power to rule on it's legitimacy, rather than the legitimacy being given to the rule of government by democratic mandate.

There is much do to repair the injustices of the past 3 years.

Firstly either the FTPA needs to be heavily modified or abolished. MPs moving from Government to opposition or vice versa should automatically trigger a by-election.

If a government loses a working majority in Parliament it should automatically trigger a general election. No zombie governments should ever be held in place by opposition MPs.

The Supreme Court should also be abolished and the Law Lords reinstated so they have the ability to scrutinise legislation as it is being made. No legislating after the fact.

There is so much more to be thrashed out...

The Insanity of the Authoritarian Left (One of God only knows how many examples)

Apparently they want to create the crime of "Ecocide" and ban eating meat, like they banned smoking.

The report is here

Don't think it's pie in the sky, these people really do think that it's a crime to be eating meat. They're authoritarian enough to ban it, just like they taxed sugar. You dirty little meat eaters, how dare you oppress farm animals and have them murdered.

FOR FUCK'S SAKE.... DON'T VOTE LABOUR!!!!

I've invented a new term for this at least. It's enforced Vegancy.

A Chap on tonight's Question Time asked why do so many young people commit suicide....

The reasons are extremely complicated, but a major factor is stress.

Kids from the age of 13 and 14 are put under immense pressure to perform in schools at GCSE level. The academic path of the national curriculum doesn't suit everyone, but the system pushes all kids to perform and anything less than straight A grades is classed as a failure.

Once the pressure of GCSEs is over, then the pressure continues through A-levels and the pressure to get good grades and get into a good university. A proportion of those kids could be better suited to a vocational route, but academia makes such a route as an admission of failure.

After A-levels are done, there is the pressure to get into a good University. Avoiding the stigma of clearing means good grades. Those without goo grades go through clearing with no real support. They have a period of stress and uncertainty and once cleared to university, they have literally zero time to get a decent residence.

Then comes 3 years at university, where still not having left schooling, they are put under another massive burden: financial debt. £9000 a year type debt. For the lucky ones they can get part-time jobs that at least pay the rent and maybe pays for food too.

After 3 years, they emerge from education after almost a decade of stress and burdened with over £20000 of debt. That prospect in itself would drive sane people to suicide.

But then educated and debt-ridden, they emerge into real life. There they find that all the stress, the promises of nirvana and a decent job over the past decade are nothing but empty vessels. After almost a decade of stressing and pressure to perform, they most likely get low-paid jobs in retail. Hardly the fantasy they were sold whilst staying up and cramming for exams. Was it really worth it?

Add to that decade, social media and the pressure to be seen to be living life to the full. Most likely the reality is a sad isolated life away from friends and family while at Uni,

More depression is inflicted as the realisation that they will never own their own home, never have the standard of living their parents had, never have the lifestyle of the dimwits on TOWIE, or never make an easy living like bloggers and vloggers.

Is it no wonder that life seems pointless to quite a number of young adults.

The "Empty-Chairing" of Boris by Luxembourg.

The fiasco of Boris refusing to speak outside on a podium yards away from a baying mob of remainiac protesters and the Luxembourg PM refusing to hold the press conference indoors in an effort to embarrass Boris shows why we should be leaving the EU.

The problem with Xavier Bettel is he is no statesman. A true stateman and leader of a country would have honour and comply with his guest's request to hold the press conference in an alternative location.

Instead Bettel deliberately sought to humiliate Boris. By either making him hold the conference outside against the baying mob, or by empty-chairing him and effectively taking the piss while Boris wasn't there.

But that's the trouble with the EU: while the EU make all the rules and laws of government and a certain political class reign, political pygmies like Bettel can rise to the top.

Macron is of the same mould, in fact the only European premiers who are not of the same Euro-elite class are Germany's Merkel and Hungary's Orban.

The Euro-elite are easily identifiable: self assured, totally committed to the European Project to cult-level brainwash. They cannot fathom why anyone would not want to be under the EU commission's unelected beaurocrats. It's great for the leaders of these smaller countries, The EU bungs money to the country and makes all the rules, so there is very little for the leader of Luxembourg for instance to do other than accept the rules of the EU, keep taking the cash and look like a leader. If the boy does good, he may make it to the gravy-train of the EU commission and be rolling in it for life, just like old Rumpy-Pumpy. Bettel is a puppet leader, much like the puppet leaders of countries tied to bigger regimes.

The Euro-elite are so cultish they view anyone who considers leaving the EU idiots, unable to see "the bigger picture".  Hence the picture of Bettel gesturing to the empty podium by his side while shrugging his shoulders and pulling a face.

No, definitely not a statesman, more a clown playing to the pro-EU media audience.

As Boris Johnson travels Europe, meeting leaders and gauging the willingness for a deal, just like David Cameron and Theresa May before him, he's coming up against the cult of EU. There cannot be any negotiation, there will be no compromise. Because you are better off in the cult than outside it. Dire things will happen should you ever leave the cult.

You will not survive, there will be turmoil, the cult cannot survive without you think of the people you leave behind: they will starve without you; and possibly finally: if you leave we'll kill you new pet dog... who knows the number of threats both direct and inferred and the number of sob stories that Boris has had to hear on his travels.

As we get closer to the 31st of October the hysteria will only get worse. The EU needs our contributions to the cult. We need to push through and ignore it. Let them wail... but let us be wary also.

If I were Boris, I would have our Army on standby and in a state of readiness, our Navy should be patrolling the channel and the North Sea. For what you may ask? Well, for anything.

At the very least the Army can be used to sort out any traffic issues on this side of the channel. Our Engineer corps can quite easily flatten a piece of land and tarmac it ready for trucks to park on, they can also set up temporary food supplies to the truckers waiting there. The Army are good in a crisis.

The Navy can shepherd those French, Spanish and Dutch fishermen that don't believe in the Brexit fairy and stroll into our waters back to their side of the ditch.

At the very worst, the Army can take on any European paratroopers falling out of European transport aircraft. The Navy can provide an anti-airctraft blockade. After all, don't underestimate the power of a cult to go to extremes to keep you in it.....

Oh and Boris, if Merkel comes to visit, keep the dog indoors in case her limo runs over it. "Accidents" can happen...Ja?