Gary Lineker and the Licence Fee.

The recent furore over Gary Lineker likening the Tory Government's language over migrants has highlighted the impossibility of the licence fee.

The BBC has an impartiality clause in contracts because it has to be seen to be above politics, to be impartial. That way, it is (in part) seen to be for everyone, and not favouring one person or another or one ideology or another.

The reason for that is everyone, regardless of political viewpoint, race or religion has to contribute towards the BBC in the form of the licence fee. 

I mean, if they stopped making programmes for a certain demographic, or started espousing political viewpoints against a certain demographic, then that demographic would quite rightly feel a bit hard done by to put it mildly. (I'm talking about old white working class men here of course).

They might wonder why they are contributing to an organisation that doesn't cater for them in the first instance and even worse, actively opposes them on screen. 

In that instance that demographic might wonder why the hell are they paying money to the BBC to be abused? I mean, some of us might be phycological masochists, but the majority aren't.

So impartiality has to be the bedrock of the BBC, in output, in opinion on and off the screen. 

If Gary Lineker likens the people paying his wages (The government following public opinion and therefore the public) to Nazis, then maybe he should rethink taking money from the public if they offend him so much? Or is it just the people that offend his virtuous sensibilities but he's quite happy to keep taking their money?

In that case, hypocrisy is very much at the fore.

It seems to me that either BBC presenters stay ideologically neutral in their public opinions, or we scrap the licence fee and then you can decide if you want to fund their opinion if it conflicts with yours.

UK Government Declare War on Workers

 The message from the budget is clear: workers are going to pay.

They are going to pay for Furlough.

They are going to pay higher taxes for fewer services in return.

They are going to pay at some point for the energy price help.

They are going to pay for higher welfare payments to the unemployed.

They are going to pay for higher pension payments.

The people that aren't going to pay are those on benefits (and I'll bet there will be an almighty push to chuck people off benefits in the coming years), and of course the very rich, including global corporations.

The working population of this country are being squeezed for every cent, every penny, to pay for the government's careless abandonment of prudent governance.

Makes you wonder if they are trying to pitch workers against those on welfare. 

I mean, the globalist environmental agenda requires a reduced population. What better way to reduce the population and not get blamed is to pitch two other parts of society against each other? The have-nots and the just have enoughs.

The just have enoughs are being taught to resent those on welfare. Why? Well, if the government ever wanted to reduce the population as part of their mad climate cult, who do you think will be first? Yep, those on welfare.

Already in Canada, the precursor for all things extremist in Government it seems at the moment, they are just preparing to approve euthanasia for mental illness. 

Bill C-7 in Canada seeks to approve the "Medical Assistance In Dying" (MAID). Giving it such warm terms as "dignity" "Compassion".

Of course, compassionate narcissists are the sort of people that will gladly hold the pillow over your face and snuff you out for the "right" reasons. They are the worst, worse still than Sociopaths and Psychopaths because Compassionate Narcissists truly believe it's for your own good. Whether you want it or not. "Take your medicine", "You're living such a miserable life, wouldn't you like to be relieved of your burden?", "It's for the benefit of others", "It's to Save the Planet". The justifications are manyfold.

These are the people you need to be very wary of, because they sound soothing and compassionate, all the while plotting the end of your life, for your own good, the good of the planet or (like in Hot Fuzz) for "The Greater Good".

You don't matter, you are a burden to yourself and the country. Just slip off quietly and do everyone including yourself a favour.

But relieving yourself of a burden voluntarily so often becomes mandatory. 

For the Nazis it was to cleanse the population and purify it. The reasons today are different, but the outcome is the same. 

Just you watch.

I can see the trend way before it even becomes apparent.

Low Paid Voters: Is it Time to Send a Message and Vote for Extremists?

 Okay, it's pretty clear now that the government don't have the interests of the poor at heart. There was absolutely nothing in the spring statement that would alleviate the energy crisis. 

There was no plan to give help in the short term and there was no deviation from the net-zero ideology. 

Great news for the middle class, abysmal news for the poorest in society who are facing the dilemma of "heat or eat", facing lower mobility, and generally a struggle to cope amid a rapidly reducing standard of living.

So, given that both the Tories and Labour want to crucify the poor on their pious plans to save the planet, what are the poor working class to do?

Do we all give a protest vote to an outlandish party? Do we vote for Communists or Nazis? Do we vote for the raving loony party? How are we to make our displeasure public? We can't refuse to vote, because that is counter productive. We need to vote in order to push the agenda our way. 

Well, it's about time the poor organised. Many special interest groups like the greens, the Muslims, the LGBTQ+, all have become politically active and vote as a block in order to sway election outcomes. Back in history, the Trades Unions would be the ones to organise the working class/poor vote. But now they are in bed with the elites that don't care about the poor working classes. 

Without the commitment and the will to vote in numbers for a specific party, none of the parties will take the poor working class agenda seriously. Why would they when they can ignore them and not suffer any consequences? If the poor had a block vote and representation as to what their demands are, then they would be better represented in Parliament. 

Until then, we're fucked.