Greece: Democracy to Dictatorship.



A world apart

A world apart



A Greek tragedy, it could be a re-write of the Shakespearian play Julius Caesar. The Brutus in this modern version is of course the EU. Perhaps a more apt correlation is that of Timon of Athens which is about bankruptcy and the failure of powerful Lords to refuse loans.

Act 1. Scene 1 Servant: ‘His means most short, his creditors most strait:’

It would be great to read a Shakespeare play on the present debacle. How the faceless bureaucrats of the EU forced their diktat on Greece in defiance of the peoples voice. How might Shakespeare have penned the death of democracy and the rise of the machine?

Other great writers come to mind, George Orwell – 1984 and Aldous Huxley – Brave New World. How may they have told the story about a David in his struggle for independent thought against the might of a Goliath?

There is consensus among journalists that the deal to keep Greece in the euro zone was harsh:

  • ‘brutal negotiations – punitive deal’ Financial Times
  • Euro zone leaders made Greece surrender much of its sovereignty. Reuters + NYT
  • ‘ultimatum’ NYT
  • ‘painful and humiliating agreement’ Economist
  • ‘no reason to consider the summit a success’     Sachische Zeitung

The ensuing debate has battle lines drawn. Daniel Stelter a German writer – Beyond the Obvious suggests that the problem is the euro which is ‘flawed’. (France 24 en) He has support in this analysis from two Nobel Prize winning economists; Paul Krugman – ‘a fateful error’ (p168) and Joseph Stiglitz ‘a political project’ (p276) not one based on sound economic analysis.

Stiglitz p275 identifies one of the problems: “In fact, the ECB continually threatens not to buy the sovereign bonds of the countries of the euro zone, unless they do as it says”.

Jacques Rupnick while supporting the deal qualifies himself by suggesting that closer fiscal integration is necessary. In doing so he is accepting the argument that the euro is the problem. Without the euro being reformed the problems will continue. The notion was that the euro would bring the different economies together; “The last decade has proved that to be illusory”. NYT

Of course the economists’ who-fly-the-flag for austerity support the deal and the Austrian School of Economics. There are several ‘schools’ of economic thought so who says the austerity mob has got it right? Being a follower of a school of thought denies the opportunity to think of alternatives.

The Greeks were given three (3) days to force law changes through their parliament to be introduced by Wednesday 15 July 2015:

  • Accept the Eurozone’s 2012 fiscal compact, which includes an independent fiscal council. Thus the Greek government cannot make decisions on its own.
  • Must introduce EU banking rules.
  • Overhaul their legal system.
  • Raise retirement age to 67 by 2022
  • Must make the statistical agency independent. It seems the EU doesn’t trust the Greeks to be honest!!!
  • Further spending cuts.
  • Raise taxes + VAT to 23% EU average = 20%

Failure to comply with the package will result in Greece being denied a sufficient loan to pay back the €3.5 billion it owes to creditors due on 20 July 2015. This is indeed a crackdown. The faceless have brought out the whip and are lashing the Greeks into submission.

One of the main creditors the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has come out against the EU proposals suggesting they are too harsh and won’t actually work! Hm. The EU negotiators were aware of the IMF report but paid it no heed. This suggests to me a strict adherence to their preferred goal – make Greece suffer; perhaps as a warning to others. Telegraph 15/07/2015

The IMF decision may have been strongly influenced by the Americans on the committee. The Yanks wanted a debt relief solution but the EU disagreed. A debt relief package would have seen a huge chunk of the debt chopped-off making it easier for Greece to repay the remainder.

Now we have the big boys at loggerheads. Fight! Fight! Fight! School playground rules, please!

It would seem that the FT called this one right by suggesting it was a ‘punitive deal’. It’s a mess caused by the € euro and the failure to implement it properly in the first instance.

Trying to hold such diverse economies together under present conditions will merely stave off the inevitable collapse. Bull by the horns comes to mind.

Why try hard to keep Greece in?

If Greece is allowed to bail out other weak economies may have to follow: Spain, Italy and Portugal among them. These are being given help under the table at the moment.

Another possible reason is that Greece has more migrants knocking on its door than Italy which has got all the publicity. If Greece opted out it could give all the migrants a free bus pass to Europe and that would cause all kinds of ramifications. A political storm is already blowing!


Do some good….join Robin Hood

Paul Krugman    End This Depression Now

Joseph Stiglitz    The Price of Inequality




War: Shit Street!



  • Refugee camp

Is there shelter from the storm? Most people know that war is hell; others have been desensitized by movies and war games. However, there is no fiction in reality. Those who have witnessed it know it is no fantasy. In recent years war has come to affect people in every country in one way or another.

An article in the taking its information from the UN (UNHCR) tells us that there are around 60 million refugees in the world. The Economist uses the same figure but gives it a concrete context by linking it to the population of Italy; that’s a lot of people. Side Bar:

  • The new term for refugees is ‘displaced persons’. Displaced is a nice word but does not give sufficient gravity to the situation. Running from hell is not exactly being displaced; it’s fleeing for your life. We are not talking of a set of keys that you know will turn up.

There is no shortage of war zones. Middle East: Syria, Yemen and Iraq with the spread of Islamic revolution by ISIS. Sub-Sahara Africa with: Somalia, South Sudan, Democratic Republic of Congo and Nigeria, with another Islamic group Boko Haram. The surprise area for some will be Columbia in South America.

Why is there such a fire burning around the globe? A main reason is political power as in Syria where the dictatorial Assad regime is in conflict with groups seeking more democratic rights. The consequences are that nearly 50% of the population has been forced to flee their homes. Many have simply fled within the country but some 4 million have scattered abroad.

Neighbours, Egypt, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan and war torn Iraq have taken many Syrians in. The NYT suggest Egypt has 138,000; the Economist says Turkey has 1.7 million. It’s important to get the numbers right as aid being sent to the accommodating nations requires solid numbers to meet the need.

  • ISIS has driven an approximate 2.6 million Iraqis from their homes.

The civil war in Syria has affected 5 / 6 of its neighbours directly. However, the ramifications go much further. Thousands have made a dash for Europe or America. For Europe they have travelled to Libya, which itself is in turmoil, to find passage across the Mediterranean Sea. There is not a warm welcome in Europe because in their travels they meet up with other refugees from various parts of the world who are also escaping hell.

It is understandable that they want to flee the hell of their home nations to find the perceived stability elsewhere. The problem is that America is trying on a daily basis to stem the flood of migrants from South America. Europe, in a period of austerity, and a history over the last 20 years of conflict in the Balkans and presently in Ukraine, is panicked by the flow.

The influx of migrants has caused a political storm in Europe, which has seen a rise in radical parties. Politicians can’t ignore this trend. Hungary, is debating whether to construct a 100 mile fence to stop migrants crossing over from Serbia as numbers have increased from 30,000 to 100,000 in the past year. There is a huge cost in both political and financial terms in trying to cope with increasing numbers.

There are many poor people in the UK; some estimates suggest upward of 2.7 million families are affected. A large influx of economic migrants can have a direct impact on the poor by forcing wages down, putting pressure on housing and waiting lists for doctors, dentists etc. Thus little surprise that most poor people will not welcome migrants.

th67LNBAFYIn sub-Sahara Africa an estimated 15 million refugees have been forced from their homes. Ethiopia, houses an approximate 665,000 mainly from Somalia and South Sudan. An interesting point made by the NYT report was that most African refugees stay in Africa. Another point raised by the Economist is that 85% of refugees have sought shelter in developing countries.

It may appear cruel on those fleeing hell but developing nations often don’t have the resources to cope with an influx of refugees. Ethiopia is such a case. This country is still a recipient of foreign aid of over £200 million just to sustain their own population.

Unfortunately, those fleeing horror face further danger of exploitation. Even if they manage to reach the UK or USA they are used as cheap labour or forced into the sex trade. When it comes to humans there is no depth to their barbarity. The continued struggle in Columbia has caused the uprooting of around 6 million, 136,000 in 2014 alone. A further 360,000 have fled abroad to adjoining nations or perhaps trying to reach the USA.

If only there was an easy solution but being tied to politics, fear and cost there is no straightforward option. It is at a time like this that we witness the selfish gene come to the fore and this gene can be very erratic, and cruel.

The Left and the Brickwall.


th83MEZBW5The Left in UK politics as elsewhere are remnants of lost tribes. There are so many groups and factions, so many one-dimensional believers. Their voices do not resonate with the people but rather sound like interference over an inaudible crackle. Little wonder that the public are left bemused by the Lefts’ call for change. The vision of the Left is blurred by yesterday and the lack of a policy of representation and comradeship. Past infamies forgotten, the Left in politics strive to keep their dream alive.

Many on the Left cannot understand why capitalism continues remorselessly, and why the people do not rise in opposition. However, like their (so called) intellectual brothers the people have no vision of a future as they are too tired from everyday routine and pondering every night on a tomorrow that will be the same.

The poor retreat into a come-what-may attitude and religion. Meanwhile their erstwhile leaders scramble for a foothold in tomorrow’s world by borrowing a Liberal overcoat. All the people hear is rabble-rousing of a thousand diverse voices challenging them to join the battle. But food must be put on the table and a semblance of self must be given space.

In essence, the Left are more lost in the political wilderness than their poor brethren. Karl Popper, sums it up neatly, “…we hate the very idea that we may be mistaken. So we cling dogmatically to our conjectures, as long as possible”. Oxford Dictionary of Quotations

Reluctance to change has been emphasized just recently at the World Economic ForumthXCVP4YWC in Davos, Switzerland, when a couple of the protesting groups decided to end their campaigns at the venue after 15 years. For over 20 years various groups on the Left have been protesting against the participants at Davos and what they represent. Sad to say but the protesters have achieved nothing.

Attacking the Dmen on site is a waste of time and energy. It brings the media to their defence and has the protesters demonized. What good does it do for the ordinary Joe?


Pub commentator: What’s it gonna change? Nutting mate. So, what’s the point mate, thN7AC3ES5eh? (Should be on Radio 4)

Old Granny: They should do something with their lives instead of all that screaming and stuff; causing trouble. Why don’t they get a job?

Conspiracy theorist: It’s a gang of fascists paid by the Dmen to make sure they get publicity. No kidding!

The Davos meeting is of the rich and famous in business and the political wanna-bes who have been holding an annual meeting for over 40 years. The blurb they issue says they’re committed to improving the state of the world by:

  • Sustained economic growth
  • Mitigating global risks
  • Promoting health for all
  • Improving social welfare
  • Fostering environmental sustainability

I’m afraid the Dmen have not been very successful; 40 + years on and they haven’t achieved any of their goals. During their watch we have had several financial crises culminating in the debacle of 2008 which is still smouldering. And every day the environment takes another battering: oil spills, plastic islands in the ocean’s and rain forest depletion. Throughout Europe and elsewhere wages are falling, employment rights ‘tossed in the dustbin of history’ (Trotsky), welfare payments cut and slavery on the increase.

thB7VOPRTBIt is simply incredulous that they have the balls to turn up every year. Well, with 5* accommodation, 5* food, 5* wine and 5* scotch (can I join?) lots of hobnobbing to size up a good deal and photo shoots galore to impress the natives back home, who wouldn’t. After all, they are of the Clan ‘Id’ which Freud describes as “…knows no judgements of value: no good or evil and no morality…” The Clan ‘Id’ thrive on instinctive and primitive urges of the pleasure principle. For us, well, there’s always a pint and a kebab. 

“Professional men, they have no cares;

Whatever happens, they get theirs.”    

Ogden Nash

And where are the defenders of the people? Marxists, Leninists, Trotskyists, Stalinists, Anarchists and piss-artists, so many ‘ists’, factions by the score. The sheer number of groups is evidence that the Left is split asunder. Out of date and out of touch, for the workers they won’t do much. That they cannot agree on a platform is an indication of the number of little Stalinist’s out there. It’s their way or no way. The people don’t need a shepherd, some understanding and a touch of guidance would help. The hearts of the Left are beating soundly but their solutions are awry. They need to stop chasing rainbows! It is not about equality in life, it’s about quality of life.

We will never be equal in all aspects of life. There are too many variances of input into a child’s upbringing and a whole myriad of interpretations that determine the adult outcome. This is why we have artists, bookworms, those who love figures – the maths kind, and others who will be happy to do-up old bangers. It’s what makes us so damn beautiful. But one thing we should all agree upon is that no human being is more important than another. It’s about fairness and a tad of respect.

A failure to understand, a failure to listen, and thus a failure to open their mind to new possibilities is what has the Left stuck in a mire of righteousness. Their dogma conditions them to push, demand and force the people into their vision. The die-hards scream and the sycophants follow as they seek to impose their philosophy on the majority, blind to the fact that such a move is fascist. Stand-up Josef Stalin!

“We become the makers of our fate when we have ceased to pose as its prophets”. Karl Popper   The Open Society and its Enemies

In cahoots with the Liberal and wishy-washy Conservatives, the workers are entitled to feel abandoned by the Left. A case in point is that of political correctness. There was no discussion with the people, no opinions sought, just accept or you’re a —- train load of abuse. It was a forced-march and many felt violated by the incursion into their everyday use of language and violated by the abuse they had to endure. The same can be said about multiculturalism. Again many felt they were being frogmarched into an ill-conceived agenda and it all seemed very much one way traffic.

But to treat Human Rights (HR) as a political whip is inexcusable. Again holding onto the coat tails of the professional classes the Left made HR a source of ridicule and much pub banter to such an extent that it is almost discredited. HR is too important to be bandied about as a politically correct minority case study. And then to try to create divisions in society by suggesting a split between the older and younger generation is the ‘last refuge of a scoundrel’. (Samuel Johnson)

Made brazen by their fervour for minority point scoring they let their passion rip on a biased political agenda. No thought, except of contempt, for the majority view is indicative of what is wrong in politics in the UK. This is not the politics for the people but the indoctrination of the people. Fascists everywhere will be amused by the flexibility of democracy.

A belief has grown among politicians and those who term themselves the intelligentsia that democracy can be utilised to impose their specific political agenda. Beware of arrogance or you may find that when your Lexus breaks down you may need a tank to get back.

Left to rot or to fester the people are let loose to make do as best they can. To contendthZL6SLM4X with the vagaries of the system and at the mercy of the capitalists who are riding roughshod over them. The belief in the democratic process will wane in consequence and poverty will raise its ugly head and snare many more aimless drifters. The traditional ‘life net’ afforded by the Left and the unions are gone; for the parties are estranged. The future is now a guessing game and a case of come-what-may.                                                  Out of context but nonetheless poignant:

“Something was dead in each of us,

And what was dead was Hope.”

Oscar Wilde   The Ballad of Reading Gaol





Blindland (2): The Cult of Personality.

thMC31RS4V“There is nothing either good or bad, but thinking makes it so”. Shakespeare, Hamlet


Reason is in hiding behind the wasteland, Objectivity has taken shelter in the dark corners and shabby boutiques of our towns and cities. Our army is scattered by the Gibbers. Nonetheless the fight goes on. We cannot surrender the ‘Gift’. At all costs we must defend it. The future will demonize us if we fail.

The Overlords contend that they are the saviours of free thought but their police are known to us all as the ‘Thought Police’. Whichever regime is in power they seek to control, to dragoon, to manipulate and mould us. You are allowed to think as long as you don’t think in opposition to the regime.

We are captivated by the ‘cult of personality’. In dictatorships either of Fascist or Communist the cult of personality surrounds the leader. Stalin of the Soviet Union, Hitler of the Nazi Regime, and look no further than Kim ll-sung/Kim Jong-un of North Korea for how far the absurdity of the ‘cult’ can reach.

However, we cannot assume that democracy is free of the cult. “The liberal democracy theory and Marxism-Leninism are very close in their common ideological assumptions”. And whilst a dictatorship is the more likely to use force on its people: “Propaganda is to democracy what a bludgeon is to a totalitarian state”. They both seek, ‘the manufacture of consent’. Noam Chomsky

Manufactured consent is secured through, what has become our obsession with movie and pop stars and with soap operas on TV. These pull us in to the netherworld and in doing so relieve us of our faculty of reason. We become immersed in a world of make-believe, which becomes our evening leisure and our daily chit-chat. Living in that world absolves us of responsibility to ourselves and to others. We are therefore left open to the propaganda of the state. “Most people are guided by emotion and impulse”. (Reinhold Niebuhr)

Yet we can overcome this sleeping sickness. Somewhere out there a sleeper has awoken! Reason awakens all that seek truth.

History is our teacher, our lifeline and the foundation of our future. Do not treat it lightly. The lessons of our past abound with great insights. Seek out history’s horror to help realize where the road ahead lies.

The past is riddled by examples of the cult of personality and strange to say but all the purveyors of Utopia have succumbed to the lust of power. All leaders of Communism, the dictatorship of the proletariat, became dictators of the workers. These erstwhile leaders of the people committed untold atrocities in order to hold on to power.

Christianity likewise has a history of persecution that can parallel any other Utopian cause. Be warned: when leaders begin to tell you what to think it is time for new leaders. Their contempt for ordinary people intensifies when the view of the populace is contrary to their own. The notion of dialectics fades into the darkness of their egocentric mind.

thCAFJWB3EUtopians may have started out with good intentions and held universality as a cornerstone but all: religion, communism and democracy become corrupted by man and the false god ego. They have given up on Reason and have closed their senses to Objectivity, and instead have allowed themselves to stumble into the cesspit of ego.

“Happy is he who has overcome his ego”.  Siddhartha Gautama, known to many as Buddha.

th03YAFKBDLeaders tend to view themselves as Plato’s Princes’, superior but with a conscience, that at times, has a tender disposition.  Unfortunately many people have little strength; our minds are easily invaded and influenced by the Gibbers, the Overlords army. The Gibbers set Dogma upon us to expel any pockets of logic that can be found. Thus we often travel blind, oblivious to the freedom that Reason brings. Reason holds the key to a future where all are equal and the search for truth is the prime objective.

Many disciples of Reason hide in open spaces; they believe it is easier to acquiesce than fight. Conflict has no set outcome and Reason can neither win nor lose by conflict. Nonetheless, Reason expects a conflict of argument to help persuade the hapless. Observe those around you: how many are so absorbed by ego that they cannot see beyond self. Truthfully, is that a good way to be?

The ‘cult of personality’ imprisons you – turn to Reason and set the people free!


Human Rights: A View from the Stalls


It would appear that the politically correct have fully utilized the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR) to realise their political ambitions. Marx and Engels could not have conceived such a scenario; the use of a law to dictate policy to the nations that make up the European Union (EU). It goes without saying that in the world in which we live that human rights is an absolute must. However, how it is used should be a concern to all.

The Second World War had recently ended and society had witnessed atrocities that it never wanted to see again. It was the holocaust in particular and the massive dislocation throughout Europe and beyond. It was the fear of a Stalinist regime bludgeoning out from the East. It was the knowledge of the Gestapo, of the Russian Secret Police, the NKVD (later KGB). It was to prevent the horror of the 1930s ever being re-established. It was the imprisonment, without trial, of hundreds of thousands of people in both Germany and Russia. It was the spectacle of the Russian ‘show trials’. It was a desire to strengthen democracy. It was a plan to give more power to the citizenry so that dictatorship would not darken the sky over Europe again. It was an attempt to give future generations light in the lives.

It was a spectacular emotional outburst borne of the heinous crimes of World War 2. That was the background to the introduction of the ECHR. Without doubt an attempt to prevent genocide from crossing the doorstep of civilisation again. The aim was to halt the spread of Stalin’s corrupted version of communism and to block communism altogether. Dictatorship had brought only death and destruction; an agony of horror. The authors of the ECHR were trying to devise a way forward and their solution was to strengthen democracy. How might they cry to see how it is being used today?

Did they envisage human rights for convicted murderers and rapists? Did they anticipate a complete liberalisation of sexual orientation as an essential element to freedom? Are these what our forefathers had in mind having witnessed Hitler and Stalin? That democracy would be the preserve of minority politics?

Isn’t it ironic…

I am all in favour of the State being held in check, no logical person wants the State to be overpowering. Our hope for a free society rests on the shoulders of democracy and a free press. As long as these two principals can be seen to be transparent then we have a fair shot at retaining, free speech, the right to life, the right to liberty and security. Do we really need an all-embracing law fashioned by powerful emotion in the post war period to govern us? Make no mistake; the Convention on Human Rights is the new method of imposing a political philosophy upon us. You may find the founders have puked in their coffins!

Human rights law supersedes all other legislation. Parliament which you voted for cannot override HR law and European judges have the power to disregard ‘secondary legislation’ and deem Acts of Parliament as ‘incompatible’. Thus your elected chamber, the Houses of Parliament is subservient to the rulings of a cabal of European Judges and must uphold what the Judges’ decree. The government when submitting legislation to parliament have to ensure that the proposed ‘Bill’ does not conflict with the ECHR. The ‘Bill’ must fit within the remit of the ECHR or the courts will reject it as incompatible.

Q. Who rules the UK?                    Not you, OK!

Scenario: (hypothetical)

The government pass a law on Social Security, this is the main law. However, the ‘Bill’ may hold several sections these are the ‘secondary legislation’. So even though Parliament passes all sections of the legislation into law the Judges’ can dismiss the ‘secondary’ pieces out of hand and deem the whole of the legislation as incompatible. Wherefore art thou democracy?

Q. Is this how the original authors intended human rights law to work?

Surely the intention of the ECHR was to forestall dictatorship; hence article after article begins with the pronoun ‘everyone’. Article 2. ‘Everyone’s right to life shall be protected by law.’ Article 8. ‘Everyone has the right to respect for his private and family life.’ Thus one principal aim was to empower the people as a battlement against the foes of democracy; creating a barricade of millions to thwart the dictatorial ambitions of the few.

Is democracy secure? Has the ECHR been the panacea envisaged? Or are we lumbered with a vision contorted by political expediency? I would have to put my money, all of it, on the latter point because I firmly believe that the vision of those who introduced the ECHR has been waylaid and subverted by the political agenda of an elitist minority.

Moreover, the ECHR is designated as a ‘living instrument’ which means that as society and attitudes change, the ECHR will adapt and adopt in the way it interprets the views expressed within society. However, as with all legal status ‘precedent’ will hold sway. Precedent is an interpretation of the law from years earlier. Therefore, if ‘precedent’ holds sway what is the point of ‘living instrument’?

Several points of clarification are needed; who interprets the change in societal attitude? Are the electorate consulted via a plebiscite/referendum? Are the parliaments of each nation state asked to consult their electorate? No! Non! Nein! No!

Any decision that has to be taken will be done by a cabal of Judges at the court of human rights. These Judges are political appointees and while some are conversant with general law, many are not well versed in the complexity of human rights law. A number of questions need explanation:

  • Who has appointed them and from what political perspective?
  • What do they in return expect from their appointees?

Do you smell something here? Does it begin with a capital C? You complete the word!

As for ‘precedent’ that is a judgement passed previously, perhaps 40 years ago. Now many may consider that attitudes were quite different when granddads roamed the earth, but for many the answer may be not so different. The problem comes with the term ‘living instrument’; is there not a contradiction here? We have a living instrument but precedent holds it tied to the chair. Hmmm

It doesn’t matter how you look at it, either as a living instrument or by precedent, we don’t get a say; it all comes down to the interpretation of the Convention on Human Rights. Judges’ rule ok! Have we uncovered the PC’s hidden bible? Every political philosophy has its bible.

Furthermore, I have a problem with the term ‘interpret’ / ‘interpretation’. Interpretation holds within its definition that an equal and valid alternative view can be had. Therefore, interpretation is open to interpretation. Which means the Judges’ might have got it all wrong. Perhaps we need to re-examine all precedents to determine if they have been interpreted correctly. Oh, my, Judges examining their own navels; can’t wait.

Big decisions are being taken, laws are being enforced but crucially the citizenry have not had a say in any of it. Democracy, the powerhouse of our freedoms is being made redundant by a law conceived over 50 years ago. The irony is that it is about human rights.Your great grandfathers laid down the law that you must now abide by and the interpretation of that law is not open to debate. The ‘living instrument’ will be determined by the Judges at the behest of their political masters. Living instrument, more like modern yoke! The politicians who impose an illusion of equality in an inherently divided society are playing a farce much greater than the creationist theory itself. I can hear our forefathers puking in their coffins.

Article 9 reads: You should not be indoctrinated by the State.

Unfortunately where there is no democracy there is only indoctrination!

Equal Rights

Equality cannot be built on a foundation when any kind of discrimination is acceptable. Yet in the UK the Government operate a system of positive action. It seems the BBC does to. In America, it’s called ‘affirmative action’. This permits by law the discrimination in favour of a minority. Logically therefore, someone is missing out.
You cannot ask anyone to accept or believe in equality when there is a government sponsored discrimination programme at work. The two concepts are diametrically opposed.
You cannot right a wrong by punishing another innocent.

Those who view guilt as a justified rationale for taking action are dealing with life on an emotional level not an intellectual one, though they may feel the latter to be true. Neither can you fast track belief systems simply because you are convinced of the righteousness of your own philosophy. Guilt is a Hadrian’s Wall to intellect. Moreover, trying to force people to accept a dogma usually backfires, how many dictatorships survive?

‘Those who attempt to level never equalize’ Edmund Burke (1729-97)

It would seem few learn from history. Perhaps they’re too busy hawking their philosophy. This has been true over the last one hundred years: Stalin, Mao Tse-Tung, Ho Chi Minh, Fidel Castro, Robert Mugabe and the startling case of N Korea, and, on, and on. These examples are so vividly stark as the characters involved all began as freedom fighters for the working class.

“Much that passes as Idealism is disguised hatred or disguised love of power”. Bertram Russell.

All attempts to implement communism have ended in dictatorships. Just as all of those who want to force change have control issues. In that respect the politically correct are no different their unwavering belief in the correctness of their philosophy suggests they ride the same animal with the leaders above. Poor donkey! Thankfully, the PC brigade doesn’t have complete power yet!!!!

Thus the key term here is hegemony (control) what Gramsci, called cultural hegemony. Like earlier communist rulers, the PC’s are in a hurry, they can’t wait for the population to catch up so the people have to be frogmarched into line. No time for explanation – no dialectics.
– Takes too long
– No guarantee the w/c will kow tow
– Could seriously divide society (battle lost)
The aim of any group or organisation who want to rule is to construct an ‘ideological consensus’, Dominic Strinati. Strinati, also suggests that, “they must take civil society before they take the state”. However, he may be wrong, for it seems that, the Liberal elite, have taken the state and are now trying to enforce an ideological consensus on the people.
Here we go round the mulberry bush……. (sing along)

The starting block of the PC is similar to all the other ideologues, the creation of the perfect society. Similar too, to many evangelicals out there. Maybe they should join forces; some could sing the Red Flag, while the others chant. l apologise to all evangelicals – for they have only goodness in their hearts.

Furthermore, America has had ‘affirmative action’ for about 50 years but tension at street level appears as hyper as ever. It has not brought society any closer; if anything it has created entrenchment of the worse kind, with White supremacists and ghettoization of ethnic groups the norm. The offspring of the ghettoes is social isolation and a gang culture.
Moreover, a huge race industry has arisen, especially in America, whereby some have made a niche and seem to have cemented themselves in to that vacuum. Political bickering and jostling for position becomes a common occurrence, with each ‘spokesperson’ seeking political clout. The self interest of those who deem themselves spokesmen of their respective community may have little interest in equality as there is little power and wealth in such a solution.
The UK seems to be heading down that self-same road. We already have isolated communities, some by choice, but most by social economic reality. Gang horror has erupted in our streets, especially in London. Basement cultures emerge to give credence to the struggle to make sense of the environment and pride becomes the sole arbiter of self worth.
Moreover, there is a real danger that the white working class can end-up at the bottom of the heap. The sheer scale in terms of number makes it a dilemma, if a sub-culture takes root. A sub-culture so entrenched that the rules of engagement with the wider community are not what might be acceptable to the rest of us. How long before ghettoes are no-go areas? How long before whole suburbs become gated communities?
With stark reality as tall as a sequoia the PC brigade take no notice and still fritter their time away building their ‘showhouse’. It would seem that they plan to make the UK a ‘showhouse’ for the rest of the world to ogle at, admire, wish for, and finally copy. It’s such a glorious dream where everyone;
 talks politically correct language,
 treats each other with a PC attitude,
 lives a PC lifestyle,
 reads the PC bible,
 checks their P C dictionary everyday (changes might have to be made).

In the showhouse, ‘Affirmative Action’ sits side by side, on the couch, with ‘Equality Act’. ‘Sub Culture’ plays on a playstation in the front room, while ‘Human Rights’ does weights in the back yard and ‘Working Class’ is under the stairs sucking it’s thumb .
But, but, but, and here’s the best bit – they all live happily ever after.

I see trees of green, red roses….



Sham     Sham     Sham

Sham:-  false, counterfeit or pretended; insincere.

That’s it folks, the perfect word to sum up politicians and much of that they impose upon us. Our lives are dominated by the decisions made by politicians, yet they rarely ask for our opinion. Why not?

There are several words that are used by ordinary people to describe our masters:

  • Accursed
  • Bickering
  • Chancer

You could probably work through a dictionary and find a word beginning with each letter of the alphabet that best sums them up in your own mind. (have a go).

We are all led to believe that democracy is the pinnacle of political development; that it is a safeguard against dictatorship and communism. That the parliament we elect serves our needs and thus is a true representative process.

“Free elections of masters does not abolish masters and slaves”.              Herbert Marcuse.

While the rhetoric might be O.T.T. the basic thrust is spot on. We elect politicians to serve our community only to find they serve themselves.

So we have one agenda but it seems members of parliament (M.P.) have their own:

  • Self
  • Party
  • Expenses
  • Income
  • Politics?

What type of person goes into politics?

“He knows nothing; and he thinks he knows everything. That points clearly to a political career”. George Bernard Shaw.

When elected to parliament they are hooked on the Party reel. They are not allowed to vote as they see fit unless they are granted a ‘free vote’. The party expects them to tow the line or they will be reeled in by the ‘whips’.

Whips:- The Prime Minister’s  (P.M.) security guard who are sent round members to ensure that they follow the dictated line and turn up to vote.

When the government want to pursue a particular policy they impose a ‘whip’. A three line whip means every member of the Party is expected/ duty bound, to vote for the government policy. The M.P. is not allowed to vote on conscience or, heaven forbid, to vote for what the people want. That’s just not cricket, old boy.

Of course, the PM is the big guy (usually) and once ensconced in his seat, he hires an army of advisors. Obviously there’s no one in the Party good enough or trustworthy enough to do the job. What does that tell us? There’s even a guy to keep the PM popular. Get a new job; that would be popular!

Caucus,                                after caucus,     after caucus

Caucus:- a small dominant group of people taking independent decisions within a larger organization.

The PM usually meets with:

  • Advisors
  • Inner cabinet
  • Full cabinet
  • Then to parliament.

How many MP’s get a say on the policy issues? What’s the point of electing someone who has to do what they’re told? What part of the process is democratic?

Democracy is supposed to be bottom up. The reality is very much top down. This is more akin to Democratic Centralism, (Trotsky & Lenin).

They make promises, we elect them

They forget?, we regret.

Perhaps they need reminding:

“A statesman is a politician who places himself at the service of the nation. A politician is a statesman who places the nation at his service”. Georges Pompidou, (late French president)

The wheels on the bus go round and round……..(sing along) And soon it’s time to kiss our babies, shake our hands and agree with all of our demands; out comes the goody bag with little sweeteners for us all.

The promise bag:

  • tough on crime
  • tough on immigration
  • tough on scroungers
  • tough on tax loopholes
  • tough on the rich

Tough, tough, tough- it’s all a load of puff! (Puff? You may have a different word in mind.)

Promises made

promises broken.

Hopes raised

Lies spoken.

Have you noticed a pattern? Politicians know what the people want but will never deliver. Why not? If the electorate don’t fully grasp the ‘possible’ of government, why don’t MP’s explain instead of treating us like imbeciles.

If politicians never listen, why vote? Simple, by not voting, you give them exactly what they want, election by default.

ME? I would make voting compulsory. Why?

Imagine the situation; 1,000,000 people vote for the Concerned Radicals Alliance Party (C.R.A.P). It could be 2m or 3m; aided by a free massive internet publicity drive.

Vote C.R A.P. and get rid of the ….!

There wouldn’t be enough toilets in the Houses of Parliament, to cope with the diarrhoea. (Diarrhoea? You can use your own shorten version.)

You have the power!



Sharing words of wisdom..let it……

For the present coalition government, a message

“…in politics the middle way is none at all” John Adams (1735-1826)

Does this suggest that Cameron & Clegg are slow learners?

For the PM Cameron:

“The concessions of the weak are concessions of fear”. Edmund Burke

And Nick Clegg, the little partner:

“It is impossible that the whisper of a faction should prevail against the voice of the nation”. Lord John Russell (1792-1878)

You gotta have faith…..

“All the ills of democracy can be cured by more democracy”.

Alfred E Smith, NY Times 1933