Monday 30 April 2018

Opposition is easy

Well, it’s all change again. Overnight, the resignation (pushed?) of the Home Secretary has delighted the opposition and sent the government into panic. There is nothing which quite exemplifies the opposite of edifying as the sight of Labour’s dogs, snapping at the heels of Amber Rudd, spitting and snarling and sensing blood as they respond to the silent whistle of their master – grievance. We may be witnessing the death of the Conservative Party here; they have nothing to offer but independence.

And this is a big problem for politics generally. Ordinary people really should not be absorbed in the minutiae of governance in the same way government should not meddle in the minutiae of individual lives. Where your product is perfection, then micromanagement of every part of the process is essential. Where your product is in managing the unmanageable – human society – the less visible you are the better. Planned economies are failed economies, planned societies likewise.

I’m not saying you should have no interest in politics, but that interest should be directed at what the administration are doing to keep as far out of your lives as possible, concentrating on the bigger picture. If you look to others to determine your remuneration, your rent, the price you pay for your groceries and your overall spiritual well-being you really would be better off joining a cult. And this is why the Tories are dead in the water.

Nobody wants to hear the cold hard truth that the person who is most responsible for how your life turns out is you. Yes, it would be good if the streets were policed and people followed the rules. And it would be great if everybody had access to an education unfettered by faddish ideals and religious influences. And wouldn’t it be nice if we all earned enough to do what we want, within reason?

What the left - as typified by Corbyn’s crew - offers is to fix all the problems without any viable means of paying for it; they will rob those who produce to pacify those who don’t. And they can offer to do this because those who produce are generally too busy doing what they should be doing. Economies are not created by centralised committees but by the collective will of individual people making their own small decisions. This is what effective people do, all the time, often unaware that they are doing so.

In any economy there are winners and losers, but in strong, market economies the losers are still better off than the majority in planned, socialist economies. Yet this message is lost when you pander to the base instincts of the herd. We want more of this! We want less of that! Help me! Hurt them! And we demand that the person who did exactly what we might have done, no matter what we believed in, under the prevailing circumstances must pay with her career!

Is this really the best we can do?

Labour is the party of eternal opposition. Even in power it really knows only how to oppose. And you can always appeal to the disgruntled to form a mob and harry that which offends you. Want to know why there aren’t counter protests to support President Trump’s July visit when there are thousands ready and willing to go blue in the face screaming out hatred? It’s because being unhappy is easy. Being dissatisfied is a piece of piss. Exploiting people’s natural propensity to dissatisfaction is the lowest form of politics. But it may be all we have left.

Saturday 28 April 2018

Amber Alert

For those wondering – both of you – where I’ve been, I’ve been banned from Twitter again. The first time it was for calling a soppy cunt a soppy cunt, which I sort of believed was the whole point of Twitter. This time it is for a number of historical ‘offences’ relating to the religion of peas, to wit; three old tweets which mildly criticised and questioned islam’s intentions. Oddly, I wasn’t banned for the multiple occasions on which I have called islam an outright cunt, which of course, it is.

Now I hear that the government is going to spend my money – and yours – in framing a legal definition of islamophobia. Well, I can save us all a lot of money by offering a working definition right now. islamophobia: an entirely rational response to the imposition of third-world cultural norms, the domination of city skylines by alien cult-worshipping structures and subjugation of the native population to religious fervour and barbaric attitudes to any form of opposition. That do you?

But it’s not just islam we should be worrying about. There has been a ‘progressive’ assault on our liberties and identity over the last few decades, propelled by the ludicrous and palpably false dogma that all immigration is good immigration and non-European immigration is the best immigration of all. Not only are we expected to accept and absorb the strictures of islam, but we must also embrace the backward tribal enmities of machete wielding sub-Saharan African ingrates. London is not becoming the murder capital of the developed world because of pretty, young, Swedish exchange students.

And talking of the Nordic races, the Danish immigration minister has dared to say openly a truth that so many of our own politicians are too afraid to confront: Not all immigrants are good people here to contribute. Some lie and cheat and use our tolerance against us and we should not be afraid of calling them out. The muslim community has been playing a long game under our noses and doing exactly that for generations; soon we will have actual blasphemy laws, not just the ersatz ones that got me suspended and have seen a few people jailed.

Yet still, in the midst of clear public anger, fear and incomprehension that our governments cannot see that millions of minimum wage workers with eight kids apiece, living in segregated ghettoes are, far from contributing, creating a huge drain on resources, there is talk of an amnesty for illegal immigrants. An amnesty? For crying out loud, even a huge proportion of legal immigrants are problem enough; start legalising – because you admit defeat on finding and deporting – and where does it all end? How soon before all you need to do is get one person from an African village onto British soil to create a conduit to import all of the rest?

In a ludicrous radio discussion on Radio 4’s PM the other day it was even argued that if an illegal immigrant had been here paying taxes for years they should be given right to remain. What? How are they paying taxes without a National Insurance Number? And how did they get a NI number if they are not legally allowed to be here? And if they are paying taxes, how in hell do we not know who they are? It is little wonder that the general public, we little people, not in possession of all the facts, unable to comment wisely and unwise to comment negatively, are frustrated to boiling point by it all.

 'Alright lads, we're in England. You can come out now!'

So while the Labour Party are angrily trying to force Amber Rudd to resign, for an admittedly clumsy administrative oversight (come on, who reads and remembers every sodding work email they ever received?) they are hoping we will forget they also tried to appeal to the voters by doing the exact, same thing. Read our lips: we want immigration rules controlled, regulated, policed and ultimately enforced. And if that means a ‘hostile’ environment for law-breakers so be it. This is why Amber Rudd should not only stay in office, she should face up to her critics, tell them to fuck off and then do the same with every illegal her resources can uncover.

Tuesday 24 April 2018

By George!

Well, what a to-do. The PM tweets out a happy St George’s day – a tweet, mind, not a gushing video message like she generally does for islamic celebrations – the same day it is announced that henceforth we will have a national Stephen Lawrence Day. I thought it was Tony Blair who wanted to rub the right’s nose in diversity, but this Conservative government is doing just fine. Jeremy Corbyn, not to be outdone, announces that ‘when’ he is PM he will make St George’s Day a national holiday.

 But wait, surely celebrating that most English of days is anathema to the left, who want more than anything for there to be no more England. Well, see, it is well known that Dragon-boy George was a foreigner, so this is perfect; let’s rub in the fact that even our patron saint was an immigrant and furthermore never even darkened our shores. Corbyn says “If we win the next election, St George’s Day will become a national holiday for Britain’s workers. It will be a day where we can all show our pride and celebrate our country’s tradition of fairness, inclusivity and social justice.”

Oh, there’s all sorts of wrong, right there. For a start isn’t international communism’s May Day bank holiday supposed to be the workers’ national holiday? Also, I very much doubt that the Jocks and Taffs will welcome St George into their hearts. And as for that last phrase - fairness, inclusivity and social justice – well, that’s just a substitution for ‘equality and diversity’ really, isn’t it, the imposition of which appears to be deliberately intended to lay waste to all vestiges of pride in a national identity.

Did he just not register the Brexit vote? Or maybe he didn’t listen to the repeated telling of why the vote went against all the efforts of the establishment; despite the confected tales of impending doom and disaster people still felt strongly enough to say no to more displaced and disconnected governance. Maybe kindly Uncle Jeremy still believes that the Islington set is somehow representative of the wishes of the horny-handed sons of toil his party tossed aside years ago, favouring identity politics ahead of genuine purpose.

But at least he hasn’t abandoned a central plank of Labour’s electoral folly adding to his speech, “Eight years of Tory austerity, which Labour will bring to an end, have had a disastrous effect on our vital public services and workers have paid a heavy price in the cost of living and their working lives. We will give our workers four extra days’ paid holiday.” Hoorah! Or, to consider this in more grown-up detail, WTF?

The last Labour government, ahead of the banking crisis, mortgaged the farm and set it on course for bankruptcy. The Conservatives were elected to undertake the unpopular task of reining back the deficit, so just as we seem to be, finally, turning an economic corner here, comes the wrecking crew with their promises of jam tomorrow. And how will we pay for this jam, given that we still have a national productivity crisis? Why, we’ll take a few more days off, sitting on our arses and contemplating the miracle of multiculturalism, thank you very much.

Jeremy and the Dragon...

A Twitter meme is currently doing the rounds and the words read: “Do you know what the Tories hate the most about Jeremy Corbyn...people love him, we'd lay our lives to defend him, he's a dignified, courteous, gentleman, a man of integrity, a man of courage, he's everything that Theresa May is not, a politician with real conviction. #JC4PM” Well, many in the Labour Party do have convictions, criminal ones, but if those aren’t the words of a brainwashed cultist, I’m hard pressed to find a better example.

Tuesday 17 April 2018

That's Entertainment

Inform, educate, entertain – that’s the purpose of this blog. Oh and to let off a bit of steam, have a rant and generally lay down documentary evidence for my forthcoming hearing at the twenty-first century witch trials. Now that it is becoming illegal to even hold a personal opinion, much less express it, the day is drawing nearer when ‘being mean’ will be a capital offence. An ancillary but nevertheless important purpose of the blog is to occasionally ruffle some feathers.

And oh, do those feathers ruffle easily; I do love it, though, when I gently trigger a malcontent. All it takes is to type, say, ‘Enoch was right, you know’ and here they come. I get called a racist, a bigot, a hateful excrescence, a stain on humanity and deserving of a long and painful death. Or else be wished a life of such loveless misery that I must surely entertain thoughts of dispatching myself from this earthly realm, ideally via a botched attempt which leaves me fully conscious and in agony for hours. The left do vitriol like no others.

Woah there fella, ‘the left’? Do you think the left are all gibbering imbeciles with no mind of their own? Do you think ‘the left’ as you so dismiss them, comprise nothing more than zombie cultists, eagerly lapping up the crumbs from Jeremy Corbyn’s philosophical table? Are you so blinkered as to believe ‘the left’ do not understand the economy, human nature, honour, national pride and selection on merit? Do you think people on the left are incapable of having an original thought, or are entirely involved in occupations which offer no value to society?

To which I reply, “You said it” and “broadly accurate”. To those on the left the economy can be harnessed for the good of us all. A laudable ambition, for sure, but experience has shown that planned economies generate market inefficiencies. Attempting to appeal to people’s sense of restraint will fall on deaf ears when shortages arise; the first thing most people do when a supply of a good falls is to stockpile it, thus hastening its disappearance from the shelves. Left-wing economic practice is hopeless at meeting demand.

To those on the left, the law can be applied evenly and fairly to all. In order to do this, every last facet of human action and speech can be regulated, categorised, graded and be given a suitably corrective tariff. “Thou shalt not be unkind!” sayeth the left and behold there came a great tide of legislation on race, association, affiliation and acceptable expression of same. Even thought can be divined from speech and thus proscribed. Left-wing legislation is counter-productive in bringing about peace and harmony.

The left believe there should be no more war and they will bring this about by preventing those most able to limit the death and destruction from acting. We will entreat with sworn enemies and they will see the sense. We will lay down our weapons and throw open our arms and our borders and we will welcome our adversaries into our homes, the better that we can educate them and show them the light. If only they would stop hating us so much. Left wing sentiment is largely responsible for the wave of terrorism sweeping through Europe these past few years.

Yesterday in Parliament

"But how can you give the far right a free ride?" they ask. I don’t. But the supposed far right is no more than a disorganised and widely despised rabble and the supposed rise is little more than a fiction. When you are on the left you think you are among the reasonable; of course everybody who disagrees seems like a dangerous lunatic. But consider this: like the eternal battle between god and evolution, leftism requires an enormous, complex and imperfect set of rules, enforced by armies of officials, bureaucrats, policemen and the like, whereas rightism simple needs those overbearing constraints to be dissolved. When you’re seeking the truth, keep it simple, stupid!

Friday 13 April 2018

The Enemy Within

What’s in a word? Common, commonality, communion, communal, communist... Common Purpose. Outwardly CP looks a little like a secular version of the church’s Alpha Course which seeks to softly indoctrinate those vulnerable to Christianity into a deeper belief. Take a bunch of people predisposed to believe and feed that predisposition. Good for the church, I guess, which needs all the faith it can marshal. But at least the Alphas don’t – as far as we know – seek to control society. Common Purpose very much does.

‘Leading Across Boundaries’ sounds an all very laudable and suitably harmless, new-age, happy-clappy evangelical mission. They say they seek to banish prejudice, break down barriers and allow people with shared values to work together. What’s not to like? After all isn’t this just the same as a commercial company’s ethos of branding and identification? But who has never found the gurning, excitable, badge bedecked indoctrinees waiting at table at TGI Fridays more than a little unnerving?

CP aims to create ‘Future Leaders of Society’ and those it calls its graduates are instructed on how to pull the levers of power in order to ‘lead outside authority’. Leading outside authority effectively means circumventing the obstacles which prevent we mere mortals from having our concerns heard. Of course, if you have a secret-handshake direct line to those who handle those levers, yours are the only voices heard. This is exactly what they are after.

The burglar and serial swindler of pensioners, Henry Vincent, was a low-life from the ironically named ‘traveller' community. His death is not something those he sought to defraud would wish to mourn, so the shrine erected in his memory in the area he tried to rob is an affront to common decency. Not so, say the police – widely reputed to be ‘riddled’ with Common Purpose graduates – it is a dignified remembrance of a loved one deceased. Once again the authorities, it seems, are taking sides.

Whether Common Purpose is as effective as it has been billed is open to debate but it is undeniable that the levers of power rarely seem to work the machinery to the benefit of the wider public, rather concentrating on the rights of those whose purpose is decidedly uncommon, at variance to the purpose of a harmonious world. How often are complainants warned that their objections are mere bigotry, injurious to the common good?

Hardly the Illuminati, Common Purpose does not seek to hide; it operates in plain sight, safe in the knowledge that until people are directly affected they will do little to oppose them. But the sense of being ruled by a shadowy elite persists and this, of course, is one of their bushiest beards. They are a registered charity. Yes, they do select and train future leaders, but for the good of us all; what could be sinister about that, they will say? Of course they are everywhere, they seek to reach out across divides; what could be less sinister?

As a serial eschewer of conspiracy theories, Common Purpose is a good one. They are the good guys, surely? If you imagine they are otherwise maybe that’s just your fevered mind working overtime. Take a chill pill, calm down; nobody wants to hurt you. But is this bluff, double-bluff, or what? What is plain, however, is that there is a new orthodoxy abroad and those who act counter to the politically correct doctrine are readily pilloried and marginalised by authority. How much easier is that for them to do, if they do, indeed, have something in common?

Tuesday 10 April 2018

Booted up

Democracy has been served and Viktor Mihály Orbán stays in power in Hungary. But what’s this I hear, the wrong sort of democracy? The ‘D’ word is often used to denote freedom, a form of decision-making where even the lowliest has his say. But should the will of one person be exactly equivalent to that of another person? Should an employer of many people, provider of many livings only have the same clout as those who serve him? Should a nurse’s priorities carry the same weight as a soldier’s, a judge’s as those of a petty thief? Come to it, what do you mean by democracy?

The people who didn’t like the outcome of the referendum nevertheless generally support proportional representation, under which system we would still have narrowly voted for Brexit. Our first-past-the-post system is a form of democracy, but is widely open to fraud and gerrymandering; would that have returned the ‘correct’ referendum vote? Was a simple majority enough and if not, what margin would be acceptable? In Britain we are so neatly split down the middle that practically any referendum on any issue who’s outcome isn’t clear beforehand is going to have a narrow outcome.

Winston Churchill said in 1947 “Many forms of Government have been tried, and will be tried in this world of sin and woe. No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time...” And he was right. Elevate a despot to power and your precious freedom is gone. Make it a free-for-all and much the same outcome ensues. We value our freedoms and our protections and our democracy gives us them, but...

Democracy is divisive; it produces winners and losers. In Britain it means that most of the time, close to 50% of the population are pissed off, the only consolation being that from time to time we get to swap the misery. But this is the game we’re in and it almost always better to make a decision than to muddle along without one, even though large-scale opposition to those decisions is inevitable. One thing noticeable in the divide, however, is that when the broadly right are in opposition they moan a bit but then get back to work because, after all, they’re paying for everything and moaning doesn’t get the work done.

When the left are in opposition, however, bitching and moaning takes on a whole new meaning. Largely freed of the need to keep the economy afloat – public sector jobs are a cost, not a contribution and many on the left are unemployed, students, etc – they can launch demonstrations, go on strike, flood social media with commentary and generally make a nuisance of themselves. They may be in the technical minority, but boy do they have a loud voice!

The rise of the right? Let history judge.

Right now the left, although preternaturally vocal, are fighting for their survival. The socialist EU super state is being challenged and the sucklers on its teats are not happy. They call democracy ‘populism’ in order to discredit  it and warn of ‘the rise of the far right’, by which they mean you and me. And Orbán’s re-election is – in their propaganda – one step away from Mussolini. But have a good look at the left. Listen to their words, see their actions. Whose feet are the jackboots really on?

Monday 9 April 2018


Let’s try a little thought experiment. Imagine, just for one second, that the Labour Party has good in its heart. Let us, for a while, entertain the notion that people like John McDonnell honestly hold their views. Let’s put aside their visceral malice towards their political rivals and just take them at their word. They are the nice party, the caring party; they have the monopoly on kindness. So, how would a Labour government change anything at all in a meaningful way, which would bring about all the things they claim to stand for?

Alan Sugar was ennobled by the Labour Party, but he left them over Ed Miliband’s hopeless leadership and is once more attacking their hard left, anti-Zionist stance; they don’t much like Alan over at Momentum Central. To be fair he had no business being in the party in the first place, but like many from working class roots he naturally admired their former championing of the working man. But – and here’s the nub of it – despite the high talk Labour hates social mobility. Get on in life and you’ll become a class traitor in their eyes.

This is particularly exemplified by their determination to eradicate grammar schools. How dare schools stretch pupils and give them ideas above their station? And how dare they promote the idea that some can and will achieve more than others? When Tony Blair said “Our top priority was, is and always will be education, education, education...” I am willing to believe he was sincere. But the trouble with education is that young people learn to reason. Maybe the mantra would more correctly be rendered as ‘indoctrination, indoctrination, indoctrination’.

Even this can be excused if you accept that the world would be a happier place if we all just tolerated each other and rubbed along, but in their admirable zeal to ‘rescue’ the ‘most vulnerable in society’ they simply do not see the reality. Despite socialism’s best efforts people do eventually begin to think for themselves and it’s all a matter of perspective; when you are young and broke it seems entirely reasonable that others should ‘do more’ (pay) to improve your lot. When you are old and rich, like Lord Sugar, it is easy to be charitable and donate directly. It’s just everybody else wherein the problem lies.

The real fear for Labour is that once people start to make larger than average tax contributions they have the annoying tendency to want to know how their money is being spent. And once you begin to question the profligacy of flawed policies throwing money at lost causes, it is inevitable that your sympathies become somewhat dissipated. Labour simply cannot be the tide that lifts all boats because at their core they are all about robbing the rich. And the rich often used to be the poor.

Forget the current round of anti-Semitism, that is just another symptom of the Labour disease. Ideology harbours contradictions and equality is the most malign ideology there is; outwardly harmless, it slowly drives its host mad. Because in order to bring about equality you have to practise inequality and penalise those you used to praise. And just like a whipped dog that one day turns on its persecutor, when the policies that once controlled you now arouse your anger, your perspective shifts. That thought experiment? Think again.

Friday 6 April 2018

Oh, honey honey!

When The Archies hit number one in the US Billboard Hot 100 in 1969 they sang, “You are my candy girl, and you've got me wanting you.” Oh, those far away days of innocence and youth and a little of what you fancy. But we got greedy. We wanted much more of what we fancied and cheered on by the marketing giants what we fancied was being carefully moulded and refined behind the scenes so that we would yearn for the instruments of our own destruction.

A survey announced yesterday claimed that two-thirds of British people felt they were living their own Groundhog day, doomed to repeat the same old routines without fulfillment forever and ever. This is what you get when you tell lumbering animals that they are better than they really are; that they have a higher purpose. But just as – from our perspective – a pig’s life is to eat and eat, grow fat quickly and then become bacon, the purpose of the average human in the west is to consume, to fuel the machine and then in turn be consumed by it

All the inspirational, aspirational lifestyle advertising and sloganizing has but one aim; whether it is a political party, a car manufacturer or a purveyor of breakfast cereal, the message is simple: buy what we are selling and you will become a better person. This groundhog day phenomenon is simply realisation setting in. Or, rather realisation not setting in, by which I mean that despite the simple truth that mankind is just another animal, its individuals truly want to believe they are better.

Not so many generations ago just surviving from one year to the next was a celebration. Easter was a collective sigh of relief for having made it through the winter and after the long, dull nights it was time to redouble efforts to grow a bigger crop for next year. Groundhog day, involving actually waking up tomorrow and doing it all again, was almost a bonus. Those few individuals who broke out of the mould and became leaders and artists and entrepreneurs were – and are – very much the exception.

And if you need any more convincing that your monotonous life really is all that you deserve, just look at what your actions produce. But it’s still not enough, is it? You need somebody else to somehow alter the consequences of your decisions. You want to eat too much sugar and not get fat. You want to spend all your money but still have a healthy bank balance. You want to vote Labour and not remain poor. You want to vote Conservative and not have to compete. In short you want to complain about Groundhog Day when you’re not prepared to step out of it. 

You want to change your life? Well it’s not up to others; don’t listen to them. You need to stop complaining about how other people are holding you back. You climb break out of your rut and re-shape your life. You need to get up off your arse and start grafting. You’re not going to get the Coca-Cola lifestyle and still keep your gym body unless you’re prepared to give something. If you really want to reduce your glucose intake you shouldn't have to wait for government to tax you into doing it. It might actually come easy; it’s more likely to be hard, but it’s not going to happen at all unless you 'just do it'. Or did you want me to sugar-coat that?

Tuesday 3 April 2018

Don't you just hate that?

Alison Saunders says she won’t be renewing her contract. This is a contract that is now widely known wasn’t going to be renewed anyway. Why do unpopular people make slow-moving targets of themselves so regularly? This isn’t so much jumping before pushed as indicating when you’re already on the slip road. But what is Alison’s greatest legacy during her time as Director of Public Prosecutions, heading up the Crown Prosecution Service? Assessed like most other service industries, on the expansion of their ‘customer base’ you’d have to say she’s done a bang-up job. But turning us all into criminals is hard to describe as any form of success.

Imagine you are on a bus in any large city in the UK and a very fat woman in a burka gets on. She addresses the driver in a language you cannot fathom, then lumbers her way towards you, the only person occupying a double seat. Knowing there are free seats upstairs and with several stops to go, you vacate your seat and allow her to sit as you head upstairs. A low murmur comes from nearby, but you think nothing of it. When, a few stops later, you descend the stairs you are greeted by and escorted from the bus by the police. What was your crime?

You are not being charged with maliciously affording a seat to a lady – that would be sexist. Nor are you aiding and abetting the recognition of disability – that would be ableist. And fat-shaming. Thinking that beneath the burka was a woman is also assuming her gender, which is transphobic and not addressing the new passenger in her native language, or engaging the services of an interpreter could be construed as xenophobic since Mrs Saunders’ tenure in post. (Actually, referring to Alison Saunders as ‘Mrs’, even though that is her title, could, in itself be construed as a crime.) Nobody dare mention the burka.

No, you need not be charged with anything so specific and practically anybody on the bus could have denounced you to the Thought Crime Unit, because you are guilty without any form of trial of hate. Yep, you nasty, nasty, hatey bastard. It’s too late to try and defend yourself by claiming you were merely offering a seat to a lady; you could have budged up a bit but no, by leaving the seat altogether you have caused offence on a level capable of inciting actual violence among the more ‘misunderstood’ communities. Consider yourself lucky you weren’t lynched.

Lest you are unaware, the CPS definition of a hate crime is: 

"Any criminal offence which is perceived by the victim or any other person, to be motivated by hostility or prejudice, based on a person's disability or perceived disability; race or perceived race; or religion or perceived religion; or sexual orientation or perceived sexual orientation or transgender identity or perceived transgender identity."

They further ‘clarify’:

There is no legal definition of hostility so we use the everyday understanding of the word which includes ill-will, spite, contempt, prejudice, unfriendliness, antagonism, resentment and dislike.”

And the departing DPP seems to actually be proud of this. So, well done Alison. You really won’t be missed.

Monday 2 April 2018

April Fools

We return once again to a timeless classic; what is the point of the Labour Party? I’m serious. Where once Keir Hardie’s band of brothers joined the struggle to wrest workers’ rights from the hands and whims of capricious High-Church philanthropists; where once the impetus was to put the means of production under the control of those who toiled, now it is, what, to turn out victims? In an effort to be all things to some men (the others are out at work) Labour has totally lost the plot as quickly as it has just lost its grip on the moral high ground.

After the failures of the overly-mighty union days and the overwhelming evidence that having horny-hands on the levers of industrial power is not such a great idea because they don’t always play nice, the parliamentary Labour Party needed a new mission. Having essentially lost control of and hence interest in the workers they decided that what society really needed was a ground-up remodelling. Hence the rise and rise of the special interests groups; but, when everybody has special needs, nobody is particularly special any more.

The moral crusades of the last few decades have not been about uniting the majority of the population in a common cause, but about dividing society into ever more nuanced variations. Variety may be the spice of life but nobody lives on spice alone... and too much spice can give you indigestion. It is little wonder then, that in a world where the microscope is used to discern the slightest difference on which to squander public money, scant attention is paid to the much wider world beyond the eyepiece. Forget them; they’re all right, Jack. All we need from them is the tax they must pay.

To the socialist, all money comes from tax. They have no interest in how the wealth which attracts that tax is generated. So, in order to feed the burgeoning equality and diversity industry, ever more government jobs need to be created, replete with all the hard-won rights won by workers who actually grafted to create the wealth that is now being squandered. Government jobs create no wealth. Government jobs outside the essential services and bureaucracies to administer them create no value either. But at least they come with tenure, eh?

Once again the laws of unintended consequences rise up from the depths to bite them on the arse. Why work hard to acquire a useful skill, a trade, a saleable portfolio of competencies when you can turn to the state instead. No father of Old Labour would have said “Today, son, I’m going to show you how to be a loser, a needy person.” But today it could be deemed useful advice. And if you can’t actually be a loser, you can always train to recognise and serve those losers, by joining the army of occupations that start with socio and end in misery.

This is the socialist mire: The more state jobs are needed to serve the dependency culture the smaller is the talent pool for productive employment. Taxes rise. The more capital flees, the greater the demand for state assistance. Labour’s solution? Yet more government intervention and an expansion of the system which created the problems in the first place. Eventually all you have is a machine for spewing out ever more demand for resources and no more resources to go around.

Trust me - there's nobody here but us chickens...

How do you sell this pack of trivialities and neediness to a wider public fed up of seeing the squeaky wheels of protest getting all the grease? Apparently, you recruit even squeakier wheels and put them in positions of power. Men on all-women short-lists; women on the boards of heavy industries entirely composed of male workers; perpetual victims to play the role of advocates for ever more wasted spending; foxes in charge of hen houses. And Eddie Izzard on the NEC. Send in the clowns.