The problem with families

I see the experts have been at it again with this report into criminality in so-called 'feckless families'. You have to love an expert; they pour millions of pounds and years of research time into discovering what most of us have known all along.

Over the years experts have revealed some 'startling' correlations:

• Children educated at grammar schools go to better universities.
• People who work harder usually earn more money.
• If you pay more in benefits than for work, people will choose benefits.
• Flooding a region with immigrants increases racist attitudes.
• The bigger the government the greater the cluster-fuck
• The European Onion[sic] - see above. And now,
• Problem families are, ahem, 'a problem'

The 1942 Beveridge Report identified five "Giant Evils" in society. (How much better if that had been 'Five Giant Elvises'?) These were named as squalor, ignorance, want, idleness and disease. And Louise Casey's £448million, three-year study has discovered what the neighbors would have told her in minutes - the five giant evils have proved to be more resilient than all the misguided efforts to eradicate them.

Charles Darwin posited the principle of natural selection, in which nature favours the survival of those mutations most suited to exploit their environment. In this case the environment is the welfare state and it seems the fittest mutations are the very same incestuous, abusive, criminal scum themselves. Many of nature's most successful species are parasites, which not only manufacture more copies of themselves, but do it at a faster rate than anything else. (Is this starting to sound familiar yet?)

For years governments have engaged in sticking plaster policies - treating the symptoms, not the disease - in the hope that the ailment might clear up on its own. (Or sometimes in the certain knowledge that they'd only be in the job for a couple more years, so sod it.) But after decades of increasingly expensive treatments it's clear the cancer has spread. 

The only way to get rid of many parasites is to destroy the host and even the Labour Party experts are now catching onto the fact that society as a whole is no longer willing to foot the bill. But the host has grown too big and, as the Eagles once said, "They stab it with their steely knives but they just can't kill the beast."

Maybe not. But isn't it about time we starved the fucker to death?

Does my country look big in this?

So, I didn’t blog yesterday; I have much ground to cover, hence today’s is a bit of a collective rant.

Over the weekend, @PlasticAussie posted on Twitter, this link about ‘Ping Pong Poms’ in which the narrow-mindedness of Western Australians is criticised. "A cat stuck up a tree or an out-of-control house party is more likely to get a run on the 7pm news than the Syrian uprising or the economic crisis that the rest of the world is facing …" Well, I’m sorry love, but isn't that just an example of a certain sense of proportion?

Australia has never really entertained the notion of itself as a major player on the world stage - maybe it's time we reined in our own ambitions? Big isn’t always beautiful as many large organisations have come to find out. In staging the biggest sporting competition on Earth we are not only thrusting ourselves once more into the international limelight but risking exposing our credibility – or lack of it - to the scrutiny of the whole planet.

G4S is the biggest security company in the world, but as with all large organisations, they have a charge sheet of incompetence that stretches back years. The widely reported G4S Olympic security fiasco is simply the latest in a predictable series of blunders that naturally arise whenever the human numbers get big.

The NHS is another behemoth whose very size mitigates against its competence. Size matters. The more people involved in anything, the greater the odds of catastrophe. And in our current big-state nightmare incompetence is practically a watchword for anything the government – any government – lays its hands on. Such as the utterly inept twenty-four-year accounting cul-de-sac that is the DWP.

The unforgiveable rise in our population during the last government’s tenure is yet another example: The article states one reason as “robust fertility levels” Oh yes, robust amongst whom? Among the hard-working middle classes that carefully cost out their decisions and pay for all the others? I rather think not. Ironically, nowhere is fertility more ‘robust’ than in the sector of the population we fear the most and are most directly responsible for the sheer size of the Olympic security operation in the first place. 

Oh yes, it all fits. In the ridiculous pursuit of universal individual liberty and happiness, we have lost control of our borders, our population and our culture. And with it, our old place in the wider world. We have pandered to the absurd notion that given freedom, humans can be trusted to behave responsibly and make good choices. We have embraced a big is beautiful ethos that finds its absurd apotheosis in this story, which frankly, is a whole load of arse. 

Does my enormous arse look big in this?

See? That's what letting people make decisions leads to. Do we want our country to look like the biggest arse on the globe? It strikes me that striving for a bit less freedom and happiness in the world would go a long way to sorting out the trouble.

The tip of the iceberg

A controversial ban on circumcision has roused a pointed protest in Germany.

Muslim and Jewish groups are tumescent with outrage, Rabbis and Imams coming together to stand erect, side by side.

"At the end, it's no laughing matter", spat out one prominent member "and we won't be shrinking from our responsibilities to our members." At the crowning moment, the very apex of his speech, he ejaculated, "This has to end! There must be a cut-off point!" and to roars of approval from the swelling crowd, "Stop dicking about with tradition!"

Likening the ban - as always - to the atrocities wrought in the holocaust he delayed his climax until the last possible moment, "We will not give headway until this matter is resolved to the satisfaction of all parties!" The crowd subsided, happy and spent after all their exertions.

A protesting Nazi penis, yesterday

What did your last slave die of?

[singing] Ru-pert, Rupert the bear, everyone sing his name! Nobody was more surprised  than I to hear what Rupert's Bear's friends, the dear old gypsies, have been up to. After all, the loveable Romany rascals are renowned for their deep sense of social justice and their celebration of diversity, with the odd big, fat wedding or bare-knuckle fight thrown in for shits and giggles.

But it seems that, what with the lucky heather and clothes peg trade being in decline and all, this much-maligned, yet gravely misunderstood community has had to reluctantly resort to slavery to make ends meet. Surprised, I said, but really Rupert and I were shocked! I mean we had no idea that these normally exemplary, law-abiding folk, who never do any more harm than cleaning up the odd tonne or two of live copper cable from along the railway embankments as they go about their traditional a-roaming, could ever contemplate such a thing.

Rupert told me he's afraid that, as well as lawless racist thugs, inbred retards and thieves they'll now be branded as slave traders too. I put him straight though and told him that such a thing would be a grave slur on their traditionally peaceable character. They're not slave traders at all, Rupert, I said; they're slave owners. A very different thing altogether, I'm sure you'll agree.

Rupert then asked me how low we have sunk when in the name of diversity we can tolerate these sub-human worms. The same applies, Rupert said, to all those seeking to impose radical Islamic on the UK, plunder our savings, import criminals from the east or squander our national wealth on supporting the European Marxist project. I replied that he couldn't consolidate all these disparate groups into one convenient hate target, but he said he could and he bloody well would. And then he stomped off to go and have a rant with Tiger Lily.

But he has a point, hasn't he? There is something deeply wrong with a society so afraid of giving offence that we shrink from a solemn duty to protect out shores and our citizens and our way of life from such invasions, liberty-taking and wrong-doings. Instead, I work all my life and end up with nothing except an obligation to keep paying for the cunts; whichever particular branch of cuntery they espouse.

So, next time you have a slave turn up at your door and ask, in the traditional Roma accent, "Would y'be after wanting y're droive Tarmacced, bejaysus?" you might want to consider that we're all slaves now and ask yourself how we got into this godawful mess. More particularly, what do we intend to do to dig ourselves out and do we, as a society, actually have the stomach for it?

We put down dangerous animals. Humans are the most dangerous animals there are and more dangerous still when there is no perceived restraint to their activities. Those who most endanger our society, by whatever means, should not be given mere prison sentences, they should be locked down forever, or else transported, preferably to Rockall or a desert, or better still left to dangle from the end of a rope.

Do have a lovely weekend. xxx

Mental

Grist to my mill to see this Daily Mail article which considers a supposed human right to claim benefits and lead a comfortable standard of living. Yet this isn't a comedy sketch and nobody is laughing. (In fact, the removal of the sense of humour from the national psyche seems to be yet another part of the Socialist project to destroy all that was once good about the British - will the last comedian standing please turn off the lights?)

We live in a world where, it seems, individual rights take precedent over the rights of the majority; over the national good. From a once-upon-a-time where children were to be seen but not heard, today the mewling infant is given immediate succour and an example is set for the rest of its life. Scream and ye shall gain.

From the shrieking demands of various left-wing special interests, we end up with the ridiculous notion of equality AND diversity being conjoined in a single oxymoronic phrase. All must have prizes, all must be happy and if governments have to pay people not to riot, which is what we're really talking about here, so be it. Anything rather than face reality.

And the reality is that equality is a delusion that could only be swallowed whole and supported by the mentally ill.

It used to be a joke when, in the nineteen seventies, the criminals' arrest mantra "I know my rights" began to be taken up by one and all in a disturbing swell of individual entitlement. Now, everybody knows that the rights of the criminal far exceed the apparent rights of their victims. Habitual offenders hypocritically demand personal rights to trespass even as they deny those rights to those they trespass against.

Where is the right not to be burgled, the right not to feel a minority in the country of your ancestors, the right not to have to hand over every penny of your life's earnings to get what others - the idle - get for free? If you have the right to choose indolence, surely I have the right NOT to pay for your choice?

The only winners here are natural criminals. By natural criminals I mean those who want what I've got without having to work for it - a dole-monkey is no different from a burglar. Or a criminal defence lawyer, for that matter. Because those who aid and abet crime are themselves part of the crime.

Once upon a time two things would have been certain in the case of Hannah Bonser, the cold-blooded murderess jailed for killing a teenager for no reason whatsoever. The first is that it would probably have never happened. The second is that she would have been swiftly tried, found guilty and sentenced to death. But, her human right to deliberately interfere with her mental balance, coupled with her human right to therefore do what the fuck she wants, has led to a defence (thankfully failed, yet paid for by us – we’re all still victims here) that she was not accountable for her actions. 

You’d have to be mental to believe that this system of abused human rights legislation ought to be extended still further; even thinking about it is enough to drive you round the bend. When will we say enough is enough? Last year's rioters were criminals or the criminally stupid. Maybe the next crop will be judged merely criminally insane and thus not responsible for their deeds. 

Shoot me now.