Revolting Peasants

With the jailing of Jayda Fransen and Paul Golding vanishes the last vestiges of any notion that the establishment is on the side of the English. While you might thoroughly despise Fransen & Golding for their openly patriotic and jingoistic views and their demonising of the islamic community as a whole, you would have to be pretty partisanally left-wing to agree that jail time is an appropriate corrective. Jail; where they both risk actual physical harm – something they never inflicted on their antagonists – for standing up for what they believe. 

Not a single mosque desecrated – and I, for one, would happily see these offensive eyesores bulldozed into rubble – nobody tortured, no rabid ranting about and incitement to violence and certainly no trail of severed heads; they have never, under police protection stopped the traffic and displayed a show of contempt for the law and greater society. While they might have expressed their feelings with some vehemence, their crusade has always remained within what they understood of the law and been motivated by beliefs which have effectively been made shameful.

This cultural apartheid – where proud English people (Scots, Welsh & Irish are exempted from the opprobrium) are effectively forbidden from demonstrating a love for their heritage – is breaking up the nation far more effectively than an invading force ever could. Perceived hate crime is pursued and prosecuted vigorously, while actual perpetrators of violent and frequently fatal savagery are accorded the full courtesy of the human rights they would so readily deny others.

Something is wrong; something is rotten and it has its roots in the same fertile lowlands that gave rise to Brexit, Trump, AfD, MS5 and all the populist movements across the world. Fransen and Golding and ‘Tommy Robinson’ and for that matter Katie Hopkins and Pat Condell are the public faces of those who dare to speak out. They do not represent a tiny minority of dangerous ‘far-right’ activists. Rather they represent a great many millions of civilised, decent, hard-working, humble people who see their liberties curtailed and their life chances limited, their values expunged from acceptable society.

Is this what you want?

Make no mistake, there are dark currents which would seize the malcontent and make mischief; there are undoubtedly genuine neo-Nazis who would want to harness this sentiment. But most people are not and never will be neo-Nazis. It is not the imaginary hordes of far right crusaders the establishment should fear, but the masses, the greater rump of decent society, quietly clenching a collective fist and nodding along, adding their voices to the murmur. When we peasants finally revolt it is going to be tumultuous.  

Porridge

Now it’s not like me to come to the defence of socialism, but the ‘official’ Socialist Party of Great Britain, while espousing an impossible form of societal madness, at least recognises that they will only reach their nirvana if people travel willingly. Unlike the more traditional, genocidal socialist ideologies, they accept that their common ownership, free love, give-peas-a-chance model will only come about when a clear majority want it. So don’t expect any ‘real socialism’ to be tried any time soon.

Most people don’t need to be told how to behave; most of us – especially the most British of us – go out of our way to avoid conflict. We open doors, say a polite ‘good morning’ and ‘no, please, after you’ and feel compelled to apologise should somebody barge into us in a crowd. You may call it passive aggressive but anybody truly British knows that a mere exasperated ‘tut’ can bring a recalcitrant queue-jumper to heel without the need for any police involvement, stabbing or playground slaughter.

On the whole we are a pretty law-abiding, peaceful lot, happy to be live and let live and rub along, playing nicely... until somebody gets our goat. Goat-getting is not something we take kindly and woe-betide the miscreant who disturbs the herd. If the tutting wasn’t deterrent enough we have a whole armoury of post-facto solutions to prevent re-offending. Ostracisation works pretty well at a group level. Beyond that we have censure and a range of other sanctions at our disposal.

We can forbid, fine, flog – wait, we stopped doing that (shame) – but we can also re-educate, re-train or even re-programme until people step back into line. Ultimately we can remove people from society; the threat of imprisonment ought to inspire sufficient dread that only the truly irredeemable would risk it. At least in theory this is how it works. Rehabilitation, sure, but let’s get the punishment element straight first.

David Gauke yesterday said prisons should be “places of hope, not despair”. To be fair, he was announcing a whole series of reforms (which will, of course, never come about; they never do) to improve not only the protection of the wider population but also vulnerable inmates from the violence, drugs and islam which infect our penal system. Of course prisoners should be helped to change their ways – otherwise we may as well just vapourise them on, say, the third custodial conviction - but that is a different issue. Bird should not be preferred; it should be the penance you do in order to recognise the error of your ways.

The population is rising and changing at an alarming rate and with it the prison population. It doesn’t help that new crimes are being invented at the drop of a wolf whistle. But is criminalising half the population in the name of social change the right thing to do? A misplaced personal pronoun is not the province of the police, neither is preferring to employ one group rather than another. Our police ‘service’ has become a joke as minor infringements of social mores have become hate crimes and place strain on an already creaking system.

Norman Stanley Fletcher... happier times

The SPGB is right; we will only get the society we want when everybody decides to practice what they preach. So how about, instead of demanding ever more sanctions for acting outside the models which the shrieking ‘progressives’ dictate, we maintain prisons as places of despair and keep as many people as possible out of them. Crime will continue (when has it not?) and in the meantime you really can trust the rest of us to behave ourselves. Nobody hopes for porridge.

Democratic Deficit

Another week, another round of Brexit, the fantasy rise of the far right, the deification of the NHS and many pointless exchanges between people whose moral and intellectual vantage points are so disparate that seeing eye to eye would involve scaffolding. Honestly, it’s amazing we can even approach concord on anything at all. Oh, sure we all want peace and love, man, but why do we have to disagree so much on who we have to butcher to achieve it? And who gets to call the shots?

I was viciously mauled on Twitter by somebody calling themselves a ‘democratic socialist’ for not agreeing that every bad thing in the land was the fault of the Tories and that Jeremy Corbyn would change all of human history when he ascended to his holy throne. ‘Viciously mauled’ is, of course, code for ‘called a racist/sexist/all-purpose-bigot’ by somebody with no other weapons. Apt because, as is by now well-established, socialism doesn’t coexist comfortably with democracy and changing history is a fairly straightforward process when you have access to all the books, including one full of matches.

Democracy is an interesting notion; everybody applauds it when the vote goes their way, but denounces it when it doesn’t. So far, so very human, but what’s the alternative? And how do we decide what is and what isn’t democracy? For instance, here in the UK we have what we refer to as Parliamentary Democracy which means we have a periodic electoral bun fight and then the party with the most members of Parliament gets to ignore the people who put it in power. Being British we put up with this because we know our place.

Supposedly, we elect individual members who best support our interests as a constituency, but in reality we tend to vote for the party we think is most on our side. We do this from a low-information base and then we look on with horror and incomprehension as they then administer the power we gave them in ‘the wrong way’. No truly representative sample of voters, from any party, voted for the social changes wrought over the last two decades. So instead a minority ideology was unimpeded in paving the way for the closest thing to actually asking the demos we have ever had; the referendum.

A clear majority, albeit a small one, voted for a course of action. But the losing side insist on believing that every abstention is a tacit vote against the result; or that the votes of people yet to be born should be taken into account, because, of course, it’s their future as much as it ours. By that measure a massive majority did not vote for the motion and therefore must have voted against. Turning that argument on its head, of course, an even larger majority must have not voted against the motion and must, therefore... oh, you get the point.

But we don’t need to tot up imaginary votes to see the contradictions of democracy; it seems that even then you only include actual ballots cast you can end up with undesirable outcomes. As I write this, exit polls have the Italian 5 Star movement set to gain the largest vote share and thus an opportunity to control the make-up of the next government. But regardless of this election, what if, say, 40% voted for one party and 30% each voted for another two? If neither minority party will work with the winners, they could join forces and form a joint majority, meaning that in effect the party that 70% did not vote for puts a Prime Minister in place.

Your vote counts... for nothing.

It is little wonder that nobody ends up happy. The politicians complain that the electorate doesn’t understand. The voters get to see their hopes betrayed. And ideological minorities get to shout with a far louder voice than they really possess. Democratic outcomes which don’t suit the politicos are denounced as ‘populist’ and therefore very, very stupid and before long you have the potential for revolution. If you are not going to have actual free and fair elections, with votes cast by a population educated and sufficiently informed of the consequences of their choices; and if you are then not going to respect the choices they make, I ask you: democracy, what’s the bloody point?

The Irish Problem

We’ve never really known our actual population and I do mean never. But in recent years, certain, shall we say ‘communities’ have turned confounding the count into something of an art form. Well, when you can register eighty Labour voters at a one-bed Tower Hamlets flat, claim benefits for multiple non-existent or non-domiciled relatives, yet appear on no census the statistical word is your oyster. In comparison our home-grown welfare milkers have much to learn from your ‘economic migrant’.

Angela Merkel opened the doors wide for around a million unregistered, unaccountable, fighting age immigrants from Africa in the last two years. By many accounts this has overwhelmed Germany, with a population of 82.7 million (2016) and following the usual modus of typical western governments, spells the eventual dilution of German culture. Here in England, where we are not allowed an English culture, as such (Scots & Welsh, culture are fine, btw.) we have allowed incoming third-worlders to utterly displace our own poor people from many enclaves, noticeably the inner cities.

Little wonder – given the complicity of all the establishment organs – that our police force (once respected around the world) now warns of a specious ‘rise of the far-right’, largely ignoring the ultimate crime of giving away our heritage, our wealth, to others. This is the political backdrop to Brexit, of course, yet useful idiots like Andrew Adonis still shriek unconvincingly that we were duped by a promise on a bus. At least the treacherous Tony Blair’s act is to pretend on the surface that he understands, but still tries to flog the Brussels bollocks anyway.

Which brings us to The Irish Problem. No, not the EU hard border hysteria, but the internal plan to bring about their own demise. Reportedly Project Ireland 2040 intends to grow the economy by swelling the population. (Why the insistence on always doing this; why not keep the population stable and swell the productivity instead?) Breitbart touts this as a globalist plot to replace the indigenous population, but by any measure this is truly drastic. If Germany was swamped, how will Ireland with a population of only 4.8 million (2016) possibly cope?

Will they be doctors, scientists and engineers to help build this brave new world? I somehow doubt it. The difficulties of integrating a massive influx of sub -Saharan muslims will put Brexit in the shade; this will be a fight for survival. When the muslim population is under 1% they are regarded as harmless and almost invisible. When they get to around 5% they begin to openly practice sharia, hide their women in sacks and – citing discrimination - seek special privileges. When they get to 10% and have managed to get some of their number into positions of authority they confer favour on their own and influence the law.

Mohammed O'Riley

At 20%  - the alleged number planned - you can pretty much kiss your homeland goodbye. The ‘New Irish’ will ride roughshod over your feeble attempts at policing, carry out their own form of justice and out-breed you in a generation. Unless you nip this in the bud, Ireland will cease to exist as a Christian country. Every single mosque is one mosque too many and when Mohammed O’Riley is the most frequent name in the land you will look back at Brexit as the best of times. 

The wheels on the bus...

The Brexit road has been a potholed, rutted track of ridiculous confected complexity. At every turn, our offers have been rejected, our proposals trashed, our stance ridiculed and short of actually baring his arse at us, Michel Barnier and his geriatric band of EU antagonists has made it abundantly clear that any deal will favour the EU. Of course, it's his job to take the piss; it’s a shame our supposed government ‘team’ hasn’t managed, with a flourish of typical British humour, to take the piss right back.

So what does Jeremy Corbyn think he is doing? Forget the Islington set and their love-in with the wonderful EU, before which Britons were confined to sitting in ditches, eating raw carrots and clothing themselves in mud. Labour’s traditional core vote, the white working classes, who The Party trots out daily as victims of Tory austerity, were utterly betrayed by this braying donkey and his fatuous ‘a’ customs union nonsense. Yesterday’s speech was not so much an announcement of Labour policy – it will be different in a week or so – as yet another election speech.

He can’t pretend it is anything else. He is in opposition, the next election should not be until 2022, when he will be 73 – and he is no The Donald. Corbyn is doing nothing more than pandering to the soft underbelly of the Tory Wets and making a bid to bring down the elected government. He has no mandate, beyond his own political bubble, to force a government defeat and in so doing to directly go against the largest plebiscite in British history

The Labour Party must suffer for this affront to the democratic process and Mrs May must dare to take up the challenge. Nothing less than destroying them, politically, will do. The time for consensus is over and Corbyn and rebels must be utterly discredited and confined to the silent back benches until the job is done. Leave the EU – no deal is infinitely preferable to the EU’s deal – get working on the future relationship and leave the election until the term is done.

Yes, Jezza, too much politics...

I don’t hate Jeremy Corbyn. I don’t even dislike him and I certainly wouldn’t lower myself to harbouring the kind of visceral spite that Momentum and its lynch mob mentalists have whipped up. I am happy to just about maintain a belief that Corbyn actually believes it when he says he wants a kinder, gentler politics. But what he is engaged in isn’t that. Just because you fervently believe in a dogma it doesn’t mean that dogma has any worth. If that was true, the baby Jesus would have brought peace on Earth by now.

The road ahead is clear and straight as an arrow. Don’t listen to the back seat drivers, Tess; put your foot down and pick up speed. Ignore the roadside attractions – they are fleeting fripperies and ultimately disappointing. The road leads us out of the morass of supranational interference in what should be our affairs alone. There is only one final destination for the Brexit bus. No stopping in the suburbs of Soft Brexit, no cruising through Under-Brexit, no stopping off for a cup of tea in Little-Brexit-in-the-Marsh; we need to get to Brexit and we need to get there soon.