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.

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.

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.

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!

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?