Saturday, 22 January 2011

Just what is the point of the Lib/Lab/Con?

"Government is nothing but a permanent conspiracy on the part of the minority against the majority, which it enslaves and fleeces."
M. Bakunin

If the Conservative Party has ceased to be Conservative, what is the point of it? A question posed by Roger Helmer in this video. Iain Martin posts on the reasons why the Conservatives failed to win a clear majority at the last general election, focusing on the votes of the C1s and C2s.

Both Helmer and Martin, each in their individual way, reach the same conclusion - namely that the Conservative Party failed to deliver a clear message. Both, though, fail to address the core reasons that caused the Conservative Party's failure. It has been shown that the increased votes Ukip obtained at the general election did cost the Conservative Party an overall majority; and yet still the Conservative Party - and Cameron - refuse to acknowledge their failure.

That the Conservative Party has lost its "way" is not in doubt, neither is the fact that the same accusation can be made in respect of the Labour Party - whether the Liberal Democrat Party ever had a "way" in the first place is open to debate, but I digress. As a result, not only has our society been emasculated by political engineering, but so has our system of government. Without rehashing the argument that there is little difference between those three parties, the one commonality that they possess is the idea of central government control - of the people.

All three of the Lib/Lab/Con pontificate about devolving power to local people, yet how can such a policy ever succeed whilst central government retains its iron grip on policy and funds? Like so much output from the political parties, the subject of devolution of power is a total sham. For example, as I have posted previously, the Localism Bill, which would allow local referenda, has been 'rigged' to retain central control by allowing local authorities to ignore the result of any referendum.

Raedwald today posts on the aspect of central control and links to this article in the Guardian which reports that a civil servant has decided to launch an investigation into a proposed government policy. Whilst the dictatorial attitude of our politicians is bad enough, at least they are "elected" - albeit one could argue in a dishonest manner. But just who elected Gus O'Donnell? Whilst his initials may be GOD, it does not give him the right to act like one!

I think that there is much wrong with our nation, the root causes of which can be traced to our politicians and their supporting bureaucracy. Raedwald ends his post by suggesting that: "It's looking like only a sharpened hatchet will free the grip of the fingers of the Central State from our lives" to which I would add the rider that application of the hatchet should not be directed at their hands - but their necks!

No comments: