And the problem is.....

"Liberty has never come from government. Liberty has always come from the subjects of government. The history of liberty is the history of resistance."

The Boiling Frog posts "Put up or shut up", noting that the coalition is apparently becoming 'fed-up' with the growing influence and intervention in how this country is governed. Autonomous Mind posts that "We've heard it all before Tories" commenting that all this 'hand-wringing' on 'EU governance' has been seen previously. Fraser Nelson posts on the Coffee House "Britain's coming crunch with Europe" and offers the suggestion that there are intriguing whispers in the Commons of Labour championing a LibDem proposal - that is, the in-or-out referendum and that it might pass the Commons with Tory votes.

I have been watching a youtube video of Ron Paul, to which Cap'n Ranty links - and more about CR later - during which Paul makes some valid and important points. We need not just change our political parties, we need to change our system of democracy; that foreign aid is but taking money from the poor people of a rich country and giving it to the rich people of a poor country; and that, probably most important of all, government should not be asked to do that which the people can do for themselves.

What we find with the present system of democracy under which we live is that regardless of what our politicians say and promise us, it remains a top-down system - and always has done! Evidence? Well, from the present day consider this quote from Nick Clegg in an interview with Henry Porter:

"I need to say this – you shouldn't trust any government, actually including this one. You should not trust government – full stop. The natural inclination of government is to hoard power and information; to accrue power to itself in the name of the public good."

Trust government? Never! Why is it that politicians always give a policy a name that actually means the exact opposite of what it implies? Take, for example the Coalition's Freedom Bill or Localism Bill, the first only promises freedoms which the politicians have deigned to 'allow' the people. The Localism Bill purports to grant power to the people, but does anything but. In both cases these Bills only grant 'freedoms' and 'power' to the people for which the practise of those 'freedoms' and 'powers' will be subject to central government control. Usurpation and accruing of power goes way back and from 21st February 1952 we have Hansard recording the opening remarks of Sir Patrick Spens (Kensington, South):

"It is with very great personal regret that, within 11 months of coming back to this House, I find Parliament having to discuss a new Bill imposing controls and restrictions on the people of this country...."

Readers must forgive me if I repeat an assertion, one made many times in the past, that we live under a system of 'democratised dictatorship'. One only has to refer to this CiF comment piece by Dr. Sarah Wollaston and this article by Toby Helm in the Guardian to see that my assertion is correct. We have one man controlling who are to be his party's candidates come a general election; who decides how his MPs should behave when considering voting and speaking; and who decides that this country should be subservient to a 'foreign' government.

Fraser Nelson speaks of a movement for an in-out referendum on membership of the European Union - yet such a debate, where it to be granted - would be 'whipped' to an extent never seen before due to Cameron's and Clegg's stated wish that our nation will remain a member. One only has to consider the present composition of the Commons to see that that debate would be defeated - even allowing for the usual 20 or so Tory rebels.

To say that we are being enslaved by the political elite is an understatement - who believe that they can introduce constraints for the people that do not apply to themselves. In this context I would refer back to Cap'n Ranty and a post of his entitled "I want to know":

"The government will fine people £50 for smoking in a bar yet allow MPs and their guests to smoke in the bars where the legislation was created? The government will, for decades, chip in to prop up dictators and then switch sides when the public get uppity? The (present) government speaks ever so sweetly of liberty when they are not in office yet when they have the power to undo 13 years of oppression they move with the speed of a striking slug?"

And we live in a democracy? Don't make me laugh! It is said that the present parliament is a rotten parliament - yet so is our system of democracy. We have a national 'government', whose members are 'rotten,' implementing the diktats of a supranational government based in Brussels, thus being no more than an 'administration centre'; we have local 'government' implementing the diktats of national government and likewise acting as an 'administration centre'; we have 'fake charities' lobbying national government for yet more funds in order that they can coerce the public into acceding to national and local government policy; and we have a submissive population who are unable to see exactly what is happening - sounds like an ideal situation for the political elite to prosper and continue on their merry way!

We are repeatedly informed that Parliament is "Sovereign"; that Parliament has the sole right to make and unmake the laws of this land and that the people are "Sovereign". It is about time that Parliament did something about it then, because if Parliament won't the people, one day, will - because one day the people of this country will eventually realise that when enough of them say 'no' to Westminster, there's not much Westminster can do about it. 

Afterthought: Apologies, bit of a 'rambling' post but in my defense I do have some pressing matters of admin to take care of - letters to write, bills to pay and ironing to do!