Saturday, 25 June 2011

Can we please just concentrate on what is important, forgetting 'tittle-tattle'

"The single most exciting thing you encounter in government is competence, because it is so rare."
Daniel Moynihan
"I believe there is something out there, watching us. Unfortunately it is the government."
Woody Allen
"Democracy is the art and science of running the circus from the monkey cage."
H.L. Mencken
It would appear from PoliticsHome that the Westminster Bubble is abuzz with MiliE's speech to the Labour Policy Forum, with the likes of Caroline Flint, Yvette Cooper and Liam Byrne all attempting to make sure they get a seat at the table come MiliE's reshuffle (if he gets his way). However, prior to reaching the point of this post, first a few comments on his speech, a transcript of which can be found here.

Initially, one has to ask just which idiot wrote this speech? In attempting to make a joke using 'U' turns, handbrake turns and three point turns to berate Cameron, consider:
"Why is it that David Cameron and this Government get themselves into these problems in the first place?  The answer is that they are reckless. Reckless with the future of our young people."
Now we all know that the present government - and it's Prime Minister - are a screwdriver short of a full tool box, but "reckless"? Just who was reckless with the nation's finances twixt 1997 and 2010? Just who was part of that government? In stating that he will never turn his back on the last government's record, MiliE is surely in full delusional mode in his attempts to deny that Labour should ever be given the keys to the safe again.

No doubt MiliE's speech will be plastered all over the MSM, including the Sunday newspapers, with "in-depth" analysis from so-called "experts" - yet the real political question will not, as usual, be asked. That question is: "Exactly what role do these politicians fulfill within our society and, if shown not to have a role, should we still employ them?"

All three, what are termed main political parties, agree on this country's membership of the European Union and all three parties refuse to grant the people a say on that membership. All three parties believe in "central government" - aka power and decision being retained in central government control. All three parties have been complicit in ceding what are sovereign powers to the European Union. All three parties stand guilty of lying and cheating their paymasters. All three parties retain a stranglehold on candidate selection. All three parties believe in constraining the freedoms of the people, while paying lip service to the idea of freedom. In other words, all three parties have the same belief, so why should we continue to divide our votes between the three, on the odd occasion we are granted the opportunity to voice our opinions?

In a short post yesterday, one which disappointingly has not attracted much attention, I asked if anyone would like to take up a challenge, that challenge being to name just one aspect of our daily lives that is not subject to, or could be subject to, legislation from our Masters in Brussels? Just referring to Articles 3,4,5 & 6 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) means anyone accepting that challenge will be hard-pushed in their endeavours. That challenge just illustrates that a self-governing nation we are not, so why the hell do we still employ our politicians?

The three quotations at the head of this post have been chosen specifically to illustrate this post. The first is so true in that any competence is not only rare, it is non-existent as every one has been handed to Brussels. The second is pertinent as our governments of late have indeed been watching us to see what freedoms they have missed and can therefore restrict further. The last was chosen as (a) in view of last Thursday's events in the House of Commons, it is topical and (b) that as we are no longer a self-governing nation what transpires in both Houses of Parliament is indeed a circus, the participants being no more than performing monkeys encaged by their subservience to the European Union.

In conclusion, as it would seem that we have become a one-party state, to those who resile at the idea of revolution, I would refer them to this quotation:
"Any people anywhere, being inclined and having the power, have the right to rise up, and shake off the existing government, and form a new one that suits them better."
Abraham Lincoln
So what the hell are we all waiting for?

13 comments:

Pavlov's Cat said...

, one which disappointingly has not attracted much attention

I suppose, like myself most of us could not think of anything.

I even thought what about breathing , but then remembered EU Emissions regulations, which determine the quality of the air we breathe.

WitteringsfromWitney said...

PC: Nice one!

DP111 said...

Pavlov's act wrote: I even thought what about breathing , but then remembered EU Emissions regulations, which determine the quality of the air we breathe.

Exactly. Ho long before a carbon cap on the air we exhale.

But really, there is no hope that we will ever get a referendum on the EU. To even hope for such a thing is tantamount to acknowledging that we are serfs, admit we are so, and have to ask, cap in hand, "Please Sir, may we have a referendum".

We will not get a referendum. It will have to be forced on parliament whether they like it or not. As to the argument that "parliament is supreme - it hasnt been for a long time.

WitteringsfromWitney said...

DP111: Exactly, hence we need to march on Parliament, demand change and if they ignore us then we just hang a few pour encourager les autres?

kenomeat said...

I can't condone violence but perhaps a non-violent movement which makes a nuisance of itself might attract publicity if it annoyed the right people. I'm thinking of paint bombs to be thrown at Cameron and his cronies or graffiti on the walls of parliament or huge banners placed across buildings where it is difficult to bring them down. It must be possible to organise a movement, non-party, that can carry out these types of pranks. It might gain support if nobody actually gets hurt. (Is this feasible or am I just getting carried away).

WitteringsfromWitney said...

k: Whilst I too do not think violence is the be all and end all to achieve the change that is needed, it has I believe come to the point that a mass demonstration is needed to show the political elite that their time has come, that we want change, that we are fed up with the status quo. If they ignore that demonstration, then what will follow will be on their heads.....

kenomeat said...

But how would the demonstration be achieved? The Tax Payers Alliance could only muster a few hundred the other week. What I'm envisaging is a group of freedom fighters, a kind of IRA but without the bullets and bombs, launching audacious attacks on government buildings in order to leave a simple message that the people of Britain demand their freedom from the EU. Imagine letters of support flooding into national newspapers and a rise for UKIP in the polls. It has to be worth a shot.

WitteringsfromWitney said...

k: Nice idea but it is dead in the water before it is launched. It may take another 6 months or a year, but when the public wake up to the fact that the elderly are dying through lack of care, that Libya is costing us more than the £250 million so far, that maybe Argentina does retake the Falklands, that our political elite are indeed impotent where the governance of our country is concerned - then you will see the mass demonstration I mention and when that fails, then you will see a revolution - and it will be bloody! Out of that mess a 'Cromwell' will appear.

Sad it is to say - I won't see it and as I believe you are far younger than I, you will, unfortunately......... That is the only way we will get our country back.

DP111 said...

WW

Direct democcracy is against the supremacy of parliament, qualifying it as a revolution.

Maybe I'm wrong but no revolution, has ever succeeded without a "stick".

Even the so-called non-violent Gandhi movement was accompanied with violence. Its just that Gandhi disavowed it. But all the same, it was a political factor.

The EDL is one to watch. It is a grass roots non-violent movement, seeking to defend England, which is a revolutionary demand in these corrupt times.

kenomeat said...

As ever, I appreciate you taking the trouble to respond. Maybe, as things come to pass as you describe, there will be mass demonstrations but, sadly, I suspect our brainwashed proletariat are unlikely to rise from their armchairs. (Perhaps, though, the future fall of the Falklands might trigger an emotional response.) By the way I doubt I am far younger than you as I am a very tired 58.

WitteringsfromWitney said...

k: Yes the Falklands would be a catalyst that would get bums off seats and if that does not happen soon it may well be something trivial that comes from Brussels that will stir the ire of the GBP.

One thing I am sure of is that it will happen and then woe betide the political class as the animosity towards them and the EU is on the rise.

cuffleyburgers said...

I think Kenomeat is right. The violence will come from the government once they see the protests beginning to work. So far the market for publicty seeking escapades has been cornered by animal rights activists and greens generally (plus fathers 4 jusice), and they've achieved very little because nobody much agrees with them.
I suspect a vociferous and imaginative campaign highlighting Britain's loss of sovereignty and the routine corruption and incompetence at the heart of government will start to make a real difference. Substantial sections of the media would be on side for a start (except the BBC at first at least).

And then once it starts to get some media profile, then a lassive march on Westminster, and they will respond with teargas and nightsticks, and les jeux sont faits.

What is then needed is an attractive personality to do the media side, and like him or not, the best person for the job would be N Farage

WitteringsfromWitney said...

cb:
"Substantial sections of the media would be on side for a start" - sorry disagree. If the media was going to get on the side of eurosceptics they would have done so by now. Other than the Mail and Express, which newspaper has? The 'heavies' are beholden to the political elite for their copy and dare not upset them.

In respect of Farage, even he does not get the coverage he should and is invariably presented as a one-trick pony, an accusation that is true to a certain extent and one that I feel he needs to change. For example, instead of saying oh we can't do this or that because of the EU, I would rather he argued against a certain policy and said his alternative could not be implemented - and did not mention the EU - ending by stating that if his political opponents on the panel/whatever did not agree with his views they would then be guilty of deceiving the electorate. That would sow the seeds of doubt in the public's minds prompting the question why.......

Whilst I am unable to say when, I know there will be a mass demonstration, one that will far outnumber the police who would not be able to control it or kettle it. The authorities would then be forced to enlist the army - and that is when it would get interesting, especially if the army then used force against those they were supposed to protect.