Back then, in the 40s and 50s, history taught in our schools instilled a pride in the achievements of our nation - the defeat of the Armada; Nelson's and Wellington's defeats of Napoleon; and Churchill's defiance of Hitler - achievements at great cost of life - that preserved that independence in the face of threats to create a continent-wide despotism on the mainland of Europe, one that wished to impose its power on our nation. What no-one then would have envisaged was that over the next half-century our nation, guided by its political elite, would set about a continuing programme of surrendering those very freedoms and independence for which so many, over the course of centuries, gave their lives. (Which lends an air of hypocrisy to the actions of our political leaders who - dare one say irreverently - attend the Cenotaph on Remembrance Sunday - but I digress)
How and why has this come about? By the simple expediencies practised by our political elite - and their political, careerist, cohorts, aided and abetted by those within 'civil society' - of lies, obfuscation and the imposition of what may be termed democratised dictatorship. The situation whereby those who persist in referring to themselves as 'Honourable', yet have behaved in a manner that can only be described as dishonourable, has to be ended - and ended now if this nation of ours is to recover it's status as a beacon for democracy.
That a change to 'Referism' and Direct Democracy is required cannot be denied - and in passing I have to say that a political party that, in effect, believes in the maintenance of the 'status quo' regarding political representation, that believes Parliament must have the decision on signing treaties and the consent to engage in wars, does not deserve the vote of anyone! (Accepted that that party is in the process of 'revising' their policies, but just how long do they need? How long have they been in existence - and only now do they decide that they need 'policies', policies that at first sight are half-baked and therefore need revision?)
Those 'Honourable' people - and their sycophants - will be 'named and shamed' by the Judas Class and that 'naming and shaming', plus the opportunity to discuss the benefits of 'Referism' and Direct Democracy at Talk Constitution, will hopefully create a debate that will spell the beginning of a change to our democracy that is long overdue.
* Acks to the CPS, their pamphlet 'Guilty Men', the authors Oborne and Weaver and the Foreward, written by Peter Jay.
7 comments:
They know that they have created this turmoil for their own ends WfW - they just don't know in which direction that anger's going.
With the direct means to information through modern medias we have all become a little bit more savvy.
The only problem is that we are lone voices in the ether.
I do believe that the message is getting out - you'd have to be blind to not see what is happening after Greece and Italy.
All the best for the new year WfW - we'll have another go next year.
Well said WfW, see you next year...
we carry on regardless..
New year, new start. You never know, this might be the year someone starts listening up there in the Westminster ivory tower.
Have an awesome 2012, mate.
Whilst I agree with most of what you say WfW, I reckon that the evil in the system is, and has always been choreographed not from parliament… Rather from the system which is supposed to be supporting it, I reckon that it has supplanted it. and about a century ago, at least.
The history of the EU 'project' and the 'civil servants' behind that devious concept are a real pointer… Parliament is then used as a tool to implement the desired path.
As for your criticism of UKIP, I don't agree, I think that they might well be taking the wrong approach… I think Richard North's criticism of a lack of underlying ideology other than 'getting out' makes it seem to the voting public like a damp squib.
However, I believe that some of it's policy is highly appropriate, it just doesn't seem to have much traction among a large part of the membership, as I indicated a few weeks back.
Richard made some very interesting points yesterday about the nature of protest and revolution in modern times, and I think that some of the points that he makes has led to the current state of UKIP… It is really, really difficult to tear people away from the MSM and their sofas, and on the occasions that it is managed, the authorities have some very effective ways of controlling any 'situations' which may arise.
Anyway, I look forward to participating in the future project, and I extend my best wishes to one and all throughout what is expected to be a tumultuous year.
Oh, and don't forget that the world ends on the 21st December 2012, so make sure you attend an apocolypse party and don your best togs for the occasion.
BJ: Fair points and the best to you too for 2012.
IPJ: Thanks and yes, onwards and upwards.
DP: Thanks and reciprocated.
r_w: Agreed that some of the policies are good, unfortunately some have just not been thought through. After nearly a decade they should have the core of their policies in place. If you take the point I raised, they talk about referenda bbu then say Parliament should have the say on treaties and war. If they too are subject to a referendum, then why not make it plain?
On your earlier point re bureaucrats that are behind the scene - agreed and to which I mean by those in civil society, the latter also including fake charities etc.
Best wishes to you and yours too for 2012!
The concept of the EU I believe is laudable in that it is supposed to give a large internal common(home) market, security and strength in common causes and a tighter bonding of nations that share similar values. A tighter bonding that was to grow organically and with sovereignty of prime importance until such time that it was mutually agreed that it was no longer necessary. However there is a great deal of difference between conception and realisation as vested interests seized the planning, construction and control of the EU project. France, Germany and the bureaucrats hijacked the EU for their own ends. Germany to boost their manufacturing base, France to protect their farmers, industries from fair competition and to impose their form of social democracy, Bureaucrats to empire build and to ensure their cushy existence in perpetuity. There were others to who used the EU to further their own ends but they were bit players in the scheme of things. The UK as usual played the game mostly by the rules but had little chance against all the other cheats. So we now have what should have been a magnificent idea a totally useless, dysfunctional and economic and socially destructive entity. The EU was to be the vehicle by which the waning declining power of Europeans could be arrested and reversed but instead is hastening their demise.
Anti: That laudable project did not need political control, did not need every closer union, could have been carried out by mutual negotiation...?
That 'magnificent idea' was for Europe, it did not need us!
Post a Comment