Meals on wheels

Not what I believe that organisation had in mind as an illustration of their slogan.

Tranposing this to a 'political analogy' the lions represent our politicians, those inside the vehicle the electorate - unfortunately the electorate are protected by a 'flat vehicle' of the same name.

H/T: nourishingobscurity from whom I nicked the pic......

Priorities (2)

Richard North, EU Referendum, posts on what he correctly calls a 'pigs-ear' policy concerning our aircraft carriers (and the lack of, presently). The latest Public Accounts Committee report on this subject can be read here.

This news comes shortly after the announcement that this country is to provide £1billion of aid to Africa and the well known fact that the Accountability Report produced by this year's summit hosts Canada shows that in 2009, the UK devoted 0.52% of its GDP to aid - 11.5 billion US dollars (£7.75 billion) - with the total projected to rise to 0.6% this year. We also know that it is Cameron's avowed intention that overseas aid will be increased to 0.7% of GDP by 2013.

Coupled with that, we have the ongoing problems involved with the care of our elderly illlustrated by a recent report of a lack of care in hospitals and care homes. We also read that councils are diverting money provided by central government grants for elderly care, to 'plug' holes in other programmes.

Presently politicians extract money from taxpayers and spend it as they see fit, presumably where foreign aid is concerned to make themselves feel good and look good on the international stage. The fact that their decisions can leave this nation with a military defence deficit; that their decisions mean money is not being spent on care of the elderly and their quality of life; presumably means nothing to the political class.

Of course, were we to have direct democracy with a touch of "Referism", how politcians spent our money would depend on their obtaining our agreement beforhand.

Just saying................

Control of the people (2)

I first posted on this subject here, back in August, following the riots. Courtesy of one of my commenters on my blog, Tom Tom, I am directed to a guest-post on ZeroHedge by Tyler Durden in which various matters are discussed - and one which is well worth reading in full. However, I wish to concentrate on one section of Durden's post in which he discusses the subject of people control. Whilst this post is written from an American 'angle' the points he makes are just as true for this country:

"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. …We are governed, our minds are molded, our tastes formed, our ideas suggested, largely by men we have never heard of. This is a logical result of the way in which our democratic society is organized. Vast numbers of human beings must cooperate in this manner if they are to live together as a smoothly functioning society. In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons…who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.” – Edward Bernays, Propaganda, 1928 

Edward Bernays, the father of propaganda to control the masses, would be so proud of his disciples running our country today. He clearly believed only an elite few were intellectually capable of running the show. Essentially, he hit upon the concept of the 1% telling the 99% what they should think and believe over eighty years ago. The mechanisms for controlling the thoughts, beliefs, and actions of the population are so much more efficient today. The conditioning begins when we are children, as every child will be bombarded with at least 30,000 hours of propaganda broadcast by media corporations by the time they reach adulthood. Their minds are molded and they are instructed what to believe and what to value. Those in control of society want to keep the masses entertained at an infantile level, with instant gratification and satisfying desires as their only considerations. The elite have achieved their Alpha status through intellectual superiority, control of the money system, and control of the political process. Their power emanates from eliminating choices, while giving the illusion of choice to the masses. People think they are free, when in reality they are slaves to a two party political system, a few Wall Street banks, and whatever our TVs tell us to buy.
Our entire system is designed to control the thoughts and actions of the masses. In many ways it is done subtly, while recently it has become more bold and blatant. It is essential for the ruling elite to keep control of our minds through media messages and the educational system. It is not a surprise that our public education system has methodically deteriorated over the last four decades. The government gained control over education and purposely teaches our children selected historical myths, social engineering gibberish and only the bare essentials of math and science. The government creates the standardized tests and approves the textbooks. We are left with millions of functionally illiterate children that grow into non-critical thinking adults. This is the exact result desired by the 1%. If too many of the 99% were able to ignore the media propaganda and think for themselves, revolution would result. This is why the moneyed interests have circled the wagons, invoked police state thug tactics, and used all the powers of their media machine to squash the OWS movement. It threatens their power and control.

“Experience has shown that even under the best forms of government those entrusted with power have, in time, and by slow operations, perverted it into tyranny.” – Thomas Jefferson

A highly educated engaged citizenry would be a danger to the existing social order. The 1%, educated at our finest universities, does not want average Americans to obtain a great education for a reasonable price. They want them to get a worthless diploma at an excessively high price tag and become debt slaves to the Wall Street 1%. They want uneducated, indebted consumers, not educated productive citizens. Our republic has been slowly perverted since the time of its inception. The insidious process had been slow and methodical until 1913. The establishment of the Federal Reserve by an elite group of bankers and their politician friends and the establishment of a personal income tax created the conditions that have allowed a small cabal of powerful men to dictate the course of our economic, political, social, and military policies for the last 98 years. Anyone that chooses to open their eyes and awake from the propaganda induced stupor can see the result of allowing a small group of corrupt authoritarian men using their power to pervert our government into tyranny. The majority remains oppressed, buried under trillions of debt, while the shysters reap obscene profits, poison the worldwide economic system, and walk away unscathed in the aftermath of their crimes."

It is unlikely that any one of the problems about which Bernays or Dreyden write would have happened under a system of democracy called direct democracy, because the 'political elite' would have been constrained by 'people power'.

'1984' has indeed arrived, albeit late - but then you can never rely on politicians to get anything to run on time!

The cry goes out: Its for the children (again)

Alex Cunningham, the MP behind the proposed bill to ban smoking in cars, has been given space on PoliticsHome in order to gain support. With regard to the question of toxins, Raedwald 'did the maths' in his post here (follow the link to the March post). Likewise, on the question secondhand smoke,  Christopher Booker and Richard North debunked any claims in that area, here (follow link to post of 24th March 2010).

Cunningham writes that quite simply, this is a serious public health issue; that we have a duty to protect children from such harm, and the most effective way we can do that is through a ban on smoking in cars. In the interests of fairness and equality, perhaps Cunningham would also permit the electorate to point out that they, too, have a similar serious, public health issue. That is that we have a duty to protect ourself from the harm that politicians do - and the only way we can do that is to ban all politicians and their practices.

Just saying......................

Ministerial 'rebellion' - really?

Andrew Grice, in the Independent, writes about Conservative ministers having joined the revolt against the Government's controversial proposals to relax the planning rules to allow more building in the countryside. Notably, as in all such articles, not one 'rebel' is named - although in fairness, on the question of HS2, both Gillan and Lidington have been reported to have stated that they would vote against that policy. However, on that last point, I have yet to see or hear either Gillan and Lidington actually say that.

What we have here with this story is yet more 'social engineering' in that we are led to believe a row is brewing within government on policy matters, one issued to have us believe that a policy may possibly be under review. As with all such stories it will be interesting to see whether principle and honour outweigh the perks of ministerial position, power and 'wonga' (in the monetary sense).

If only we had a participatory/referism form of democracy it would not matter one iota what a government minister intimated as their 'view', or 'spin', would count for nought - likewise it would 'kill' their use of the media and 'friendly' journalists, thus saving us from wasting our eyesight reading non-stories.

There are many reasons for a change to our system of democracy - and probably the most important and beneficial would be the negation of politicians and their thought processes, together with non-journalists who it would seem have no thought processes!

Catastrophe?

From Politics Home we hear Tony Blair warning of catastrophic consequences if the eurozone is broken up whilst maintaining that Britain should keep entry into the single currency as a "long-term option". We also have another 'usual suspect', in the shape of Will Hutton, warning of catastrosphe should the eurozone break-up.

We are no doubt going to hear more statements such as the above in the desperate attempt by Europhiles to save their beloved project, statements intended to frighten the population of Europe, especially the UK - included in which will no doubt be the old claim that 3million jobs depend on our being a member of the EU. It is extremely doubtful whether any form of rebuttal will come from our politicians, especially the leaders of the Lib/Lab/Con who are enthralled with EU membership.

From John Redwood:

"As the rest of the EU sells us a lot more than we sell them, they will not want to disrupt it in any way. They have more to lose than we do. EU goods trade probably accounts for around £120 billion of our output. (EU exports adjusted for the entrepot factor) That’s around 8% of our total National Income. It’s important, but not nearly as important as the 92% that is not dependent on selling things on the continent. Since 2008 the government figures show that our exports to the rest of the EU have anyway fallen by 6%, whilst our exports to the rest of the world have risen by 4%. So the trend has been going against the EU before the crisis. Slowdown in the EU and collapse in the weaker EU economies will accelerate this process."

Not once has the Lib/Lab/Con published a cost/benefit analysis, always arguing that the benefits are obvious, something from which it is possible to draw one's own conclusions. Courtesy of Gerard Batten, Ukip MEP, the latest cost/benefit analysis he has done can be accessed via this post. Besides the scare of lost jobs our politicians cite figures about the percentage of trade, especially exports, that is done by the UK. In this context we have what is called The Rotterdam (and Antwerp) Effect, covered in this post from Helen at Your Freedom and Ours; one which shows that the UK's export statistics are, shall we say, flawed?

Because our politicians lie to us in order to further their own despicable ends it is perhaps pertinent to end with a quotation, the origin of which I know not, but one that is directed at the people of this country and our politicians:

"From the cowardice that shrinks from new truth; from the laziness that is content with half-truths; from the arrogance that thinks it knows all truth - oh God of Truth deliver us!"

Prescient words on the eurozone problem.....

"Whenever destroyers appear among men, they start by destroying money... Destroyers seize gold and leave to its owners a counterfeit pile of paper. This kills all objective standards and delivers men into the arbitrary power of an arbitrary setter of values...Paper is a check drawn by legal looters upon an account which is not theirs; upon the virtue of the victims. Watch for the day when it bounces, marked: Account Overdrawn"
Ayn Rand

The peoples of any nation work to better their lives, financially and socially -  and in so doing, improving the financial state of the nation in which they live. What the political elite of the European Union is doing is putting those people, who are attempting to 'better their lot' and thus the prosperity of their nation, into a position of endless penury for the sake of political ideology.

That the political elite in their attempt to 'unite' Europe seem to have forgotten their history is best illustrated by an extract from Margaret Thatcher's "Statecraft" (page 327):

"What we should grasp, however, from the lessons of European history is that, first, there is nothing necessarily benevolent about programmes of European integration; second, the desire to achieve grand utopian plans often poses a grave threat to freedom; and third, European unity has been tried before, and the outcome was far from happy."

Just a few questions:

• Who, in their right mind, would agree that money contributed (voluntary or otherwise) to a common cause, namely the growth of their nation, should be spent without the consent of those contributing?
• Who, in their right mind, would agree to a life of penury and servitude when they have, within their grasp, the means to cease a life that amounts to slavery?
• Who, in their right minds, would entrust their future to members of their society without first ensuring that those members had the faintest idea about that which they professed to know?

Is it not time that the people of our country were offered a more participatory form of democracy, one in which the people are the masters and politicians their servants? Is that not what the word 'democracy' means?

Once again, just asking.............

Truth is the new 'Hate Speech'

The title of this post is taken from a video over at Klein Verzet's place. Whilst this speaker is talking about the islamization of the United States, a great deal of what she say is true in this country. For example, if you dare to speak out against membership of the EU you're promptly accused of xenophobia, or, speak out against immigration and you are accused of being a racist. She also makes the point that politicians control the media and thus control what information is available. As an aside to that last point, Off with your head confirms that view.

Autonomous Mind posts on "The next European War" and The Boiling Frog on "Another Warning" and both posts are well worth the trip over to read them. Coupled with these two post and likewise worthy of reading is that from Janet Daley on the Telegraph website. I particularly liked this section:

"Indeed, it is often quite eerie how the statements and mannerisms of EU officials, seemingly so dedicated to being the precise opposite of earlier, infamous generations, end up echoing (or parodying) the more memorable moments of the war-torn 20th century. When the president of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, proclaimed, “I am pleased to stand before you this morning and confirm that Europe is closer to resolving its financial and economic crisis… We are showing that we can unite in the most difficult of times”, I half expected him to wave a piece of paper in the air and proclaim economic stability in our time."

That the public is becoming more and more aware that our politicians lie to us; treat us as 'cash cows'; believe they are a race apart; have no real understanding of democracy; through a compliant media, control the information provided to us; and consequently treat us as slaves, brings forward the secenario of a 'peoples revolution'. That because the political system is rigged against the electorate means that Janet Daley's end of her article is even more relevant:

"It relies on unswerving belief and enforced conformity, just like all the “year zero” political movements that ended in totalitarianism and terror in the past. The one hope is that the great mass of the people, unlike most of their political leaders, seem to understand all this quite clearly. It remains to be seen whether they will have to go out on the streets to make their case."

 As a nation our first characteristic may not be immediate retaliation against those that offend us however, as history shows, when 'push comes to shove' we are as good as - if not better - than any other nation in showing our displeasure when it becomes necessary. When 'shove' is the only alternative left I am sure the British people will do so to such an extent that they will be able to face any other nation and, quoting the words of Mr. Punch, say to them: "That's the way to do it".

So all those Tory rebels were 'eurosceptics' were they?

"I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you."
Friedrich Nietzsche

With all the political commentators, Conservative Home and Jacob Reese Mogg maintaining that the Conservative Party are by nature eurosceptics and that 81 of their number voted accordingly, a small paragraph at the end of an article by James Kirkup in today's Daily Telegraph caught my eye (unfortunately it does not appear to be on line). In this article he quotes Conservative MPs who say they are worried about reselection come the new boundary changes and at the end of the article comes this:

"One rebel confessed: "I'm actually not particularly anti-European. If there was a referendum tomorrow, I'd vote to stay in. Supporting the motion was partly about keeping faith with the people who sent me here and partly about taking a swing at No10."

This unnamed rebel will not be the only one from the 81 holding similar beliefs and reasons for rebelling, hence the electorate has every reason to be doubtful when a Conservative MP declares himself a eurosceptic. The fact that this rebel is prepared to disregard his/her constituent's faith speaks volumes about polititians principle's and their sense of honour.

And people are petitioning for a second debate on the referendum question? Bearing in mind the above - for what and why, exactly?

Politicians - Spinmeisters extraordinaire

"When the representative body have lost the confidence of their constituents, when they have notoriously made sale of their most valuable rights, when they have assumed to themselves powers which the people never put into their hands, then indeed their continuing in office becomes dangerous."

Thomas Jefferson

Richard North, EU Referendum, posts on Osborne's 'sleight of hand' in blaming Labour for the present price of energy bills, a post to which Restoring Britain also links. As Richard North so correctly states the Conservative Party voted for the Climate Change Act so it is a tad disingenuous for Osborne to attempt to lay the blame for that on Labour.

But of course, in keeping with politicians of all parties, truth is not a characteristic for which they are renowned. Let us look at the Conservative Party Manifesto 2010 which states:

"We’re in the process of drawing up Marine Conservation Zones which will safeguard large areas of our marine habitat for the first time."

a statement that was in effect repeated in The Coalition's retrospective manifesto "Our programme for government" (page 18).

But then of course all this policy presented as 'We' is complete lies and is not theirs but that of the EU. We need look no further than Council Regulation (EC) 2371/2002 on the conservation and sustainable exploitation of fisheries resources under the Common Fisheries Policy and the Marine Strategy Framework Directive 2008 to see where the policy is originated. With the latter, the Labour government agreed the final text of the Marine Framework Directive which determined the management of seas throughout the EU, including all seas under UK management and jurisdiction. By 2015 member states will be required to have developed strategies for their seas which deliver "good environmental status" which is defined in the Directive as meaning that biodiversity is maintained, all commercially exploited fish stocks are within safe biological limits both in terms of age and size, and that all elements of the marine food web are at normal abundance and diversity. These strategies required by the Directive must be in force by 2020.

These two examples illustrate how the political elite have made the people of this country the victims of propaganda, aided and abetted by the people who have not taken any interest in the practises of those they have elected - in other words they have become intellectually incompetent. In so doing they have created an ideal tyranny as it is one that is ignorantly self-administered by themselves and they have become the most perfect of slaves to their political servants in that they have blissfully enslaved themselves.

The state of our country, economically and socially, is therefore the fault of the people, not the politicians as by their ignorance the people have given the government the power to do what the hell it likes, although to be fair - in view of the present hoo-ha about Liam Fox and lobbyists - I suppose we do, at any one time, have the best government that money can buy. Politicians of all parties talk about the need for stable government - the problem is that they never tell us in advance how bad the stable will smell. As it is not the function of government to dictate to the people their standard of behaviour, but it is the function of the people to dictate to the government their standard of behaviour, perhaps we should disband the government and save ourselves a great deal of hassle.

Voltaire is credited with saying that the best government is a benevolent tyranny tempered by occasional assassination. I would counter that the best government is no government - and that can quite easily be achieved by mass assassination! An event followed, of course, by a change to a Swiss style of democracy incorporating "Referism" - but then I repeat myself...........

No news is good news

so the saying goes, conversely we also know that, unfortunately, EU news is bad news.

First up is the news that Eurogendfor are carrying out an 'exercise' with the Greek police - advance apologies as the link is a 'google translation' from Greek, although the general gist of what has been written can be understood. Bearing in mind the recent demonstrations in Greece, the timing of this 'exercise' is questionable to say the least and it can only be assumed Brussels has decided that repression of the Greek people is necessary. In any event it would seem that they have practised the art of repression already in Brussels, using the Belgian police to hone their tactics on the 'Indignados'.

Next up is repression of the freedom of thought by means of 'teaching' the people of the EU about the 'benefits' that being a citizen brings them. At least that is what Employment Commissioner Laszlo Andor believes when he states that citizens are educated about what are the costs of Europe, but they are not informed about what are the costs without Europe. (That problem could easily be solved by an 'Andor' cost benefit analysis - but I digress) Graham Watson MEP wishes for the benefits of EU membership to be a core subject in schools, again believing that promoting the idea of not being a member is vitally important. On the same subject of what can only be described as propaganda, Mary Ellen Synon's post about the opening of the European Parliament's 'visitor centre', an article which is well worth reading. An extract:

"Besides being a vanity project for MEPs, the thing is also is a way for the EU institutions to brainwash school children, who are invited to come in groups to join a 'multi-modal role play game' in which they can take on the role of an MEP and go through all the steps need to approve a new European law. Yes, laws come from Europe, not from Westminster anymore, but I'd hardly take a British child on a holiday to Brussels to celebrate that disaster. Take him instead to the House of Commons and let him lay a wreath."

It may be recalled that I posted about the conditioning of young minds here and the fact that our political elite appear to be content in breaking the provisions of our education acts, where political content is raised in our schools, speaks for itself. That they and the representatives of their respective parties in Brussels allow such an exhibition as that in the 'visitor centre' to continue without protest also speaks for itself.

Our political elite are becoming more and more blatant in their use of propaganda too, an art not just containing lies but one that also uses omission of facts. An example of this occured only the other day in the House of Lords. Lord Stoddart asked a question (Lord's Hansard Col: WA254):

"Lord Stoddart: To ask Her Majesty's Government whether they could agree to an European Union financial transaction tax without parliamentary approval and a referendum. [HL12084]
Lord Sassoon: Agreement to a directive on a financial transaction tax would require unanimity in the Council of Ministers, giving the UK Government a veto over any such proposal. Therefore such an EU tax cannot be imposed on the UK without the UK's agreement. While the UK Government are not opposed to financial transaction taxes in principle, the Government do oppose a European financial transaction tax. Any EU directive on a financial transaction tax or any other tax could not be implemented in the UK without parliamentary approval of the requisite Finance Bill legislation."

The omission in this instance is that were the financial transaction tax to be introduced by means of unanimity, such a possible directive could be vetoed by the UK government, however it is on the cards that such a directive may not be necessary. As Kay Swinburne, MEP, informed the Conservative Party conference moves are afoot to have this financial transaction tax introduced as a VAT measure, one which would be 'sanctioned' by means of qualified majority voting - and obviously means it could be imposed on the UK without the agreement of the government.

Just what is it about this creeping totalitarianism, one that is being foisted on the people, that remains invisible to them? As I posted previously, whilst the political elite in this country continue their ploy of making us believe that only they are right where matters affecting our country and our lives are concerned, do people no longer think about, or question in their own minds, what is happening to them, what they are being told? When someone lies, someone to whom one looks for guidance - be that a politician or anyone placed in positions of trust - and that lie is discovered, all trust in that person is gone, never to return. In the words of Thomas Paine, Voice of Reason, when a man has so far corrupted and prostituted the chastity of his mind as to subscribe his professional belief to things he does not believe, he has prepared himself for the commission of every other crime.

Perhaps the biggest joke played upon the people of our country is Members of Parliament referring to each other in the House of Commons as 'Honourable' Given the choice I would rather our country still had honour without the MPs, than MPs without honour. That is why there must be a cleaning of the 'Augean Stables', that is why there must be change to our system of democracy thus ensuring that this country never, ever again has to suffer the decades of political deceit which have been inflicted upon us.

Trust? Honour? Principle?

One of their own has just posted:

"Once again SW1 people have deliberately used words to create the impression of an assurance that they are now only too quick to explain was never made. They use words as a conjurer might use mirrors. But the crowd are not entertained. Their patience is wearing thin at being taken for fools for too long. The lesson to draw from today is simple; you cannot trust SW1 people on Europe. And if they won't deal straight with you, how can we possibly leave it to them to cut any new deal with Europe?"

It is fair to say that, never mind Europe, the people in SW1 have shown that they cannot be trusted on anything. They have no honour, no principle as our present form of democracy requires neither. Not only is the 'flesh' rotten, but so it would appear is the 'core'. That which is wrong with our society and democracy can be explained by paraphrasing Teresa Stover, someone who has highlighted a few salient facts.

The current state of the news media is partially to blame for the public's general lack of information vital for responsible citizenship in a democracy. The news media has become an aspect of show business, offering merely 'infotainment'. It has evolved into an entity that tends to function as a public relations agency for wealthy and powerful multinational corporations, members of Parliament and the current political leadership, including the administrations that preceded the present one. The news media is being utilized as a political tool of suppression and propaganda by those in power - and propaganda is psychological in nature. Full of half-truths and utter misinformation, it's an arrogant and very commercial strategy that is implemented because it appeals to emotions, fear being the main one with relentless talk of national security, personal and community safety.

The most obvious and condescending tell-tale sign that manipulation is taking place is that no one takes responsibility for the actions of the administration - it's always some other department who is to blame and never the people who have authority. Manipulators rarely advise you to seek new and diverse information or to 'learn and research' for yourself. It tends to be safer for exploitative and irresponsible leaders to keep their citizens in the dark: in their view less independent thought is better as independent thought leads to an inquiring mind, a mindset that eventually leads to the questioning of authority figures and that is the one thing that inadequate leaders and the present political class do not want. When a leader discourages questioning of his/her leadership style, actions and motivations, that is a sure sign that they have something to hide, that they are not worthy of the public's trust. The present power structure wishes us to believe that the only options available are those which they present to us, something we know to be simply not true.

When the present system of democracy, one by which anything is done - and those doing it - is known not to work, logic dictates that both must be changed. To bring that change about some would argue it is up to us to confront those who cannot see; those who cannot, or do not wish to, hear; it is up to us to spread the word. An alternative view held is that the only recourse left to those who know something is wrong is open, possibly armed, rebellion from which the bloodshed would be great - for 'them' and us.

As time is of the essence - and being an impatient sod - personally, I quite favour the latter option.

Faux politicians and faux politics

We have all read about the 'faux europsceptics headed by 'Useless Eustice' but we seem to have ignored the 'faux politicians' and 'faux politics' that has happened, not just since May 2010, but for decades now. From Peter Hitchens in today's Mail on Sunday, writing on what he terms the fake fights twixt the LibDems and the Tories within the Coalition:

"Mr Cameron is far closer to Mr Clegg than he is to his own voters. He loves being manacled to him, and much prefers Coalition to governing alone. Mr Clegg helps David Cameron ensure that the Government remains pro-EU, pro-crime, anti-education, pro-tax, politically correct and pro-immigration."

In those three sentences Hitchens sums up the present state of our political system and those involved in that circus - because circus is exactly what it is. By allowing Clegg to dictate policies such as Human Rights, EU membership and a host of other matters allows Cameron to maintain his 'liberal left-wing tendencies', whilst at the same time controlling the more right-wing members of his own party - or at least the odd half-dozen or so who have no desire for a ministerial position but who still wish to continuing receiving their 30 pieces of silver by remaining under the Conservative banner.

That the Lib/Lab/Con will never, ever agree to a referendum on EU membership; that they will never, ever agree to a cost/benefit analysis of EU membership; that they will never, ever even agree to a public discussion on EU membership cannot now be beyond doubt. That Party Leaders are able to continue to exert their hold over our political system by means of their ability to nominate those for 'elevation' to the House of Lords; that Party Leaders likewise exert a dictatorial control over the selection of party members and in which constituencies those party members may be included for selection as a candidate, is also beyond doubt.

Bearing in mind the tribalistic voting patterns, I wonder whether anyone has actually bothered to talk to those committed 'tribalists' to explain just exactly how they are being led by their noses? To explain just what exactly is going on and the future to which we are all being led?

In today's edition of the Sunday Telegraph Janet Daley has an article entitled "What is the point of the Labour Party" - bearing in mind the troughs of dispair into which our country has been led, I would pose the question: What is the point of any political party?

Just bear in mind policies that are presented by the Coalition as devolving power to the people and thus to put the people in charge, are a sham - or to be more precise; a bloody great sham. I give but one example and that is the Localism Bill in which we, the people, are to be 'allowed' to have a referendum on any local issue we wish - but in the small print it also states that if local authorities wish to ignore the result of that referendum they have the power to do so. Whatever policy you care to read, ultimate control resides with central government and so the process of controlling us continues by the political elite. 

Just remember the words of Ronald Reagan:

"When dictators come to power, the first thing they do is take away the people's weapons....... it makes it so much easier to force the will of the ruler upon the ruled."

That our political elite are disarming us by placing obstacles in our democratic path must also be obvious and therefore the only means of rectifying the situation will be by us taking to the streets and forcibly removing these bastards!