Archive

Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Rename Remain ‘informed consent’ or anything else you’d like to try to overturn Brexit. The democratic decision to Leave has not yet been delivered and that’s the truth your obfuscation can never deny

December 4, 2018 Leave a comment

Culturally, perhaps one of our worst pastimes of the day is the habit of trying to make everyone else wrong.

Whilst the clearest manifestation of this behavioural menace is that of the blame culture, it is the adoption of this approach as the standard tactic by Remainers in their continuing efforts to overturn Brexit where its presence is most clearly and most dangerously felt.

I have met and spoken at length with many people and friends who are Remainers. Individuals and professionals who are intelligent, sensible and have the wherewithal to steer their way through the day-to-day minefield which is the voter end of the political spectrum – just as long as the politicians are being honest and the truth isn’t actually being denied.

What They all have in common is that none of them have been able to provide genuine reason for Remaining a Member of the EU other than some form of personal advantage, such as banking or what their employer does, or it simply being most often the case that they hate notified change and they want to maintain the status quo.

It is clear that the vitriol which drives the Remain faction is based upon a sense of loss of control, the sense of personal cost or just the sense from fear of change.

There is nothing tangible about benefits to the wider community, the interests of anyone beyond those they care about or the surfacing of any argument which indicates that Remaining a Member of the EU is a genuine solution to all the ills around us – it being the case that since June 2016, this is what we have been repeatedly told.

So it is the media support and manipulation through communication and the disingenuous behaviour of our Politicians which form the basis of this sell-out of our Sovereignty to an accumulation of different foreign shores. And when there is no real substance to anything that they are telling us or even saying, it comes as little wonder that so many of their messages and soundbites are so freely susceptible to change.

The big problem with all of this is that Leaving the EU properly offers UK People and Businesses a clearly discernible difference to everything that we have for over 40 years experienced and to that which we are still being drip-fed and directly told.

But a real Brexit as yet hasn’t been delivered. This despite the fact that the objective was set in stone as a democratic instruction. It was given by the People, by a majority and in direct response to the binary choice which was binding – as the same Politicians who are now trying to commit us to the EU, convinced us before that historic European Referendum and underlined their very clearly in bold.

So no matter how much effort is spent on trying to repackage the same old story, it is clear that the same old lack of substance Remains.

This whole plan is still about selling out the UK to a foreign power. One driven by an autocracy that wants to use the UK as a resource for nothing more than its own empire building, doesn’t care about democracy in the UK or the people or businesses within it. Yet it will do everything within its power to sell the idea that we cannot live without the influence and control of 27 other countries and that Remaining is the only way that we can ever be safe, secure and feel prosperous, when the truth is quite the opposite.

Put in the words of one of the World’s most influential statesman, ‘You can fool all of the people some of the time, and some of the people all of the time, but you cannot fool all the people all the time*’.

So go ahead. Rename Remain ‘informed consent’ or anything else you’d like to try to overturn Brexit.

The democratic decision to Leave has not yet been delivered and that’s the truth your obfuscation can never deny.

image thanks to unknown

*Abraham Lincoln

Parliament exists to be representative of the People, not the wants of the Government of the day. Reducing the number of MP’s will only increase public disenfranchisement as power is centralised further

September 28, 2018 Leave a comment

download 22In amongst the din of the Brexit chaos, you may detect the odd snippet of news concerning the proposed reduction in the number of MP’s.

Under a supposed process of making representation more fair, by redrawing Parliamentary Constituency Boundaries, the current Government is seeking to complete the process began by David Cameron to reduce the number of Parliamentary Seats.

As has become normal practice with the Political Classes of today, the story focuses on what they want us all to hear. Not what they don’t want us to think.

Hear ‘balance’, hear ‘fair’, hear ‘equality in representation’.

Don’t hear ‘more people per MP. Don’t hear ‘greater distance between voters and their representatives’. Certainly don’t hear ‘redrawing the political geography of the Country to favour one political side’.

Its pretty normal for us all to have political allegiances of one kind or another. Thats the way that the UK has worked culturally for a long time. But whatever side we support, there is nothing positive to be gained by attempting to tip the balance of the electoral system to place one Party in front, with the indirect aim of ensuring that for the opposition, becoming a government will almost always be denied.

One of the greatest struggles of contemporary politicians is understanding why they don’t get support for their ideas and policies. They don’t consider that their policies and ideas might be wrong. They certainly don’t entertain the thought that they are so completely out of touch with the electorate that they represent, that they have lost their way from the pathway that they should be taking. That of ensuring the impact of policies and decisions, and therefore their consequences are considered for their impact upon us all.

Instead they have concluded that it is the system which is broken. It is the system that is wrong. Their solution being that the system should be fixed. That everything will be much better if they can ensure that their own side can achieve a guaranteed and majority win.

It doesn’t matter if its redrawing electoral boundaries, or introducing proportional representation or a derivative form of it. All these ideas are about gaining more control by dubious means, rather than simply doing the job that all of these politicians have been elected to do.

The problem is that each and every step that is taken in this way is ultimately making the disconnect, the disenfranchisement between us, the Government and the Establishment more distinct. It will not make things better. It will give voters even less of a chance to speak.

image thanks to unknown

Categories: Uncategorized

A General Election by New Year just became a lot more likely and it’s time for May to accept that the battles ahead are no longer hers to win

September 14, 2018 Leave a comment

VOTE 18Emily Thornberry’s announcement that Labour will oppose Theresa May’s Chequers Policy today should really come as little surprise.

In fact, it’s not in the least bit unexpected.

Labour’s recent mantra has after all been based on nothing more than attempting to force a General Election as quickly as it is possible to do.

As a lapsed Tory, disenfranchised by the current interpretation of conservatism emanating from No.10, I gain no pleasure from the prospect that Theresa May could prove to be the last Tory Prime Minister before anything remotely recognisable as an attempt at government for all in the UK is painfully left behind.

Yet that is exactly the fate that surely awaits us all, if some form of sense and reason doesn’t land in Downing Street very soon.

The reality must be accepted at Cabinet level that the charade which is Chequers is not only dead in the Channel, but that the dying embers of credible politics in the UK now require a Conservative leader who can win a working majority against what should otherwise be an unelectable opposition which should only ever be capable of having pipe dreams about being in government.

Today, Corbyn’s left is gaining confidence with dangerously quixotic policies that are now looming as large as the void in leadership which has left us all ineptly exposed against EU negotiators, whilst conjuring up the Chequers plan to remain.

But in Downing Street, the penny hasn’t dropped.

Emboldened by the phoney zone of safety in which the 2017 General Election result left the Prime Minister seemingly unexposed, May’s misplaced confidence in her position and influence could all-too-easily lead her to call a General Election under immense pressure, rather than  stepping aside before the watershed vote is taken on the final Brexit plan.

We should be under no illusion that this quickly approaching vote is almost certainly now set to yield the result that could immediately lead to the opportunity which Labour currently craves so badly.

A Conservative, as passionate about Leaving the EU as they are about bringing all sides together as we go forward must be allowed to take the helm of this Government before it is too late.

The change must happen now.

The likelihood of a vote on the final pre-Brexit Day position being won by any Conservative Government with the Parliamentary Seats they hold today and the current make-up of Leave and Remain supporting MP’s amongst their number would at any time be all but impossible.

It won’t matter if it’s ‘Chequers’ or something prepared by the ERG that MP’s are called to vote on. There is simply too much self interest in Parliament to allow the right decision to be made and deliver upon the democratic instruction which was given by a majority of voters on behalf of us all.

Forced or voluntarily called, a General Election is now likely to be the only way to deliver the Brexit that the Electorate require.

It is now up to May to decide if she wants to help a Conservative Government see the result of the real peoples vote through.

The rise & times of the Opinionator

September 14, 2018 Leave a comment

I have to admit that I do enjoy watching political programmes. I have a habit of reading my twitter feed 2 or 3 times on weekdays and mirroring that with a flick through my Facebook Feed too.

What has been noticeable, particularly since the European Referendum in June 2016, is that there has been a quantum shift away from news content which was actually focused on news. Even sources once respected are now firmly biased towards opinion as the key part of their content in a wholly comprehensive way.

Yes, news has always had opinion as a strong and often influential element. Thats why we have newspapers recognised as being left, liberal or right wing, and therefore being of greatest appeal to the people or readers who political feel those areas are where their allegiances belong.

But already have experienced what may continue to be a cultural shift way from people being asked to answer questions about a subject, simply because that subject is something that they have very specific experience of or are perhaps academically qualified to talk about.

Those who once had real-life or academic experience at the very least have been replaced by a range of speakers. Some of these are even journalists themselves. All have become the go-to interviewees and public speakers, modelled as the people to got to who can explain everything going on – often within areas of life where they themselves are little more than spectators.

In the right place at the right time or so it would seem. It’s just the case that they have found themselves in jobs where they are paid to create engaging comment and little more.

There is no comfort in making comparisons between what is supposed to be quality news mediums and a trip down the pub. But the near farcical reality is that with the way that opinion is now being presented as fact by almost every outlet in every way, we really would get better value from having a beer or wine fuelled chat about everything down at the local with people who are out in the world and living real lives.

At least there we can give speakers the benefit of the doubt from there being alcohol involved, rather than being otherwise fooled into thinking that because we are hearing this noise on TV, reading it in a paper or on a social media feed, we are wrong about the interpretations of the experiences that we have and that these opinionators represent the real views of the public and the majority of people.

Categories: Uncategorized

Giving employees mandatory ownership of companies will contradict everything that business and economy is about

September 14, 2018 Leave a comment

download (18)If you sneezed this week, you may have missed Labour’s Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell announcing that an incoming Labour government will make it mandatory for companies with 250 employees or more to have shared ownership of the business.

Businesses are not started with job creation in mind. Businesses are established to provide products and services.

The creation of jobs is just one positive consequence of a process which is driven by exploiting opportunity. An entrepreneurially driven process which for most has little to do with inclusivity, a sense of community or any conscious aim of creating future opportunities of any kind.

It simply doesn’t matter how socially attuned or in possession of an alternative truth that political leaders may imagine themselves to be. That’s the way that commercially viable business works and the principle which underpins the forward-looking economic success of any Country.

The role of Government is to create the environment in which businesses can thrive. The circumstances in which commerce can deliver positive consequences for all and to therefore be of benefit to everyone as a whole. It is not the role of politicians to micromanage business governance in a way which will then inevitably dictate how a company strategy, direction and therefore viability is determined.

 

image thanks to Reuters / http://www.dailymail.co.uk

 

 

 

How to get Elected: The conversation about getting into politics that I would have liked right now if I’d never been elected before

March 10, 2018 Leave a comment

When the watershed moment arrived when I finally accepted that Local Politics, National Politics and our Political Party system is completely broken, it was far from being a happy time.

Genuine democracy does after all require that a few can work collaboratively and collectively together, so that the many beyond them can all benefit together as one.

Hope that change will come from the top in Politics today feels like at best an aspiration. In reality, it looks to be little more than a pipe dream.

If the ongoing Brexit circus tells us anything in the future, when we look back at this time, it will be that the self-serving nature of many politicians is more entrenched now than it has ever been before. That far too many of the Politicians who we have most recently entrusted with our Votes, treat the Electorate with a level of contempt that they are now struggling to hide.

We are desperate for change right now. But with the system behaving as it is, the change necessary is likely to take time.

If time is what it will take to deliver a better kind of politics that genuinely benefits us all, taking the first steps in some way is progress that we must find a way to make.

After all, none of us will benefit from an immediate or revolutionary-type change if one form of oppression is simply replaced with something far worse or at best the very same.

Sadly, the rot in politics is as rabid at Local level as it is at Westminster. But it is here where the most realistic opportunity exists to create and develop a catalyst of change. One that will make people living real lives and the communities around them the centre and priority of government services and politics across the UK once again.

Whilst all of the Political Parties have ideas and members motivated in the right direction, they have reached the stage where the more they change, the more they stay the same.

Without convincing influence from outside, the Parties will never identify any pressing need to even consider doing more.

Real Localism is a fine place to begin. Putting people and communities back in charge. Giving Voters voices which genuinely represent them from within.

To do this, we need more Independent and like-minded people representing us in Local Authorities of all kinds. But they need to know what they are getting themselves into, and what will be required of them to get Elected, to be good Representatives and to work with others in ways that can achieve so much more.

With experience of being an Elected Member and running in the range of Elections that I have, I decided it was time to create, produce and publish a resource that can help.

Using the knowledge, insight and understanding that I have from that personal experience of our political world, I have this week launched the complete version of ‘How to get Elected’ (H2GE).

How to get Elected covers all things that a new entrant to Politics in the UK should consider. It is the conversation about getting into politics that I would have liked to have right now if I’d never been elected before.

H2GE ranges from the questions that should be asked before beginning a Campaign and the formal requirements of becoming a Candidate and running an Election Campaign, to the good practice principles which can assist and help individual Councillors and Campaigners feel more sure of themselves and what they are doing.

It is my sincerest hope that H2GE will provide aspiring community minded politicians with a form of support that will allow them to feel confident in their efforts and reassure them that they are not alone.

How to get Elected is a Free to use Website aimed at those who genuinely want to work for change. It is also available as a Book for Kindle.

Please visit, read, share and where possible ENJOY!

The overreach of Libertarianism may deliver a dystopian future that even those who lead us greatly fear

August 4, 2017 Leave a comment

Pendulum of LibertyMany have suspected that TV, Films and Games can influence real-life behaviors and there are certainly studies that have been carried out which suggest a link. As we watch programming like Coronation Street, Eastenders and now the ‘reality TV’ gems like The Only Way is Essex, Geordie Shore, Made in Chelsea and of course ‘Love Island’, the entertainment for some defiantly comes from the anticipation that anything deemed now acceptable on TV will soon find its way into ‘real life’.

As a rule, TV today has become prescient in a way which is surprisingly quick in its delivery and the mediums of social media running shotgun alongside, have only served to increase the speed with which ‘artistic license’ has become manifest as a reality from which none of us can hide.

Seldom however, does a programme like The Handmaid’s Tale come along, which has all the hallmarks of being exactly the same as a programme which creates real life out of thin air, but feels all the more possible, because it identifies the destination of a process in which our otherwise increasing ‘freedoms’ have been religiously denied.

That the story alludes to and carefully anchors itself in a picture and to experiences of life with which we can all already identify makes the whole possibility more terrifying as we realise within the surety of our own thoughts, how easily a way of life for us all which has been created from nothing more than fear and its bedfellow hate could eclipse the ‘never had it so good’ world that the establishment complacently equates with our own.

But how did we get here, and how could we really jump from a world so apparently full of freedoms into another where freedom could mean nothing at all?

Perhaps most surprisingly, it is the relationship between these ‘freedoms’ and rights that we now have; the way they have come into being, and the impact that they are quietly having on everyone, rather than just the few for whom they were genuinely, but nonetheless idealistically intended, where the real genesis of the problem may lie.

Uncomfortable to read as it may seem, this argument is not about attacking any form of equality, as equality should be the natural approach we intrinsically employ as individuals towards everyone else, one and all.

Regrettably, such levels of selflessness in our consideration have never been the default or conditioned form of all people, whether as individuals or as groups at any point in the history of the World.

This is the very reason that legislation and forms of positive discrimination have been employed in the coercive attempt to put this right and avoid the future wrongs that can and sadly sill continue to be committed.

What is being seriously overlooked and in many cases ignored, is that discrimination comes about not because of colour, gender, race, sexuality, disability, culture or indeed anything else which has now become the focus of rights.  Discrimination is present in almost every interaction in some way and at some level, because the self-interest and nucleus of fear which ultimately feeds it within every individual is and will continue to be present universally because it is delivered culturally and in conditioned form. It therefore becomes a default setting which can never be completely coerced into being under the control of others, unless it is given voluntarily, consciously and willingly so by each and every individual concerned.

Whilst the eradication of any form of prejudice is a laudable goal, human nature dictates that with the realities of what we call free will, freedom of thought will always prevail beyond the objectives of setting models of behaviour and can all too easily be manipulated by being overtly adhered to whilst the true intentions of those concerned are cleverly hidden, usually in plain sight.

It has been said that the more things change, the more they stay the same, and it is the reality of this statement which has driven the culture of transparency to a level where even Conservative Home Secretaries are now insisting on unworkable levels of bureaucracy for the Police to ensure that no rule or freedom for suspects, the convicted or prisoners has been denied. The imposition of rights, which in the minds of their architects should have precipitated an instant result simply did not do so. And so the culture of monitoring was created and continues to be unrealistically and impractically refined.

This whole process has played itself out in so many ways and in so many different directions, but the result has ultimately become the same.

The views of some individuals, their feelings, their opportunities, their ‘rights’ have now and are being openly paraded as being more important than those of the communities in which they live, work and in some cases even themselves would otherwise closely identify.

Somewhere in this process, a definitive line was crossed. A line where a genuine balance could have been established and set to evolve, where people really don’t see difference as a threat. A line where a genuine respect for every other individual and their place within the wider community could have thrived.

The obsession with rights has seen the point where balance could have been achieved, not only crossed, but to a point where the rights of minorities have been flipped and now supersede those of the majority, who have themselves by default and the process of positive discrimination, become those inadvertently discriminated against. Discrimination, however it is applied, always affects others with the opposite consequence.

Some would suggest that such a response or feeling of fear on the part of the majority, when any number of minorities have been repressed for such a long time would itself be fair. But this is certainly not so and whilst an understandable emotion on the part of those who have been victims of prejudice to the point that they might see things this way, to mirror an injustice in any way is to pick up and continue with the very same form of attack – just going in a different way.

Two wrongs don’t make a right. Particularly not when prejudice against others is typically born out of the fear of difference between people and aspects of others that they simply don’t understand, or has come about simply because certain actions and views are understood as the way that we are culturally expected to do so. Indeed, the dehumanization of relationships which is steadily evolving on a minute by minute basis by the impact and assimilation of internet, smart phones and by response-at-the-push-of-a-button technology, is almost certain to make things much worse.

Rights have for a long time been costing Government and the Economy a lot of money. Nobody should delude themselves into thinking that there isn’t a price to be paid by us all – financially or otherwise – when business and the public sector becomes less productive as a direct result of rights being enhanced or government officers effectively refusing to take and execute their full responsibilities – passing them on to others such as highly paid consultants – simply because they are living in fear of what will happen if they should be accused of wrongdoing on behalf of someone who as a result of this whole corrupting process believes that their rights have in some way been denied.

The inaction and professional ineptitude which is now common throughout the public sector has far more to do with the insidious nature of the rights culture than it does either because of lack of skilled people or lack of money through the Government’s Policy of Austerity, which has become a very useful and much less risky scapegoat for political activism on all sides.

What has been achieved by this giant overstep and attempt to achieve coercive control is the emergence of two populations within one. The majority which falls increasingly silent as it witnesses attempts by others to even have its thought processes denied. The other, a hybrid minority of over-empowered victims who aggressively and successfully interpret the actions of others within what we used to know as normal life, as being insulting, inconsiderate and unquestionably set against their own ‘human rights’.

Some suggest the fear that this insidious culture has created as Britain having become a Nation without an identity. It isn’t that. The majority of people are just too afraid to openly identify with our National Identity for fear of what injustice towards others they might then be ridiculously accused.

The real harm to our democracy, is the unspoken and dangerously complacent conclusion on the part of those who Govern to conclude that silence itself is equal to acquiescence.

People are much savvier than their actions might otherwise deny, and whilst Westminster continues to misunderstand and misread the electoral actions of the public, it is little wonder that the European Referendum result came as such a surprise because such little account if any is being made for the fact that within the confines of a voting booth, there is a distinct level of anonymity and unhindered choice which even within friendships and families can otherwise be at the very least emotionally denied.

What also appears to be complacently overlooked by the establishment and in particular the liberal elites, is that Government, law, order and social cohesion is on every level dependent fully on the voluntary consent and support of the British People, who continue to respect the idea of democracy and the voluntary surrender of decision making responsibility for affairs affecting us all communally to our so-called elected representatives of the people.

The real problem with the ascendency of the ‘self’ culture and the empowerment of this hybrid mentality where minorities now look upon the majority who they are led to believe have intentionally scorned them, in a way that suggests they can now impose their own values and morality unequivocally upon us all.

For example criminals and prisoners alike are now able to deflect attention away from whatever they have done, simply by complaining that their own rights have been infringed. They do so knowing that they have blithely and wantonly done exactly the same to innocent others. Innocents who more often than not remain out of the spotlight for fear of what reprisal they will experience as a result of the application of law now being toothless, simply because the rights of the individual are placed before the best interests of the community and therefore openly denied.

People will not go on indefinitely allowing an unjust system to exist. The civil order which is voluntarily maintained on the part of the wider community is as fragile as that of those and their supporters who feel themselves to be justified in taking to the streets and rioting because they now feel it safe to assume that when an opportunity for blame arises, it will always be the party which represents authority which has committed the true crime.

However, whilst we have cause to be genuinely concerned that the good will of the majority of the British People could and does have the potential to snap, we are culturally a very patient People, even beyond that which fear would deny.

As such, the break down of civil order and rioting on the streets simply over the issue of overstretched rights, may in isolation thankfully remain a long way off.

But that isn’t to say that the resentment and true feeling against rights culture and the belief that the silent majority are obliged to play-court to the emperors new clothes which liberalism has made could not itself be the straw that breaks the camels back, should any one of a number of other pressing issues such as a financial meltdown or a consistent run of terrorist attacks increase the feeling that the genuine will of the people is being denied in such a way which precipitates people taking to the streets.

Revolution is a word which means many things to different people and the misguided romanticism with this idea of instantaneous change leaves the true meaning and impact of this type of societal transition completely denied.

Yet the feelings of mistrust and resentment against what is now widely considered to be an entitled political class and the interests of big business which rightly or wrongly are generally perceived to be behind it, could easily lead to circumstances where social behaviour lead those in power to believe that its genesis is progressively and proactively implied.

Fear leads even the leaders of people to do silly things. In such circumstances, with anarchy considered likely, or even if it is by then present on the streets, it is the immediate denial of the rights which will have previously been seen to promote any idea of complete freedom that would be quickly denied.

Whilst a model of governance like that of the Sons of Jacob may not appear to be on the cards, the power vacuum created as any voluntary form of democracy falls would indeed create an opportunity for any group which can organise itself where its own ideals for living can be implemented and then refined.

The building blocks are already in place for a fully functioning dystopian order and the predictive connotations of George Orwell’s Nineteen Eighty Four are playing themselves out daily within the technology that we are inviting into our homes, supported by the attempts of Government to remove anything which could be considered a safety net for our individual independence by paying lip service the idea that in this one instance, they will be protecting the greater interests of society as they do.

We haven’t got there yet. We must all hope that we do not.

But if we do, it will be clear that the price to be paid for the results of a liberalised society  which delivers equality for one by taking it away from many others will have proven to have been inhumanly high.

%d bloggers like this: