The British People deserve much better than the incompetence, deceit, and
treachery of the left liberal ruling establishment of the TINOs (Tories in Name
Only), Labour (aka Champagne Socialists) and Lib Dems (EU and PC tyranny). Yet,
there still remains considerable ignorance about how awful the political class
is, how far they have deviated from addressing the wishes, hopes, and fears of
ordinary people and what their end game of social engineering, political
correctness, and control freak, big costly government actually is. Unfortunately
on this voyage of discovery each revelation makes the overall situation
depressingly worse.
The origins of such oppressive ideology and government are, perhaps,
laudable or even inevitable within an evolving democratic system. Yet this leads
to the premise that it is the application which is faulty. This can,
‘magically’, be corrected, by minor tweaks like electing a government which
claims to be different, but in reality turns out to be different only in their
speed of implementing a left liberal agenda. Such has been the case for many
years and consequently, we need to look ‘beneath the surface’ of our country’s
political landscape and the likely implications. Peter Hitchens sheds some
thought-provoking light here in his book The
Abolition of Britain and more recently in his blog
posts Corbyn or Blair? Guess which one’s the real Marxist
menace, Some thoughts on the Scandinavian and Nordic
Utopias and A Fascinating Radio Programme about Roy Jenkins, Britain’s Unlikely
Cultural Revolutionary.
To deal with ‘inequities’ of an observed nineteenth-century class
struggle between the providers of capital (the rich) and labour (the poor), the
socialists and communists introduced the idea of the big state; owning the means
of production. As the state’s role increases, it inevitably intrudes upon and
undermines alternative or rival power sources, for example, freedom of
independent thought and action, the family, marriage, property ownership (in its
various forms), and existing religious and other institutions. Where these are
seen as threats to the state’s power, there is obviously also an incentive to
crush them, as happened, for example, in the Soviet Union. Liberals should, in
theory, oppose the big state, yet in practice, they veer towards it,
why?
Alexis de Tocqueville in Democracy
in America (1835 and 1840) foresaw the rise of the welfare
state form of big government, in effect a benign tyranny operating within an
apparent democracy. There is a political incentive to move in this direction to
appease or appeal to the voting majority. This form of tyranny is less obvious
but more invidious because it claims to benefit the people and can be described
as ‘progress’ or for ‘the common or even individual good’. It also has appeal
to the liberal consciousness for apparently ‘setting free’ the individual from
previous restraints imposed by society and tradition.
Ideological Marxists and apparent liberals can consequently find common
ground in the big state and in using it to smash up anything that represents
conservatism and the status quo. The conversion of the former Conservative Party
(or at least its leadership) to left liberal ideology (big state tyranny) and
its agenda is more inexplicable. One possible explanation is
in From Tory to Tony. However,
the origins of the change could go back much further to a loss of confidence and
articulation of conservative values (for example, free enterprise, prudence,
self-reliance, national sovereignty, support for the family, patriotism and
conserving the ‘best of Britain’) whilst being battered by the fashionable
advance of socialism and communism here, in Europe and in the former empire.
Once in motion, the political opportunist and ‘modernising’ TINOs went with the
flow of the demolition of ‘old’ Britain.
The left liberal agenda appears to contain no restraints. Downsides and
resources required to address resulting problems are largely unacknowledged
unknowns that can be dismissed through spin, deceit, and self-denial. Basic
humanity and duties to kith and kin have limited influence. For example,
smashing up communities with bulldozers or alien cultures has not been stopped
because of any consideration of the harmful effects or even what the existing
communities themselves wanted. Traditional morality and (Judaeo-Christian)
concepts of right and wrong can also be dismissed as of no value. To acknowledge
any value in anything traditionally British would be to open the gate to being
challenged requiring the left liberal establishment to explain and justify their
actions. Debate is shut down by, for example, name calling or refusal to discuss
the subject. Omission from party manifestos and conspiring with the ‘opposition’
are used to circumvent any serious scrutiny or the need for a democratic
mandate. A left liberal judiciary also provides limited restraint as they
autocratically re-write the meanings of various laws.
The destruction of the best of Britain (or at least what actually worked)
seems more ruthless than just following a theoretical political and social
ideology, although it is sometimes difficult to see where ideology ends and
arrogant incompetence takes over. However, there appears to be a real loathing
for all things British and, therefore, a willingness to do what it takes to
firstly undermine and then destroy them. This can be taken to extremes of
contradictions. For example, after smashing up integrated infrastructure in the
name of privatisation, large chunks (railways and electricity) are now run or
even owned by foreign state owned enterprises. Also having imported
multi-culturalism (in practice Islam) to smash up the monopoly of
Judaeo-Christian based values, there is silence on how a common basis of
equitable laws, democratic governance and (progressive) moral standards can
exist (and flourish) in the resulting environment of diversity and
enclaves.
Our country is on a slippery slope of left liberalism without any obvious
means of limitation. As state power increases it can become more ambitious,
bizarre and coercive, aided by its ideological fellow travellers in the main
stream media. The left liberal establishment answer to everything (especially
the problems resulting from their actions) is:expanded scope for interference
and more of the same: more propaganda; manipulated statistics;more inhumanity of
ostracism, coercion and outright persecution; politicising and emasculating
education, the police, armed forces and justice system; functional destruction
of existing (conservative) institutions (for example, family, marriage, small
business, freedom thought and speech and freedom from fear); abolishing genuine
British conservative values. Where does the sledge hammer stop? It doesn’t!
One day you and what you hold dear will be their target. Ukip
Daily.
