Yesterday’s Part 1 Slogpost concluded by suggesting that the task for those Brits with their brains, hearts and souls still intact ‘is to assemble a very cold and harsh analysis of the governing class, and decide which side the main institutions, key players and hopefuls are on: that of citizen liberty, or taking liberties at the expense of the citizen’. This Part 2 below looks at each in turn.
In many ways, this first is the most depressing part of the analysis. But in others, it illustrates just how shakey those organs of the State and society are… and how there is – genuinely – no case for resorting to violent revolution: their structure and fabric is so rotten, concerted action at constituency and ballot booth would be more than enough to blow them down. Even if division and stupidity stops that process, peaceful resistance can quickly restore the balance of power we have lost.
UK police forces represent a good example of this. Cut back in numbers and starved of funds by one administration after another, the cops have abandoned their strictly civil role of discouraging and detecting crime in favour of an easier one: doing what the politicians want and behaving like Thought Police in the ethereal areas of ideological Newspeak – homophobia, Islamophobia, hate crime and all the rest of the pc drivel. Senior officers too clever for their own good seek promotion by turning to corrupt media owners for spin and promotion. They go on courses to become ‘leaders in diversity, but hedge their bets by lobbying for riot gear and water-cannon to give them another burgeoning role: putting down the discontent of otherwise law-abiding citizens suffering from real rather than imagined repression. And finally, they turn to technology to improve their skills in the area of taxation, aka the collection of fines.
The same thing applies to the BBC. Once a world-admired paragon of Truth, since around 1965 the Beeb has been infiltrated first, by left of Centre university graduates given jobs in programming, news content and direction; and then by Cameronian cronies from less than desirable areas of financialised capitalism and internet technology. The result is a bias by turns to collectivist pc and neoliberal conformity that bamboozles everyone most of the time, but works perfectly for the Establishment….which works at starving the BBC too, and its subsequent replacement by Newscorp – or something equally robotic such as Bloomberg or CNN.
The rest of the media set beyond independent internet news sites and the declining blogosphere provide persuasive and monied support for the political élites in their varietal shades of grey. They need only the occasional club to the head from D-notices to behave themselves in the required manner; usually, they are willing hauteurs in the manufacture of circuses.
All of these areas look like a mountain range of obstacles at first sight. But all three have one major weakness in common: they depend on vast supplies of money in one direction or another for their continued pursuit of perverted objectives. As long as there is the ballot box – and as long as candidates with no skin at all in this game can be elected in large enough numbers – the flow of that money can be stopped within weeks. I’d very much like you to hold the thought in that italicised condition, because it is absolutely central to everything. If we eschew the united political Opposition, then the solution will have to be much broader than merely “political”.
The starting point (and under FPTP rules, it is more of a man-trap than a set of blocks) is the election to Parliament of such candidates. As I have written before, we are a Leaver/Free speech majority (and an electorate of many varying outlooks beyond that) held captive by a Remainer Parliament, itself dominated by a corrupt ideological duopoly.
Key players and hopefuls
Very few current members of the political class are fit for any purpose beyond lining pockets, representing very narrow interests or feeding an insatiable ego. The tiny minority apart from that description are exceptions of very great honour, but literally a dying species: Denis Skinner, John Redwood, Kate Hoey, Bill Cash, and a few other lower-profile MPs.
There are others I would put into ‘the Jury’s out’ category – people of chequered pasts and unclear futures who seem, nevertheless, to have a degree of honesty, honour and goodness within them somewhere. In this group I would include Owen Paterson, Dominic Raab, Johnny Mercer, David Davis, and (with many caveats) Gavin Williamson.
The absence of further Labour MPs doesn’t reflect bias on my part: it is simply the reality of the decent Left in Parliament clinging on here and there, but largely being deselected by Momentum and constituency infiltration purges. Rosie Duffield I think is a brave woman, but sits in a marginal and may be swept away at the next election; Dr Paul Williams is another fine person who should survive electorally, but is far too independent to stay the course with the Trots around Corbyn and McDonnell: he was only offered the Stockton nomination because the Labour hierarchy thought the seat was unwinnable.
At or near the Top of the Jury’s Out League are four very disparate people who could be hugely influential, but are flawed in various ways: Prince Charles, Tommy Robinson aka Stephen Yaxley-Lennon (SYL), Jacob Rees-Mogg and Nigel Farage.
Prince Charles may seem an odd person to include in the political class, but whether we like it or not he is a political influence. Seen by most these days as a slightly potty old eco-warrior, behind the scenes the heir to the throne is a meddler, and a thorough protectionist of Windsor Line plc. The Queen isn’t going to last forever, and it is possible he will be crowned in or close to a period of political meltdown. He could be an extremely useful power-broking force for reform, but he does quite obviously have an inflated idea of his real constitutional role….and is at heart a social small-c conservative. The Prince can be OK in small doses. Somebody close by needs to explain this to him.
Tommy Robinson SYL attracts a sizeable level of support, largely thanks to the abject failure of the Establishment to listen to widely expressed concerns about the anti-integrationist and intolerant demands of Islamic immigrants. The reality of State victimisation he has suffered only adds to the bloke’s appeal among those who feel both disenfranchised and ignored by the liberal élite. My doubts about Robinson remain, however: he lacks both breadth and depth as anything beyond a single-issue politician, and he shows clear signs in some behaviours of being manipulative as an operator – he does, for instance, go all out to attract the victimisation above and beyond what you’d expect. He has a brutalist haircut and a very short fuse when attacked. I frequently defend him against Useful Idiots and the hypocritical Hard Left; but he is himself a divisive influence, and unlikely to play anything beyond a minor role as things stand today. I will continue to defend him where appropriate, but there are no circumstances in which I could actively support him.
Jacob Rees-Mogg enjoys a much higher level (and totally different spectrum) of support. At first – once it became clear that she had no intention of honouring the Referendum result – he quickly became a genuine rival to Theresa May, appearing to have calm command of a solid group of Leaver Tory MPs and attracting serious comment as The Coming Man. But Rees-Mogg gradually demonstrated that he would, if necessary, put Party before principles. Equally important, his ‘Young Fogey’ manner began to grate with many, his threats appeared empty, and today he seems both lower-profile and lacking in ideas. Despite this, the ERG’s leader is the only ‘tolerant’ Conservative (alongside Redwood and Paterson) who seems to have a real fear of just how badly the Prime Minister is abusing constitutional precedent and procedure. I don’t write him off completely – and I could see him operating honourably in a coalition – but like pretty much everyone at Westminster, he would struggle to unite a Britain at war with itself.
Nigel Farage of course dominates this group. Easily the most determined and radical Rightist since Margaret Thatcher, he was instrumental in the development of UKIP from a borderline extreme fringe Party into a major political force. He is also the sole person apart from Jeremy Corbyn, Kate Hoey and Boris Johnson who has cultivated an image of being “a real person” populist rather than an amoral egomaniac: love or loathe the bloke, his supporters believe in him.
In the immediate to medium term we now face, Farage is without doubt the leading standard bearer when it comes to British Independence from the EU. As such – bearing in mind UKIP’s pitiful showing in yesterday’s local elections, and his new Brexit Party’s poll numbers in the euroelections – he probably has earned the right to present himself as the only viable magnet for those determined to punish Parliament and tear up May’s ludicrous Withdrawal Agreement.
But for my money, in any longer term outlook he has fatal flaws when it comes to ambitions of one day entering Number Ten. Over the years, there has been ample evidence that Nigel Farage is strategically muddled, confrontational, and more interested in his City community than the electorate at large. Critics cite his shambolic approach to campaign organisation, strained relationships with colleagues, and inability to build consensus or obvious fits with allied causes.
Personally, I doubt he really wants to take the donor and lobbying elements out of politics. I don’t think he understands branding issues: he says his new Party isn’t Single Issue, but then names it after a single issue. I don’t think he supports those who have financially fallen behind. And he has made serious errors of judgement since 2016: in particular, standing aside in the 2017 General Election, disappearing to the Antipodes on a speaking tour, adopting an unhelpful tone towards UKIP and Robinson, and showing zero interest in the Waspi/2020 cause. Finally, if anything his relations with the media are getting worse not better, and he has of late adopted an air of dismissing former Labour voters.
He may be the Man of the Hour now. But he shows little or no flair for statesmanship beyond that.
This is a great pity, because the mainstream key players at the Westminster-Whitehall level truly are everything from pernicious fascists to incompetent technocrats and dull capos.
At or near the top, we have a Conservative hierarchy surrounding Theresa May of unusual suspects like Hunt, Javid, Hammond, Green and Lidington on one side; and the reverse takeover of directionless Labour led by the Wild Bunch of Corbyn, McDonnell, Abbott and Starmer, nibbled at by a ragbag of rank and file as shifty and deranged as Benn, Cooper and Lammy.
The Tory Troubles have left the most dangerous Rightist in Britain isolated. That man is Boris Johnson, whose trail of bullying, cover-up, corruption and falsification might possibly one day be revealed as the most heinous in UK political history.
The UK Leftib Wagon Train now has so many staging posts, it resembles the Pony Express. The appalling feminist bigot and rentagob Jess Phillips, the hounded Brownites, the Federal nutjob Baron Adonis, the Blairite Campbell in exile, and the dying old Left of Bolsover remain variously in the flock: some excommunicated, some leading the dictatorship of the Stalinists, some lost to the Changelings and some to the Vincibles.
Sitting uncomfortably in that caravan of farago is the most dangerous Socialist in Britain now that Harriet Harman has retired to the comfort of her enormous UNITE pension. That man is Tom Watson, who has in the last fortnight alone shown his spitting contempt for free speech in a disgraceful campaign of harassing internet sites and social media offering succour to those who oppose The Korrectissars.
Both the “big” Parties are a mess, their multiple divisions reflecting in sharp focus their utter irrelevance to social change in Britain and the rise of Me Too narcissism. And both display unmistakable totalitarian tendencies.
Being weak, they have fallen to control by globalism, the TUC, Momentum, the City, Brussels, NATO, aggressive minorities and over-represented Nationalists. The Mayflower in particular has been boarded by pirates from the Treasury, the FCO, the federalists and Military Intelligence.
This makes them appear formidable. But they are far from unassailable, because every week it becomes increasingly obvious that they can only control us with the help of the minority élites who control them.
In the short term, my informed speculation is that they will put off the day when that structural weakness is revealed by doing a deal with each other over Brexit-am-Brino. I am increasingly coming to see it as the Nazi-Soviet Pact of our times.
I wrote yesterday that this Part 2 would be an examination of loyalties. The headline to today’s post talks of True Colours. As you have probably gathered, I don’t see much loyalty, and the colours have run somewhat.
All of the heroes?
All the Shakespearoes?
They watched their Rome burn
Whatever happened to the heroes?
Whatever happened to the heroes?
No more heroes any more
But there is no Messiah to lead us into a Promised Land.
There is no Saviour, no Healer, no Churchill. Nobody as yet on the radar is up to it.
Nevertheless, across the Channel there is an inspiration: the Gilets Jaunes.
Forget what the Macronite, NATO, Brussels and US mind-benders have told you. The Gilets Jaunes are not violent, they are not fascists, and they are not revolutionaries.
They are not even political.
They are – in their own words – simply working people across the spectrum who have come together to be The Resistance to taxation injustices: les injustices fiscales.
I am now convinced that the only way we in Britain and Europe as a whole can retrieve control over personal destiny is via a peaceful but relentlessly insistent programme of civil disobedience and Beast Starvation.
Thank you for persevering with this lengthy post. I wish you a calm and sunny weekend.