Elephant in the room (2)

On Sunday, a post went up on the subject of elephants in rooms – well it’s a bit more than elephants with Labour – it’s herds of wilderbeast trampling everything within the room:

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2019/11/21/labour-party-unveils-retro-class-war-manifesto/

Look at some of it:

“Claiming that “bankers, billionaires, and establishment” figures do not want Britons to have the raft of ‘free’ — ultimately taxpayer-funded — programmes by Labour, Corbyn claimed to be on the receiving end of attacks from the “rich and powerful” and that the “billionaire-owned media makes things up about us”.”

He is very much part of it. Across the pond, some pundit said that DJT made his billions before office and started steadily losing it after 2016, while Pelosi and cohorts only started making theirs whilst in office. The name Biden springs to mind.

Anyone recall an expenses scandal over here and an epithet given to one of the worst – The Chipmunk? Corbyn’s talk of us and them is fine as long as he identifies the Them correctly, which he doesn’t, the old enemies of Britain lover, Grandpa Semtex, lies and yet there are tribalists who lap it up.

It’s going to be interesting on December 13th to see how many oop north have been taken in again. Or maybe it wouldn’t matter what he says as long as it has a red rosette and hates Boris.

““the very fastest, full-fibre broadband for free” for everyone in the country”

Instant end of the ability to speak out and OoL is very much one of those affected.

“Tax the rich”

One commenter replied:

‘The Top 1% of the wealthy pay nearly 70% of the tax take, businesses provided another 20%, and wage and salary earners make up the other 10%…’

Ghost of Clegg:

““And yes, we will scrap university tuition fees,” Mr Corbyn said to rapturous applause at the university venue. In order to pay for all of this and more, Mr Corbyn announced £82.9 billion in tax rises. The party’s funding document outlines that will include increasing corporation tax, increasing income tax on higher earners, a “new national levy” on second homes, “impos[ing] VAT on private school fees”, and getting rid of the Married Persons Allowance.”

Capital flight, squeeze the middle-class out of existence. I see. One commenter:

‘Politics of envy. Increasing low skilled workers to be on £10.00 per hour. I have 8 staff that I would 100% let go. Our customers will not accept the increase cost to cover this. There will be huge job losses. I truly believe that unrest will happen because of these idiots.

Yes.

“getting rid of the Married Persons Allowance.” This is encouraging families to split up.’

Yes again, although the process began long before that.

“On immigration, the manifesto says that Labour will “establish a humane immigration system”, and, like the Liberal Democrats, will halt the “hostile environment” to illegal immigration. “Instead, our system will be built on human rights and aimed at meeting the skills and labour shortages that exist in our economy and public services,” the document continued, explaining that the party will increase the flow of low-skilled labour from outside of the EU by restoring the “overseas domestic workers’ visa”.”

Refer please to previous OoL post on this, linked at the top.

“Labour also pledged chain migration of the unskilled for all migrants, writing: “In accordance with our values and domestic laws, we will uphold the right to a family life for British, EU and non-EU residents alike. We will end the deportation of family members of people entitled to be here and end the minimum income requirements which separate families.””

It goes on about votes for 16 year olds and anyone resident here over that age, irrespective – one commenter comments:

‘give children that are still in school the right to vote w[ith] their teachers providing daily doses of indoctrination’

Inheritance tax – one commenter:

‘Isn’t the tax on all inheritances above £125,000 essentially an attack on private property ownership, drastically reducing the amount that parents can pass on to their children?

The threshold is laughable, because £125,000 will buy next to nothing in the over-inflated British property market, so it is clearly not just a tax on the wealthy, but on everyone, including members of the working class who once would have considered themselves to be Labour supporters.’

In general – another commenter:

‘What this sounds like…. is party collusion…. one side makes radically stupid and outlandish proposals all in an effort to pass legislation that is slightly less egregious [than] the other side’s.’

Uniparty, yes. One enormous con.  Boris is a Remoaner, his Major Lie about Brexit is just that – it is NOT Brexit, it is betrayal and Remain – defence and fisheries the two most immediately hit.

This deep collusion was summed up by another commenter:

‘”A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse over loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a dictatorship.” (attributed to Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, 1887)’

Picked up by another:

‘Unlesss Corbyn really is as mind-numbingly stupid as he appears, there must surely be an agenda here? Deliberately pushing voters away from the Labour party so they’ll vote Conservative, and for the ‘deal’, which means no Brexit in any meaningful sense. Why else would he be promoting policies that he MUST know are against almost everything the British people want.’

In the previous post [linked at the top], I touched on the reaction of violence to all the above and warned that it was strategically unwise, irrespective of any moral debate. One commenter wrote:

‘Anyone who clings to the historically untrue-and thoroughly immoral-doctrine that ‘violence never settles anything’ I would advise to conjure the ghosts of Napoleon Bonaparte and the Duke of Wellington and let them debate it.’

I’ve no philosophical objection to ‘applied uncontrolled chaos’ but when the time is ripe, meanwhile using other channels, but the strategic objection is twofold, as mentioned in the last post:

1. When the Uniparty and its deep state backers are clearly pushing for people like us to radicalise enough to hit the streets, it is in order to:

a. foment violence in general to further their own agenda;
b. pick off the ringleaders and scribes, the key objectors.

2. Uncontrolled chaos is an open invitation to warlords with the dosh and therefore the private armies to step in and make the situation worse than ever before – see Stephen and Matilda during the years of chaos.

Not saying in the least that insurrection would not drain the swamp – it could well clear parliament of its swamp creatures – but only at a cost of others taking their place. Corruption is endemic to our species.

And never forget that there is another foe in this land – see the first Elephants post linked at the top. They are still short of the numbers but not if Corbyn gets in.

Look for a moment at the US scene. The Donald’s move to demand a trial and therefore to be able to clear the swamp at last would be at a cost of him becoming near omnipotent in his second four years and who says it would be four? See Roosevelt here.

Unfortunately, Person A’s reservations, opposed by Person B’s reservations, ultimately prove both to have been right. I fully understand people’s rage exploding, which at least is better than it simmering and gnawing away at them. Hate to be relativistic here – democracy may well be terminal but it’s also the only real hope of preserving at least some liberty.

But May seized on that to support something equally wrong – she said that though Leave had won, nevertheless Remain also had to be represented in the form of Brexit. How ridiculous – if you set up an either/or, then only one stands.

Meanwhile, Corbyn taps into the chaotic mood of deep resentment and tries to turn it back into class warfare again, totally ignoring the elephant in the room – Islam, the black and feminazi victimhood and violence etc etc. It’s this twisted tapping into and cynical usage of a national mood which is the most dangerous aspect of it.

December 12th

1. Just don’t turn up, don’t vote?

What does that achieve, even if 80% who could, don’t vote? A feeling of moral superiority? Meanwhile, the organised do vote, the dead rise and the students double vote. Welcome, Grandpa Semtex.

2. Vote Brexit Party when you are able?  Or if there is no BP candidate, write ‘No Deal Brexit’ across the paper, which I’m contemplating? Or creating another box and writing ‘TBP’? Those votes are still counted in the overall tally – but how many such votes? The MSM would hardly let out that the vast majority had indicated Brexit, so what is achieved, apart from a nice leisurely walk to the polling station?

3. Vote Boris Party and get Remain? Because, especially on paying Brussels, on the EU Army and on fisheries, that is most certainly what he indicated. But worse, it shows just how forgetful humans are. Look at this from Vox Day, speaking of the US but quite applicable here as well:

Frankly, it astonishes me that no matter how many times the U.S. government is proven beyond any shadow of a doubt to have lied, from the USS Maine to Pearl Harbor, most people will nevertheless unhesitatingly believe the very next lie they produce. You have to be extraordinarily forgetful to believe anything the U.S. government tells you is true, whether the claim concerns the food pyramid, global warming, or historical events.

Boris is flat out lying to you, those touting his manifesto have extremely short memories.

4.  Corbyn and Momentum.  Living up north here, I get to speak with locals and it ranges from red rosette minds to those actually thinking, recognising that Corbyn is Momentum and Momentum is bad.  All I spoke with are agreed on immigration though.  Many guarded their words and so did I.  Those just mentioned pointed out that there IS no alternative.

5.  One of the others.

Two last related issues

1. Boris himself stands to lose his seat.

Think about that one for a moment.  Plus other Leavers who ratted on Brexit – Raab, Baker, Redwood et al. What if he does lose his seat – to whom?  To Labour?

Realms of fantasy?  It’s Uxbridge – where is Uxbridge?  And never forget the people within the M25 bubble, the young people:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/17/view-from-uxbridge-young-voters-battle-to-oust-boris-johnson

https://www.express.co.uk/news/politics/1198211/election-2019-boris-johnson-lose-seat-uxbridge-ruislip-labour-ali-milani

Let’s say the Tories are returned, crippled, minus Boris.  Are all bets off now for the vacillating pretend Leavers?  Will Boris’s Brexit betrayal manifesto then be unceremoniously dumped?  Would it be straight Remain remaining?

2.  The other point was brought up on two posts of mine by Professor Bruce Charlton:

“The only clout we have is to act in unison ”

Disagree – The only way that ‘things’ will happen is if each person does the right thing, regardless of what he expects other people to do. A million revolutionary cells of individuals is impossible to manipulate, whereas it is trivially easy to corrupt the leadership of an organisation of a million people.

This is just the latest example of a really deep and long term problem.

Ordinary politics will not work – surely that is clear by now? Not least because people aren’t motivated. I was active in resisting this kind of stuff in universities and medicine 25 years ago, and there was near zero support even then (and there was almost no risk to resisting; resistance had no effect at all – maybe made matters worse. Nowadays, there is Much less support and the risks of resisting are much greater and increasing monthly.

My interpretation of this latest example of convergence is that it will happen to all instutional hold outs against the Left, sooner rather than later; because it is built-into institutions. Institutions are Leftist, and they have been becoming more Leftist since they originated several generations ago.

If this move to totalitarian Leftism is to be stopped from where we are Now, there would need to be a really massive social disruption; a transformation of the basic structure of our society and the rules on which it operates. Old ideas have all been tried and have all failed.

If it doesn’t happen bottom-up, by the individual action of millions, it will not happen. I’m not saying this mass resistance will happen or is at all likely to happen, because I don’t see any sign of it; but nothing else could suffice.

The thing is, things are much worse – more ‘converged’ than people realise; because all the time, all organisations are moving towards the Godless-Left-totalitarian agenda.

This includes all charities of any size, all self-identified Christian churches and other organisations.

For example the Salvation Army “The Salvation Army is standing with over 130 organisations to call for climate action for the sake of all the things that matter most.”

https://www.salvationarmy.org.uk/id/climate-change

“Things that matter most”… from a Christian denomination! Whatever happened to ‘Not of this world’.

My point is that when everybody does it, and everybody thinks it is A Good Thing – it is too late to reform; including too late to stop by boycotting or other directed transfers of wealth – because all organisations are on the same slope and all are sliding.

The most we can do (even in theory, albeit probably not in practice) is to transfer resources from faster-sliding to slower-sliding institutions.

(Much like voting in elections, we can only vote for those on the card. When politics is corrupt, we can only vote for more, or less, corrupt politicians.)

When it is too late for reform, there will be no reform. To stop entails destruction, one way or another. Since the current trends are unsustainable, they will not be sustained – hence destruction.

Most likely, societal destruction can’t be avoided, only delayed – and all delay increases the minimum amount of destruction (by allowing more time for the greater accumulation of problems).

But this world is ephemeral, while our souls are eternal. That’s the clue to what to do…

Once more:

The only way that ‘things’ will happen is if each person does the right thing, regardless of what he expects other people to do. A million revolutionary cells of individuals is impossible to manipulate, whereas it is trivially easy to corrupt the leadership of an organisation of a million people.

This is just the latest example of a really deep and long term problem.

Ordinary politics will not work – surely that is clear by now? Not least because people aren’t motivated.

And:

But this world is ephemeral, while our souls are eternal. That’s the clue to what to do…

Still obliquely referring to this without coming out and saying it, I would say … well let me put it another way:

Unless we realise that much of what we are doing and accepting as right and fine is really just the end product of a process which began post war by Them – Boomers worse than the Silent Generation, Gen X worse than Boomers, Millennials worse than … and so on to where we are now.

Only people whose heads are not right can possibly accept all this tranny and other guff – so starkly shown in sport. People whose heads are straight, with a straight family life, are far less likely to buy all this guff swirling around.

Therefore, we’re dangerous, therefore we must be silenced. The key though is that if you have a population, e.g. in Hungary and Poland, to a point in Italy, where traditional personal values still prevail, then you do not have the slouch to oblivion at the same pace as the UK and to a lesser extent – the US.

Methinks it’s not a point to be airily dismissed.

5 comments for “Elephant in the room (2)

  1. Lord T
    November 25, 2019 at 11:45 am

    I don’t know how anyone can believe violence never solves anything. Why do we have Police and an Army then?

    Violence is the bedrock of all societies. It is the reason most don’t break the laws. Don’t wear a seat belt. Pay a fine or else we will send people around to take your home. Resist and we will send armed people around to take you and jail you, resist and they will kill you.

    Our entire society is based on violence and that is the reason that would be dictators and would be tyrants disarm the people before they start their dictatorship and treason. It is time honoured way of taking power. Disarm the people and register what is out there then nobody will be able to resist. Simply collect their arms when they start getting uppity and you will only face people armed with cooking utensils.

    That is why our lords and masters are confident in ignoring our wishes. They protected by armed plod and the law can do what they want.

    However, as we have seen before. It isn’t as easy but even if you are still unarmed, violence can be brought to bear, albeit at great cost, and traitors brought to justice.

    We are not there yet. Mainly because years of leftist indoctrination have made us wimps and we still cling to the hope that someone else will fix it. After all we still believe violence doesn’t solve anything.

    • James Strong
      November 25, 2019 at 5:01 pm

      I read recently that Eammon Holmes, a television personality, was rebuked because ‘upitty’ is now a Very Bad Word.

      Maybe you didn’t know. Even better, maybe you don’t care.

    • November 25, 2019 at 6:36 pm

      LT: I was referring to when to apply it of course.

      JS: Hope he accused them of being uppity.

  2. Voice of Reason
    November 25, 2019 at 9:46 pm

    By his own admission (it’s in one of his books), and the interviews with his children, President Trump has lost most of his money, and is being propped up by Deutsche Bank.

Comments are closed.