Sunday, 14 August 2011

Marxist scum play the race card, as usual

All the usual suspects - the BBC, Guardian, Labour Party are lining up to attack David Starkey for alleged racism. As usual, of course, they are entirely wrong. David Starkey is as racist as he is heterosexual - ie, not at all.

Anyone who works with young offenders in any capacity must have observed a growing respect among the young, white criminal class for black 'gangstas'. Gangstas are seen as cool and trendy and the racist, sexist and violent lyrics of black rappers are lapped up by white youths who, tragically, do not see anyone from their own culture who inspires them. Perhaps therein lies the problem. Young white bastards (using the 'b' word in its correct sense) growing up with no male role model at home; either no father, or an unemployed one, or their mother entertaining a series of unemployable louts; the sort who appear on the Jeremy Kyle show trying to identify which out of several unsavoury individuals is the father, see something different, exotic and glamorous in black culture.

Ironically, there is somewhere in there a rejection of the moral degeneracy which infiltrates so much of our society, including unmarried motherhood: the 'bitches' and 'hoes' who receive no respect in the gangsta culture are, in fact, symbolic of the immoral whores who produce bastards to grow up without fathers; without morality; without standards. In a sense, therefore, the youths are right in rejecting what they are rejecting. Unfortunately, it is so hopelessly inarticulate and buried beneath such a steaming pile of emotional baggage in their lives, that these young people are unable to make the next logical step, which would be to seek integration into civilised, middle class society via conventional things such as marriage and work. They can see what they are fighting against, but cannot see how to make their lives better.

Ali G represented real people: white youths who are searching in black culture for the sense of purpose which their own culture has failed to deliver to them.

So David Starkey is right. White youths have 'become' black. Of course it does not represent all black culture any more than the white youths who go astray represent all white culture. The solution is to have more positive white role models for the white youths to follow.

Saturday, 13 August 2011

England is sick

So says Monika Konczyk who was almost burned to death by rioters. And who could say she is wrong?

A mesly few months in prison is not sufficient for the people who were involved in these riots. Let's be clear: I believe that the army should have been sent on to the streets with a shoot to kill policy. Every serviceman should have been brought back from Afghanistan or any other Godforsaken spot in the world they have been posted to; anyone with moral qualms about euthanising scum should have been allowed leave and the others sent out to do precisely that: euthanise the scum.

Any rioters who do end up in our holiday camp prisons should, in my view, be sent out each day in chain gangs to clean up the mess they have created. Of course, it won't happen. We have had 66 years of socialist governments ever since the vile, anti-Semitic Clement Attlee was elected in 1945. Socialists know that the morally defective scum of society are their core voters although, of course, it doesn't matter whom you vote for, since all of our political parties are contaminated with it. Maggie Thatcher talked tough, but failed to bring back capital punishment; increased spending on social security and she abolished corporal punishment in schools, contributing to the spoilt, selfish generation we now have. David Cameron? If he had gone to a less posh school, he would have been New Labour to the core. To quote Blackadder, he "is as wet as a haddock's bathing costume."

Thursday, 11 August 2011

Who said dinosaurs were extinct?

The Red Kenosaurus is determined to keep the Jurassic era alive. According to Ken Livingstone, government spending cuts are responsible for the riots. So now we know. While Leroy was stealing a plasma TV and Charlene was trying on the designer trainers she had looted, they were only wanting to sell the stuff so that they could pay their university tuition fees. Yeah, right! For one thing, if you have burned down all the shops in your neighbourhood and all of your friends have piles of goods they have looted themselves, then selling stuff becomes a bit difficult. Whom do you sell to? Stick it all on eBay?

Student loans and tuition fees mean that you borrow money when you need it, and pay it back when you can afford it. I must admit, I can't see anything wrong with that principle. Under the Tories, the threshold for repayment has increased, making it easier for people on low incomes. That is absolutely the right priority, in my opinion.

As for cuts, what happened to working for a living and paying your own way? Don't get me wrong, I have claimed social security benefits a long time ago. When I needed them. Since I started working, I haven't claimed a brass farthing, nor expected any. Too many people in this country have a misplaced sense of entitlement, where they expect to receive handouts at others' expense. If I can't afford something, I do without. Unless you are super-rich or a super-scrounger, that is a choice we all make. If you can't afford a Ferrari, you can buy a BMW. If you can't afford that, you can buy a Ford. If you can't afford a car at all, there are buses.

In my opinion, the cuts haven't gone far enough. I shouldn't be paying tax so that Samantha Cameron can claim child benefit. Someone who sweeps the streets shouldn't be paying tax so that teachers can claim tax credits. Apparently, some London authorities have cut spending on youth clubs by 75%. So fucking what? I would cut it by 100%. I have never been to a youth club in my life and I have never considered thieving, looting, rioting and burning to be the only alternatives, funnily enough.

Wednesday, 10 August 2011

London riots; England burns

What is to be said? The mindless thuggery and violence which has affected deprived communities in this country for years has now erupted spectacularly into the world's headlines. Normally, as I say, the victims are poor people who are helpless and voiceless. In the leafiest of suburbs, our political class are completely immune. Every political party is led by a millionaire who got where they are because of their parents' wealth and connections. One good consequence of the current situation is that it affects even the country's élite: we really are 'in it together' Mr Cameron.

Who or what is to blame? Forget poverty, at least in a material sense. The people carrying out this violence have Blackberries and the latest designer gear: they are deprived morally and spiritually, not materially. We have whole generations of families living a lifetime on benefits: they are told they are entitled to handouts; entitled to human rights, and no one in authority ever tells them that they have responsibilities to contribute to the society which supports them.

Family breakdown is an issue. What do David Cameron, Nick Clegg, Ed and David Miliband, Harriet Harman, Gordon Brown and Tony Blair have in common? They are all married. They know that a stable family background and parents who work for a living is best for their families, and they are right. What is wrong, is that most of them refuse to advocate it for other people. Not one of them condemns a single mother a brood of bastards by several different fathers. Not one of them is prepared to say that it is not right for a child to grow up without knowing his father (as I did). They support truckloads of benefits for the underclass and hope that the problem will go away. In doing so, they betray the young people that they supposedly care about.

What about religious leaders? The Church of Scotland has been debating whether practising sodomites should be ordained. When did you last hear a Christian leader condemning fornication? Not in this century, I'll bet. Men who should fear only God seem to fear and care only about left-wing politicians and supporting immoral 'equality' laws which discriminate against Christians in our own country. In case you think this is a racist point, it is not. The United Kingdom is consitutionally a Protestant Christian country: remove that, and you break up the UK. Alex Salmond understands that: undoubtedly he believes in 'equality', but he also wants to undermine our country's constitution and destroy our country.

Our police forces have become emasculated. Senior officers are obsessed with 'rights' and 'diversity' and sucking up to left wing politicians, instead of focusing on why we need police: to keep law and order. We don't need a 'police service', because it won't serve. We need a 'police force' because it exists to enforce the law without fear or favour, or it is nothing. We don't need police officers to be mincing social workers: we need them to strike fear into the criminal classes. If I am a victim of crime, I don't want a policeman to hold my hand: I want a ruthless bastard who will sort out the criminal. Vigilantes only exist where official forces have failed: interestingly, we are seeing vigilante groups starting up among ethnic minorities in London to protect their property.

On the international scene, many of our political class have cheered the so-called 'Arab Spring'. Our government has spent hundreds of millions of pounds of taxpayers' money interfering in the Libyan Civil War, whilst encouraging armed thugs to riot against their government and condemning those such as Assad who have put down riots with force. Hopefully the current situation will focus their minds and knock sense into them. You either support the integrity of a sovereign state and the duty of a government to maintain law and order, or you don't. You can't pick and choose. However evil Assad or Gadaffi are, the average Syrian or Libyan wants to go about their daily life peacefully and doesn't really care which bunch of shysters are lording it over them. Just like the poor of our inner cities who are having their lives destroyed by thugs.

Sunday, 30 January 2011

Socialists disgrace themselves again

Once again, socialists show their true colours. It is always ludicrous to describe the likes of the BNP as 'right wing' politically: just as the Nazis began as the National SOCIALIST Workers' Party, this sort of anti-semitic vileness always comes from the political left. You only have to remember the antisemitic campaigns that the L*bour Party waged against Michael Howard when he was Tory leader and the anti-Israel hatred stirred up by lefty politicians in recent years to realise that this kind of vileness is far from unusual in their part of the political spectrum. The worst thing I will say about Aaron Porter is that he is unbelievably naive in having joined the L*bour Party and expecting to receive any sympathy from their hangers-on. Socialism by definition is evil.

Sunday, 2 January 2011

Chris Jefferies

I hope the man is guilty. Because the police and media between them have destroyed this man's life, apparently without a shred of evidence. I am particularly dismayed by the utterly dishonest gutter journalism which has been used to twist the most mundane of events into 'signs of being a strangler'.

For example, a classic of English literature, the Ballad of Reading Gaol is reduced to a poem about wife-killing in the Daily Mirror.

Not that the Mirror stopped there. Jefferies is apparently 'bizarre' because he once had blue hair (Marge Simpson watch out!) and was described as an odd, lonely young man by people who knew him nearly half a century ago.

The Sun presumably believes that all teachers who follow the National Curriculum by teaching about the Holocaust are obsessed with death, for there is nothing in the article to distinguish Mr Jefferies from thousands of other good teachers.

Even my beloved Daily Mail believes that we need to know Mr Jefferies got his mother to do his washing.

The innuendo which has been published about a man who has been charged with nothing is truly staggering. Society really has not moved very far from the days when we burned witches alive.

Something bad has happened... therefore
Find someone who looks, sounds and behaves a bit oddly*... and
You have a witch. Burn them!


*I used an adverb. I must be a posh weirdo! Burn me!

Monday, 10 May 2010

Party politics at its most sordid...

That is the quote from Lord Heseltine after the astonishing revelation about the duplicitous behaviour of Nick Clegg in trying to back both horses at once. If this latest scheme comes about, the country will have yet another unelected Prime Minister foisted on it. Clegg, who claimed to have been the 'only candidate offering real change', will have proved himself to be merely a patsy for the Liebour Party to remain in power.

A rainbow coalition would be outrageously unfair to English voters, who voted overwhelmingly for a Conservative Government. Dependent on regional parties, it would mean harsh budgetary cuts for public services in England whilst Scotland, Wales and/or Northern Ireland escaped. No wonder Alex Salmond is rubbing his hands in glee. No one who seriously wants the United Kingdom to survive can support this.

There is no way that there is a majority in this Parliament in favour of PR, including Alternative Vote. FPTP is the least bad system we have; it is the clear preference of virtually all Tory MPs as well as a fair proportion of Labour MPS. If Brown puts forward a Queen's Speech, Tory MPs have to be united in their votes against it and take every opportunity to highlight the utter immorality of this stitch-up of power. We need to force an early General Election, on the current boundaries and without AV, in which Liebour and the Fib Dems would be decimated. After that, a majority Tory Government could introduce equal-sized constituencies at its leisure.

The utter dishonesty of Clegg and his party has to be made crystal-clear to voters. Any attempt at a deal with them by the Conservatives has to be called off - now, and made clear that it will not be on the table next time either. The Fib Dems have shown that they could never make PR work. PR would lead inevitably to coalition and, for PR to be effective, the smaller parties have to be mature and willing to negotiate with whoever the majority party is. The Fib Dems have shown themselves conclusively to be a collection of beardy-weirdies who actually have no interest in gaining power. They get off on being in permanent opposition; moaning about how life is unfair, whilst really being quite relieved not to have the responsibility of making the real-life decisions of which they are incapable. The Orange Bookers should join the Tory Party; left-wingers who are serious politicians should join the Labout Party, and leave the rest exposed as the rump of weirdos and losers that they are.

Saturday, 8 May 2010

So this is how Zimbabweans feel

Doesn't it feel like living in a banana republic? A Prime Minister who was never elected in the first place has now lost an election and... he's still bloody there!

The LibDems hoped to take an historic stride towards PR - well, I think they have royally f*cked up. This, friends is what you would have after every election. A squatter, unelected, in Number 10 while the great and good meet behind closed doors to concoct a compromise deal that no one actually voted for. And, natch, the Lib Dems appointing the new PM.

Well, it sucks. FPTP generally provides a decisive result. The candidate who tops the poll in each seat may not have 50% of the vote, but they are closer to being the popular choice than anyone else. Therefore, why should the candidates who come second and third have any chance of depriving them? Extrapolate that to the national level. I can see the Tories don't have an overall majority, but we are the closest party to it. Where PR breaks down, in my opinion, is that it potentially gives the party which comes third or even fourth more power than the one which comes first, if a coalition chooses to shut out the most popular party. If that's democracy, I'm a banana. Which, appropriately enough, fits the thesis I began with.

Thursday, 6 May 2010

VOTE CONSERVATIVE

So, General Election day is here and I intend to be at the polling station shortly after 7am to be one of the first people to cast a vote.

For the first time in my life, I have some insight into what it must be like to live in a banana republic. How many fake postal votes have ZanuLabour engineered? There have got to be major reforms after this Election. Postal votes have got to be restricted to those who genuinely need them; they should only be available to people whose names appear on the published electoral register (mine doesn't) and they should only be available to people whose names have been on the published register for at least one year. Additionally, there must be prosecutions for any and all breaches of electoral law.

Why vote Conservative? We need a return to honesty. It is time for change. Thatcher and Blair both showed that no leader should go on for more than two terms. Major and Brown both showed that, when a long-serving leader departs, it is not a good idea to have a replacement who is chosen only by the governing party. There is nothing party political in this: the comparison between a successful leader being succeeded by a disastrous one is eerily similar in both cases. However, a tired government cannot enact the changes we need.

The country needs to cut its addiction to taxing and borrowing and spending. Social security beneftis should be sufficient fot those who need them and not handed out to people who don't. I would like to see an axe being taken to family tax credits and child benefit. Why have an army of civil servants taking taxes from people and another army handing back money to people who don't need it? Leaving the money in people's pockets to begin with would cost the government nothing and would save millions in administration. Let the civil servants find jobs where they can actually be productive.

It's time to support families. That means supporting marriage. A real family includes a married couple, with or without children. That is why we need a substantial married couple's tax allowance. We also need to end the iniquity of people on benefits being better off if they separate than if they live together. Single parenthood cheats children. Children of married couples tend to be healthier; better behaved; higher achieving; more likely to find jobs when they leave school; more likely to go into higher education and less likely to be involved in crime. All of the above saves the country money in the health service; legal system; social workers etc etc. When the people take up jobs, they pay more tax. It is a win-win situation. I despise left-wing politicians like Gordon Brown; Harriet Harman; Nick Clegg etc etc who are married; ie they see the benefits of marriage for their own families; yet refuse to lift a finger to promote the benefits to poor people.

Reform of the electoral system has to include equal-sized constituencies. End Labour's rotten burghs (Scottish spelling, for my English readers) where two men, a dog, 2000 names harvested from the local cemetery and several thousand fictitious people would elect a monkey in a red rosette. Atheist Nick Clegg says that he wants to end 'safe seats'. Fine. Let's merge Orkney & Shetland with Caithness & Sutherland: two constituencies which elected Liberal MPs even when they only had half a dozen voters across the UK. Let's put the Western Isles into Charlie Kennedy's consituency. Let's get rid of some of the sparsely populated Highland and Borders constituencies which would elect a monkey in a yellow rosette while we are about it.

We need to redefine our relationship with Europe. If only Dave had stuck to his "cast-iron guarantee" to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty: he might have found Angela Merkel more sympathetic than he could have possibly imagined. What a vote-winner this golden opportunity could have been in the final week of the campaign.

However, to quote Shagger Bill himself, "It's the economy, stupid." Labour has once again (as in 1979) left the country broke. Like every Labour government in history, unemployment is higher than when they took office. The next government needs to get Britain working, saving and investing. We need low taxes; incentives for entrepreneurs and an end to political correctness. If you want ethnic minorities to vote for you, show that you are serious about family values; if you want gay people to vote for you, show that you are serious about low taxation. These will be better vote-winners, and better for the economy, than a million policies based around PC nonsense.

Anyway, the polling starts in a few minutes. I'm off to vote Tory.

Sunday, 2 May 2010

Direct Party and Representative Voting

No, I hadn't heard of this until today either.

I think the system has a certain amount to commend it. Each elector would vote for both a local MP and for a party. Basically, it would keep the MP to constituency link, but introduce proportionality by weighting the voting power in Parliament according to the proportion of votes cast for each party.

The problem I have, is that you would still have the problem of any proportional system, that you would almost always have weak coalition government. It would also be possible for the largest single party to be shut out of power by the parties in second and third places. However, I wonder if this can be solved by altering the weightings?

Let us say that the party which finishes first in the popular vote automatically gets to choose the executive. Each party would have an equal chance to achieve this. In Parliament, the Prime Minister and Cabinet would therefore represent the single most popular party, and they would have a collective 5% of the voting power in Parliament in addition to their individual votes as MPs.. They would therefore be more powerful than individual MPs, but would be nowhere near a majority on their own.

The largest party in the popular vote would have 45% of the voting power in Parliament. This would almost certainly include all of the Executive as individual MPs. Assuming the party and Executive are united, they have 50% of the vote and, with the Speaker's casting vote, they can always get their legislation through Parliament. We have strong government. Any division in the largest party could be punished, though, because a single rebel MP would move them below 50%.

The second largest party would have 30% of the voting power in Parliament, and the third largest party would have 15% of the voting power. Combined, they would have equal power to the largest party minus the executive.

The smallest parties (SNP, Plaid Cymru, DUP etc) would have a combined 5% of the voting power in Parliament.

On any 'free' vote, each MP would have equal voting power.