Cookie Notice

However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Friday 31 May 2019

Democracy deniers - a paucity of intellectual rigour

The Euro Idiots de jour are Maciej Kisilowski and Anna Wojciuk - dissident Polish academics at odds with the democratic choices of their fellow countrymen. To read the risible trash they have penned for Politico EU is to gain an insight into the deep delusions of the Refuseniks, the democracy deniers.

Democracy, they insist is a sort of disease that can be 'contained' by right-thinking illiberal authoritarians such as themselves. Like Communism. And the way in which they can 'contain' democracy, they state, is to use the anti-democratic powers of the unelected EU to bully, harass, victimise and thuggishly sanction any signs of emergent democracy across Europe. To use, in other words, exactly the methods used by the Soviet Union to repress emergent freedoms in its satellite nations. These two Poles would no doubt have reasoned that Lech Walesa should have been sent to a gulag right at the start, for the good of Poland.

The utter vacuousness of their intellectual reach is exposed by their projecting their own stupidity onto Europe's democrats -

"You cannot “keep migrants out” and pay for the growing number of pensioners." 
Yes you can. That Europe needs millions of migrants to work the factories that will shortly all be automated was a Globalist's myth, a con. Open borders policies have one aim only - to help destroy national identity and to establish a Globalist hegemony.

"As a mid-sized nation-state, you cannot both “take back control” and strengthen your position in the global economy."
Ah, the Orwellian mantras that slavery is freedom, poverty is wealth. Only giving away your sovereignty to a supranational authority can make you a viable nation, they claim. This is utter bilgewater and like their previous point is offered without any supporting evidence. In fact there is much evidence to the contrary.

"You cannot make government more accountable to “the people” at the same time as you destroy independent institutions."
Again, a paradox against reason. By rejecting unelected anti-democratic self-appointed illiberal supranationalists you become less democratic, they claim. What they mean by 'independent institutions' is institutions free from any democratic control or oversight - like the organs of the Soviet state.
"And you cannot build an innovative economy while stifling critical thinking."
But surely under their Sovietised. illiberal and authoritarian anti-democracy, stifling critical thinking - i.e. thinking that opposes their bigoted orthodoxy, is the entire point of the 'containment' they are advocating?

This drivel is the thin intellectual gruel of the EU's cerebral giants. No wonder EU universities are utterly third-rate, with not a single EU27 university in the global top 20. And no wonder so many Poles are flocking to the UK to experience what world-beating universities, with four or five in the global top 20, can demonstrate to these illiberal democracy deniers. 

Thursday 30 May 2019

Eurosnouts head for the trough

European Parliament election results are greeted here with a shrug and the familiar maxim "same trough different snouts". The low-level Eurosnouts can look forward to bloated untaxed salaries, expenses beyond the dreams of avarice for which they need to render no account, a corrupt EU that forces even the smallest companies under GDPR to onerous disclosure but absolutely refuses to itself reveal how Europe's taxpayers' cash has been squandered, misused, stolen, misappropriated, defrauded and peculated by the myriad snouts in the Brussels trough. They therefore have free rein to be as dirty, crooked and squalid as they wish, safe from the wrath of their electors.

This time around though the scramble for the EP trough is as nothing in comparison to the vicious in-fighting for a chance at the elite swill; several of the EU's unelected capos are up for rotation. On his way out is Juncker the Druncker, dismissed from his post in Luxembourg for tax fraud and whose appointment to Brussels possibly saved him from jail time. Those in the running for his replacement include Christine Lagarde, convicted in 2015 for her part in a $400m fraud but astonishingly not jailed by a corrupt French political establishment.

Various other Presidents and top jobs are up for replacement by unelected nomenklatura candidates and the field is filled with twitching bristly snouts all eager to bury themselves in the Euroswill.

We've written previously on the deep links between organised crime and EU funding HERE and on the involvement of EU funds / organised crime in the murder of journalists HERE. The Brussels trough is not a joke; the filth of the EU's corruption pollutes Europe and destroys lives.

Wednesday 29 May 2019

Rory Stewart - Antidemocrat

Just when I thought I was fairly well acquainted with the liggers on the green benches, up pops one I've never noticed before. Commentators use terms such as 'original' 'different' or 'out of the box' to describe Rory Stewart (Eton and Balliol), the son of a senior civil servant, when what they mean is a weird but ruthless narcissist so deeply in love with himself he's lost touch with reality. Tory leadership elections are also opportunities to judge politicians we never want in positions of responsibility, and for me, Stewart is a member of that small and exclusive club.

The Guardian reports on Stewart's latest inanity -
Instead he hopes to deliver Brexit via a citizens’ assembly, which he said he would convene on day one of entering No 10 and would pay a jury of 500 UK citizens to work a seven-day week to find a Brexit consensus that parliament would respect.
Citizens' assemblies, a process also known as Sortition, are a favourite of the anti-democrats who cried in frustration in 2016 that the 'wrong sort of people are using democracy'. We only voted for Brexit because we're not as clever as Rory, apparently. Clearly, we're wrong. All we need - 500 of us, picked at random - is to be locked up together and lectured by experts until we reach a consensus, which will be, effectively, to cancel Brexit. Problem solved.

As an absolute Baldrick of an idea, it has few equals. A suggestion so utterly, risibly stupid that only an extremely clever moron could have thought of it.

Sortition does have a role.  For stuff like the council's new masterplan for the High Street, as part of the consultation process before it goes to the planning committee. Where it has absolutely no place is in replacing universal suffrage and the secret ballot in matters of constitutional significance, for which a truly democratic referendum has already given Stewart and his chums in the Commons a clear and unambiguous instruction. If he doesn't like it, I suggest he either resigns his seat or joins the CUKs.

Citizens assemblies and other varieties of sortition are increasingly a favourite of the anti-democrats who fear that we, via the ballot box, may displace them from their capture of the State. That a champion of such anti-democracy seriously imagines that Conservatives will vote for him as leader displays a greater than usual self-delusion.

Tuesday 28 May 2019

Our Watchdogs of Democracy are not working

Of our two guardians of the minutiae of democracy, the Boundary Commission and the Electoral Commission, the EC is held in the lowest regard. Both have, to an extent, failed in their objectives, but the failures of the EC are by far the most egregious. I do not believe this is as a result of wilful conspiracy but of institutional inertia. Their faults lie in their evolution into institutions defending a monochrome political establishment rather than defending our democratic processes; their Commissioners and senior managers are not so much Common Purpose shills as unimaginative and semi-capable public servants utterly unable to understand the world in which they now function. Both are well past their sell-by date and are now in urgent need of reform.

Looking through the EC's website at its written Election guidance one is struck by its high quality. Clear, cogent, succinct, well written and helpfully presented and indexed; no manual of how to conduct fair elections could be better. Our teams of dedicated junior Town Hall officials who conduct the polling stations, counts and checks, who guard the ballots and facilitate candidates and their own teams openly inspecting every stage of the process cannot be faulted. We can have full confidence that the processes are tight enough to prevent the sort of abuses endemic in lesser nations.

Yet at the top level, their perceived bias against Leave-supporting political movements, a bias that culminated in their 'raiding' the Brexit Party's offices practically on the eve of the election whilst seemingly ignoring the most blatant breaches of electoral law by a Remain campaigner, as exposed by Guido, has destroyed any remaining faith that millions of voters had in the EC's impartiality.

Their reluctance to implement ID checks at polling stations is also seen as pandering to the Labour Party - who have long defended corrupt electoral practices in the big conurbations that favour their candidates. One cannot pick up a packet from the local Post Office sorting office on a Saturday morning without showing a passport or driving licence, so why resist this simple check for elections, which may happen only every two years? The Commissioners show an alarming bias to political partiality - for the most part, they are retreads from the Commons or local government of no great distinction who fit Betz and Smith's description
Here are different kinds of political ice cream for sale, but when licked they all turn out to have roughly the same unpalatable taste: a bland, socially progressive, anti-traditionalist, globalist, corporatist flavour.
The EC are also unable to get their collective heads around technological change. Our election rules were created in an age of 'push' media, when newspapers had circulations in the millions rather than the hundreds of thousands and the TV audiences of our three channels could reach over ten million. We've moved to an era of 'pull' media, when the audience decide individually on their own news, information and entertainment sources, timings and formats. The EC have proved incapable of adapting the existing rules and are unwilling to move. No, I don't think our electoral processes have so far been corrupted by external interference but clearly foreign powers have been experimenting in how to use technology and social media to disrupt democracy - and we must protect against it.

Political funding and its abuse are also once again under our scrutiny. Whether it's the buying of political influence by the mega-wealthy global corporates, Russian oligarchs or the abuse of Trade Union block funding, we cannot allow our democratic systems to be bought and sold. Recent attempts at funding reform by Hayden Phillips and Christopher Kelly failed because they were establishment solutions aimed at institutionalising the then-existing 2.1/2 parties into quasi-constitutional bodies - all in the name of  'stability', i.e. of preventing the sort of shake-up that millions of voters are now demanding.

This catalogue of failure, of serial incompetence, of second-rate actors not up to the job and of a complacent patrician elite with no interest in correcting these failures must end. We must have institutions that defend our democracy that have probity, integrity, transparency and the ability to protect and defend our most fundamental and hard-won rights at a time of profound change.

Monday 27 May 2019


Well, you can read the news as well as I can. Just 3 MEPs for the Conservatives, but including Dan Hannan. I must say 9% of the vote was better than I was expecting - if May hadn't announced her resignation, I'm convinced we would have got no more than 6% and no seats. More good news in PTSD Adonis having been disappointed, but that's thin cheer.

For most people of course TBP's success is the single story. Nothing can detract from 28 seats - possibly 29 when the last two areas declare. If the party had been around a month or two longer I suspect they would have taken even more votes from both Labour and the Conservatives.

And of course the LibDems, the Remain party, with some 2/3rds of the Brexit Party votes, will also now move to consolidate their status as the Brexit opposition party with an eye to the next GE, with the advantage of an established party structure and existing parliamentary incumbency. They can sell themselves as "We're not Corbyn" and also take more voters from Labour and Conservative parties. The CUKs are nothing - forget their grandiose delusions of a 'pact' with the LibDems. Cable can tell them to join-up or FO.

All over Europe the victor has been .... democracy. Turnout up, apple carts overturned, politicians in tears, some dreams shattered, others come to fruition. Nothing earth shattering, but a clear message. The Conservative Party, like Labour, may have no future, the corpses of both parties picked over by the Teal and Orange insurgents, but for now will remain in government . Our MPs will be shitting themselves and will avoid a GE like a vampire eschews garlic.

Have a good day all - Today is a good day. 

                                       Predicted %             Actual %
Brexit                                        34                       32
LibDem                                     17                       20
Lab                                            15                       14
Green                                        11                        12
Con                                             9                          9
CUK                                           4                          3
UKIP                                          3                          3

Sunday 26 May 2019

Runners and riders for the Downing Street Cup

This is not quite a parochial post as the Leader chosen by the 160,000 members of the Conservative Party will also be the Prime Minister - so everyone has an interest in these hustings. Here are my initial opinions

Mediocity is one of the French bourgouis virtues (Assiduité, Economie, Mediocrité, Conjugalité, Tenacité, Optomisme, Dynamisme, Modernité*) but it's never been an English one. Yet this field of runners has more mediocre, almost unrecognisable, candidates than any other I can remember. And a good deal of utterly unrealistic self-love from those who have absolutely no chance.

Boris Johnson - Best election-winner but a man with flaws. He frightens the EU and is the biggest obstacle to the Brexit Party's ambitions. Can he be trusted to deliver? That's the question

Dominic Raab - Bland and clean with good Brexit credentials but does he have leadership charisma - the sort that comforts Remainers and wins Conservative voters back to the fold?

Michael Gove - Pretty well loathed by the public for being a didactic arse and by Tory Brexiteers for betraying Boris, his loyalty to May will not have helped him. No electoral charisma, a cold technocrat. Might make a decent Chancellor so long as he is sackable.

Andrea Leadsom - Decent all-rounder with a spine who was not afraid to stand up to the sanctimonious dwarf. Sufficient distance from May to be credible. But however unfair, illogical and plain wrong it may be, I have a feeling in my water that being a woman may disadvantage her this time around and next time she may be just a liitle too long in the tooth.

Jeremy Hunt - Another bland and clean minister of indeterminate age indeterminate accomplishments and indeterminate ability. I can't recall a single interesting thing about him.

Penny Mordaunt -  I like Penny. A lot. Her maiden speech still stands out for warmth, real humour, intelligence and a finely judged use of opportunity without seeming forward. She has myriad sterling qualities. However, the one she lacks - through no fault of her own - is ministerial / cabinet experience. Our next Leader (but one).

Rory Stewart - The Party's fantasist - both with a record of making stuff up and the delusion that he is electable. Said to be an original thinker. He has a weird face.

Sajid Javid - Clean and bland and calculating. He's nursed his career with an eye to the top spot and puts his credentials on public display in a noticeable way. But what does he believe in, apart from himself?

Amber Rudd -  Just No. Her delusion that she can partner with Boris is pure unrealistic fantasy, just like her support of May's treasonous deal

David Lidington - David would win prizes for mediocrity. If Blandness were an Olympic event, he'd take gold.

Matthew Hancock - Who?

James Cleverly - Another of the Dulwich School hopefuls. A real crawler. No real ability.

Steve Baker - A competent man with real beliefs. Also a trained engineer and ex-RAF officer. Ideologically sound. Superb ministerial material - but does he connect with voters?

Esther McVey - Again, a strong and capable personality with her feet on the ground. Much respect. Again, good cabinet material but does she have a natural sense of humour? Humour is important to me. Not essential, but I find those that have it are better people.

*All English Men Chew Toffee On Dreary Mondays has fixed these tedious virtues in my head for forty years.