Skip to content

Ah, democracy, d’ye see?

And that summarises the whole of modern politics. The far-right parties are only interested in promoting the cause of the wealthy. At the end of the day, that is all their agenda about. Everything else – from furore about migration onwards – is about deflecting attention from this fact. And it is working. It seems that almost a third of voters in England – the vast majority of them not well off – are being persuaded to destroy the very system of government that was created to protect their interests, and they are falling for it.

If the people choose to do the things I disapprove of then that’s not democracy.

See?

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest

21 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
andyf
andyf
12 hours ago

Far-right is always used as a slur for pretty much anyone who isn’t a card carrying member of the communist party.

Ideas could be a lot further right. Take that famous political slogan “No taxation without representation”. How about a minor modification to “No representation without taxation”?

Ted S., Catskill Mtns, NY, USA
Reply to  andyf

I’ve taken to using the term “non far-left”.

Grikath
Grikath
11 hours ago

The Potato supports quite a lot of the ideas of the Soros/WEF crowd. Quite actively so..
That means he’s actively promoting the agenda of the Rich and Wealthy.
Which makes him, by his own logic, Far Right….

See? the horseshoe bends allll the way until the ends touch…

Last edited 11 hours ago by Grikath
Jonathan
Jonathan
11 hours ago

 destroy the very system of government that was created to protect their interests…

Lol. When was the last time a British government, of any party, put the interests of the British people first?

john77
john77
5 hours ago
Reply to  Jonathan

Churchill, MacMillan, Thatcher

decnine
decnine
11 hours ago

If socialism did what it says on the tin, Wales, Scotland and the northern cities of England would be rich.

Gamecock
Gamecock
11 hours ago

No wealth = no employment.

Western Bloke
Western Bloke
11 hours ago

“The voters are complete idiots” nearly always means you don’t get it.

I tend to think the voters don’t pay enough attention, but they aren’t total idiots. They get that they’ve been lied to. The data that is coming out from some sections of government about the value of immigrants now supports this: over their lifetime, they’re going to be a net cost.

And the system we had was created to support the richer end of society. It’s about supporting the Eloi who can fanny around in overstaffed government doing overpaid useless wank (government arts, large parts of education, NHS management, eco) by importing more Morlocks. The existing Morlocks doing care work, cafe work, supermarkets get nothing from this. They get to be worse off.

This is now the biggest single problem facing Britain. Governments of both colours put their thumb on the scale to promote mothers going to work, women having careers. It promotes to middle class women that they can all be aristos. And the problem is that it just doesn’t add up. You can only have half of girls going to university if they’re going to be really serious about work. So they study engineering or economics, and not psychology and sociology. And then put in more than a 9-5. And do a useful job, not some dumb fucking government money bonfire.

It’s why Japan had £32K GDP compared to Britain’s £52K GDP but no-one going to Japan thinks it’s poorer. Money earned doing a pointless job is a +GDP. Then buying a second car so you can get to it? +GDP. Then childcare? +GDP. You could get £50K of GDP out of all of that. But the net to the wife might be £5K. Oh and her husband gets taxed more to pay for her pointless job. So it could be a -ve overall.

I believe that if you got 70% of mothers back at home, the rest would follow. That a lot of the value of work to women today (and I’ve observed how female workplaces behave) is socialisation with other women. That if they have kids and stay home, there’s no-one else to have a chinwag with.

Bob Smith
Bob Smith
11 hours ago
Reply to  Western Bloke

You miss the other attraction of work to wimmins – being able to tell men (skilled people) what to do in your HR or project manager (boss girl) role.

Last edited 11 hours ago by Bob Smith
Western Bloke
Western Bloke
10 hours ago
Reply to  Bob Smith

Female women do not prioritise work like men or more masculine women do. They prioritise getting out in time for their family, having other women to natter to, doing nice things, being polite in the office.

I specifically say “female women” because there’s a chunk of the female spectrum, maybe 20% that are more like men. Like Mrs Thatch, Kathryn Bigelow or the CEO of AMD.

People got this idea that women can do as well as men because of these types. No-one points out how unfeminine they are. How they don’t want children, or are happy having a house husband. If you want to find a serious woman in a workplace, she spends on work clothes like men do: something cheap from Next or M&S. Useless types spend a ton of money at Hobbs.

Norman
Norman
9 hours ago
Reply to  Western Bloke

We’ve just spent a week in Wells, and spent a couple of evenings with my friend’s sister and her husband, dairy farmers. Early in their marriage, he didn’t have a day off for 7 years. Now, in his 60s, he has one day off a fortnight, still doing 12-hour days.

Married in her early 20s at one point she had four kids under five. Successfully brought them up: eldest boy now a partner in the farm, 2nd runs his own firewood processing company, two girls do various things, are horsey, are Army reserves. Solid family.

The farmer’s wife – tradwife, you might say – has worked her tits off all her life. Knocked up a roast chicken dinner for us all almost as an afterthought whilst conversing about her life. Apart from farm work she also does all the farm’s admin. Runs a wedding catering business and runs external stewards at Glasto. One of the most impressive and capable people I’ve ever met.

And she’s still fit and full of fun. In other circumstances I most definitely would (have).

Last edited 9 hours ago by Norman
Shiney
Shiney
6 hours ago
Reply to  Norman

Wells is lovely…. hope you had a mooch around the town and Saturday Market. No1 went to school there (musician) and still regards it as ‘home’

Norman
Norman
5 hours ago
Reply to  Shiney

Certainly did. Thinking of relocating. It reminds me of the country I grew up in.

Gamecock
Gamecock
10 hours ago
Reply to  Western Bloke

This is now the biggest single problem facing Britain.

You’ll change your mind when the blackouts come.

Norman
Norman
9 hours ago
Reply to  Gamecock

No, he’s right. The collapsing birthrate outside Africa is the biggest single problem facing humanity. Everything else is downstream from that.

Agammamon
Agammamon
4 hours ago
Reply to  Western Bloke

It’s kinda ironic – the Brit elite used to go all over the world to find brown people to rule over.

That is too much work for them now so they import the brown people into the UK to rule over.

Norman
Norman
3 hours ago
Reply to  Agammamon

Only to find that eventually the tables turn.

Chris Miller
Chris Miller
1 hour ago
Reply to  Western Bloke

if they have kids and stay home, there’s no-one else to have a chinwag with

You’ve never seen two neighbours chatting over the garden fence? Watch a few Les Dawson repeats 🙂

Baron Jackfield
Baron Jackfield
10 hours ago

The far-right parties are only interested in promoting the cause of the wealthy. 

So what? The left are only interested in promoting the cause of the apparatchiks…

We must therefore ask ourselves “who, as a spin-off, improves the lot of the ‘ordinary’ population more?”. Comparing socialist states with capitalist – the answer appears very strongly to favour the latter.

Agammamon
Agammamon
4 hours ago

It is the wealthy that are pushing unlimited migration.

Charles
Charles
1 minute ago

If, in a democracy, one party has policies that favour the rich, while their opponents have policies that favour the poor, then the first party has no hope of getting power as there are far more poor people than rich people.

If a party gets power while seeming to favour the rich, it’s either because they have fooled the poor into voting for them, or the poor understand economics better and the policies really favour the poor as well as the rich.

A lot of policies from the left which are claimed to favour the poor are really malevolent policies intended to harm the rich, motivated by envy and a belief in zero-sum economics.

Can you help support The Blog? If you can spare a few pounds you can donate to our fundraising campaign below. All donations are greatly appreciated and go towards our server, security and software costs. 25,000 people per day read our sites and every penny goes towards our fight against for independent journalism. We don't take a wage and do what we do because we enjoy it and hope our readers enjoy it too.
21
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x