1,826

Unfortunately, I don’t write much these days, as sitting in front of a computer for anything other than a short time I find truly wearying. Typing anything exhaustive on a tablet is impossible, and despite my best efforts to commission a reasonable voice recognition system, my polite Scottish accent refuses to submit to conversion from the audible to accurate typewritten words. So you can be assured that my gall has been bladdered, my spleen vented and blood boiled if and when I commit my ageing, immobile and deformed fingers to a cheap Chinese keyboard for any length of time. Duly fortified with alcohol and tobacco as an analgesic, I shall attempt to actually complete something vaguely readable for a change.

You can probably guess what has caused such consternation in my spirit, and it is not the current batch of political no-hopers we have now dancing on the political stage like demented elephants on ice. Nor is it the fact that after generations of abuse of privilege, the “Conservatives” have left this country in a greater mess than anyone thought humanly possible. Such observations are as plain as the nose on ones face, and require little expansion and reiteration. Nor is it really worth writing about the total economic train-wreck we are heading towards, with a Labour government in charge and little financial acumen left in the national kitty. The cracks were already fast appearing in the faux Starmer “Unity” amongst the Labour camp with the election of Diane Abbott, Jeremy Corbyn and Jess Phillips et al. All the son of the toolmaker had to do to gain victory was to corral the troublemakers out of direct line of sight of the electorate, and this his did, par excellence. The result was an unassailable Labour majority, enough to give the leadership sufficient slack to immediately boot out any dissent over the next five years without the blinking an eyelid. A centrist government this is not, it is marinaded in the blood of political opponents slaughtered over the many years in both local government and opposition.

Equally troubling though, is the fact that Labour are as divided as the Conservatives were during the reign of Cameron and beyond. For an effective democracy we need both a stable government and a stable opposition, currently we have neither. Whilst Starmer will attempt to project a “Strong silent type” persona, you can be assured the excrement covered knives will have been sharpened in advance and buried like bamboo spikes in Vietnamese pits, ready to deliver a lingering and painful death to anyone – leadership included – who dares offend. This, again, was patently obvious pre-election. The refusal of Starmer to clearly define the two biological genders was just a warm up act – our current Prime Minister may currently have support, but once the honeymoon period is over, he will be condemned to walking on the cracks beneath the political paving stones as there is no guarantee any true substance other than ideology lies beneath them. Hence the deeply worrying hypothesis that Tony Blair et al will be playing a major role in directing the Labour government from behind the scenes, a completely logical and rational assumption. As a PM green behind the ears, Starmer will need every possible assistance if he is to navigate his way through the current political landscape, which is exponentially more febrile than when Blair was in charge. The harsh lessons learned during opposition will be a stark reminder of the crumbling cliff edge of compromise, and you can be assured that this government will be ruthless to the point of psychosis in leveraging every last ounce of the majority it has been given. You can almost taste the progressive political pheromones exuding from the pores of Mandelson and Blair in anticipation.

Despite the temptation to lay into those who voted Labour, I would counter this with the observation that we live in a democracy, and every voter has both freedom of choice and the assurance of anonymity at the ballot box. We cannot expect to be considered reasonable if we rail at being called “Tory scum” if, at the same time, we consider those with opposing political views, “Labour scum”. By all means, parody, take the Mick, and troll if necessary. However, I am a firm believer in the Hogarth school of political reply, and many a political cartoon or caricature has encapsulated or pierced a complex issue with brutal succinctness. If we are to remain upon the moral high ground, we must always “Play the ball, not the man”. In this respect, I (shock horror), believe that Corbyn would probably have made a far better Prime Minister than our current incumbent, based purely on the fact that he consistently refused to sink into the political hinterland of the non-answer and at least attempted to argue his position with dignity and his colours firmly nailed to the mast. This strategy, which revealed the true extremist underbelly of Labour philosophy, was his weakness at the last election. He was a man “Before his time”, so to speak, and the political diet he served at the previous election was far too rich for the electorate. I am unequivocal on this point, and I believe what Starmer has in store is far more nefarious, based on the fact that he consistently dodged any penetrating questions, and the really bad guys will never, ever, reveal their true intentions. On that basis, I would consider Corbyn to be far more honourable than Starmer, a rare attribute amongst the political sharks that swim in these infested waters. Starmer, when challenged, could not even bring himself to credit Corbyn with that fact. At least with Corbyn you knew where you stood, and I would go as far as saying comparing the two in conservative terms would be akin to Thatcher and Major. It is clear with perfect hindsight as to who out of those two PM’s ultimately wrought the most damage to HMS UK below the waterline.

No, I am quite happy with being considered a complete tw*t for even giving Corbyn an ounce of credibility, but bear with me. I come from the position that as a voter in 1997 election, anything was better than the weary, corrupt Conservative government overturned by Blair and his cohorts at the time. I, like a substantial proportion of the electorate, wanted a change of leadership, not quite realising at the time the sleight of hand that happened in the Labour ranks with the untimely demise of John Smith. Although pro-European, he was very much center-right, and believed in the need for open and transparent constitutional reform versus an elective dictatorship. Blair, a globalist at heart, perverted this obvious electoral desire to the meet the ends of the neo-liberal/neo-conservative establishment. Hence, the majority of the population thought they were getting a reformed Labour party under Blair, when in fact they were getting the “Third way”, a form of institutional fifth column that embedded change agents in every sector of society. This form of political sleight of hand was continued under the disastrous Cameron coalition, which, by the Greening of the Conservative party, ripped the very heart and soul from small “c” conservatism, and prompted the descent (initialised by Blair) down the icy path from the peak of that particular mountain. The scene was then set for the continual accelerated downward pressure of Supranationalism, the government of the people by unelected globalist bodies such as the WEF, CFR, WHO, World Council of Mayors etc. It wasn’t until the true agenda of Blair was revealed, that the British public realised they had been deceived, and by that time it was too late. Desperately trying to turn the behemoth political oil tanker around, they returned a minority Conservative government, which played neatly into the duet that was the generational apotheosis in paralysed sovereign government. Cameron, thinking that a Referendum on Brexit would bolster the globalist/supranationalist credibility of his party, spectacularly failed to read the mood of the nation. Hence the spectre of Brexit was made manifest.

Ghosts, however, are only scary if you believe in them. Despite the nation returning a resounding “Non” to anything other than old fashioned sovereign government, the political and media class stuck both thumbs in their receptive ears and yelled “Na na na na na”. The politically astute realised that we were in BRINO territory (Brexit in Name Only) and this was confirmed by the wasted majority spaffed up the wall by Johnson and his successors. Lots of political heat was generated attempting to persuade the masses that we had, indeed, left Europe, but as Ann Widdecombe so succinctly stated, if we have left Europe why are they still dictating our VAT rules? Political actions are always louder than words, and the political car crash over the border in Scotland for the SNP paves the way for the UK to quietly rejoin the EU by the back door, irrespective of any wishes of the electorate to the contrary. Never forget, it was Blair who summoned the demon of Devolution, and you can be assured that this constitutional framework aligns more neatly with European and Globalist agenda than anything vaguely hinting at national sovereignty.

Consequently, my ire with this election result is squarely focussed on the 193 wards that chose to vote either Liberal Democrat or Conservative. These are the voters that decided the Conservative party would continue to survive, who were so afraid of a Labour victory (which was pretty much a foregone conclusion after the political decapitation of Corbyn). They were so scared, they were willing to give succour to a corrupt political rump that was so disingenuous it couldn’t even manage to abolish our forelock tugging to the ECHR. As a cynical manifesto sop, the legislation even made it to the Queens speech, then was quietly abandoned like a naked bastard orphan atop a freezing mountaintop. Despite countless betrayal after betrayal, from student fees to Brexit and the boats, like some demented Stockholm Syndrome survivor, they believed that the leopard had somehow changed its spots, and Sunak or Davey was in a position to deliver. I place the Lib Dem vote in an identical category, not because I think they would make a good opposition, coalition partner or government, but purely on the basis that their track record is so utterly appalling only a p*ssed off Conservative voter or disaffected Green could put a cross next to their name. Anyone who voted Lib Dem after the betrayal of students or the Post Office scandal, in my book, understands neither the meaning of the word “Liberal” or “Democrat”, never mind the two words strung together. Despite the hankering for change, these wards were the ultimate condom on the prick of progress, and have now condemned the UK to the uniparty until the current political model collapses and we usher in a new global government.

My frustration, consequently, does not rest with those that voted Labour in the recent election. Playing the ball, not the man, I am comfortable that the Labour vote was a combination of demographics and political naivety. The not terribly politically aware masses being brainwashed by the BBC etc, fell into the same elephant trap as the voters did in 1979. Anything, anything to get rid of those damned Conservatives! Fair enough, the only difference between then and now is that Starmer clearly has many warning flags attached, unlike the relatively “Squeaky clean” Blair at the time. What is fascinating, is a YouGov poll in 2020, Starmer was considered to appeal more to Labour voters than Corbyn by a factor of 48% (56% – 8%). Equally surprising, while 33% thought Starmer was very or totally similar to Blair, 43% couldn’t tell in what direction Starmer had taken the Labour party. It is clear that Starmer has played the centrist mood music competently, if extremely awkwardly. Think elephant in tutu here. By playing the “Grey man”, he pulled an electoral rabbit out of the hat in a very similar vein to John Major. As always, that poll is a prescient warning on a number of levels. Be careful what you wish for, and elections are always for the current government to lose. It also indicates the inherent febrility of the UK electorate, insofar that we are quick to mouth off about “Change”, but when presented with that in clear terms, we quickly return to the “Safe” uniparty candidate once coddled behind the anonymous curtain of the voting booth. If this is down to hypocrisy or irony I truly know not which. What really is so galling, is that we know that post election, the previous musical record will be quickly abandoned like the Conservative ECHR baby, once feet are under the legislative table. Personally, I wonder what difference this election would have brought to the nation if Corbyn was still at the head of the Labour party. Would this have lead to a coalition that forced his hand towards a more moderate position? Would a champagne socialist have fared better from a national perspective than a suspiciously WEF smelling candidate? I don’t know, but I suspect we are about to find out. What is abundantly clear, is despite their vocal desire for change, the British electorate were in reality not ready for it, and once again will become disillusioned as the ingredients advertised on the outside of the political tin refuse to match the real contents.

That leaves analysis of Reform and Andrew Bridgen. Ironically, their fate was irrevocably intertwined. Despite having my nagging doubts about Reform, I placed my “X” next to their candidate in my area, effectively placing a hand drawn phallic symbol on my voting slip. In my constituency, we seem to be dedicated uniparty voters, with a monkey in red wellingtons and wearing a red rosette winning most of the time. The only recent exception being the previous couple of elections, where a combination of Brexit and the “Corbyn effect” forced the electorate to vote Conservative. So much, so “Change”.

My previous tirade against the “Shy” Conservative voters is no less applicable here than the utter rout that was the North West Leicestershire result. Firstly, Reform. What on earth possessed them to contest the seat in the first place? They came third, unlike in many seats where they came a respectable second. If they truly wanted reform, what better change than getting an excellent constituency MP such as Andrew Bridgen re-elected? If he was that rubbish, how did he hold onto his seat for nigh on 14 years? The Conservative voters on the other hand, clearly had either received too many vaccinations or were worried that a vote for Bridgen risked a Labour win. I’m sorry, but a Conservative vote in this election, probably the most vital and democratically critical in the history of this once proud nation, was the equivalent of not voting at all. It was clear that the Conservatives were never going to win nationally, so even best case, if you end up with a candidate who favours your values, you can be assured that central government will tilt the table against you either in Local Government terms, or by the inevitable boundary reviews. Purely on a visceral level, you can bet your bottom dollar that our new arrivals will end up in your constituency, just out of pure political spite, and to quote Blair, to “Rub our noses in it”.

I can think of no more tragic a result of the election apart from Sunak retaining his seat. Andrew Bridgen, if you are reading this, your extended interview truly touched my heart and I am convinced you are a decent and honourable man, and one of the very few decent parliamentarians we had. I share your pain at being so brutally dismissed by an electorate that know not what they have done. Your constituents deserve everything that is coming to them, it will not be pretty.

I leave my final warped and outlier political views for Reform. While I am pleased that they have finally got a seat at the top table, however, I am in no way convinced that this will translate to political leverage. 5 MP’s is better than no MP’s, but it is a far shout from being a credible opposition party. Sure, they can exploit the internecine warfare that will no doubt dominate both the Labour and Conservative camps, but in no way can they come close to the leverage even the Liberal Democrats have in Parliament. “Big trees from acorns grow” I hear, but the political realist must divorce any thoughts of Reform being the British equivalent of MAGA if they are to stay sane and not suffer from a major overdose of hopium. In reality, did Reform finish the Conservative party? Not by a long shot. To do so, they would have had to drive the Conservatives down below the psychological ceiling of triple digit seats, preferably into single digits. A big ask for a new party, but it was telling that Reform came second in 98 seats, of which 89 were Labour. Looking from that perspective, this squashes my argument that the “Shy” Conservative voters were the root problem. Clearly, Reform are eating into the Labour vote, but this still doesn’t account for the remaining 112 Conservative seats. Taking into account the YouGov poll, 43% of those polled were uncertain in what direction Starmer was taking Labour. What if, the shy Reform (nee Labour) voters actually held a lot more sway than first realised, Conservatives notwithstanding? This would be a very interesting development.

In this election cycle, the problem Reform face is twofold. First of all, they have a huge credibility issue (Right wing racist Nazi thugs, anti-Europe etc.) and also they have no real political authority at the grass roots level. If that is to change, they need to have members in Parish Councils, Local Government etc., but the first problem exacerbates the second. It is all very well saying they are in it for the long term, but by the next election cycle where will be as a nation? Potentially, we are facing a third world war, and regardless of what happens in Blighty, the outcome of the US elections will have a massive impact on the long term outcome. Like the Andrew Bridgen vote was inextricably linked to Reform, so the future of Reform will be inextricably linked to the US election result. If the US turns Trump (fingers crossed), the Zietgiest may shift, overcoming first hurdle at least.

If I am honest (and I never intend to mislead my readers), I’m still not persuaded that Reform are anything other than controlled opposition. The noises coming out of Reform at the moment post election, suggest that I am correct. The cry coming from the party machine (as it is) is for a change in the voting system towards some form of PR. This falls neatly in line with all the supranationalist darkest desires (See A. Blair for further details). As I have written previously, PR is a giant poisoned chalice, and Reform would be much better off arguing for a model based on the Swiss referendum concept. If you are going to be revolutionary, at least suggest something that elevates the ballot slip rather than degrades it. Time is no longer on our side though.

We only get to vote in general elections once every 1,826 days (including leap years). As to the current state of the British electorate post election, the best analogy I can suggest is that of the battered wife, just released into the care of their abusive partner. “He won’t do it again” she surmises, just before he smashes her head, terminally, into the concrete floor.
 

© Rookwood 2024