The British People deserve much better than the incompetence, deceit, and treachery of the left liberal ruling establishment of the TINOs (Tories in Name Only), Labour (aka Champagne Socialists) and Lib Dems (EU and PC tyranny). Yet, there still remains considerable ignorance about how awful the political class is, how far they have deviated from addressing the wishes, hopes, and fears of ordinary people and what their end game of social engineering, political correctness, and control freak, big costly government actually is. Unfortunately on this voyage of discovery each revelation makes the overall situation depressingly worse.
The origins of such oppressive ideology and government are, perhaps, laudable or even inevitable within an evolving democratic system. Yet this leads to the premise that it is the application which is faulty. This can, ‘magically’, be corrected, by minor tweaks like electing a government which claims to be different, but in reality turns out to be different only in their speed of implementing a left liberal agenda. Such has been the case for many years and consequently, we need to look ‘beneath the surface’ of our country’s political landscape and the likely implications. Peter Hitchens sheds some thought-provoking light here in his book The Abolition of Britain and more recently in his blog posts Corbyn or Blair? Guess which one’s the real Marxist menace, Some thoughts on the Scandinavian and Nordic Utopias and A Fascinating Radio Programme about Roy Jenkins, Britain’s Unlikely Cultural Revolutionary.
To deal with ‘inequities’ of an observed nineteenth-century class struggle between the providers of capital (the rich) and labour (the poor), the socialists and communists introduced the idea of the big state; owning the means of production. As the state’s role increases, it inevitably intrudes upon and undermines alternative or rival power sources, for example, freedom of independent thought and action, the family, marriage, property ownership (in its various forms), and existing religious and other institutions. Where these are seen as threats to the state’s power, there is obviously also an incentive to crush them, as happened, for example, in the Soviet Union. Liberals should, in theory, oppose the big state, yet in practice, they veer towards it, why?
Alexis de Tocqueville in Democracy in America (1835 and 1840) foresaw the rise of the welfare state form of big government, in effect a benign tyranny operating within an apparent democracy. There is a political incentive to move in this direction to appease or appeal to the voting majority. This form of tyranny is less obvious but more invidious because it claims to benefit the people and can be described as ‘progress’ or for ‘the common or even individual good’. It also has appeal to the liberal consciousness for apparently ‘setting free’ the individual from previous restraints imposed by society and tradition.
Ideological Marxists and apparent liberals can consequently find common ground in the big state and in using it to smash up anything that represents conservatism and the status quo. The conversion of the former Conservative Party (or at least its leadership) to left liberal ideology (big state tyranny) and its agenda is more inexplicable. One possible explanation is in From Tory to Tony. However, the origins of the change could go back much further to a loss of confidence and articulation of conservative values (for example, free enterprise, prudence, self-reliance, national sovereignty, support for the family, patriotism and conserving the ‘best of Britain’) whilst being battered by the fashionable advance of socialism and communism here, in Europe and in the former empire. Once in motion, the political opportunist and ‘modernising’ TINOs went with the flow of the demolition of ‘old’ Britain.
The left liberal agenda appears to contain no restraints. Downsides and resources required to address resulting problems are largely unacknowledged unknowns that can be dismissed through spin, deceit, and self-denial. Basic humanity and duties to kith and kin have limited influence. For example, smashing up communities with bulldozers or alien cultures has not been stopped because of any consideration of the harmful effects or even what the existing communities themselves wanted. Traditional morality and (Judaeo-Christian) concepts of right and wrong can also be dismissed as of no value. To acknowledge any value in anything traditionally British would be to open the gate to being challenged requiring the left liberal establishment to explain and justify their actions. Debate is shut down by, for example, name calling or refusal to discuss the subject. Omission from party manifestos and conspiring with the ‘opposition’ are used to circumvent any serious scrutiny or the need for a democratic mandate. A left liberal judiciary also provides limited restraint as they autocratically re-write the meanings of various laws.
The destruction of the best of Britain (or at least what actually worked) seems more ruthless than just following a theoretical political and social ideology, although it is sometimes difficult to see where ideology ends and arrogant incompetence takes over. However, there appears to be a real loathing for all things British and, therefore, a willingness to do what it takes to firstly undermine and then destroy them. This can be taken to extremes of contradictions. For example, after smashing up integrated infrastructure in the name of privatisation, large chunks (railways and electricity) are now run or even owned by foreign state owned enterprises. Also having imported multi-culturalism (in practice Islam) to smash up the monopoly of Judaeo-Christian based values, there is silence on how a common basis of equitable laws, democratic governance and (progressive) moral standards can exist (and flourish) in the resulting environment of diversity and enclaves.
Our country is on a slippery slope of left liberalism without any obvious means of limitation. As state power increases it can become more ambitious, bizarre and coercive, aided by its ideological fellow travellers in the main stream media. The left liberal establishment answer to everything (especially the problems resulting from their actions) is:expanded scope for interference and more of the same: more propaganda; manipulated statistics;more inhumanity of ostracism, coercion and outright persecution; politicising and emasculating education, the police, armed forces and justice system; functional destruction of existing (conservative) institutions (for example, family, marriage, small business, freedom thought and speech and freedom from fear); abolishing genuine British conservative values. Where does the sledge hammer stop? It doesn’t! One day you and what you hold dear will be their target.