You know how sometimes a shag leaves you feeling energised and other times it leaves you exhausted and you just want to sleep?
Well, I had been hoping that this election announcement was going to energise me. But instead, I feel like I just want to sleep until it's all over. It's not going to make any fucking difference, anyway.
25 comments:
Agreed.
Although don't you get a little tingle of excitement at the idea of the Tories losing...just to imagine the look on the Cameroon's faces?
It would be the best outcome. Might shake up the centre right and love things in the right direction.
An observation from an astute mind, camouflaged by gutterspeak.
get the rake out again!!
J Demetriou,
If the Tories loose we will never have a non-Lab/Lib government again.
Broon has already promised to rig the electoral system to achieve this.
What's the point of shaking up the right if you shake them out of the running entirely.
Honestly, I think you and Ob need to wake up and see that Broon may appear to be a bumbling buffoon, and he is of course. But he is also a totalitarian, and will not hesitate to rig the system against the right forever. He will pick whatever voting system favours the left most.
Conversely, if the "Conservatives" win, we will never have a non-Lab/Lib government again.
With Cameron, there is no "right". There are no principles except those adopted from the social democrat left. When a right-wing thought is detected amongst the "Conservatives", it is mercilessly crushed. Chris Grayling anyone?
This is not like the choice between Thatcher and Michael Foot, it is more like a "choice" between Brown and Blair. The Tories are still useless.
Vladimir, I think your massively overstating the case.
Honestly, if you really can't tell the difference between the Tories and the Labour you have gone political blind, probably playing with your anarcho-capitalist thingy too much.
[i]You know how sometimes a shag leaves you feeling energised and other times it leaves you exhausted and you just want to sleep?[/i]
It depends upon how much time you have to dump the body.
I can think of at least 500 I'd like in shallow graves, horribly violated.
What's a shag?
Buy a flesh light and some Glasgow A class. Before you know it, it will be 2014. It seems to be what most folk do to survive these parliaments voted in by morons and run by insidious finagling confidence men and women.
What astounds me, is the fear the UK has to make a change but then again, there isn't a party out there that I find remotely worthy of my vote. Maybe if the Libertarians get rid of some of their foul mouthed, constantly bickering, disgustingly and boringly angry representatives in the blogsphere....then maybe next time I'll support them.
On second thoughts just pass me some A class, it's the only way I'll see pigs fly.
Not really. What did Cameron ever do to oppose Brown or Blair? What is it exactly that makes him a conservative as opposed to a Conservative? He sat opposite Labour for the past five years and did... nothing.
Where is the Thatcher moment that inspires and enthuses; makes you think "It will be awesome if these guys win?" The moment where you realise they share your convictions and think "This ins't going to be popular, but it's the right thing to do." Again... nothing.
You say we should support Blue Labour out of fear of what Brown will do if re-elected. Well, I'm not afraid of Brown. He's had 13 years to wreck everything. He's already done his worst. Whereas Blue Labour would just be starting off, eager to prove their commitment to social justice and equality.
I hate New Labour. But I really hate Blue Labour.
Vlad is right.
And read the link he provided, because Hitchens is right too.
“He sat opposite Labour for the past five years and did... nothing.”
At the danger of sounding condescending the opposition has precisely squat executive powers. As a legislative block they are also inert all the time Labour maintain a majority.
Further, I believe you are very wrong when you say Brown has done his worse and can do no more harm. I see Brown get ever more emboldened, Balls even more so. I think if Brown wins he will install Balls and chancellor and the two of them with unleash a new wave of statism that will make the current proportion of 51% public sector look like Somila.
If you’re looking for positive reason to vote Tory, I would almost agree with you. BUT there is one good reason, and if you take the trouble to really look at it I think your find it is a very good reason.
The problem with this country is that statism is the all pervasive intellectual air that we breath. Several generations of a left wing educational establishment and the BBC have captured the argument, and while they don’t tell people what to think they do something far more insidious, they tell people HOW to think.
You must know this yourself. You try and tell friends or family about non-statist solutions and they just don’t understand what you’re talking about. Not any more than if you tried to explain busting supermarkets full of foods, or shopping centres full of cheap goods to a 3rd generation soviet citizen in the early 80’s. They have spent so long under statism they are often unable to grasp the alternative. Balls believes that state is the economy, today’s school children and BBC viewers are also being educated this message.
So what’s the brilliant Tory idea? Liberalisation of schools.
The Tories could not possibly harp on about an agenda that you and I want, i.e. the destruction of about 80% of the state and the privatisation of almost all services including the NHS. The public would not support that as they don’t understand the alternative yet. You can’t turn an oil tanker on a penny that fast. The absolute brilliance of the schools policy is that schools are in such a mess people are willing to let the Tories try a new idea. And after allowing private schools funded by vouchers within 5 years Britain will have some of the best schools in Europe. I don’t need to explain to a fellow libertarian why. This will educate the public that free market solutions can and do produce better results.
Then you’re turning that tanker around. You’re changing the intellectual air. You’re making it possible to go onwards to the rest of the sorts of things that libertarians know is right, but that the public will not support yet.
If you ever met Michael Gove one of the things he is always going on about is the point of winning power is to then give it away. He is a libertarian like us, I promise you that, but he is also very aware that you need to move the public with you in measured steps. People like him in the Tories are no more happy with the status quo then Labour is. The difference is that the Tories want to start moving us towards the free market. Labour wants to accelerate us towards ever more totalitarianism. I only wish people like you and Obnoxio would believe me on this.
AAAAAHAHAHA! Michael Gove? Libertarian?
I do believe Hitchens has adequately shown what Michael Gove's politics are like and how he supported Blair and Blairite politics.
But why refer to his thoughts, when you can read straight from the horse's mouth?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/michael_gove/article1112354.ece
Gove, Cameron et al - all New Labour suck ups and social democrats. They are no different to Labour and do not deserve the votes of centre rightists.
Good response Kingbingo.
I have heard quite a few arguments for supporting Callmedave despite his flaws. This is a new one and well argued.
I believe very strongly in grammar schools and independent schools, so I can absolutely see what you are saying about education. Selection by ability is absolutely key to a functional education system. Ideally, either grammar schools should be plentiful or independent schools should be affordable. I know that Cameron won't support grammar schools, but a voucher system might be almost as effective.
However, I can't find any recent evidence that he's actually going to support one. The Tory manifesto on schools says there will be reforms like those in Sweden - i.e. vouchers - but there's no commitment to that. They also talk about reforms like those in the USA, where the state schools are probably even worse than the ones we have here.
I must seem like a bit of a pessimist here, doing down the Conservatives without really knowing what they will do. Of course you are right that they had no power in opposition, but nevertheless they should have been criticising and debating. Not all media would have been hostile to them. They could have taken a strong stance against the big authoritarian state and argued for an alternative. But they didn't.
Really, I am an optimist. It is true that statism is ingrained in the minds of the public, but nevertheless, I think there would be a lot of popular support for a genuinely anti-Labour party. Even, perhaps especially, amongst Labour supporters who have been disenfranchised.
For instance, neither Cameron nor Brown dare to hold a referendum on the EU. We all know why. Their EU policy doesn't match the actual wishes of the majority, and they know it.
Only 51% of those surveyed recently by the Guardian said they were certain to vote. About 40% of the population either will not vote or is undecided. Again, the policies of the big parties don't match what the people want.
Conservative supporters are limited to about a quarter of the population: a shockingly small figure given the circumstances.
Facts like these make me think that there is a real reason to disrupt the fake right wing who call themselves Conservatives. Project Cameron needs to fail in order to create a vacuum for a new party. Otherwise, it's hard to see how anything can really change.
Vlad, are you willing to concede my central point that you can’t turn a tanker on a penny?
Have you had a conversation with the average voter recently? They truly do not believe that the alternative to statism is success in the free market, they can’t perceive it. When Hannan talks of abolishing the NHS you and I and David Cameron all know he is right. But the public have been convinced by years of statist education and media that the alternative to the NHS is no healthcare at all except for the rich. You have to break down that ingrained attitude slowly, and David Cameron understands that, he wants to get there, but he wants to bring the public with him by winning the small arguments on education first. Its our Trojan horse to opening the debate to go much further in time!
Kingbingo says:
"Have you had a conversation with the average voter recently? They truly do not believe that the alternative to statism is success in the free market, they can’t perceive it."
I agree with that entirely. So...how is voting Tory going to help?
Because they will prove on something central like schools that the free market can provide. If they do this in 5 years time rather than schools blowing off parents who wanted to go to a certain school but could not get in it will be the other way around. Parents will be able to select a good school for their kids out of a choice. Sometimes those parents will be using their £5,500 voucher as is, other times they will top up by a grand or so. It will be like when those parents choose which supermarket to go to. They have several very good very viable choices.
After the Tories have demonstrated on something central but small like schools work better under the free market they can then say to the public, you know, we have just proved that schools work better in the free market, so now lets get those improvements rolled out to GP’s too. Before you know it they are gradually privatising the NHS. Then its welfare provision, roads, emergency services, the lot. Once they have been privatised the socialists are not getting them back. 13 years of Labour and they never got the railways or British Gas back did they. You irreversibly shrink the state. Gentlemen, we are in this for the long game. And if the Tories start getting their advice from window licking loons like us libtards the general public will run a mile, and you bloody well know it.
Softly softly catch a monkey. Today Schools, 5 years time GP’s, 10 years time welfare provision and roads, and emergency services, and non combat military divisions and etc etc.
Oh, I agree about the tanker and the penny. It's when you say "David Cameron understands that, he wants to get there" that I am doubtful. I think he's only been able to convince the leftie media to support him by actually being one of them.
You mention £5500 vouchers. Do you have a link to this?
I know the spectator did a few articles on this in the first issue of March. I don’t have a direct link, but I imagine the manifesto will be published on their website soon, so the education section will cover the actual details
On the figure of £5500 that is not confirmed as I understand it, the pledge that will be going into the manifesto will be I believe ‘the cost to educate the child’ which is about £5,500, but that will be confirmed once they get their hands on the books.
I did look in the draft manifesto - no obvious reference to anything like this.
http://www.conservatives.com/Policy/Where_we_stand/~/media/Files/Draft%20Manifesto/DraftSchoolsManifesto.ashx
Incidentally, I think this is a well written document and there's all sorts of things in it that I would agree with. Some very good ideas here. But in between them, there are danger signs, like "use the state to remake society" (shudder).
I get the feeling that this document is a bit like Blair's famous "Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime", which is a clever statement that appeals to both conservatives (first part) and socialists (second part). I think that's why it goes on about "academies" instead of just saying "state schools will be permitted to select by ability".
http://www.spectator.co.uk/politics/leaders/5813623/the-tory-lesson.thtml
http://www.spectator.co.uk/essays/all/5813573/lets-set-schools-free.thtml
Schools established under Michael Gove's proposals will not be allowed to select on the basis of academic ability.
He has confirmed this repeatedly, at least once in an interview with Andrew Neil, and also in the link below. Look at his answer to a woman from 'Comprehensive Future'.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2010/mar/02/michael-gove-readers-questions-ofsted
Gove states: "All new schools will have to abide by an admissions code, which will guarantee they are socially comprehensive."
'Socially comprehensive'? Hardly the language of a libertarian. 'Admissions code' - not the language of a free marketeer.
Vladimir is almost right when he says that Cameron "sat opposite Labour for the past five years and did... nothing."
Cameron didn't exactly do nothing - he did encourage his side to give Tony Blair a standing ovation when he stood down as PM...
Re: academic selection.
Go to 3.50 in the interview below:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/the_daily_politics/8295076.stm
Andrew Neil: "You can't select on the basis of ability?"
Michael Gove: "No."
Gove also says that he does not see the need for the profit motive within markets for education. Generating a profit for shareholders will therefore be banned under his proposals.
Yup, truly a great free marketeer.
I looked at the Spectator articles you linked - thanks for that.
Gove talks a lot about education reform. He says sensible things and I find myself agreeing with much of it. But at the same time he falls short of making any kind of commitment to serious reform. No promise about the vouchers - not even a "cast iron" one :). And Tom Harrington is right - definitely no selection by ability.
It's sad, because if he'd just take his ideas to their logical conclusion, then he could do a lot of good.
As no one seems willing to go for the nuclear option of taking up pitchforks and marching on Westminster... we're left with few alternatives.
1. Hope that the Tories win and everything will be magically better again.
2. Labour win and self destruct.
Lets be honest here, if option one had any legs at all then the Tories would be 20, 30% ahead in the polls. They're not because they've failed to produce so much as a magic wand never mind any persuasive spells or potions.
Option two at least shows some promise. Yes its slightly risky and no doubt they'll be some pain for all in the meantime but eventually they'll implode. Brown will be out, the in-fighting will begin and the country will wobble. Make no mistake, we need something so utterly seismic that this corrupt aberration from the Twentieth Century can never again hold power in these islands.
Not convinced?
Well this is what option one offers: Tories drop opposition to DNA plans
As for Brown and his rigging of the electoral system (as someone above posited)? It won't happen. He's floating the idea to soften the LibDems for a possible hung parliament. If Labour wins you can be damn sure they'll keep the system that's worked so well for them.
If Labour win they'll have little more than a year, just long enough so as not to appear too ungrateful to Brown for returning them to power. After that, its every man for himself. Meanwhile the public will finally have woken up to the mess we're in and will be demanding action.
If we're really lucky, the Tories will have rebuilt themselves - or another party has filled the void - ready to do some proper work to make this nation great again.
Of course it might not turn out this way. But do any of us really want another spin on the same tired old merry-go-round? Look at the mess we're in! Two Statist EU-centric illiberal leftist parties duking it out to decide who sits in the big chair. Sod that.
Its time for a REAL CHANGE !
Post a Comment