Seeing as Sir Michael White has decided
not to write about the Libertarian Party despite the
challenge laid down for him, I guess it falls upon myself to
undertake an analysis of British politics, and show where the LPUK
fits into the mainstream, but most importantly why it was necessary
to form the Libertarian Party in the first place.
There is a void in political thought at
present, there is also a void in the manifesto coverage from the big
parties, one that needed filling, one which the public are determined
to find, and the Libertarian Party is the one positioned to soak up
the disaffected from these mainstream parties, simply because their
voices are and have been falling on deaf ears.
This is the primary reason they will
not give LPUK any media exposure. They fear, all the main parties
fear, that LPUK will become the voice of reason.
The march towards authoritarian rule
has been embraced not just by Labour, but undeniably by the
Conservative and LibDem leadership. This article intends to map out
what has happened over the past 12 years, and where we are heading.
We have accepted that after 12 years in
No.10 Labour are the ones who have undertaken the enactment of over
32,000 new pieces of legislation (more than all the previous
parliaments since its inception), forcing through many new and
contentious laws which run counter to the rule of law as laid out in
our constitutional documents.
I don't need to compile another list of
Liberty
lost, I have already done that, which the Convention of Modern
Liberty picked up and ran with, despite that event being a false
flag attempt by the establishment to retain control of the
Liberty agenda.
It only scratches the surface.
As I established earlier this week, the
OECD
global blueprint is being followed by the majority of
western states, so in Britain it currently makes little difference at
present who sits in No.10, that blueprint will be followed.
The only difference we will see when
Cameron arrives to take up his residency will be a little tweaking,
rounding off the hard edges to placate some of the more vocal
elements, and a good deal more spin, wrapped up in Nudge
style media pressure.
So lets go back to the beginning of
Labour's invasion of our liberties, 1997 (I could go back further and
include all the Conservative treaties, Rome and Maastricht being the
2 biggest such treaties under Conservative rule which have ceded
British sovereignty to unelected bodies, and the introduction of the
West Lothian plan as a direct result of the Equalisation Project in
the OECD blueprint), but the real assault began with Blair.
At the national level British politics
was at that time what I could call moderate, very clearly defined as
Labour left and Conservative right, with a LibDem foot in both camps,
with a positive left leaning. All these parties are pro EU and pro
OECD. We see a single blip that is UKIP, who whilst being anti EU
dampens any perceived support for OECD, although their very existence
is dependent upon EU participation and funding.
This is shown in the diagram below.
So what changed after Blair was elected
in a landslide victory, on
a platform laden with promises of smaller government, dissolution
of quangos, EU referendums, squeaky clean government and spending
restraint.
Just by reading through the 1997
manifesto, we can see just how comprehensively the British people
were conned, absolutely conned, but time dulls the memory so it is
worth reminding, as are the pledges given in the 2005
manifesto.
But then conning the British people was
always the intention, which was confirmed in
a court case in which the Labour government stated unequivocally
that “manifesto pledges are not subject to legitimate
expectation” and therefore cannot be relied upon. As blogger Mr
Eugenides said at the time: you know something's gone wrong with
politics when… (1) you tell a court “I'm a liar and my
promises cannot be relied on”, and (2) that's your defence…
Labour had no intention of fulfilling
its pledges, whereas it had every intention of working to the EU and
OECD master blueprint, as I suspect the Conservative party appears to
have every intention of working to.. Surrounded by an army of
lawyers, script writers, media spin doctors, academics and
ideological mentors from the Fabians, Labour set about the controlled
destruction of Britain.
Regionalising Britain is a big part of
that plan, and the success of the SNP is Scotland was initially
viewed as a major setback, although it now looks as though they too
have been quietly pressured into following the 'guidance'. Plaid
Cymru in Wales have not yet had such success to be considered a real
threat.
By far the biggest change we have
undertaken however are the mental attitudes towards life, the
universe and everything. The key to this has been the politics of
fear. Otherwise known as The Four Horsemen of the Infocalypse it is a term for criminals, or the imagery of criminals, and it refers to types of criminals who use the internet to facilitate crime and consequently jeopardize the rights and well being of citizens. They are usually described as terrorists, drug dealers, pedophiles, and organized crime.
The creation of fears, enemies within
and without that must be feared and fought, either real or imagined
has been a political weapon in the hands of politicians for 2000
years or more, used very effectively in the last 75 years and now
being used again on us.
We have seen the establishment of an
entirely new politically motivated industry of police and private
security to support the politics and newly created public perception
from the fear of paedophiles, the same with climate change which has
also spawned new political parties, and the same fears and
uncertainties are aimed at cigarettes, alcohol and food products,
health scares of varying degrees, of illegal immigrants and feral
youth. The use of fake charities* to increase supposedly 'public
concern' is now so widespread that it undermines legitimate
charitable works.
To 'combat' these created fears a host
of new laws strip us of our right to privacy, to protect our personal
data or our right to be left alone by the state. There are databases,
dozens
of databases, fingerprinting, DNA collection and retention, CRB
checks, ID Cards, age rules, random stops for ID, alcohol checks,
insurances, searches, entry to our homes and offices, covert
surveillance by all and sundry, all backed up by a closely controlled
TV and Press media operation and a central government propaganda unit
the COI.
All these new laws and regulations have
ensured an explosion in the growth of quangos
and government funded fake
charities to oversee, investigate, mentor, spread propaganda,
lobby and to infantile and patronise the British public.
This has gone hand in hand with a step
change in the work environment, a Health and Safety regime gone mad
and the introduction of process driven procedures that ensure that
growth of the state is ensured. Such methodologies** as Prince2, Lean
and Six Sigma introduced to the Civil Service allows for the
political agenda to flow unabated whilst limiting the big picture
view to the most senior politically correct incumbents.
Then there is terrorism. Real or
perceived to be real, the fear has been capitalised on, the small
number of events have been hyped up, pushed, shoved, and spun for all
its worth. By using the Police and Media to best effect, that fear
has been projected into the living room and lives of every citizen.
It is a well trodden path, but one that
the public is increasingly not buying, as each new high profile
scenario unravels and those involved are released without charge, we
can all hear the boy crying wolf.
So where are we now today, lets see
where the political parties have moved since 1997.
As the diagram shows, most of the
parties have moved to the centre ground as the old right left
paradigm is left behind, and all have moved further towards the
authoritarian regulated form of politics, Communitarianism.
The notable exception is the BNP, who
have shrugged off their right wing fascist thug origins and are now
firmly placed in the left wing camp in a more moderate position. No
small feat on their part to move from right to left whilst
campaigning in the main on the same major issues. This explains
NuLabour's absolute fear of them, whilst other parties tend to
politely keep them at arms length.
If we return to the OECD, it is clear
that the
blueprint that they describe and advise governments on the course
of actions to be followed in their various projects, Communitarianism
is most definitely the end game, not just at a national level, nor
even regional, but Global in its application.
It is also clear that Cameron intends
to follow through with this OECD plan, his rejection of the
Libertarians in his party and the half hearted uttering from Osborne,
IDS and Clarke tell us much more in what they fail to say.
There will not be a rolling back of
legislation, there may a tinkering around the edges, a smoothing of
the rougher edges, but the reclaiming of rights lost is not on the
agenda. Even David Davis is very selective of the battles he fights,
those he knows will win public support, but not those he knows will
have little effect on the leadership.
The Conservatives intended use of Nudge
has been widely written about, it is public knowledge, and we expect
that it will be used to hoodwink the public into further steps along
the road to the OECD global governance objectives, which are
themselves now openly spoken of.
There is no room left in the
Conservative party for Liberty minded individuals, unless they
compromise their beliefs and step into line. Only positive rights
from now on, you will be allowed to choose from the following
list……
So where does that leave me, and the
millions of other voters who are being led somewhere they do not wish
to be led, are not asked or consulted about this monumental shift
towards a communitarian society.
Looking back at the diagram, The
Libertarian Party places itself firmly in the centre ground, it is
neither left nor right, despite what our detractors may attempt to
tell you. Nor is it in extreme so Laissez faire that it sees no role
for Government.
LPUK is a Minarchist party, it does
see that Government must in some areas be there for the well-being of
the nation, but that does not mean constant interference or
continual control of people and events, it means reducing interference or coercion and de-coupling Government from big business.
We are not so naïve to imagine
that the separation of these powers will be easy, nor turning around
decades of legislation that puts the agendas of political parties,
and the wants of business and corporate bodies before the needs of
the individual.
The condemnation of the abuse of the supporting terror legislation used for trivial matters by Conservative or LDP is laudable, but it is not enough, nor is
tweaking the primary legislation, only the Libertarian Party have
promised to repeal it completely as laws in place before 1997 were
ably sufficient to deal with terrorists and their threats without impinging on the rights of citizens.
We are looking to return Britain to a
moderate Britain, where personal freedom is important, where our
rights and Liberty are guaranteed at birth, not granted at the whim
of a government, a Britain where our laws are consensual, based upon
the rights earned by our forefathers, laws written and agreed in
Britain, by members of a Parliament that represent the people
who elected them rather than those who pay them from abroad.
We are looking to return to a Britain
where you are free to do as you wish providing that you do not
impinge upon the rights of others, but more importantly a Britain
where you also take responsibility for your own actions, at all
levels, by all of us.
A Britain that works in the best
interests of inventiveness, innovation, tolerance of others, and
self-worth. A Britain that will reward hard work by not having a
government take the lions share of your earnings, and where you may
go about your lawful business without interference by the state.
A Britain of values, your values, not
mine or imposed communal values. Each of us have different priorities
in our lives, different ambitions for ourselves and our families and
each must be free to fulfil their dreams, without hindrance by the
state. In short a Britain where you can be yourself, knowing that the
government is there to protect you and your rights, not the other way
round.
To those who currently support the
Conservative and LibDem parties, who are Liberal in their souls, we
know you can see where your leadership is taking us, we know because
you are still attempting to reform from within, but try as you may
you will not detract them from this Communitarian course.
Nor will you ever get them to change direction on our economic woes, to reduce significantly the size of government, quangos and the plethora of projects that just keep eating our taxes. You will not get them to live within our means, to turn away from the credit/debt economy which fuels yet more debt just to survive.
Cameron has been totally clear in his
condemnation of Libertarian ideals, and Clegg has allowed the
marginalisation of Libertarians to the point where we consider that
the LDP is now just the Social Democrats.
There is a home, a natural home for all
Libertarians, it is with LPUK, and there is a natural home for a
Libertarian Party, as the British have for centuries shown themselves
to be naturally Libertarian in nature.. Liberty is the future, real
liberty, but not the manufactured illusion of liberty being offered
by those presently represented in Westminster and beyond, for that
will never be attainable.
Notes
*: Fake charities are those who gain significant funding from Central government or other charities so funded and not from individual donations, with the sole intention of working a government set agenda or for the purposes of lobbying government to enact a desired government set agenda by assuming or creating a false sense of public outcry or demand which is then echoed in a controlled media campaign, i.e. ASH or Alcohol Concern.
**: Prince2, Lean and Six Sigma are designed to take roles that are normally conducted by 1 or maybe 2 people in their process from end to end, and slice it up into small managed chunks. These chunks are then allocated to staff who are trained to only do the work in that very confined work package.
By taking an entire department, slicing up their existing processes, re-allocating the chunks to an ever growing workforce one can create the impression of modernisation.
What in effect happens however is that the chunks are cleverly allocated in such a way that there are never enough people to handle all the chunks. New managers are therefore needed to manage this under allocation, and there is a constant demand for new staff to fill the un-allocated elements. Therefore constant staff growth is guaranteed and new management levels are created to deal with this constant shortfall.
It also means that no single worker can ever see the big picture, they only being allowed access to their own work-package, and no single person can ever be responsible for the failures that follow as it is always blamed on the process.
Whilst originally designed by big consultancy groups to ensure billing leverage, Lean and Six Sigma have been adopted by government departments to use as political tools, with Prince2 being developed in house by the Treasury buying department (OGC) in conjunction with big consultancy.
It allows suppliers to government to be absolutely vague about the services and goods they are offering whilst creating the appearance of professionalism, but allowing for the blame of client processes and departmental barriers which should rightly be attributed to their own failures, but guaranteeing billing flow and maximising their profits.
