Tuesday, 18 December 2018

Let''s remember that the official Tory policy was to oppose Brexit (they even sent out a propaganda booklet to every home). Cameron lost to a coalition of Labour Leave, UKIP and "some" Tories (Boris and Gove).

Because the Tory cabinet lost the vote they (grudgingly) had to proceed with implementing the policy. However, they picked a remain supporter to succeed Cameron, and she in turn created a Brexit policy designed to appeal to both the Leave and Remain camps, rather than the winning side.

The problem is that there is not a political party in parliament that represents the 52% who voted to scrap the Treaty of Rome. If there were then it could be trusted to push through what people voted for.

Such a party may not be in favour of allowing hardship on the current scale, because it would be largely comprised of the poor (the people who voted for Brexit - those the political commentators disparagingly class as "left behind", as if sudden wealth would make them turn into remainers.....)

Thursday, 13 December 2018

No Deal Brexit: the REAL reason the EU fears it. In layman's terms.

1) The EU wishes to control and negotiate trade deals on behalf of national governments but EU businesses that wish to trade with the UK will seek to by-pass the EU and continue to trade with the UK.

2) Businessmen are in business to make a profit. Given the choice between adhering to EU diktats that may prevent lucrative trade with the UK, or ignoring them, the businesses will choose the latter option.

3) If the EU is seen as hitting their profits, as a result of lost trade with the UK, then EU businessmen affected will lose faith in the EU and provide financial support to Eurosceptics.

4) In this country, if there is a scarcity of certain products; if imports become more expensive due to EU tariffs, then a void will appear that needs filling. That's how private enterprise works - that's what the Tories always used to tell us....

Scarcity will lead to demand. That demand will be filled by British businesses producing local equivalents at a cheaper price (no internal tariffs). The banks will fund this due to guaranteed profits due to decreased competition. .

5) The needs for manufacturing in a "no deal" scenario will shift the economic focus away from services and finance, effectively killing the neoliberal model in the UK and increasing the power of the working class. As more people HAVE to "buy British" the demand will decrease UK unemployment too, meaning a sharp reduction in the amount of welfare assistance the government has to supply. That will release funds for investment.

6) A NO DEAL Brexit would mean no more money to the EU - which would finance the scrapping of VAT thus making UK goods cheaper, would allow a reduction in national debt and many other economy boosting measures - making a self-reliant Britain more likely.

7) And lastly, If the UK shows it can be more self-reliant, with home production, other nations will not fear leaving the EU. We could see the collapse of the EU.

This is the upshot of last night's vote.

1) The Tories are stuck with Theresa May until March 29th 2019.

2) Any General Election between now and then would be fought with her as leader, not a Boris or David Davies figure...

3) That means a potential loss of votes to "No Deal" Brexit parties, which could be sufficient to lose them seats.

4) Knowing that, if the Labour Party calls a vote of no confidence in the government every single Tory MP will vote with Theresa May, regardless of how they voted in the leadership election.

5) If Labour tries and fails to topple the weakest PM in a generation, then they will end up discredited in the eyes of their members.

6) Therefore the chances of an advanced General Election are lessened.

7) On 12/12/18 Tory MPs weren't just voting about May as a leader. It was more about her version of Brexit. They knew that her replacement could have supported "no deal", but if they voted for THAT then sufficient Tory Remain MPs would have departed the party to join the Lib Dems or perhaps another Remain party, leaving the existing Tories with a better policy, but so depleted in MPs that the government would have been ousted by the opposition (swelled by the Tory defectors).

8) Therefore the next Tory leader will be in the same mould as Theresa May, judging by the voting stats, and will back the Chequers Deal.

9) The 37% NO DEAL wing of the Tories are damned now. If they leave the party, the government falls. If they stay, then they are to be viewed as propping the treacherous 63% who backed a deal that the people did not vote for.

10. Conclusion - unless a Tory MP resigns from the party before next March they are complicit in this Chequers Deal and as guilty as those who watered down what people voted for (the Repeal of the Treaty of Rome).

Monday, 26 November 2018

At last! The Populist Party has a website.


Go to http://www.populistparty.co.uk/


For:


(1) Making the justice system tougher


(2) Having tighter restrictions on immigration


(3) Stopping military interventions in other countries by leaving NATO.


(4) Introducing tougher regulation of big business - proper control over mergers and monopolies.


(5) Full employment


(6) A true Brexit which removes the UK from the ECJ and stops the EU bleeding us dry even AFTER we have left. A Brexit which protects the British worker from Third World undercutting on wages and prices.


Join the Populists.......

Thursday, 15 November 2018

The Populist Party stands opposed to globalisation.
What does globalisation mean to the British people?
***************************************************************************
1) Goods that could be made here are instead imported.
The globalists say that this provides cheaper goods, as they can be made cheaper in the far East, where wages are low, and worker conditions poor. What they don't mention is the massive cost in providing welfare for the people who, if not for globalism, would be working in factories making these goods in the UK, rather than on the dole.
****************************************************************************
2) The High Street is hit hard.
Globalists claim that goods made in poor nations are cheaper. However, if they were made by British workers, then our workers would have more money to buy items in the shops. Not only that, but if the wages for production are going to someone abroad, they will be spent in foreign shops, not those in the UK.
And the importation of labour, often on the minimum wage, makes the situation even worse, because a large proportion of their wages head off to their country of origin, to be spent by relatives there, rather than in our economy. That's why we support heavy tax on money transfer.
*****************************************************************************
3) Globalisation damages democracy.
Globalisation, in the form of multinational business, means that nations are fearful of the chance that these companies will pull out of their country if the elected representatives fail to do their bidding. So, we support the concept of co-operatives, self-employment and smaller locally owned business as an economic model - if you have a stake in the economy you will not pull out, and workers will have better job security. That helps the economy. People with security are able to make longer term financial decisions.
******************************************************************************
That's just three reasons why YOU should oppose Globalisation. There are many other reasons, that are well documented - like immigration which causes a squeeze on housing, on school and hospital places, on the green belt, and on jobs. Immigration is part of globalisation too.
Find out more about the Populist Party. We propose protection of our workers against global competition as OUR Brexit strategy. We propose breaking down the economy into smaller businesses (including media ownership) by using monopoly and merger legislation and generous tax incentives for the small business.
Join Today
£5 per year.
BACS details:
Populist Party
Sort code. 20-98-57
Account number. 20332798.
Populist Party, 11 Greensleeves Avenue, Broadstone, Dorset, BH18 8BJ.

Thursday, 8 November 2018

"Communities across the UK have told Britain’s first counter-extremism commissioner that they are increasingly facing “a climate of intolerance and polarisation”.
"Speaking several months into a nationwide investigation to quantify the scale and reach of extremism, Sara Khan said she had been shocked by the depth of disquiet expressed to her by the residents of the 13 towns and cities she has so far visited."
"Khan, appointed by Theresa May in the wake of the Manchester Arena attack, told the Observer: “I was really shocked that in every place I visited I heard deep concerns about the activity and impact of the far right."
As per the Observer website....

===============================================================================
--- Wow! This one passed me by. Theresa May appointed Sara Khan to respond to extremism following the Manchester Arena attack, but who carried out the attack? It wasn't the so-called "far right" (code language for white people who oppose multiculturalism). The bomber was Salman Ramadan Abedi, a 22-year-old man of Libyan ancestry. Yet, Khan, instead of investigating within the Islamic population investigates the "far right".

Of course, this is no surprise, as within hours of Savid Javid becoming Home Secretary, Tommy Robinson was in jail. Another so called member of the "far right"......

"Matthew Feldman, director of the centre for fascist, anti-fascist and post-fascist studies at Teesside University, said he was not surprised by Khan’s initial findings: “I think this is the most propitious time for the radical right since the end of the second world war, that hasn’t yet translated into activists, members or a party that might be able to overcome the first-past-the-post system.”

Khan added: “Youth workers in the south feared vulnerable young people could easily be sucked into a world of hatred. In the north, refugees and those from a minority background spoke of their fear of leaving their home during far-right marches.”
-----------------------
Perhaps, though, white people fear leaving their home on a regular basis, and are forced out of their homes due to the influx of people who hate them? Will Khan examine that form of extremism? No.

Theresa May described the Commission as "a statutory body to help fight hatred and extremism in the same way as we have fought racism."

Appointing Sara Khan to the position is like putting Jeremy Corbyn in charge of tackling Antifa!
I find I can often identify political opponents by their view of the past. There are two groups (and a smaller number believe in a mixture of the 2 main opinions).

Group 1
1) The police were more respected and more effective in the past. Sure, the methods they used were tough, but they got results.
2) Education in the past provided results. Students learned discipline and it prepared them to go to work.
3) Censorship of swearing, sex and violence in the media, prevented society from becoming coarser and more dangerous.
4) Music was more joyous. It lifted the spirits. Modern music is less melodic and more downbeat.
5) Comedy was more light hearted and less "political". Most people could see the funny side of stereotypes, because they were based upon real people, but with some exaggeration for comic effect.
6) People could live in the same area for many years, knowing it would not alter rapidly in a short space of time.
7) People stayed in the same industry for years because once your had a skill you could always find employment.
Group 2
1) Policing in the 1970s was "racist", "sexist" etc. The type of policemen depicted on TV shows like The Sweeney and Life On Mars are thankfully being weeded out. Policing is now more inclusive of minorities and based upon mutual consent.
2) Education in the past was too focused upon results, rather than developing the whole person. The system was too strict and upset those who did not perform, so today's idea of "everyone must have rewards - no winners or losers" is kinder.
3) Censorship of swearing, sex and violence in the media presented an unrealistic view of life. Those in the arts were stifled by the likes of Mary Whitehouse, who imposed Christian morality on the media...
4) Music was frivolous, lacking depth. Modern music dealt with social issues rather simply than love and romance between a man and a woman.
5) TV comedy relied upon outmoded stereotypes of black people (Black and White Minstrels, Love Thy Neighbour), women and homosexuals (Carry on Films). Today's comedy is socially relevant and only hurts the bigot and the xenophobe.
6) People lived in the same area for years because of a lack of "social mobility". Housing had "no dogs, no blacks, no Irish" signs in the window. Now minority groups can move wherever they wish, and eventually there will be no all white areas.
7) People were stuck in the same industry for years without progressing. Technology has meant that people now retrain every few years, to keep themselves employable so the economy does not stagnate.


--- Is this a fair reflection of the key cultural mindset divide?