Sunday, August 30, 2015


CORBYNMANIA HAS gripped not only the plebeian Left, but parts of the affluent Labour communities in London, Notting Hill, Islington, Primrose Hill, Hampstead, and many other middle class Labour supporting redoubts throughout London, where dear Jeremy is doing very well in his attempt to win the leadership of the Labour Party. There is a kind of mass hysteria among the London Guardianista. It is as if they have signed up to a new cult. The Great Leader, Jeremy Corbyn, speaks the common tongue; he has 'new' policies; he has the common touch which Miliband never had: he offers, in plain and unexpurgated language that which any spinmeister would readily disapprove of: he represents that old time socialist religion – which is anything but new in Corbyn's or any other sane persons conception.
                 We witnessed the same kind of disenchantment with our political class earlier, when they, from both the Left and the Right within our press, pounced upon and ridiculed Nigel Farage; then lived to regret it come the local and European elections. It seems to me that it is not only the politicians per- say, but the whole awful gravy train of journalists in the media, who have pandered to the politicians and fought for their much sought after positions in becoming part of the lobby system.
                 Jeremy Corbyn is the Left's Nigel Farage; but his populism is restricted to London, whereas Farage carried all parts of the country with him, apart, that is, from London. How will Corbyn, if he is elect leader of the Labour Party, tackle the concerns of white working class voters over immigration?  Farage answered this question: Corbyn, if he is true to his open and un-spun rhetoric, will welcome all comers from all parts of the world who say they are in peril and seek asylum. How will he separate such genuine cases for consideration from purely economic migrants who will take jobs from the indigenous population? Or does he not accept such a differential – thus concluding that all are welcome on our shores from whatever corner of the world they wish to overrun us from.

WHAT WE HAVE is a serious disenchantment with party politicians within the two main parties. The so called battle for the middle ground which both the main parties still believe in, is no longer acceptable to many parts of the country; both Farage and Corbyn from opposite points on the political compass have captured between them enough discontent for Farage to win the EU elections, and for Corbyn to become the next leader of the Labour Party. The middle ground is changing in British politics and if it goes ignored by the liberal establishment then both the main parties as well as the establishment will suffer the consequences.
                Under such circumstances there will evolve a new centre ground, depending upon who wins the current ideological battle; a battle surrounding not the traditional ideological conflict between socialism and capitalism represented by the Labour and Tory parties. But a new conflict; not about purely ideological differences, but about the way we handle mass migration on our shores: the liberal centre ground has no other answer than to submit to the invasion.
                 Immigration is now the UK citizen's greatest concern and the two main political parties have no answer to it because they both support being members of the European Union; and as such cannot stop such migration. Whatever any British politician within the two main parties tells you about restricting immigration; they are lying and playing for time, hoping you will not wake up to the fraud they are perpetrating upon you.
                The British people must understand one thing. The British government has little or no control over who enters our borders from within Europe; and when Cameron promises to restrict immigration, he has not the power to do so. As for those migrants travelling from North Africa to Italy; and from Turkey to Greece before embarking on a Journey through Macedonia into northern Europe, to find a home in either Germany or, after being held up in Calais, to make their way to the UK; we are apparently helpless to prevent such an incursion upon our indigenous culture: an incursion which will eventually swamp the UKs indigenous people.
                Our politicians are media creations; they dissemble on such a scale that it has become second nature. Straight answers to straight questions are worked around, and have become part and parcel of the professional politician's artistry when being interviewed in a television studio.
                No wonder supporters from both the Left and the Right, or for that matter among the floating voters, turn to the likes of Nigel Farage and Jeremy Corbyn. Our politicians have effectively been neutered by Schengen when it comes to tackling mass immigration. Open boarders have proven to have been catastrophic, and carry with them the prospect of social unrest all over the European continent…soon crowds of our white indigenous people; tolerant people: even people who welcomed immigrants from the commonwealth; will be chanting 'Enoch was right.' Enoch may indeed turn out to have been right: as he quoted, 'Those whom the Gods wish to destroy they first make mad.'


Saturday, August 22, 2015

Corbyn; the torpedo aimed at Britain and primed by Miliband

ED MILIBAND'S FEATURES HAVE always reminded me of Mr Bean. I have always known that, like Michael Foot, Ed could not lead a political party like the Labour Party; and could never govern a country like ours: maybe some newly discovered Polynesian island - but not the UK.
                 Michael Foot was born into both politics and academia; and as far as the latter was concerned he could have reached its highest slopes. In politics however, his physical presence, like that of Miliband's, disadvantaged him with the electorate: and in both cases their dysfunctional Left wing ideologies became an added burden on their attempt at leading the party into Downing Street. Both of them were perfectly acceptable as highly competent ministers in a Labour government – but were never born to lead our nation. They were both infected with the rickets of socialism: the Old Time Religion that succoured the Labour Party.
                 But both of them did become leaders of their party. In 1983 Michael Foot put socialism into full throttle, by producing what Gerald Kaufman described as the longest suicide note in history.  The 1983 Labour Party manifesto was that Old Time Religion rubber stamped and ready for government.
                 In the past the Labour Party's electoral failures (during the Wilson and Callaghan years) were always attributed to the party not being socialist enough by the party's Left Wing. The 1983 manifesto could never be described as a watering down of socialism: it was tried and tested and it failed abysmally - in fact, the elderly yet still somewhat naive Michael Foot whose manifesto could have come as close as it dared to that of Marx's Communist version, helped keep Labour out of power for the next 14 years. But even then the Left within the party and the trade unions still persisted under the leadership of Neil Kinnock to keep faith with the greatest suicide note in history.
                 These were the Labour Party Militant years. Where further suicide notes were manufactured within Liverpool. The then so called Militant Tendency sought to infiltrate and eventually overcome what they considered the 'reactionary leadership' of the party. Kinnock to his credit, in the only constructive accomplishment of his political career (and he no doubt still dines out on it today, like some faded actor) came when he addressed the 1985 Labour Party Conference and mesmerised both the conference delegates and the press with his rhetorical destruction of the Militant Tendency. He saved the Labour Party by his performance; and it should not be forgotten.
                  Ed Miliband failed miserably on a Left Wing manifesto as we saw last May: as had poor old Foot who, politically speaking, did not deserve such a fate; but was no doubt encouraged upon such a fate by his dear wife.

THE LABOUR PARTY today now have a candidate for the leadership of the Labour Party that even Foot would never have supported if, as now seems likely, Jeremy Corbyn will become the next Labour leader. It was none other than Ed Miliband that elevated Corbyn to his popularity by his 'reform' of the party's electoral procedure. If Corbyn wins then Miliband will have, by displaying the incompetence of Mr Bean put his party's continued existence at risk.
                 The irony is; Ed Miliband's innate Marxism that was handed to him by his father may also destroy the Labour Party as a social democratic entity; that, by the way, helped advanced himself in politics and mercilessly embraced the public sector unions to his own advantage. If the Labour Party wished to flourish as not a socialist party but a social democratic Blairite one, then Ed Miliband has destroyed it in the name his father's Marxist socialism.
                 If the Labour Party is once more riven by schism, then such a phenomenon will be put at Ed Miliband's door; which is no doubt why he has yet to appear in public; preferring to have an extended holiday abroad.
                 Ed Miliband has a lot to answer for concerning Labour's current leadership battle. I often wonder what his brother thinks of him. David Miliband was to have been the 'chosen one' to replace Gordon Brown; but his brother had other ideas and sold himself out to the unions like some later day Faust prostrating himself before the great Mephistophelian trade union leaders who would make him his party's leader; as long as he bowed to their will…which he did. But it was never Ed's soul at stake, but his betrayal of his brother; and having accomplished his objectives following such a betrayal - he never measured up to the task that his brother would have undoubtedly done, of leading the country.
                 His party is now under the influence of Jeremy Corbyn. A presence that Ed should have been considered likely after his reform of the voting procedure: all Corbyn did was take advantage of the rules Ed Miliband brought into being which went unchallenged by those within his own party. If the Labour Party of today cannot arrange an election that serves purely their party establishment; then what the hell would they do to the country?
                 Thankfully Miliband was never elected. I do not write this because of the obvious incompetence he demonstrated as leader of the Labour Party; but because he had been elected by the trade unions; a large part of the same Labour establishment that has now readily given their support to Jeremy Corbyn.
                  Corbyn is a modern day Prince Mushkin; a simple being whose soul has been assembled partly out of naivety, and a hopelessly romantic view of socialism. Socialism's innumerable bloody failures leave him undaunted. We should not be too hard on him for inviting as his guests to visit parliament both Hamas and Hezbollah representatives. The useful idiocy he finds himself all too willing to display before the most egregious of terrorist organisations showing to them gullibility; which they are all too ready to take advantage of.
                 Lenin's famous description 'useful idiots' in relationship to the Webb's, Shaw, Wells; and many other British  fellow travellers of the Left, surely now applies to Corbyn. He could no more keep his party united, let alone the country. In fact I think he knows himself that he is not fit to hold such an office as prime minister.
                 Even his supporters cannot ever imagine him becoming prime minister traversing the world stage. Corbyn's life-long function has always been to oppose his own party. Fearful of ever being put in a position of having to take decisions and incur the blame when they are proven to be the wrong decisions, is not in Corbyn's political makeup. He is the kind of socialist that does not seek power: Corbyn's function is agitprop; he sits on the back benches scouring the government front benches, and puritanically overseeing his own.
He is afraid of power; the exercising of which calls for compromise – a word not in the extreme Left's lexicon; he would have to stay true to his principles; he has never ever come into contact with Realpolitik. The political realities of government would need compromise. If he were ever to lead this country…indeed, if he were to stand Full Square behind his principle if elected to the premiership of this country; then in trying to apply such principles, he would lead this country into a second civil war; not as a Cromwell but a Charles I; and he would hopefully face the same end.
                 Corbyn is as bemused by his present position as his own party's enemies are mortified. He has found himself where Tony Benn always tried to be. Benn accepted the ups and downs of leadership and had the education behind him to become a functioning prime minister. He had held office under Labour governments in several ministries; and had as much loathing for the party leadership as Corbyn has. But Benn, given his chance, the chance Corbyn now has, he would have taken it and would, compared to the wretched Corbyn, have stood a much better chance of becoming prime minister.
                 Jeremy Corbyn, we are told by those in the media, is a very personable creature in private. This is no recommendation, because in history there has been many tyrants described as such, who turned out to do the most appalling things to their fellow mankind.
                Corbyn could never lead; in such a position he could only be led – he could only be a puppet to a puppet master; and who could fulfil the role of puppet master? I think that if Corbyn were ever to become prime minister (which thankfully he never will); this Mushkin will attract around him advisor's. Politicians who can help him steer the country toward another socialist disaster. I have little doubt that he would recruit the advice of Ken Livingstone and George Galloway among other socialist derelicts.
                Corbyn is not made for leadership of anything, including a branch of MacDonald's. He is not and can never be a leader. Well, obviously he can become a leader if elected to the role; but how long can he last before his fate is sealed, by his enemies.


Thursday, August 20, 2015

Under Corbyn; once more will the comrades be called upon to rally

JEREMY CORBYN'S latest pronouncement about the possibility of resurrecting Clause IV - that abysmal socialist construct that sits well with those early French cave paintings as a historical curiosity – is an almost embarrassing pronouncement to make. But Corbyn is serious. Corbyn leading the Labour Party is conceivable - but leading the country?
                Socialism has always; wherever it has been applied has been the great drag anchor on human advancement in the fields of science and technology… coupled with ambition and enterprise. This two forked fork of human advancement is built upon an understanding of human nature which is in direct opposition to socialism.
                Capitalism is a construct by which human nature works to the benefit of society as a whole; not through any socialist impulse; but through ambition, success and reward: the social benefits are the outcome of such an arrangement, but are purely coincidental to the system of capitalism. They are accidental because the ambitious impulses of the individual given the freedom to advance themselves which democracy gives them; and allows them to create wealth via businesses that give employment to whole families. Ambition, so the saying goes, is its own reward. But this can only be true under free market capitalism – the socialist alternative is working for the state; where ambition and reward are effectively ideologically neutered.
                Socialists despise wealth creation and profit and they see ambition as a worm eating into the very fabric of a socialist society. Impulses such as ambition are part of the bourgeois construct and are to be got rid of. How the cleansing of these impulses of human nature is to be traduced, we will only know if Corbyn becomes the next prime minister: but the history of socialism gives us plenty of forewarning.
                But if this historical precedent becomes Corbyn's example for his future socialist utopia, then human misery can only follow. It will follow because whenever socialism has attained any kind of supremacy, human misery has habitually followed. Socialism challenges capitalism: socialism sees only socialism as a replacement for the fiction it spreads against capitalism. So the kind of socialism Corbyn believes in will always lead to a one party state without any kind of opposition.
                Corbyn may object to the above, but he will be wrong to do so. He clearly separates socialism from capitalism and sees only his socialist supremacy as a counter to what he perceives as unwanted challenges from the private enterprise.

IT IS UTTER madness of course; but such romantic notions of equality and egalitarianism have always appealed to the young; as they did me in my own youth, and are still doing to today's youth. Young men like the Guardianista Owen Jones, who are too young to bear witness to the ruination of humanity that socialism wrought in its wake, but nevertheless remain infatuated with such an abysmal ideology. I can list to Corbyn the millions of deaths that socialism has been proved responsible for. But it is now too late in Corbyn's life for him to retract the insidiousness of socialism that he has spent his life trying to justify. 

               Corbyn, I hope, will eventually win his leadership battle. But even with a 30 percent increase over his nearest rival, according to the latest poll, in the Labour Party leadership battle; it does not mean he will become the next party leader. But if he does, and I think he will, the Labour Party will follow the old Whig party in becoming mordant and a mere blemish on the historical political landscape.

                The Labour Party will no doubt split into halves (and not for the first time), that will have to go their own separate ways. The divide if it comes will be between a new Social Democratic Party (SDP), and a new kind of Benn/Foot/Corbyn kind of axis that has, in its whole history managed to construct failure and replicate its failure time and time again. In the 1980s the so called Gang of Four, Roy Jenkins, and other former Labour cabinet ministers, David Owen, William Rodgers and Shirley Williams, all named by the media after its Chinese 'equivalent'; left the Labour Party, and sought to change the political landscape by creating a new party - they failed; they were well before their time – but as the old adage says time catches up. Now it may be time for the Labour Party to go their own separate ways once more, as the pull between social democracy and socialism once again engage in battle as it did in the 1980s .
                Corbyn will become Labour leader; but he will not become prime minister. If the British people however, overwhelmed by Corbyn's outmoded rhetoric believe him capable of leading the country in sufficient numbers to elect him; then it will be the end of England and will lead to a mass exodus from the country of those of the indigenous population with the finances to so do, to calmer waters over the pond: and those indigenous people left behind without the finances to claim asylum in America, will be left to oppose Corbynism.

Corbyn – the Great Leader

OH WHAT A DELICIOUS time we are going through politically. This seems to be the consensus of the journalist community in all quarters of the media. Why this should be the case is because of Jeremy Corbyn; the ageing man of (politically speaking) yesteryear who is now challenging successfully for the Labour Party leadership. His success has probably been as much of a surprise to him as it has been to the media collective. Corbyn does not want to become prime minister; he knows it and his supporters know it. If David Cameron approached him tomorrow and ordered him to run the country; he would probably drop to his knees and beg not to be considered: Jeremy Corbyn is no leader; for such a position means making unpopular decisions in the cause to which you hold dear to in your heart.
                Tony Benn; if he had been in Corbyn's position would have been fully prepared to sit in Downing Street, and would have relished the position Corbyn is in toady. But Corbyn, having sat on the back benches for 32 years has found it a very comfortable perch on which to relax; which he finds provides an agreeable life at the tax payers' expense. It is from this sitting position that from time to time he rises to his feet, not only to challenge the great class enemy; but also his own party whenever there has been a Labour government. Corbyn has always proven a damp squid; but a gentleman squid nevertheless if you listen to the media commentators who have met him in private.
               I do not know how many of you have read Dostoyevsky's The Idiot; but Corbyn fits the description perfectly of the naive and simplistic Prince Mushkin. Corbyn's ideas are puerile and adolescent and have been tried and tested ever since the Russian Revolution; and ever since, they have not only failed economically, but the outcome of such failure has been bought at the cost of millions upon millions of lives; thus disproving Corbyn's socialist thesis. Socialism has proven the final failure of, politically speaking, human vanity. Thinking they are capable of overcoming human nature, socialists have imposed the most rigorous tests on reforming our nature, resulting only in misery.
              Jeremy Corbyn is like a scarecrow whose mere presence is meant to keep the Tory crows from feeding of the seeds and crops of socialism. He has decorated the back benches, like an ancient monolith in complement with that of Dennis Skinner. Between them they have, at the irritation of their own party, proved between them the servants of Toryism. They would disagree, as would their supporters within the Labour membership as a well as those from without the membership who have, at a small price, helped Corbyn on his way.

JEREMY CORBYN is a captive of the age of steam and its labour relationships. He has spent his life despising the fat, top hated, cigar smoking capitalist, circa the later part of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century. Corbyn may believe he and his ideology is once more on the rise thus fulfilling his own belief in the Marxist dialectic, at whose philosophical maxim, he has poured his faith into. But it is a false dawn. Capitalism is here to stay because it accommodates human nature without which in the West technological advances could never have taken place.
                 Socialism is the governance and the chairmanship of all industry by the state; where there will be put in the place of competition, ambition, and financial reward, the five year plan organised by the socialist state under people like Corbyn. Does Corbyn tap out the keys on a computer? Does Corbyn use the internet? Does Corbyn use Twitter and Facebook? If the answer to all of these is yes; then he has to accept that they all came about by the capitalist method of production which rewards ambition and innovation with wealth; which socialism under the state can never compete with.
                The truth is that socialism in its many forms and historical fluctuations; but particularly in its Marxist form, can only procure human misery with little on the credit side. Western capitalism has never wrought the type of human misery; even in its 19th century form which Marxism has managed to do since the Bolshevik revolution in Russia.
                Jeremy Corbyn, by winning his place as the leader of the Labour Party, is like a poor imbecile ascending the executioners block without any knowledge of his fate. Corbyn will be his own executioner if he wins. He cannot ever govern this country; he is a Marxist red in both tooth and claw. If there are those of his supporters who challenge my belief in this statement; then may he or she speak now, or forever hold their tongue. If Corbyn can invite the leaders of Hamas and Hezbollah to Westminster as his guests; then God help the Jewish community in this country if he was ever to govern this country – it will not happen.
                Corbyn will hang himself if he wins; not literally of course, but in terms of misplaced expectancy. The Labour Party will try to get rid of him before the next election. He will ill-perform at parliamentary Question Time; and the press, even the liberal variety will try to bring him down. Corbyn's one and only support from within the press will be the financially  impoverished Morning Star; that geriatric publication that still subsists for its sales upon the good will of its readership to write cheques - now the Soviet embassy has departed.
                For Cameron, if Corbyn is elected; it will be like shooting ducks, and will almost guarantee the Tory Party a third term. Corbyn will become the next leader of the Labour Party and will face such opposition from within his own party on the back benches, that there will be another challenge to his leadership within a year of him taking office. Corbyn is not a serious candidate and the Labour Party leadership understands this; but the membership, many of whom (especially among the activists) believe in his Marxist socialism, that has only managed to bring ruination from wherever it has been practised.
                 Corbyn can never produce an example of a successful socialist society; and will never be able to do so to support his own claim for the leadership of the Labour Party. Corbyn will never lead the Labour Party for more than a year if he wins this contest. He will not ever become prime minister; so why worry about his popularity?

                 Indeed, why so? Let him win; he will only weaken evermore the prospects of the Labour Party to govern the country…so good riddance. 

Corbyn the interloper

YVETTE COOPER has played the sexist card: so desperate she is to become the first female leader of the Party. She has insisted that Andy Burnham who is ahead of her in the polls should stand down and let her harvest his supporters. This, she insists, is the only way of defeating Jeremy Corbyn. There is of course another way: if she stands down and let Andy Burnham defeat Corbyn.
               The brothers and sisters are at loggerheads over those who are unfit to run the country in the national interest; but only in the interest of women in Cooper's case; and in his own interest in Burnham's case. The truth is that Jeremy Corbyn is the court Jester, who is about to be crowned King, thanks in no small way to Ed Miliband who made Leftist politics once more respectable within the Labour Party, but forgot about the country.
                The truth is none of the candidate's in this election has the intellectual propensity to lead a town hall, let alone a country. There is only one candidate that can lead Labour's fight for power, and he now resides over the pond, no doubt putting two fingers up to his party. Yes, you've got it – the other Miliband; a Blairite in his analysis of the way forward for the Labour Party who, intellectually, surpasses his brother's, and equals Tony Blair's.
                 But the unions would never tolerate David Miliband's presence as a political Young Pretender as they see it, occupying the Labour Party throne. He is the only one that can keep the political oxygen flowing into the Labour Party lungs that would secure a Labour victory in a general election.  He was Blair's heir who the unions rejected for his Marxist brother - if the Labour Party does not abandon the unions; then the people will abandon the Labour Party.
                 When we talk of unions today we speak of those whose members who are in the public sector; the sector which the private sector subsidises through taxation. This is an anomaly of the type consistent with having to pay taxes on the ownership of a television set. The Public Sector which is the great behemoth that drains the oxygen away from ambition and enterprise: yet the Labour party has always encouraged its expansion; until, that is, Tony Blair did away with Clause IV; that wretched imbecilic construction that has dragged the Labour Party down to defeat after defeat. Clause IV lost its imperium decades ago in countries like the Soviet Union that encompassed much of Eastern Europe: in Cuba, China, and topically today among the Left, Venezuela.
                 All over the world Jeremy Corbyn's vision of socialism has, time after time, proved a cruel and bloody failure in terms of the human lives socialism has destroyed on the mere whim of an ideology within an inbuilt dystopian vision for human advancement. Socialism, in terms of the cruelty it has inflicted, bares comparison with Nazism. I would suggest the tally of death under Marxist regimes mad the Nazis look like liberals.
                 But the folksy, bearded, and staid Corbyn, who travels the country evangelising on behalf of an almost psychotic political ideology that has wrought (wherever it has triumphed throughout human history) only ignominy and failure of a kind resulting in barbarism in its intolerance of any opposing ideology which they tar and feather as bourgeois. It is socialism of which I write. Those on the Right, particularly within the Conservative party who joined Labour in order to receive a ballot paper on line to vote for Corbyn, I would say this – be careful for what you wish.
                Corbyn will win the vote for leadership of the Labour Party unless he can be stopped by dubious practices that can result in the whole electoral process being abandoned for a rerun at a future date. We saw this pattern of behaviour in Ireland and Holland when the public dared oppose the EU in a referendum. The solution was to re-run the referendums until the 'right' result was procured. We witnessed a similar casual abuse of democracy when both Italy and Greece had imposed upon them by the EU, technocrats to administer each of their countries after the people had voted into power politicians.
                Corbyn, if he wins, will no doubt prove victim of the same anti-democratic shenanigans as went on in Europe. He will be gotten rid of at the earliest opportunity as party leader. In fact I doubt that Corbyn even wants to be prime minister. It would scare the hell out of him. He just wants a stage to perform upon; a stage where as the leader of the main opposition; the media has to take notice and give him an equivalent air-time to David Cameron. He wants only one thing; to propagandise on behalf of socialism; which is why his many supporters do not think that the attainment of power should be the prime objective of the Labour Party.
                Corbyn is not prime ministerial material. He knows himself that he does not have it in him to govern a country. For one thing he lacks the mental aptitude for such a position. He would have to concentrate on the fine details of government instead of his ideological banalities regarding the advancement of socialism. Corbyn is not yet a danger to the country and hopefully he never will be.

JEREMY CORBYN has earned his position as the front runner for the Labour Party leadership. He did not sabotage the rules of the competition for his own benefit. He has obeyed the rules for the election of a leader that Ed Milliband introduced; which were meant to weaken the influence of the trade unions and to distance him from them; but purely to gain the occupancy of No 10 Downing Street which for the country's sake he managed to avoid.
                I hope the Labour Party is finished. I hope that if Corbyn wins the party will split once more. If it doesn't then some other party according to Darwinian evolution will eventually provide a credible opposition to the Tories.


Thursday, August 6, 2015

Yet another bloody socialist martyr.

JEREMY CORBYN is apparently a delightful man (I have never met him) – his delightfulness comes second hand from those parliamentarians, even from the Right of centre, as well as from within all parties. Even journalists evangelising from either the Left or Right of the centre perspective, have nothing to criticise Corbyn for as far as his personality is concerned. Indeed they all seem to admire him for his honesty, free from political advisers and spin doctors; he is considered a decent if languorous parliamentarian who has always preferred to sit on the back benches (like the Beast of Bolsover) criticising both his own party when in government, and the Tories when in opposition. This has been Corbyn's niche market. He has always been the critic: he has never had to shoulder the responsibility of governing; of making decisions (for such a formula will assuredly make him unpopular sooner or later, with his cantankerous followers who oversee every word he speaks). He will have to make decisions instead of criticising the decisions made by his own party: he will have to endure unpopularity instead of promoting it for leaders whom he disagreed with.
                The defeat of Miliband, whom, no doubt Corbyn had temporarily put his faith in; concluded from his defeat, as the Left always does, that Miliband's socialism was not socialist enough as far as the proletariat are concerned; and he, Corbyn, would personally deliver the socialist dystopia if given the chance. Socialists believe that if they fall fowl of the electorate; as Labour did in May; then the only reason they did so was because they were presented with a watered down version of socialism; which the Left now believe Corbyn can triumph over. In other words the Left have now found another socialist Pope to lead them into what they still believe to be the 'post capitalist age': the socialist decay still has, apparently, its grip on the naivety of the young
                Jeremy Corbyn threw his hat into the ring, never expecting to become party leader; but only to challenge the right wing of the party, among whom all the candidates that emerged fitted, from his socialist perspective, as right-wingers. He decided to throw his hat into the ring, more from emotion than reason. Nevertheless the deed was done; and now the fate of the Labour Party is in Corbyn's hands.
                I do not think that Corbyn ever wanted the responsibility of leadership. He was a back bencher-back-biter; his role was purely that of debunking his own and the Tory Party from the back benches. When he threw his hat into the ring; it was done merely as a gesture. Corbyn is no leader; he is no more than an ideological Left-wing trumpeter living on the Labour back benches despoiling all his own party's policies that he disagrees with. When he found himself ahead in the polls for the Labour Party leadership – it was a bolt from the blue. Corbyn now faces the problem of realistically leading the Labour Party. He has spent all his political life disparaging his own party in government from the back benches; he has never had to lead his party or make decisions on its behalf in government – a position which, for the nation's sake, he never accomplishes.
                Corbyn is like the theatre critic suddenly becoming the playwright hoping his accomplishments will appear in the West End. Corbyn is an ankle snapper and nothing more. He has sought sainthood among the Left by criticising what the Left have always perceived to be the evils of capitalism, as well as the right wing of the Labour Party's endeavours to keep capitalism functioning.
                 Jeremy Corbyn is as surprised by his present situation, as was the equally intellectually challenged Forrest Gump on presenting his arse to Lyndon Johnson. Corbyn will bring down the Labour Party if he becomes leader. It is inevitable that if Corbyn wins the leadership battle and is not dislodged from his position before the next election, by his own party; then the Labour Party will become split down the middle, and will once more remain in opposition. Parties, like the Whigs, Liberals, and now the Labour Party, all of whom, through good intentions, sought to improve the well being of mankind; at the expense human nature which the Tories once believed drove the capitalist system will only result in failure.

IF ELECTED TO LEAD the Labour Party, Jeremy Corbyn, will achieve one of two things, each ending in disaster for the Labour Party and the country. If he were to win the leadership battle, his party would be split down the middle: if even after this split he was to be magically elected to govern; he would bring the same kind of ruination to the UK that Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, Castro and latterly Chávez did to their respective societies. If after all of this you still believe; then elect by all means Jeremy Corbyn; for he would be gladly listed among such failures.
                Socialism is dead; it was all part of the infatuation by the Left with the Enlightenment; where human idealism flourished over human nature to try and create a Utopian idyll that has never been achieved, and will never be achieved…for it would only lead to the tyranny of the state that all such countries under the dictate of socialism find themselves imprisoned in.
                 Jeremy Corbyn is no leader. I bet he does not even want the sinecure that the Labour Party seems to be giving him. Corbyn knows he cannot lead this nation - only divide it. He has bathed in what he perceived as the respectability of the backbenches. He knew he could only remain popular within the Left wing of his party if he did not allow himself to be put in a position where he had to make decisions. Decisions will always provide opposition from onetime supporters (particularly on the Left). But if Corbyn wins, he will be subject to the same criticism from his own supporters as all Labour leaders have previously suffered: for he will have to make decisions that will ultimately fall foul of his supporters. Betrayal is the is the clarion call of the Left within the Labour Party and Corbyn knows he will be subjected to it.


Friday, July 17, 2015

Obama courts a legacy in his second and final term

CAN SOMEONE PLEASE tell me what Obama has done for his country? You may come back with the retort that he is his country's first black president – well yes this is true; but surely, as an egotistical politicians  - and all such modern politicians have to have a flourishing ego - this is not what he wants to be remembered for after two terms. This is why he is currently locked in a diplomatic pavane with Iran over her capacity to produce nuclear weapons which, in any Iranian Ayatollah's hands would be a real and genuine threat to the West: Saudi Arabia; has now promised to develop its own nuclear capacity in response to Iran's.
                Obama is playing a dangerous game in order only to secure his legacy; for have no doubt, this has been what these negotiations have been about: and there is no doubt in my mind that he will compromise to secure it. This is what Israel fears – and rightly so.
                Obama's terms in office have centred on his gift for rhetoric and the elegant phrase; but the persuasive tongue is always insufficient in itself, unless you back up the words and threats you make  with the action you suggest will follow if your demands are not met; which Obama has singularly failed to do. We remember his red line on Syria over Assad's use of chemical weapons: if it could be proven that Assad had used chemical weapons on his own people then America would act militarily.
                It was proven, and Obama did not act. The message this sent out to the West's enemies was that the leader of the most powerful military nation on earth had blinked, and was capable of blinking time after time…after time. Obama has demeaned his office, and himself. He is now trying to redeem his presidency by trying to diplomatically bring an end to Iran's nuclear capacity. Even after every deadline imposed on the negotiations by the White House go ignored by the Iranians - yet other deadlines are forthcoming by the White House.
                The Iranians are a counterfeit outfit as far as diplomacy and negotiation is concerned. They use negotiation as a weapon to achieve what they want, and once a treaty is signed it is fully prepared to ignore it if something superior comes along to alter their circumstances for the better an put them on a stronger foot: which is how Iran understands negotiation; and any deal reached on this fraudulent basis means little to Iran: but the naive American presidency of Obama is fully compliant with whatever he is presented with – his place as the first black American president in American history seems to be his one and only concern as his second term is  just 18 months from its end.
                Good faith means nothing to the Iranians; they will break any treaty once they have benefited enough from its clauses. Then they will become emboldened once more to achieve their nuclear ends.
ONE OF THE FIRST acts Obama took on gaining office was to remove a bust of Winston Churchill from the Oval Office. The significance of this simple act told us something about the man. Why would he want to dispose of Churchill's effigy by returning it to the British embassy in Washington? This must have told the British Foreign Office of the kind of man they were dealing with; but being diplomats they took it in good grace. After all, the special relationship was paramount, and if we were disliked as a nation by one particular president then we could live with it until another president arrived to continue the time line of the special relationship.
                It turns out that an ancestor of Obama was a member of the Mau Mau in Kenya who had been killed or tortured by the British under their colonial occupation. This seems to have driven Obama toward a particular hatred for the British. I understand this because my father served in Burma and I also once resented the Japanese.
                But the Japanese I recognise today have little bearing on the Japanese my father had fought in Burma; and one would have thought that Obama would have arrived at the same conclusion regarding imperial Britain.

THERE IS HOWEVER another aspect of Obama that has barely been touched upon and that is his support for the beliefs of Pastor Jeremiah Wright who was Obama's religious mentor. There have been suggestions from this relationship that Obama is a closet Muslim – why, I do not know. The pastor has apparently given sermons supportive of the Islamic faith, but certainly not of the Islamists.
                My concern is that president Obama carries much baggage. There have been accusations (and nothing more) that Obama is a believer in Islam. If so then Islam is not exactly outlawed. But if his faith belongs to Islam, he should have been upfront about it when he first stood for the presidency. For it brings into dispute the very question, and the very nature of the talks with Iran.
                It is also true that Obama is no friend of Israel. To Obama, the Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is evil incarnate, as was witnessed off camera by his true feelings toward the Israeli prime minister.
                Obama has reached out to Iran and has done so against not only the advice of Israel which it appears his Democratic administration was deliberately picked to oppose from the very start of his presidency; but also other Arabic countries, like Saudi Arabia. Both Iran and Saudi Arabia are unpleasant regimes, they each, between them support their Shia and Sunni brethren who are now at war throughout the Middle East. But it is in the West's interest to support neither.
                 President Obama is nothing more than a black figure-head for both the afro-American, and the white liberals of the Democratic Party. Whatever Obama achieved in office which was very little; these constituencies would stand true to him out of political correctness: he also had the undying loyalty of West and East coast liberals; while most of America only wanted an end to what they perceive as the tsunami of migration.