Category Archives: mayor of london

How the Lord Mayor of London undermines Liberalism!

 

What the Lord Mayor of London teaches us about Liberal theory! 

OR

How the Lord Mayor of London undermines Liberalism!


Liberal theory, from John Stuart Mill onwards (and especially in the modern era of ‘Neo-Liberalism’) is based upon the idea that all people are fundamentally the same.  In particular, that everyone’s fundamental nature is to maximise their position in the market-place, as economists put it.  This is the theory that human-beings are “rational economic actors” whose only motivation is to improve their personal position in economic terms – like good economic worker ants!  

I believe this theory to be fundamentally wrong and to be a fundamental misunderstanding of human nature.  

I also believe that this error is important in explaining many of the problems of our country today because it is an error that permeates the thinking of the elite in our society. That is not only the rich elite, but also the political elite, the media elite and the decision-making elite in universities and in most of the key positions of power and influence in our State and in our country. 

This error has led the key policy decision-makers in our society to disregard and disrespect the natural urges of most of our people. 

I started this with headings relating to the Lord Mayor of London.  Above there is a picture of him in all his refinery!  You might ask what is the link?  I think it is this. The Lord Mayoralty of the City of London is the supreme English example of what rich people will do and how far they will go for Status and for Respect within our traditional communities..

In order to be Lord Mayor you have to give up many hours to unpaid work and activity within the City of London Corporation as an Alderman and as a Sherriff.  There is also a three year stretch, in the run-up to and in the year of being Lord Mayor, in which you have no time for any paid work.  During this time you would have to be fully focussed on your ceremonial roles in the City of London hierarchy.  Also even when in office as Lord Mayor, you will have virtually no real power, nor will any of it will gain you any economic advantage.  Indeed a generally held estimate for the cost of being Lord Mayor is that it costs at least £500,000!

In “Liberal” theory of course all this activity is completely irrational.  In fact, so irrational as to be almost utterly inexplicable.

This of course vividly demonstrates that ‘Liberal’ theory is wildly adrift from the reality of human nature because in fact rich people getting involved in such activities are perfectly rationally focussed on the acquisition of status and respect within our traditional communities.

Across the Nation many other people chose other ways of getting such communal status and respect. For example in most English counties there is an equivalent office of High Sherriff.  Also there is the whole “Honours System” in which many people struggle to get OBEs or Knighthoods, etc. 

The oddity is that rich people do not understand that their own urges for status and respect and community are perfectly normal not only for them, but also for everybody else as well!  

Therefore the same rich people are very often perfectly happy to justify low paid, low status and insecure jobs for “ordinary people” and they try to justify this hypocracy using ‘Liberal’ economic arguments.  Such people really should not be as surprised as they apparently are when most of our people don’t like the outcome! 

We need a new politics with a new economic model which does give proper status and respect to our own people in our own most natural and very traditional community, namely our Nation, I mean those people who do all the “ordinary” jobs which are nevertheless, of course, so very necessary to the proper functioning of our society and to our collective English culture and prosperity.  

My New Year message therefore is that we English Nationalists need to focus more on reforms that give English People a justified pride and self-respect as citizens, and as fellow members of our Nation, as well as a fair reward for fair labour.  Also we should focus on attacking the dogma on “economic efficiency” which currently excessively rewards big business and bankers and ‘Liberal’ British Establishment politicians!

WHY IS THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA MANIPULATING WHAT IT TELLS US ABOUT ISLAMIST TERROR ATTACKS?

WHY IS THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA MANIPULATING WHAT IT TELLS US ABOUT ISLAMIST TERROR ATTACKS?

On Friday the 15th September there was another Islamist terror attack in England on London’s Underground. The home-made bomb partially went off at Parsons Green Tube Station.

When it was first being reported very shortly after it had happened, there were various pictures and clips which had been filmed on people’s mobile phones put up onto the internet in which you could see what was happening, including the above picture of the bomb.

The initial reports were of people who were in the carriage and who heard it go off who said that it wasn’t a bang, it was a sort of “whoomp”. There was a smell, smoke and some flames. People were desperate to get off the tube train and there was a wild panic to get off the station away from the train in which people were injured in the ensuing stampede.

At first the mainstream media were talking up the possibility that this attack could have been done by “Far-Right Extremists”. As their hopes of that faded there was an increasing unwillingness in the mainstream media, whether it be Sky, ITV or BBC, to report on what type of people were thought to be the perpetrators.

Even though it has since become clear that the people who have been arrested so far are young male Muslim “refugees” it is only recently that it has become crystal clear that the principle suspect is one of the Syrian child refugees that so much fuss was made about to bring them over to England. This was regardless of such and with no attempt to vet whether they were dangerous or not. Well now we know of course that at least some of them are going to prove to be dangerous Jihadists! So much for the effectiveness of our British authorities in showing any interest in looking after our own People!

One thing however that was striking on the day as reporting of the news story progressed on Friday was that, by the 6 o’clock BBC Radio 4 news, the BBC was reporting that the bomb had “exploded”, that there had been a “wall of flame” and that “29 people had been injured”, the obvious implication being, to anybody who didn’t know better, that the people were injured by the bomb, rather than as they actually were by the panic and stampede to escape from the station. The bomb of course did not “explode”. The videos at the time showed that there was not a “wall of flame”, at most the flames were a foot high and perhaps only six inches high.

What better example of fake news could you get than this distortion from the BBC?

The question that then arises is why would they do it? But then you have to think what Sadiq Khan, the Mayor of London, has been saying in response to Islamist attacks in London. After the car ramming and knife attack on Westminster Bridge he said:-


“Londoners will see an increased police presence today and over the course of the next few days – no reason to be alarmed. One of the things police and all of us need to do is make sure we’re as safe as we possibly can be.

“I’m reassured that we are one of the safest global cities in the world, if not the safest global city in the world.

“But we always evolve and review ways to make sure we remain as safe as we possibly can.”

After the van rammings and knife attacks on London Bridge and Borough Market he said:-

“Our city is filled with great sorrow and anger tonight but also great resolve and determination because our unity and love for one another will always be stronger than the hate of the extremists.

“This is our city. These are our values and this is our way of life. London will never be broken by terrorism we will step up the fight against extremism and we will defeat the terrorists.”

And:-

“I want to reassure all Londoners, and all our visitors, not to be alarmed. Our city remains one of the safest in the world.

“London is the greatest city in the world and we stand together in the face of those who seek to harm us and destroy our way of life.

“We always have and we always will. Londoners will never be cowed by terrorism.”

In stark contrast to these remarks however, after the attack on Muslims near the Finsbury mosque, he said:-

“The Met have deployed extra police to reassure communities, especially those observing Ramadan.”

The moral of these quotations seems to be that, whilst Muslims must be protected whatever the cost to taxpayers, the rest of us must simply get used to being attacked by Islamists.

This agenda is confirmed by what he is reported to have said in New York:-

“Living with terror attacks – like the one that hit New York at the weekend – is ‘part and parcel of living in a big city’.

‘It is a reality I’m afraid that London, New York, other major cities around the world have got to be prepared for these sorts of things.

‘That means being vigilant, having a police force that is in touch with communities, it means the security services being ready, but also it means exchanging ideas and best practice.”

In short what people like Sadiq Khan want to happen is that the general population accepts the story that these sorts of Jihadi terror attacks are now simply part and parcel of living in a big city, rather than what they obviously actually are, accordingly to common-sense: Which is the consequence of the British Establishment allowing unrestricted immigration by large numbers of unvetted Muslims, often from very troubled parts of the world, who too often bring their wars and their Jihadi mentality with them!

It should also be noted that when Islamists get involved in suicide bombing or other suicidal terrorist activity, their focus is currently being completely misunderstood by the authorities and, in particular being mis-reported by the mainstream media.

What we have to understand is that a Jihadist deciding to undertake such a mission is thinking of it not in terms of a “suicide mission”, but of a “martyrdom operation”. This explains why the London Bridge terrorists were wearing fake suicide vests. The point of doing so was to make sure that the police wouldn’t try to capture them and instead would shoot them dead!

It should be remembered that the point of a “martyrdom operation” is obviously to be martyred and is therefore done in reliance on the statements in the Koran and the Haddith that he who dies in Jihad will automatically go to Paradise and be rewarded by Allah with celestial virgins in a jewelled palace for eternity!

Jihadists truly believe that this is what will happen to them if they die in Jihad. So if their life has not been lived fully accordingly to Muslim law then they are a person who is more likely to feel that a “martyrdom operation” will get him to paradise, despite his sins, than if he had lived a blameless life.

It therefore makes no sense for commentators to talk about the fact that some pf those Jihadists who commit martyrdom operations have not lived strict Muslim lives!

We need to realise that the killing of unbelievers in a “martyrdom operation” is not the goal of the operation; it is merely the goalposts which enable the goal to be scored. That is getting into Paradise by being killed whilst on Jihad.

No wonder the mainstream media do not want people to understand what is going on because if they did then maybe the demand to end Muslim immigration would rise from its current opinion poll rating of about 47% to a pitch where almost everybody who was not a Muslim would be saying no to any further Muslim immigration!

Sadiq Khan reveals the undemocratic gerrymandering at the heart of Labour’s vision of multi-culturalist London


Sadiq Khan reveals the undemocratic gerrymandering at the heart of Labour’s vision of multi-culturalist London

 

“Sadiq urges 500,000 EU voters to take revenge on Zac for backing Brexit”


The word democracy comes from the Ancient Greek, the Rule of the Demos or the People.

In Athens and the other ancient Greek democratic City States the Demos, the People, were clearly defined by law, so that only those that qualified legally could become citizens and could vote.

Even in the modern world only those States which have a defined citizen body can properly be called a democracy, since if the citizen body is not defined properly then anyone, whether they be citizen or not, can vote.

What could be a clearer illustration of the extent to which unchecked and uncontrolled mass immigration and the New Labour project to replace the English people with a new and no doubt more politically useful population than Sadiq Khan’s call as set out in the article below?

Can anyone think of an example of a more self-interested and anti-patriotic stance by a British Establishment politician, or, indeed, a living example of the best possible reason to vote to Leave the EU whilst the possibility of us still being able to do so still exists by the use of the ballot box rather than (in Irish Republican terms) the Armalite?

Zac Goldsmith and Sadiq Khan go to war over Brexit

Europe moved to the heart of London’s mayoral battle today as it emerged that the votes of a record half a million citizens from other EU states could be critical to the contest.

Labour’s Sadiq Khan launched an unprecedented campaign to persuade them to take revenge against Tory rival Zac Goldsmith for backing a British exit from the European Union.

Mr Khan said the Brexit campaign was putting at risk the rights of around a million EU citizens in London to live and work here. If Britain left the EU they could end up “having to leave London”, he said. The army of Europeans in London could become a significant political force as they make up around 10 per cent of the capital’s electorate.

A record 559,543 people from European countries outside the UK are registered to vote in the capital, according to figures released to Parliament.

Although they are not entitled to vote in the EU referendum or in Westminster elections, they all have the right to vote for a new Mayor on May 5 and for members of the London Assembly. Only 62,538 votes separated Boris Johnson from rival Ken Livingstone at the 2012 mayoral election.

The most recent mayoral poll suggested the gap between Mr Khan and Mr Goldsmith was about 140,000 votes.

A spokesman for Mr Goldsmith accused Mr Khan of “divisive scaremongering” and claimed the Labour candidate’s policies were a bigger risk to all Londoners. “This divisive scaremongering shows Khan doesn’t want to talk about the issues at stake in this Mayoral election — more homes, better transport, safer streets and cleaner air,” he said. “Zac’s job, if he is elected, will be to bring London together and make sure it flourishes. The real risk to London’s families is a four year Khan–Corbyn experiment in City Hall, with a £1.9 billion budget black hole, and the threat it presents to all our futures.”

Conservative MEP for London, Charles Tannock, said it could be the first major election where EU citizens are a major factor. “Generally EU citizens don’t turn out in large numbers for local elections and have been traditionally ignored by mainstream parties and candidates for that reason,” he told the Evening Standard.

“Things could change on May 5. There is no indication of that at present but the EU Referendum happening the following month may raise awareness of UK elections.” The number of EU citizens has risen since the last mayoral race in 2012 because of the arrival of young workers from countries such as Bulgaria and Hungary, whose citizens gained full freedom of movement in 2014.

London boroughs with the largest number of European citizens are Ealing (31,339), Lambeth (28,035) and Newham (25,562).

Mr Khan said that Euro-voters could become a significant factor because of the In-Out referendum. “Britain’s role in Europe is absolutely critical for all Londoners — supporting hundreds of thousands of jobs, and helping us keep Londoners safe,” he told the Standard.

“But our relationship with Europe is of even greater concern for the half a million European citizens in London. If Zac Goldsmith has his way and drags London out of Europe, they face massive uncertainty and even the prospect of having to leave London altogether.

“EU citizens in London won’t get a vote in the referendum, but they can still have their say by backing a Mayoral candidate who will campaign for Britain to remain in Europe. It’s clearly in all Londoners’ interests for Britain to remain in Europe.”

What do you think?


Here is a link to the original article >>> Zac Goldsmith and Sadiq Khan go to war over Brexit | Mayor | News | London Evening Standard

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/mayor/zac-goldsmith-and-sadiq-khan-go-to-war-over-brexit-a3187961.html

BIASED OR A JOKE? THE NEWSPAPER THAT SUPPORTS EDDIE IZZARD FOR MAYOR OF LONDON


IS A NEWSPAPER THAT SUPPORTS EDDIE IZZARD FOR MAYOR OF LONDON BIASED OR A JOKE?

The London ‘newspaper’, the Evening Standard, recently announced that it is supporting the unfunny Leftist ‘comedian’ Eddie Izzard to be the next Mayor of London for Labour. So much for their editorial team’s commonsense – clearly a JOKE! But what about their BIAS?

I recently put out this:-

“Scottish Independence: London and Scotland need each other” Debate – June 30 in London’s Guild Hall London Evening Standard | Scotland

“So do London and Scotland need each other in a Union, or will both manage just fine if Scotland votes for independence? That is the topic for a major public debate, jointly hosted by the Evening Standard and the City of London at Guildhall. Leading public figures taking part as panellists (sic) include:-” NOT ONE SINGLE ENGLISHMAN OR ENGLISHWOMAN!

Parody and/or Propaganda? Bias and/or B…….?”

As ever with the usual Media/Political Class arrogance the event went ahead unchanged and the CEP staged a very effective demonstration as reported here:-

Three members of the Campaign team for the CEP attended the Evening Standard Scottish Independence event in London on Monday night (30 June 2014) where six Scottish speakers (three Brit Scots and three Nationalist Scots) debated the relationship between England and Scotland. Not one clearly defined English voice was included on the debating panel. We highlighted the incongruity of a debate where only one side is represented.

Just imagine if six Englishman went to Edinburgh to debate Scotland’s relationship with England and suggested that Scotland could be better governed by breaking her up into smaller pieces, or regionalised. There would be outrage and rightly so. As such the debate was biased and missed several obvious points. To show how this debate failed the people of England we stood with a huge St George cross, mounted on a 10ft pole at the back of the Guildhall where the event was held and stuck tape over our mouths. We were mentioned by the debating panel no less than three times but still we were otherwise ignored.

We have attempted to contact the Evening Standard’s editor, both before and after the event but currently we have been met with silence. Maybe it’s the silence of the guilty. IF NOT IT SHOULD BE!

I was asked to comment by the Evening Standard and did so as follows:-

All English Nationalists should join the English Democrats in supporting a YES vote in Scotland on the 18th September because it will trigger the dissolution of the United Kingdom. Since the end of the era great power politics, the UK has been a persistent drag on the English Nation.

The United Kingdom State is expensive, incompetently authoritarian and vain-gloriously addicted to its great power status whilst draining the wealth of England with its debts, its vanity projects, its international interventionism and its failure to focus on the best interests of the English Nation.

For the mathematically minded, the UK’s dissolution can be put as a formula:- E + S = GB therefore GB – S = E.

As the EU Commission has regularly confirmed it is only the UK which is a member of the EU. This means dissolution of the UK means that we are also all automatically out of the EU. Also the debts are those of the UK and not England or Scotland. So the English Nation will get independence not only from the UK and from its debts but also from the EU in one easy step.

The UK failure to operate in the best interests of English people is easily shown by the extra £10,000 it spends on the average Scottish family.

If this extra money tempts Scots to vote NO then all the so called Unionist Parties are promising them yet further Devolution so all the unfairness and discrimination against the English Nation will quickly get far worse.

So come on Scotland vote YES on the 18th September and give us all a fresh start as friendly neighbours outside the UK and its debts and outside of the EU!

Here is the Standard’s report. Not only no mention of the CEP or the lack of an English voice but also an emasculated version of my comment at the end. So never mind Greeks bearing Gifts – watch out for the Standard telling tall tales!

Scottish Independence: England must send ‘love letter’ north of the border

David Churchill      Published: 01 July 2014

England needs to send a “love letter” to Scotland if it wants to save the marriage of the UK, a major debate on independence heard.

The plea to show Scots more respect and affection came from Penrith and The Border MP Rory Stewart and human rights lawyer Helena Kennedy QC at a packed Guildhall for the Evening Standard debate ahead of September’s referendum.

“What is England doing?” asked Tory MP Mr Stewart. “It seems to be dealing with the situation much as if your partner tells you they are going to leave you.

In the chair: Emily Maitlis directed the passionate debate at Guildhall (Picture: Nigel Howard) “England seems to be doing one of two things, either saying ‘oh you’ll never be able to afford it, you’re never going to be able to go out on your own, you’ll regret it, you’ll come back soon’.

“Or even worse, we seem to be sitting in our armchair saying ‘well, it’s up to you if you want to do it, but it’s nothing to do with me’.

“If we wish to keep this country together, we need to say something else. We need to say ‘we love you’.”

The panel, chaired by the BBC Newsnight presenter Emily Maitlis, included Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander, Scottish National Party MP Stewart Hosie, businesswoman Michelle Thomson and Scottish comedian Hardeep Singh Kohli.

Baroness Kennedy, a “proud” Scot who would “hate” to see a severance, urged: “We have to say to them, ‘your contribution is vital and hasn’t been listened to enough’, let’s talk about liberal democracy, let’s talk about the values we all share?…?that’s the love letter that will bring Scots together with the English to create a better kind of United Kingdom.”

Today, a new poll claimed Scottish voters are turning away from Alex Salmond’s dream of independence. Excluding the don’t knows, the Yes vote is trailing by 39 per cent to 61 percent, said the YouGov/Times survey. That was a shift from 42 and 58 in March, suggesting the No campaign is pulling ahead.

Scotland’s ability to control its own tax revenues, welfare and economic growth were at the heart of passionate clashes in last night’s debate. Mr Alexander promised extra powers if Scotland stays, including control over income tax, capital gains and inheritance taxes — giving it the power to raise “over half” of revenues.

He added: “Nationalism is fundamentally about putting up barriers, liberalism is about taking those barriers down. In the UK we have the best of both worlds, let’s keep it that way.”

But Mr Hosie retorted: “What we are seeking is not segregation, it’s not ethnic nationalism.

“It’s about equipping our [Scottish] government with all the tools and powers it needs to improve the life chances of the people of Scotland.”

He said Scotland was not dependent on London or the UK, saying that for the last 50 years “every man woman and child in Scotland has contributed £1,500 more every year in tax than the UK average”.

Ms Thomson, representing the business community, said: “As Vince Cable said, London is becoming a giant sucking machine draining the life out of the rest of the country. Does London need Scotland to thrive? No. Does Scotland need London to thrive? No.”

Hardeep Singh Kohli joked that hatred for the English dissipated “a few weeks ago” when England was knocked out of the World Cup, adding: “The reason why Scottish independence is so important is?…?we [Scots] know who we are. The single biggest beneficiary of Scottish independence will be England. Your body politic is rotting, your House of Commons is full of charlatans and thieves. That’s the truth.”

For the Union

Helena Kennedy, Barrister and member of the Lords:

“I am a proud Scot. I love Scotland. But I love London and I am very clear it is my city. I love its diversity, entrepreneurialism, cultural capacity, pulse and its power. This city is very much one young Scots look to and are stimulated by and they bring the experience they’ve had with them. I would hate to see a severance of the links. The cost of structural change is an issue. No one has clear figures as to what it would cost to create embassies around the world, the creation of security services an independent Scotland would need. The way forward is about working together to solve the problems that are confronting us in the face of globalisation.”

Danny Alexander. Chief Secretary to the Treasury:

“We in Scotland face the most important decision we will ever make. A decision in which there is no going back. We are much better, stronger and influential together than apart. Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland are the most successful family of nations ever known, with a stronger future united. Scotland is a hugely successful nation. London is a hugely successful city. And we’re successful because we are part of one United Kingdom. Success comes, for example, from the deep-rooted links between London and Scotland, deep links in science, finance and the arts.”

Rory Stewart, Tory MP for Penrith and the Border:

“This campaign has unlocked a real energy in Scottish politics. Scots have never been so serious and so engaged, in fact in some ways coming back into England can feel like a deflating experience. What we need to find is not an event that is temporary, 15 minutes of holding hands, but something much more permanent, something symbolic but which in the end has to be the rebuilding of our country, which recognises that in the end the arguments are on the side of union, not division. The challenge is reaching out and embracing the North and embracing the areas that are doing less well [than London].”

For Independence


Hardeep Singh Kohli, Scottish comedian:

“This isn’t about our hatred of the English, that dissipated when you got knocked out [of the World Cup]. I’m the child of an immigrant. My people come from north-west India, surely by extension of a ‘better together’ argument, India should have stayed together with Britain? There was a documentary on BBC Scotland some years ago about what the English really think of the Scots, and the reality is, not a great deal.We’re just not on their radar. We know who we are. The biggest beneficiary of Scottish independence will be England. Your body politic is rotting, your House of Commons is full of charlatans and thieves.”

Michelle Thomson, MD Business for Scotland:

“Given that we recognise the Scots as a nation and the current UK as a grouping of nations, then we must also recognise the right of those nations within that union to exercise self-determination. London is an economic powerhouse, perhaps even a city state. As Vince Cable said, London is becoming a giant sucking machine draining the life out of the rest of the country. Shouldn’t Scotland embrace the healthy ambition that suggests it should be so much more? Independence is about the sovereign nation of Scotland taking accountability.”

Stewart Hosie, SNP MP:

“Do we need each other? Probably. Every nation, every city, every region on the face of the planet is interconnected. We all need each other in every way. But what we are seeking is not segregation, it’s not ethnic nationalism, it’s not putting up a wall, we’re not going to dig a trench across the border. Independence is normal, absolutely normal. The ability of our nation to elect its own government, to get the government it elects, every time, not just some of the time, and for that government to have all the powers every other government takes for granted, to improve the lot of the Scottish people.”

Letters to the editor: The issues in the Scottish debate

Last night’s debate illustrated the myth of the Scottish Yes campaign’s supposed positivity.
Stewart Hosie MP’s defence of a break-up on the grounds of “increased prosperity, social justice and fairness” is an exclusive vision of prosperity and social justice for Scots alone.
The Yes side argued that the UK is broken, corrupt and finished, and Scotland is therefore justified in seeking an exit. Even if the UK fitted that description, it would be even more reason for staying together and cooperating to find solutions in future.
The main policies proposed by the Scottish government (tax “competition”, possible national debt default, North Sea oil reallocation, Trident relocation, for example) is to extract resources from UK taxpayers and population. Trying to frame it as a struggle for liberty and freedom is beyond absurd.
A vote for No is a vote against intolerance, exclusivity and division. I hope the majority of Scots, for all our sakes, feel the same way.
Ollie Shipway

Since the end of the era of great power politics, the UK has been a persistent drag on the English nation.
The UK State, vaingloriously addicted to great power status, drains England’s wealth through prodigal spending and international interventionism.
As the European Commission has regularly confirmed, it is the UK not its constituent nations which is a member of the EU. Scottish independence also means the untying of the relationship with Northern Ireland, which postdates the 1707 Union of Parliaments. The dissolution of the UK by this means implies we are automatically out of the EU.
The UK’s failure to operate in the best interests of English people is amply demonstrated by the extra £10,000 it spends on the average Scottish family.
The promise of yet further devolution by all the main parties in the event of a No vote means all the unfairness and discrimination against the English is set to worsen.
All proud Englishmen and women should hope Scotland votes Yes in September to give us all a fresh start as friendly neighbours outside the UK.
Robin Tilbrook, English Democrats

Here is a link to the original >>> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/scottish-independence-england-should-send-scotland-a-love-letter-to-save-our-marriage-9576568.html?=version1