A Few Thoughts About The Next Few Years In British Politics

Present Situation

I see no significant change from the situation obtaining immediately after, or even prior to, the 2017 General Election. Neither main System party has broken through to clear water with the public; both are trapped in the ice of public cynicism and/or disapproval.

Labour Party

The Labour Party may have been able to recruit hundreds of thousands of enthusiastic members and supporters in the past few years (and that is more than it was able to do under the Blair/Brown Zionist control of yesteryear), but there is no sign that it has much (if at all) broken through beyond the traditional Labour heartlands. It sits in the range 37%-42% in the opinion polls. Corbyn-Labour is ideologically-incapable of seeing or accepting that having so many “blacks and browns” in high positions (examples include Diane Abbott and Dawn Butler) is one factor killing Labour’s wider electability. Not just the fact that such people are black or whatever, but the fact that they seem so unintelligent and/or uneducated. The two mentioned were also egregious expenses freeloaders and still try to grab as much money as they can.

The attack on Labour by the Jew-Zionist element mostly goes over the head of the masses of voters, but the venom seen in the msm (put there by the Jew-Zionists and doormats thereof) may affect Labour’s electability in marginal seats. Labour is still stuck with a Parliamentary party which is mostly hostile to its leader, Corbyn. The resultant impression of division is bound to affect Labour’s vote, as does its pro-immigration stance.

Conservative Party

The Conservatives are still led, or at least headed by Theresa May, who is only there by reason of the lack of an obvious alternative leader; she was in fact only elected as Leader by default, as this cartoon shows well.

CnLGOc5XYAALLJd

There remain vast swathes of Conservative-voting Britain, especially in Southern Britain, where, however unpopular the Conservatives are, no other party is more popular. That applies a fortiori to Labour. The Cons sit around 39%-43% in the opinion polls.

UKIP

UKIP was making significant inroads into Conservative Britain before the semi-rigged First Past The Post electoral system defeated it in 2015, when it should have (under any fair system) have gathered in about 70 MPs, but in fact only got one. As I predicted even before the election, UKIP had peaked. Now, the only reason to include it in a blog post such as this is for reasons of completeness. It may be able to climb slightly higher in the opinion polls from its recent low of 3% (the latest outlier has it at 6% but the polls overall are at 3.3%); this is mere “dustbin voting” and protest voting. UKIP is now effectively finished, irrelevant.

Liberal Democrats

The Con Coalition finished the LibDems. The only bright spots for them are that some young and naive first-time voters might choose their “pick and mix” policies as attractive to them; and that some pro-EU Con voters might vote LibDem in places where the sitting Con MP is a “Brexiteer”; but the overall effect will be small. Presently in the opinion polls between 8% and 11%, which is not enough to retain more than a few MPs.

Social Nationalist Parties

There is no social-national party which can be described as even marginally credible. The two which are now most visible are very small and without wide public support. The Anne Marie Waters vehicle, For Britain, a UKIP offshoot, is a sideshow of a sideshow; a complete irrelevance. It is also a “one-trick pony”, basically an anti-Islamist group, despite attempts to present a wider policy offering. As Wikipedia puts it:

“The party fielded fifteen candidates in the 2018 local elections, with none being elected.[9] The party came last in almost all the seats it contested.”

The article continues:

“Waters contested the Lewisham East by-election, receiving 266 votes (1.2% of the total) and losing her deposit.[12]

Membership is thought to be around 200.

As for Britain First, while in some respects better run and more credible as an organization (it is said to have 1,000 members), it is ideologically suspect, having declared itself pro-Israel and pro-Jew. Like “For Britain”, Britain First seems to have anti-Islamism as its main point. Electorally, it too has been a washout: it last contested a Westminster seat in 2014, when Deputy Leader Jayda Fransen stood at the Rochester and Strood by-election:

UKIP won the by-election. Britain First finished 9th of 13 candidates, with 56 votes (0.14%), finishing below the Monster Raving Loony Party (with 151 votes, 0.38%) and above the Patriotic Socialist Party (with 33 votes, 0.08%).[53]” [Wikipedia]

Britain First also put up its leader, Paul Golding, as candidate for Mayor of London:

“On 27 September 2015, Paul Golding announced that he would stand as a candidate in the 2016 London mayoral election. He received 31,372 or 1.2% of the vote, coming eighth of twelve candidates.[55]” [Wikipedia]

The Next General Election

The next UK General Election may come as early as 2018 itself, or in 2019. It is unlikely to be later. Many will be voting against the party they dislike more or most, rather than for the party they like the most. Many may abstain and, while that will not affect seats heavily for one System party or another, it will affect marginal seats.

My present view is that the likely result will be a hung Parliament and a House of Commons possibly with Labour as the largest party, but without a majority. Labour will prove incapable of governing effectively or well and will be weak on immigration. That may then open the door to radical social nationalism.

The Future

Britain seems set for economic and social turbulence, revolving around the questions of race, culture, immigration, social standards, standards of living and issues around free speech. A credible social national movement could take off in the short-term to medium-term (2018 to 2022 and beyond), but that will require leadership, ideology, discipline and belief, as well as money and organization.

 

6 thoughts on “A Few Thoughts About The Next Few Years In British Politics”

  1. “For Britain” also studiously avoids the question of monetary reform, just as studiously in fact as the vast majority of MPs (including the MP for Westminster and the City) who all failed to attend the petitioned-for HoC debate in November 2014 on Money Creation and Society.

    (and)
    Early Day Motion 748
    https://www.parliament.uk/edm/2013-14/748

    PS (off-topic): consider doing a piece on your time in practice in (the former Soviet Union?). Reports from the criminal courts are a tad depressing, evoking the likes of James Jones’ “Courts Day by Day” and provoking the thought that law abiding citizens also are likely notwithstanding to end up in them these days.

    Like

    1. Thank you. I do not want to be too rude about “For Britain”, but how can that really be avoided? It is, as I have written, a “one-trick pony”, just a dustbin for those who think that Islamism is the only socio-political question. Pro-Israel, pro-Jewish lobby, pro-abortion (I think), pro various other forms of social decadence. Its leader, with her laughable 1.2% vote in the recent Lewisham by-election, should go and get a job in the NHS again. She has nothing to say. Irrelevant.

      As for me doing a post about my time(s) in the former Soviet Union, that might read somewhat like a travelogue or diary (albeit a real one, unlike the "Anne Frank" novella), but perhaps I shall.

      Like

      1. I agree with you about For Britain. Whilst they are correct to show concern about Britain’s increasing Islamifiation and Islamism within Britain they don’t show any over Britain’s Zionist Lobby and shy away from discussing an admittedly ‘difficult’ subject. Like UKIP, they appear to have no real coherent political philosophy and will crash and burn like that party has (if they ever get off the ground which I doubt).

        I am sad you were removed from Twitter and was gutted a few months back when you blocked your tweets from being seen by any casual browser of your account. Whilst I haven’t always agreed with your output on that social media platform they were always an interesting take on current events and politics in Britain. You are missed by me and no doubt quite a few others as well. Would you be willing to consider going back on Twitter under a different name if that is possible? Twitter is the poorer for your absence.

        Like

      2. Thank you. I suppose I could get back on Twitter under a different name, despite Twitter blocking me via ISP number. However, I begin to wonder whether Twitter is actually productive. In fact, I have been thinking that for a couple of years. There are other aspects: the Jewish Zionist element watch my tweets and other posts like hawks (or vultures), waiting so that they can make malicious complaints to police etc. I have to balance influencing the public as against likely attacks instigated by the enemy.

        I am on GAB — https://gab.ai/ianrmillard — . The account is private, though anyone can apply to be let in.

        For Britain came last in almost all the local council seats it contested recently; Anne Marie Waters got 1.2% of the vote in the Lewisham by-election. A waste of space.

        Like

  2. I hope you can manage somehow to get back onto Twitter. I think that being on Twitter can be of some use ie in spreading some basic awareness of the Zionist Lobby in Britain which the vast majority of people in Britain remain, sadly, blissfully unaware of and discussing other important topics. Yes, Twitter does have its limitations as far as practical politics goes and being active in the ‘real world’ will always be more productive.

    For Britain is useless as you correctly observe and was always going to be being merely a offshoot of a party (UKIP) that never did develop a coherent and attractive political philosophy that was truely distinct from the globalist Lib/Lab/CON party (no wonder the British political Establishment had a fairly well justified fear of the BNP in this respect rather than UKIP) Unfortunately, due to Britain using the archaic and profoundly undemocratic First Past The Post electoral system even if a social nationalist party were to be created, had a decent leader and loads of monetary resources behind it it would still find it hard to gain traction as the system proved in 2015 when UKIP had about the same level of public support as the German AFD ie about 12.5% of the national vote and got ONE MP compared to the AFD’S 90 PLUS!

    We desperately need real electoral reform (my preferred system is the German Mixed-Member Proportional Representation one and not the weird Single Transferable Vote of the Republic of Ireland). The only other alternative is your ethno state idea and yes the South West of England (preferably Devon, Dorset or Somerset being the best counties for this idea rather than Cornwall with its liking for the Liberal Democrats and some tendency to be Cornish Nationalist). We need people in the South West to set-up a similar operation to the village of Jamel, Germany (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Janel,_Germany)

    Like

    1. As you say. The proportional idea is obviously the best one, though the devil is in the detail. If (as I believe obtains in Israel) the electoral system allows 1% of seats for 1% of votes, you end up with a plethora of parties. Some countries apply a threshold (I think that Germany’s is 10% but I may be wrong). You only get seats if your vote is over the threshold. Easier to live with, but less fair (10% votes = 10% seats, but 9% votes = 0% seats…). Maybe almost-pure pr would be best, say with a 1% or 2% threshold. That would, in the UK, only exclude the joke or prank “parties” but still allow small parties such as Greens and (in past) BNP, NF etc some MPs.

      My “safe zone” plan would have greatest impact in areas of low density of population. Cornwall has a slightly lower pop. density than Devon, which has a lower one compared to Somerset and then Dorset. Property is slightly cheaper too.

      I think that the “safe zone” idea is the only practical one in the UK at present. The alternatives are to do nothing, or try to form little parties that get 1% (if that) in elections, in seats where, in the cities, maybe a quarter, half or three-quarters of voters are not even English! A waste of time.

      It would be a huge victory even to get one small town, or even a village, mainly social-national. The ripple effect would be huge.

      Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s