Tag Archives: Castro

Diary Blog, 4 February 2022

Morning music

[Canaletto, view of St. Paul’s, river, Royal Barge]

On this day a year ago

Southend West by-election result

Hardly worth blogging about the result of the Southend West result but, for the record, the Conservative Party candidate won as expected, and with 86.1% of the vote, though on a pathetic turnout of 24%, and without the other main System parties standing: Labour, LibDem, and also Greens, absented themselves from the contest.

All other candidates lost their deposits. The second-placed was some character who wants drug decriminalization, and called himself the Psychedelic Party. His vote-share was 3.4%.

As for the “nationalist” candidates, Steve Laws (UKIP)— 2.7%; Catherine Blaiklock (English Democrats)— 2.2%; Jayda Fransen— 2%. Bearing in mind that this was the ideal chance to pick up protest votes, pretty unimpressive.

The real “protest vote” was the fact that 76% of those eligible to vote abstained. In fact, the abstainers together with those who voted for candidates other than the Con candidate comprised over 90% of those eligible to vote in the by-election.

Hardly “democracy’s” finest hour.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_Southend_West_by-election#Results

Other thoughts arising: as noted previously, that England does not have any credible social-national or even conservative-nationalist party, and that, that being so, the voters treat the underwhelming candidates that do exist (and stand in elections) with, not even contempt, but indifference.

Tweets seen

As I blogged a day or two ago, unlikely but not impossible.

A puzzle. Reach for the sky!

Inflation

When the present UK government started to throw money at the “panicdemic”, paying millions to stay home, paying businesses which otherwise might go into insolvency, the msm “experts” all applauded Indian “clever boy” Rishi Sunak and, of course, Boris-idiot. A few voices worried about the inflationary effects, but they were treated as near idiots. Peter Hitchens was one of the few inthe ranks of msm scribblers.

Almost everyone seemed to think that the “furlough” holiday season was cost-free. Now look. True, energy prices are from another direction, but the rest can be laid at the door of the effective devaluation of the currency. Now we read that inflation may reach 7%! A couple of years ago it was 2%.

Still think that all those furlough payments, “eat out to help out”, and business support schemes came at no cost? If you do, what can I say or suggest? That you should stand outside your house and clap until told to stop?

Historical discovery

Chaos at Downing Street

What interests me about the latest nonsense around Boris-idiot is that, as the “advisers” depart, how few are English, or even really British. Just as in the Cabinet. I note the names: Rosenfield, Narozanski, Mirza…

More Tweets

Clever of the Russian Government to focus on the weakest point of the present UK Govt., i.e. competence or, more pointedly, incompetence.

If so, Moscow must have changed much since I was last there. On my (only two) visits there (1993 and 2007), the same thought occurred to me: Moscow is not a comfortable or convenient city. It is not even a question of money spent; whether you pay out plenty or not, everything conspires to make you feel dissatisfied.

As a matter of fact, I found it easier to get by there, on a daily basis, in 1993, than on a later fairly brief visit in 2007.

The post-1945 order in Europe fell to pieces after 1989. Russia now has the chance to reset the post-1989 agenda, but that means, inter alia, seizing Eastern Ukraine, Kiev, and the Black Sea littoral. So far, the tanks have not started to roll. It is now —within the next weeks— or never, probably.

“There is a tide in the affairs of men.
Which, taken at the flood, leads on to fortune;
Omitted, all the voyage of their life
Is bound in shallows and in miseries.
On such a full sea are we now afloat,
And we must take the current when it serves,
Or lose our ventures.

[Shakespeare, Julius Caesar]

Literary note:

Brutus and Cassius are discussing the final phase of their civil war with the forces of Octavian and Marcus Antonius. Cassius has been urging that they group their forces at Sardis and take advantage of the secure location to catch their breath. Brutus, however, advocates heading off the enemy at Philippi before Octavian can recruit more men. Brutus’s main point is that, since “the enemy increaseth every day” and “We, at the height, are ready to decline” (lines 216–217), he and Cassius must act now while the ratio of forces is most advantageous. “There’s a tide in the affairs of men,” he insists; that is, power is a force that ebbs and flows in time, and one must “go with the flow.” Waiting around only allows your power to pass its crest and begin to ebb; if the opportunity is “omitted” (missed), you’ll find yourself stranded in miserable shallows.” [Shakespeare Quotes]

London (zoo)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10476143/Terrifying-moment-teenagers-fight-knife-SWORD-bus-south-London.html

More tweets

Russia today is not the old Soviet Union, with its worldwide hegemonic aims, and its Marxist-Leninist ideology; it is basically defensive. However, a basically defensive strategy can include specific offensive capabilities and operations. The point is that the “West”, particularly Western Europe, and Central Europe, has nothing to fear from Russia unless Russia is attacked or provoked too far.

Late tweets

Late music

Taking the Whole Package

This evening, I watched a show called something like “The Real Marigold Hotel”, in which four elderly once-“celebrities” went to a country (in this case, Cuba) in order to see what facilities might be available for retired people. As such, as a “documentary”, it was very superficial and lacking depth, though entertaining. What interested me was the society in general.

The Cuba –actually just Havana– shown (and I have never been there, though I am quite well acquainted with its history of the past century and, in the manner of Sarah Palin, have glimpsed it from the air and from the sea) was in fact largely the stereotype: old American cars in pastel pink and blue, decrepit but charming colonial mansions, palm trees etc.

The old people went to cultural classes and talked to Cubans in parks. It struck me anew that any society is a package: Cuba has some culture (both European and its own mixture incorporating the Caribbean and African, as well as that of the USA.

The Havana shown was one where the parks were (on the face of it) safe to visit, the people well-educated (one or two Cubans carefully making the point that their good education had been free, as were the classes available to the elderly).

Most people know that the Cuban healthcare system is also very good, both in relative and absolute terms. On the other hand, and as the TV programme noted, the Internet is tightly controlled, requires a card (no doubt traceable..) and is mostly only available in “wi-fi” areas such as certain parks; not so many have home Internet connection.

It is perhaps pointless to reiterate what most of us know in terms of the Cuban police state (which –in all the documentary films I have ever seen– is so pervasive that it is invisible: you never see the hand of the State in plain sight, though it is there all right).

So there you have the Cuban package: low crime rate (supposedly), no obvious disorder, at least some rather polite, cultured citizens, good education and healthcare etc (one Cuban did say that it was better before the supportive Soviet Union collapsed), as well as a certain charm.

As against that, a socialist state which controls the news and Internet tightly, imprisons dissidents for years (not to mention the large number who, in the late 1950s and 1960s, were just shot); a socialized economy which (leaving aside the effect of American embargo) was and largely is hopelessly inefficient at providing consumer goods. Travel restrictions, too.

Let us take a different case. The German Reich in the 1930s was intolerant of dissidents too, though it was far more tolerant than was the Soviet Union under Stalin or, indeed, Cuba under Fidel.

The National Socialist state imprisoned some dissidents or placed them in concentration camps such as Dachau (though few now know that many served short sentences, such as 3 months, there, and were not there indefinitely). Others were encouraged or more or less forced out of the country. There was a generally militarized ethos. How could a state both German and quasi-socialist be anything else?

In the Reich, there was state interference in culture (though, again, far less than, say, in the Soviet Union). Consumer production was given a lower priority than rearmament (“Guns Before Butter”), though large projects for the benefit of the people were also pushed into the foreground: the Autobahnen; the VW “people’s car”; the 1936 Olympics; a huge programme of educational and cultural events; the Kraft durch Freude [“Strength through Joy”] programme of Canary Islands cruises and Baltic beach holidays for the people (at a time when, in the UK, most people who had a holiday at all were corralled into poky Blackpool guest houses…); better nutrition for young people, too.

The National Socialist Reich was hugely beneficial for most Germans, certainly compared to what existed in the Weimar period. The Reich solved the inflation problem, the unemployment problem, the decadence problem and, yes, what it termed “the Jewish question”.

In the UK at the same time, there was greater ostensible “freedom”: elections every 5 years, the freedom to eat daily at the Ritz or at the Savoy Grill (if one had the funds..), no obvious book censorship (though, behind the scenes, there was much, not least via the Jewish element, even then). There was official theatre and cinema censorship (via the Lord Chamberlain’s office) and there was also, of course, grinding poverty (especially outside the South East), and a very repressive justice and prison system; not to mention the pervasive class system and its inequities.

No state, no political system is “perfect”. All have flaws, and all (most, at least) have benefits (though what might be the benefits of living in, say, North Korea or the Congo might be disputed). The aim can only be to do the best with what is available at the material time. We take everything as a package, as a whole.