Tag Archives: Richard Tice

Diary Blog, 9 August 2020, including thoughts about BBC World Service, Claire Fox and Nigel Farage

An annoying early-morning start to the day, waking up not far past the middle of the night to typical rubbish on the BBC World Service. A programme called United Zingdom, in which what sounded like two Welsh women (one certainly was, being one Lisa Angharad) got together to trash England, the UK, and the British people. One of them apparently has a Singapore passport as well as a British one.

Everything, it seems, is the fault of “the British” (English). They, the English, are basically nasty, “racist” etc. They should not want their own country, language, customs, population. Now Wales, Wales is different! It (apparently) should have its own language etc. The bias and sheer untruth in that little broadcast was incredible.

The woman with the Singapore passport was asked about whether she would prefer to live there and seemed to affirm, though she said that “but they have anti-gay laws there…”, which apparently was a drawback. She then added “…but the British brought those to Singapore“. Ah, so once more the British (and failing that, no doubt any other white Northern Europeans) were to blame! I should have guessed. The other woman then chimed in with “ah, the British again“. Why are we paying (forced to pay) the BBC so that it can pay bitches like that to spout anti-British propaganda?

They should have added that, until the British arrived on the island of Singapore, there was nothing there at all, and had not been for at least 200 years: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Singapore

Another couple of deliberate inaccuracies: we were told that the Welsh language is vibrant and becoming more spoken, and that there is “a huge upsurge” in Welsh nationalism.

Language: I myself know from experience in the 1980s that Welsh is naturally a first language in some areas, in West Wales especially. It seems however that less than a quarter of the Welsh population as a whole speak Welsh to any useable standard: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Welsh_language

Welsh nationalism: Plaid Cymru is only nominally “nationalist” anyway, willing to have people in Wales “whatever their race, nationality, gender, colour, creed [etc]” [Plaid Cymru platform].

Even leaving aside the above, the Plaid electoral performance has been poor: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaid_Cymru#Electoral_performance

Plaid Cymru controls only one local council in Wales (out of dozens). It also has 4 out of 40 Westminster MPs (a figure unchanged or not much changed since the 1970s), and in the last (and final) EU elections had elected 1 MEP out of 4 (their best result was in 1999, 2 out of 5).

Conclusion: there is no upsurge of Welsh “nationalism”, let alone a huge one.

The trashing of the World Service has been one of the saddest things over the past 30 years. It was once interesting, lively, truthful, stimulating. 1970s and 1980s. Now, it cannot even seem to be able to tell the time clearly! The World Service seemed to go into a kind of spiral of decline in the 1990s. A Jewish woman whose name I forget was on constantly, and —quelle surprise— obsessed on air about “holocaust” and “Nazis” almost nonstop.

The decline of BBC World Service continued, reaching (I hope) the bottom round about 2010. In the past year or two, there has been a slight improvement, but only slight. There are still only a few worthwhile programmes, the best being The Forum, especially when presented by Bridget Kendall: https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/w3cszjvc https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridget_Kendall.

Martin Bell, the famous broadcaster, journalist and one-term MP [Independent, Tatton] made the point several times that, in dangerous parts of the world (Iraq, Bosnia etc) people know the BBC World Service, yet the World Service is funded on a shoestring compared to rather useless projects such as the British Council [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Council]

I really value the BBC World Service, which is precisely why I despise what it has largely become. As Nietzsche wrote: “the great despisers are also the great reverers” [Friedrich Nietzsche, Also Sprach Zarathustra].

Tweets seen

Here we see science popularizer Professor Brian Cox putting forward, yet again, his tendentious political views. The sort of person all too common in the UK, meaning someone who wants the country to become even more of a multikulti dustbin. After all, “I’m all right, Jack”.

There are two types of scientist: the ones doing serious research and perhaps making real and even great discoveries or leaps forward; then there are the others, who are basically popular in the mass media, write books popular with the public, are on TV frequently, rack up official honours (and plenty of money) for all that. Nuff said…

Cox is a good example of the “clever person” (not infrequently someone of scientific background) who has come to think that he is a good deal more clever than he is and who, at least when out of his specialist area or areas, is rather silly.

Incidentally, he presumably meant to say “arrant nonsense“, not “errant nonsense“…

There are huge numbers of bien-pensant idiots in the UK, who love to think of themselves as kind, compassionate, generous etc, as they virtue-signal on Twitter and elsewhere. The famous or infamous ones, such as Yvette Cooper, Lily Allen, Gary Lineker etc are only the tip of the iceberg. Below their capital, income, and public-recognition levels, there are thousands, perhaps even millions of others.

I hesitate to say that none of those people, the “refugees welcome” dimwits, would ever accommodate migrant-invaders in their own homes. A few of the brainwashed and obscure ones might, just as, out of tens of millions, a very few people swim the Channel (to France, usually!), or learn to speak 10 languages fluently.

I met a man once who worked near Elephant and Castle, London, and who could speak, not 10 languages, admittedly, but certainly 8 languages fluently, and those languages did include some of the near-“impossible” ones, such as Finnish and Hungarian.

Such people are rare. They are not the general run. Most of the “refugees welcome” dimwits want the State and/or other people (which is all the State is, in the end) to house and feed those migrant-invaders, and to educate the children of the invaders. The dimwits prioritize the invaders over English/British people such as the ex-soldiers sleeping on the streets, or the middle-aged Brits struggling to survive after the (basically Jewish-influenced) “austerity” of 2010-2020 and the socio-economic upheavals which have occurred and those which lie ahead.

Interesting report

Israel has the highest per capita COVID-19 morbidity rate in the world, according to Gamzu. As of Thursday, the total number of cases in Israel stood at 78,514 with 569 deaths and 53,362 recoveries, according to the Johns Hopkins coronavirus tracker.” [Jerusalem Post] https://www.jpost.com/israel-news/tourism-officials-were-ready-for-foreign-visitors-when-skies-open-up-637789

More tweets seen

House of Lords, Brexit Party and Nigel Farage

I thought that Richard Tice, 2-i-c of Brexit Party, had been nominated for a peerage; apparently not. Claire Fox has, though. What a strange nomination that is.

I first saw Claire Fox [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claire_Fox] on TV about a decade ago. I think that it was on Newsnight. Or Daily Politics. I think the former. She was supposedly the head of something called The Institute of Ideas. I was curious enough to look it up via Internet. There was not much to see. The “Institute” seemed to consist mainly of Claire Fox, and (I found out after a while) seemed to be funded mainly by a City of London hedge fund speculator Jew, whose name I cannot at present recall.

As for Claire Fox herself, as seen on TV, she was not at all impressive, not convincing; there was something fake about her and her “Institute”, even before I started to look into it.

I found the “Institute of Ideas” to be little more than a facade; indeed, little more than a catchy name. I was unable to discover much about it. The whole thing seemed opaque, insubstantial. One could not grasp hold of it.

I see now that others, such as the journalist and TV news presenter, Jon Snow, had similar problems:

” The news broadcaster Jon Snow, according to a Guardian article, withdrew from an event to which he had been invited by the Royal Society of Arts after realising the IoI’s involvement. Snow felt there was a lack of transparency. ‘I didn’t have a clear idea of who they were,’ he said.  This lack of transparency affects almost every aspect of IoI events, as the article notes:  ‘From the platforms and the floor, the LM [Living Marxism] line is assiduously promoted by the magazine’s supporters and contributors – often without clear attribution of their affiliations.’ ” [Lobbywatch] http://www.lobbywatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=142]

It seems that the “Institute” was founded in 2000 by Fiona Fox, sister of Claire Fox, and other undisclosed persons. Fiona Fox also heads the Science Media Centre [http://www.lobbywatch.org/profile1.asp?PrId=121], which is embedded within the very Establishment scientific body, the Royal Institution [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Institution]. Another sister, Gemma Fox, heads an EU-funded IT organization in Wales.

As noted in the Lobbywatch piece, above, the so-called “Institute” was founded by people connected with the tiny, obscure, and superficially uninfluential Revolutionary Communist Party [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revolutionary_Communist_Party_(UK,_1978)] and its connected magazine, Living Marxism or LM [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Living_Marxism], which formally shut down in 2000 but in reality has now been rebranded as the online magazine Spiked [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spiked_(magazine)], which has a fairly high profile on Twitter etc: https://twitter.com/spikedonline

Another fairly high-profile person connected with the above is Frank Furedi, a person of Hungarian origins, frequently on BBC radio [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frank_Furedi], whose wife is the head of the UK’s largest abortion “advice” organization.

The “Institute of Ideas” has now retitled itself “The Academy of Ideas” [https://www.facebook.com/instofideas/]. Oddly, on Wikipedia, neither “Institute of Ideas” or “Academy of Ideas” have pages, though the “Academy” has its own website: https://www.academyofideas.org.uk/.

Some of the tweets of Spiked can command my support, many cannot, such as this pitiful article:

Taking just the main contention of that article, the Anglo-American atom-bomb project aka the Manhattan Project or Tube Alloys [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manhattan_Project; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tube_Alloys] had as its primary aim the destruction of Germany and the German people, not Japan. Most of the scientists of importance were Jews. They hated Germany and National Socialism. Some were also Communists. Germany was only saved from atomic destruction by its unconditional surrender before the bomb was ready to be used.

The above exploration may or may not be interesting, but what interests me now and particularly is why did Boris-idiot (Boris Johnson) nominate Claire Fox for a peerage? Why?

Claire Fox has no real academic pedigree. Even in the 1980s (i.e. before the start of the present “award inflation”, by which almost all students get a supposed “First” or “Upper Second” degree), a 2:2 in English and American Literature scarcely cut it in the academic world! She was a mental health social worker for some years after graduation, then for 10 years a lecturer in English Literature at a couple of technical colleges in South Essex and in South Hertfordshire.

I think that we can be sure that Claire Fox’s peerage nomination was not for “services to education”!

We have already seen that, as a “think tank”, the “Institute of Ideas” scarcely existed. Even as an active lobby group, its activities do not seem to have had much impact. Claire Fox, despite a few appearances on TV, including the —now very outdated— Question Time, was not until recently (until 2019) a very publicly-known person; neither has she been involved with anything normally likely to attract an honour of any sort, let alone a peerage.

What about Claire Fox’s political life? Well, membership of the Revolutionary Communist Party or anything like it has never been an easy route to the House of Lords! Anyone with similar views who ended up with a peerage at least had to pretend to be “Labour”! I cannot think of many, even so. A few Jews, now long gone, perhaps. As for a “revolutionary communist”, even one now sort-of apostate, being ennobled “on the recommendation of” a Conservative Party Prime Minister would have been unthinkable, until now.

Claire Fox joined Nigel Farage’s pop-up “Brexit Party” in 2019, was selected (along with at least two other “former” Revolutionary Communist Party members) as a candidate for the European elections. She was elected, and was an MEP for about a year, until the UK nominally left the EU. One year…

It goes beyond that. Claire Fox has said things that many consider unforgiveable, such as, and in particular, her championing of IRA bombing in 1993, specifically the killing of a child.

Looking at it all, it seems inconceivable that, even a few years ago, or today, such a person could ever be nominated for a peerage, to become one of the UK’s upper house legislators, even bearing in mind the weird collection now in the Lords. Yet there she sits (soon). In fact, her previous (never reversed) support for the IRA has not stood in her way. Even the Sun “newspaper” has her on its YouTube channel!

Not that I disagree with everything she says. I agree with some of what she is saying in the above clip. [Having now —several hours later— seen all of the interview, I concede that I agree with a good deal of what she says in it].

So why was she given (nomination for) a peerage? I cannot entirely work it out, but it is obviously connected with her work for Brexit, and even more so with the standing down of most Brexit Party candidates while the election campaign was ongoing. A stunning act of betrayal by con-man Nigel Farage. He shot his own party in the neck. Or the back. Moreover, he stood down only candidates facing previously-incumbent or new Conservative Party candidates! Including Conservative Party candidates who were Remain supporters!

Nigel Farage ensured that the Conservative Party won the 2019 General Election. It might have won anyway, but might not have done, and certainly would not have achieved a Commons majority of 80 (or any majority).

If I am correct, and Claire Fox has been somehow rewarded for supporting Farage in his betrayal, why has Farage himself (or his 2-i-c, Tice), not been nominated for the House of Lords? There could be a number of reasons, such as (speculating) that Farage has been paid, as his reward, millions of pounds into an offshore secret account. Why not? I have no evidence that that is the case, but it seems not unlikely to me. £10 million? £20 million? Cheap at the price, when you get the UK in exchange…

Anyway, “the night is young”. Farage still might get a peerage from Boris-idiot; next year, or the year after. Tice too, maybe. Maybe Claire Fox getting one now is in the nature of a “statement of intent” or down-payment to Farage. Maybe giving Farage a peerage right now would make the corruption and betrayal just too obvious. Next year? 2022? Maybe.

The present politics of the System is more than sleazy. It has to be exterminated.

Other tweets seen

Patriots Day

Just watched an American film, Patriots Day, about the ghastly bombing of the Boston Marathon, and the hunt for the perpetrators. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patriots_Day_(film)

I think that the film is one of the best of its type that I have seen. Quite long on TV (with ad breaks, 2 hrs 35 mins), it nonetheless kept the attention throughout (and that is not always the case with me: in younger days, as a 20-something, I was notorious among my friends for getting bored and walking out of cinemas after 20 or 30 minutes of the start of a film).

Assuming that the film was accurate (and I do remember some of the details of that terrible event of 2013), the wife of the main terrorist —she was a Muslim convert, he a Chechen resident in the Boston area— was lucky that it was considered that there was insufficient evidence to charge her.

As for the surviving terrorist, he only last week won his appeal against the death sentence he eventually received. He will spend the rest of his life in some soulless American prison. He was only 19 when he helped his brother to bomb the marathon event.

Such people cannot be described as “urban guerrillas”, if that term is still in use. They are purely terrorists, actuated by malice rather than anything approaching real ideology.

Some may say, “but look what American forces do, bombing civilians“, and that is true, but even from the point of view of hearts and minds, and leaving aside ethics, to bomb a civilian event like the Boston Marathon has no point and indeed is counter-productive: the Islamists gain nothing but the enmity of a superpower and its people.

A film I can thoroughly recommend.

Music at midnight

Update, 16 August 2020

Diary Blog, 19 December 2019

First, some music:

The General Election continues to supply interesting facts.

The “experts” are still working on General Election 2019 statistics. One that I saw today was that, because Brexit Party was standing in Labour-held seats, the Conservative Party was deprived of another 20 seats.

I have already blogged about how Labour got (in rough figures) about 37% of the vote in Hartlepool (its lowest-ever share), while Brexit Party got about 25% and the Cons 28%. Had Brexit Party not stood, the Cons would have won Hartlepool! The same is true the other way round too, of course. In fact, I wonder whether Brexit Party might not have won Hartlepool anyway had Farage not stood down his candidates in Conservative-held seats. His action in doing that destroyed Brexit Party’s credibility and totally exposed it as a fake and as basically a shield for the Con Party.

The other piece of election-related news I saw was that, if the proposed boundary changes go ahead, as well as the reduction of MP numbers to 600, the Conservative Party would have a majority of 104 on the GE 2019 voting figures. The Cons would have fewer seats, 352, than the 365 they now have, but Labour would have only 179 compared to the present 208. SNP would have almost the same number as at present (47), maybe minus one or two. The LibDems would have 7 MPs instead of 11.

I do not know how the absence of Brexit Party (which must surely just fold soon) would affect those figures. If it meant that the Cons would get 20 or even 10 seats more, then that would give the Cons an unassailable advantage, about 360 or 370 seats out of 600. With Labour on maybe 169 or even 159 out of 600, the changes would reduce Labour to near irrelevance and the LibDems to near-zero.

It occurred to me that, in the (admittedly very unlikely) contingency that Scotland became “independent” (of the UK, though not from the EU, IMF, NATO etc…that’s another story), its (presently) 59 (or reduced figure) MPs would be removed, leaving the Westminster Parliament with about 540. That would, notionally, entrench Conservative rule in England and Wales even more. Without the SNP, Labour would be a small niche party with no possibility even of minority government.

but…

We have seen (noted in previous blogs) that relatively few young people voted Conservative at GE 2019:

  • 18-24s only 23% (Labour 56%)
  • 25-29s 23% (Labour 54%)
  • 30-39s 30% (Labour 46%).
  • Only the over-40s gave Conservative a plurality of votes (41%, with Labour on 35%)
  • and only the over-60s and over-70s gave the Cons a majority (57% and 67% as against Labour’s 22% and 14%).
  • LibDem support was consistent at all ages at 11%-12% (with a slight increase among 30-y-o people: 14%).

https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2019/12/17/how-britain-voted-2019-general-election

If you were to take out the over-70s and introduce a notional new 18-24 wave, that would change the overall picture entirely. The Conservative majority might well disappear, perhaps to be replaced by a Labour majority.

If only life were that simple!

The bias of Radio 4 Today Programme

I rarely listen to the Today Programme for more than a few minutes these days. It was never much to my taste, but now it is basically a Jewish-lobby-oriented multikulti-favouring, finance-capitalist-favouring propaganda outlet.

When Justin Webb (one of the presenters) finished his time in the USA and joined the Today Programme, he was asked about the difference between the UK and USA. His answer? (and remember this was after eight years in the US)…He told the old old apocryphal story about how, in each country, a poor man sees a rich man driving a Rolls-Royce or Cadillac. In the UK, the poor man says “I have nothing; he has too much” but in the USA, the poor man says “I have nothing, but one day I too shall have such a car“…

Is that the sort of  “insight” we get when drones such as Justin Webb get paid £200,000-£300,000 a year out of the BBC’s “licence fees” (a tax imposed on the viewing public, on pain of imprisonment if unpaid)? Sadly, yes, that is exactly the sort of “insight” that those on the Today Programme provide…

Another aspect of the Today Programme is the religio-philosophical platitude-slot, sub nom “Thought For The Day“. About one day out of five, a Jew (usually some “rabbi”) does it. It seems to be about 1 out of 5 (20%), it may be (but no, I think not) as infrequently as 1 out of 10 (10%). Yet Jews in the UK number 250,000-300,000, so perhaps about 1 out of 280 (perhaps fewer), which is a fraction of one percent; in rough figures about 0.25%. Look at the disproportion. 1 out of about 280 of the whole population, but 1 out of 5 or so on Thought For The Day!

Here’s a “Thought For The Day”

There must be a curb (i.e. a tax) on the huge concentrations of economic power (capital wealth) in the hands of so very few. That applies to the USA, the UK, Russia and elsewhere.

NHS

Boris-idiot’s days are already numbered

Stray read

Saw this. Worth a look.

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/dec/19/i-didnt-buy-any-food-for-a-year-and-im-healthier-than-ive-ever-been

Probably a great deal easier in the Floridian climate than it would be in Northern Europe, though.

A few more thoughts about Labour

I read this:

and this:

As I have been saying for several years in blogs and (before the Jews had me expelled from Twitter) in tweets, Labour declined parallel to the decline of the society and conditions and people that created and sustained it.

Lisa Nandy

Just read her recent tweets. The odd spelling mistake. As to content, not an airhead, neither in the obvious Jess Phillips way, nor in the less obvious Caroline Flint way.

I of course disagree with quite a lot of what Lisa Nandy says, eg re. “refugees” and other migrant-invaders, but she seems politically-effective. Obviously a System politician but of a higher calibre than the average MP (including most of Corbyn’s Shadow Cabinet).

Stray thought

Mao said that the guerrilla was like a fish, swimming in the water (the people). Looking at tweets from the most fervent Corbyn supporters, there is plenty of water but (so far) no fish.

Labour’s problem

Labour’s problem is that the more “socialist” leaders of recent decades (Corbyn, Miliband, Kinnock) failed to “win” elections under the existing electoral system and so some Labour people say “return to good old Tony” because Blair won three successive elections. However, what really happened was that Blair-Labour won in 1997 against a tired fag-end of a Conservative government, after 18 years of Con government, but then struggled to win in 2001 and 2005.

The figures:

  • 1997: 43.2%, 419 seats; Blair
  • 2001: 40.7%, 413 seats; Blair
  • 2005: 35.3%, 356 seats; Blair
  • 2010: 29.1%, 258 seats; Brown
  • 2015: 30.5%, 232 seats; Miliband
  • 2017: 40.0%, 262 seats; Corbyn
  • 2019: 32.2%, 202 seats; Corbyn

The anomalies caused by Britain’s crazy FPTP voting system and the carefully-“managed” boundaries account for some inconsistencies; also, the total number of MPs in Parliament has varied from 646 to 659 even in the past 25 years.

You can see from the above timeline that, in the sense of national vote-percentage, Corbyn in 2017 did about as well as Blair did in 2001, nearly as well as Blair did in 1997 (!) and far better than Blair and Labour did in 2005. Corbyn also, both in 2017 and 2019, did as well as or better than both Brown and Miliband did in 2010 and 2015.

In 2019, Corbyn-Labour slumped, but still got 32.2% of the national vote, which was as good in rough figures as Miliband in 2015, and better than Brown in 2010. In fact, it was only 3 points off Blair’s 2005 performance.

The national vote percentage of Labour declined steadily from 1997 right through to Corbyn’s leadership! The 2010 and 2015 results were similar in terms of percentage. Corbyn did better than his two most recent predecessors and almost as well as Blair!

I say the above not to praise Corbyn, but to bury Labour. It can be seen that both the Tony Blair 43.2% in 1997 and the Corbyn 40% in 2015 were anomalous in a picture otherwise of decline, or at best stagnation, that started around 1970.

My main point in practical terms is that returning to some mythical “Centrism” will not help Labour. “Centrism” seems to be somewhere between “Con-lite” and social democracy; pro Israel; anti-socialist; anti-national; globalist. Finance capitalism but with some crumbs thrown to the pigeons. You have seen what has happened to the LibDems who espouse similar ideas. Smashed. 11 MPs, which will, after boundary changes and another election, probably be 3 or 4. Or none.

Of course, Labour’s poor recent performance was to a large extent the result of truly relentless Jew-Zionist propaganda since 2015 and especially since the 2017 result (which showed that Labour might actually be able to win a majority or at least become the largest party in the Commons). Labour, especially Corbyn, has been trashed daily in the msm as well as on social media. That was not the only factor, but it was very significant.

The idea that Labour will suddenly become “electable” if it bows the knee to the Jews and abandons any “socialist” ideas is ridiculous. In fact, Corbyn and McDonnell should have stopped parrotting the Zionist “holocaust” nonsense (and stopped recounting 1930s Communist/Jewish propaganda around “Cable Street” etc as well); they should have fought back. Idiots.

Corbyn supporters write

“Cosmic Landmine” used to follow my Twitter account (before the Jews had me expelled). Good to see that he is still trucking.

Below, a despairing Labour supporter tweets…

Perhaps that tweet should read “Why is Jess Phillips, who always doormats for the Jew-Zionists, is a member of Labour Friends of Israel, parrots “holocaust” propaganda, and who trashed her own party and leader during the recent General Election campaign, getting so much airtime?“…

Look at this Daily Mirror article by a former Labour adviser. Not a word about suffering British people: unemployed, poor, disabled, sick, young people without hope of their own homes or even decently-paid work, just two or three paragraphs about Jews Jews Jews. Typical. System-Labour:

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/i-ran-jeremy-corbyns-leadership-21103136

It’s rubbish. That’s machine-“Labour”, Mirror “Labour”, Kevin Maguire tribal “Labour”. Failed Labour.

…and here is Matthew d’Ancona, another System mouthpiece and Conservative Party partisan, pushing bad joke MP Jess Phillips for Labour leader:

https://www.standard.co.uk/comment/comment/talented-strong-and-relatable-jess-phillips-is-labour-s-best-asset-a4316766.html

Mary Creagh

Seems that Mary Creagh cannot quite bring herself to accept that her well-paid position, with its decent salary, very generous expenses and plenty of opportunity for both “donations” from here and there and also outside income possibilities such as “consultancies”, has been taken away by the voters of Wakefield. She still calls herself “MP” on Twitter. As rather sarcastic people tend to say on Twitter, “bless”.

Mary Creagh is a member of Labour Friends of Israel, and a frequent and fervent critic of “anti-Semitism”. All the same, the Jewish lobby could not save her and she will not be an MP again. I expect that “they” —you know, (((they)))— will find her “a nice little earner”, but her eviction from Westminster must give those “Friends of Israel” still in Parliament pause, nicht wahr?

Note the final sentence at the foot of that Independent profile of Wakefield, Yorkshire, a few weeks before the General Election: “Personally,” he says, “I think a lot of people here just won’t vote. I think they’ve had enough of it all.

Was that not the truth of the GE 2019 result? Conservative vote up just 1.2% nationally, but Labour vote down, and by 8%. Labour may have lost, but this was not a Conservative victory, as such. People were not voting Labour, maybe not voting at all, or were in a few cases voting Con to spite Lab. They were not voting Con for “positive” reasons.

Blink and you would miss it

Ah, nearly missed it: a small news story about the winding-down or winding-up of the “Independent Group for Change”, briefly known as “Change UK”, the party whose meetings tended to attract a crowd of about 5 (literally), once or twice actually getting into double figures, and where the audience was always outnumbered by the Press and sometimes by the few on stage.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/independent-group-for-change-uk-election-results-mps-anna-soubry-chuka-umunna-a9254166.html

Anna Soubry is now off to swim in a vat of gin.

Trump impeachment

Americans like a bit of drama. When I lived in the central/shore area of New Jersey, local TV (based in New York City) would sometimes report on an expected storm, sending a reporter out onto the New Jersey beaches dressed in raincoat and scarf. Often enough, the waves were disappointingly languid, resulting in a non-event.

That is how I see the “Trump impeachment”— lots of noise, but no result that means anything. Trump is sent for trial by the Democrat-controlled lower house, sent for trial to a Senate where the Republican majority will secure his acquittal. Over there, they regard that sort of waste of time and effort as “democracy”. I just call it “farce”.

Meanwhile, in another fake democracy…

Something more to think about

Final words

General Election 2019 Daily Updated Blog (no.3)

Once again I restart my General Election blog because the previous two are now both long and inconvenient to read. Starting in the evening of 11 November 2019.

Previous blogs:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/11/01/general-election-2019-daily-updated-blog/

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/11/06/general-election-2019-daily-updated-blog-no-2/

This translates (using Electoral Calculus) to a Conservative Party majority somewhere around 14. Is this just an outlier, or the first poll showing a break in the wave of opinion poll predictions of massive Conservative majorities (some of 150 or more)? We shall see.

The latest round fired in the Brexit Party war was this, in The Independent, from Labour MP Phil Wilson:

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/brexit-party-nigel-farage-general-election-north-east-sedgefield-phil-wilson-a9198241.html

A hard-hitting polemic. Gritty Northern lad turned MP, Phil, against effete Southern carpetbagger Nigel. Except, as so often in UK politics, the details get in the way.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phil_Wilson_(British_politician)

True, Phil Wilson was born the son of a miner in Co. Durham. He has lived in the constituency he represents for much of his life. However, “Wilson later worked as a gambling lobbyist for the Gala Coral Group in the lead up to the passing of the 2005 Gambling Act, and as a director at London based public affairs consultancy Fellows’ Associates.” [Wikipedia].

A lobbyist for a giant bookmaker? A director of a public relations firm based in London? That’s not very gritty and Northern…Almost like working for “the man, the very fat man, that waters the workers’ beer”…

Wilson is known for being one of the “Famous Five”, a group of local Labour

Party members who helped a young Tony Blair get selected as the Labour candidate for Sedgefield for the 1983 election.[3] He subsequently worked for Tony Blair in his constituency office, the Labour Party and a PR company.” [Wikipedia]

It gets worse:

In his 2017 general election voter leaflet, Wilson stated he was not a supporter of Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, and suggested Labour would not win the election.[11] He had supported Owen Smith in the failed attempt to replace Jeremy Corbyn in the 2016 Labour Party (UK) leadership election

[Wikipedia]

Phil Wilson supports remaining in the EU, wants to ignore the 2016 Referendum by holding another one, and is (quelle surprise) a member of Labour Friends of Israel

I have heard nothing from Phil Wilson against either the Jewish lobby or the migration-invasion of Britain by blacks, browns and others.

Of course, he is right about Farage, but Wilson and his MP cronies (and those in his public relations/Blairite circles) should muse on why it is that people in places like Sedgefield turn to snake-oil salesmen like Farage? Might it be that they are sick of “Labour” MPs who are all tied up with Jewish and/or London public relations and gambling interests yet pretend to be hardy Northern proletarians at election time? “Labour” MPs who turned a blind eye to the invasion of the UK by racially and culturally inferior peoples? Who turned a deaf ear to the many girl victims of Pakistani Muslim “grooming” etc?

Voters in places like Sedgefield (and the rest of the country) have no social-national party to support, so some of them turn to obvious fakes like Farage and Brexit Party, because those voters are sick of fakes like Blair, his (((enablers))) and fake “Labour”.

From the Sky News politics juju man, Lewis Goodall:

A good example of reasoning which may or may not be correct, but which is not logically inevitably so. There may be other motivators. All the same, it is remarkable that Farage is willing to take the word of the biggest fraud seen in UK politics for decades, Boris-Idiot. A con-man conned?

Interesting shot across the bows by Remain partisan and ex-Con and ex-Cabinet minister, Nick Boles

and Katie Hopkins, who was at first ecstatic at the Brexit Party “pact” (unilateral surrender), now rows back a bit, while still loving it. I don’t rate her political nous very highly but she is cunning.

Other tweets:

Tactical voting, the pathetic, inadequate but only alternative for voters when the electoral system and political milieu is as broken as it is…

“Wolfie”, who used to retweet me before the Jews had me expelled from Twitter:

and it seems that Farage is operating a political Ponzi scheme:

As I blogged earlier today, when I heard about Farage’s extraordinary U-turn, this finishes Brexit Party. Right here and now. Finished. Killed stone dead.

In other news, “the times they are a’changin’…”

https://www.somersetlive.co.uk/news/somerset-news/people-who-started-caravan-fires-3515159

and continuing with the real Britain outside the Brexit bubble(s):

Will this, below, be in the Sun “newspaper”? I doubt it.

Update, 12 November 2019

For me, there are two main stories today, both of which can be seen via the latest opinion polls. The most recent (but still taken before the latest Farage/Brexit Party shambles):

  • Labour starting to catch up with the Conservative Party;
  • Brexit Party sinking

In fact, those figures would still give the “Conservatives” (they really should get a more honest label) a Commons majority of about 56, because 39% is high anyway, and because the LibDems and Brexit Party look like taking fewer Con votes. However, the direction of travel of Labour is clearly upward.

I really think that Farage’s latest slippery tactic, standing down 317 candidates to help the “Conservatives”, has mortally wounded Brexit Party. In fact, I think that it has killed it stone dead. The same may be true of the reputation of Nigel Farage.

Brexit Party was at 8% in the latest poll, taken before the latest Farage action. I doubt whether, across the board, Brexit Party will get a vote share of more than 5% on 12 December, polling day, and very much doubt that it can get even 1 MP, though Tice might have a chance as a protest candidate in Hartlepool.

I think that most Brexit Party candidates are going to lose their deposits. It now appears that all potential Brexit Party candidates, 3,000 of them, had to stump up £100 each to apply. After Farage’s unilateral surrender to the “Conservatives”, this money will not be refunded! As far as I know, the electoral deposits payable to the electoral authorities by Brexit Party candidates have not been paid yet, so Farage (who is the major shareholder in the private company that owns Brexit Party) has just decided to keep those monies, amounting to £300,000 (minus the £150,000 in deposits —£500 each— which will be paid to allow the remaining 300+ candidates to stand). Unless I have missed something, that means that Farage and Brexit Party have in effect just “stolen” £150,000 from their own most fervent supporters!

As to Labour, its policies may now be working through to public consciousness. Some are popular in principle, such as those to do with rail, water, other utilities. The “Conservatives” may say that they are “unaffordable”, but many of their own policies, such as the “welfare” “reforms” of Dunce Duncan Smith have cost unbelievable amounts of money (instead of saving money), all so that the poor can be terrorized.

Corbyn is never going to be flavour of the month with the public, but the screams of the msm (the Jewish press, really) are becoming so shrill and absurd that few take them seriously. Corbyn as Stalin (per Boris-Idiot)? No-one believes that. Corbyn as Trotsky or Lenin? Just ridiculous. I think that that card has now been played and has little more traction in it.

We may be looking at a narrowing of the gap between Conservative and Labour, with Brexit Party all but dropping out and the LibDems either losing support or concentrating it in a relatively small number of seats in the South where they have a good chance against the Conservatives.

I may be wrong, but at present feel that the “Conservatives” are about to be squeezed on two fronts. As we know, a two-front war is hard to win! Who said that?…

YouGov has now come out with a poll taken since Farage threw his party under a bus:

It rather proves my blog point of, originally, some months ago, to the effect that Farage is not a very good politician despite his gifts of oratory etc. That does not preclude the possibility that Farage is doing what I call a Mikhail Tal.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikhail_Tal#Notable_games: “Tal vs. Vasily Smyslov, Yugoslavia Candidates’ Tournament 1959, Caro–Kann Defence (B10), 1–0.[29] A daring piece sacrifice to win a brilliancy prize.”

Tal was a Soviet chess grandmaster and World Champion. One of his famous games showed him sacrifice almost all his pieces in order to place the few remaining ones in a winning position, having of course plotted it all out in advance. The question then would be: what, for Farage, *is* a winning position? Not for “Brexit Party”, which, like all pawns, “exists to be sacrificed” (in the words of Wilhelm Steinitz), but for Farage?

Those figures would give the “Conservatives” a Commons majority of perhaps 156…which would be an “elected” dictatorship. We might be in “V for Vengeance” territory. If the General Election itself mirrored that opinion poll, Labour would be left with only 155 MPs, a loss of 107.

“[Farage] told ITV’s Good Morning Britain: “I made a big, generous offer to the Conservative Party yesterday [Monday]. I gifted them a couple of dozen seats.”

Mr Farage later criticised the Tories for not reciprocating his move by standing aside in some Labour areas where the Brexit Party could challenge the incumbent.

He told the BBC: “I would have expected, having put country before party, to perhaps have got something back from the Conservatives.

“But no, nothing is good enough for them.”

He added: “It is clear to me it is not a Leave majority they want in Parliament, it is just a Tory one.”

[BBC News https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2019-50387254]

Is Farage really that naive? Why should the Cons stand down anywhere, now that Brexit Party has unilaterally stood down 317 candidates?!

Has Boris just driven his steamroller through Farage’s croquet game?

In fact, under electoral law, Farage/Brexit Party still have about 50 hours (until 1600 hrs, 14 November 2019) in which to officially declare or withdraw candidates. Why does Farage not belay his last order and allow the 317 stood-down candidates to stand anyway, to spite Boris-Idiot? Farage now knows that Boris has no intention of playing the game. Boris is carrying a machine-gun onto the grouse moor.

https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/parliament-and-elections/elections-elections/what-is-the-timetable-of-general-election-2019/

Commentary on the election betting market:

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/boris-johnson-general-election-odds-labour-conservatives-betting-prediction-a9200241.html

Update, 13 November 2019

Perhaps not directly an election story, but not irrelevant either: Jew business leech presently polluting the air of the UK tells struggling nurse that she should get a second job or start an online business!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7678301/Apprentices-Claude-Littner-tells-nurses-need-work-struggling-make-ends-meet.html

Nurses and all NHS staff must be paid reasonably well. While we are on the subject of the NHS, we must change this absurd system that has been allowed to grow up, whereby parking has to be paid for. When you visit a hospital in most countries, you do not pay to park! Hospitals should be funded out of taxation (if public, as most are in the UK). That should be even more the case when the hospital staff park! Plan hospitals properly, with adequate and free parking!

Another opinion poll:

Out of sync with most other recent polls. An outlier, if you like. However, this is the second poll (from 2 polling companies) which goes against the orthodoxy of the past weeks (that the Conservatives are about to win hugely). On this Survation polling, the Conservative Party would actually be 1 MP short of a majority, so better off than a month or two ago, but far from trampling over all other parties.

My sense is that this General Election is not yet cut and dried.

The George Monbiot article, below, is a good example of how out of touch so many Guardian-reading chattering-class twitterati are. Everyone with any sense knows that there is a serious problem in the UK, especially in England, with both Roma-type Gypsies and the faux-Gypsies also referred to as Irish “tinkers” or, in today’s politically-correct nonsense-term, “travellers”. To ignore that fact, or, worse, to actually support these anti-social elements, plays into the hands of would-be dictators like Priti Patel.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/13/priti-patel-demonisation-gypsies-prejudice-bigotry

When politicians such as Corbyn (living in Islington) “support” thieves, scavengers and despoilers of the green and pleasant land (what little is left of it), they place themselves against the British people. The British people notice, and vote accordingly.

George Monbiot himself lives rather comfortably, mostly in Oxford…

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Monbiot]

Boris-Idiot went to the flood-affected areas with a mop, in a typically ham-fisted attempt to entertain the people. Now he orders 100 soldiers to go (to be filmed for TV news). Someone who merely poses as PM.

Talking of floods, the Mayor of Venice seems to be another political idiot, saying that the bad flooding there is “obviously a result of climate change”. Poor sap obviously cannot think. The flooding is the worst for 50+ years, i.e. there was flooding as bad or worse back in 1966…In fact, St, Mark’s Basilica has been flooded, as it now is again, 6 times in 1,200 years, so there was such flooding as bad in Venice hundreds of years ago, even 1,000 years ago!

There is a danger that we as a society retreat to a “belief”-society which ignores facts, eschews logic as well as intellectual freedom, and prefers “belief”, officially-approved “belief”, officially-enforced “belief”:

“Climate change” caused by human “emissions”, “holocaust” a-history involving “gas chambers” gassing millions of Jews from 1942-1944, and so on. The Aral Sea, in a film by Al Gore, gone by reason of “global warming” (in reality, because Soviet authorities diverted its feeder streams and rivers to cotton production) etc. There are innumerable other examples. Fake history, fake news, fake science. Our times…

Farage now says that he might vote “Conservative”!

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7681309/300-Brexit-Party-candidates-stand-election-vows-Nigel-Farage.html

Boris Johnson offers Farage a pact that the Cons will put up paper candidates only in 40 Labour-held seats, if Brexit Party stand down their remaining candidates (about 250). So far refused, with (as I write) only 17 hours to go before the deadline (1600 hrs, 14 November 2019).

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/11/13/tories-offer-nigel-farage-eleventh-hour-deal/

Farage has pretty much killed Brexit Party by standing down 317 candidates for no reciprocation by the Conservative Party. It’s pathetic.

Update, 14 November 2019

Farage seems (on the face of it) to have only now woken up to what I have been blogging about for months: that Boris Johnson and his cronies are not really interested in Brexit but want a Commons majority for other and very sinister ends. They weaponized Brexit in the attempt to maximize a Commons majority, but Brexit is not the end for them, merely the means to get a higher number of votes in the General Election, and so a greater number of MPs.

Nigel Farage has ruled out standing down more Brexit Party candidates as the deadline day for nominations arrives.

It comes after Mr Farage was warned that votes for his party would hand the keys of Number 10 to Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, with Boris Johnson claiming that a Conservative government is the only way to “get Brexit done”.

Speaking on Radio 4’s Today Programme, the Brexit Party [leader] said: “What I’ve realised is that the Conservatives want a Conservative majority in Parliament, not a Brexit majority in Parliament.”” [Evening Standard https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/general-election-2019-live-nigel-farage-urged-to-pull-more-brexit-party-candidates-as-deadline-day-a4286751.html]

Farage still has time, in theory, to re-stand the 317 candidates he stood down recently. As I write, there remain just under 4 hours before the deadline. However, many of his betrayed candidates now despise him and his pop-up “party” and would probably not agree anyway.

It may be that Brexit Party standing in Labour-held seats will now redound to Labour’s benefit, in that even if Brexit Party only gets a few percent, the votes will be from voters who would otherwise vote Conservative. It might save Labour’s bacon in many Northern seats.

Labour’s election messages so far are mixed, ineffective and not grabbing the voters (is my sense, anyway), and the wall-to-wall anti-Corbyn bias of the Jewish-influenced UK msm just intensifies that.

Labour’s immigration policy is turning voters off, but it may be that most people already were turned off by it, and so cannot be turned off “double”, so to speak. In any case, people know that the Conservatives themselves have been pathetic on the migration-invasion question.

Having said the above, I sense that Brexit is perhaps just beginning to take a back seat as domestic policy issues come to the fore: the floods in Northern England, the emergency services, the NHS etc. Labour’s strong suits.

Meanwhile, Jo Swinson, doormatting (as usual) for the Jewish-Zionist lobby:

Jo Swinson is pathetic:

  • The “IHRA” is basically a Jewish-Zionist front; Blair was one of its early supporters;
  • The “International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance” only has 31 states (out of about 200) as members;
  • only 6 out of those 31 states have formally endorsed or adopted the “definition” referred to by Jo Swinson;
  • On 1 January 2015, Professor David Feldman stated in a Sub-Report for the Parliamentary Committee Against Antisemitism that the definition had “largely has fallen out of favour” due to criticisms received.[45][46]” [Wikipedia]
  • In the UK, only extremist Zionist organizations, and doormats such as Jo Swinson, Eric Pickles and that little pissant Robert Jenrick, have promoted the so-called “definition”;
  • In October 2019, University College London required speakers at a book launch to agree to additional guidelines relating to discussing antisemitism, even though that was not the subject of the book“…in other words, the “definition” is merely a tool via which Jewish-Zionist extremists attempt to close down the freedom of expression of host peoples.
  • Jo Swinson is no more than semi-literate. A “definition” is “of” something, not “on” something; and “which all candidates are being asked to sign this Election“? Ha ha!

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Working_Definition_of_Antisemitism

Another reason never to vote LibDem!

Here’s another: Jo Swinson is longing to get into another Con-LibDem coalition. She loved the 2010-2015 Con Coalition, in which she was a PUS (junior Government appointee) and voted for all of the terrible measures against the poorer people of the UK.

Jo Swinson, the Liberal Democrat leader, has said she would sooner push the UK into another general election than put Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn into Downing Street in the event of a hung parliament. Ms Swinson, who could hold the balance of power if no party wins a House of Commons majority in the December 12 election, rejected the possibility of the anti-Brexit Lib Dems entering a parliamentary pact with Mr Corbyn.” [Financial Times]

https://www.ft.com/content/454c1ed0-060b-11ea-9afa-d9e2401fa7ca

There it is: vote LibDem, get Con

And, quelle surprise…Robert Largan, the “Conservative” candidate at High Peak, Derbyshire (who lives, it seems, in Fulham, London, and works as an accountant for Marks & Spencer), has signed that same fake “definition”! Wouldn’t you know it?!

Largan seems to specialize in negative attacks on the present Labour MP for High Peak, Ruth George, as well as on anyone who tweets support for her. See below.

—and notice Largan’s supporter there, “Happy”/”@lcfcsingh”, presumably an Indian and Conservative Party member, from Leicester (Largan seems to have to bus-in supporters, he seems to have very few locally), who plays the (more usually) Jew-Zionist card, trying to intimidate the anti-Conservative tweeter, “David”, by threatening him with the UK police acting as a Poundland KGB : “just reported your tweet. Expect a knock at the door.” Ha ha! Yeah, right…A sign of the times, though.

(though “David” is misinformed if he imagines that “denying” a so-called “holocaust” “is a crime”. It is not, not in the UK).

Some locals appear to despise Largan, who would no doubt be more at home in some chi-chi Fulham (or Soho?…) bar.

A reader of this blog just sent me this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antisemitism_in_the_UK_Conservative_Party

Back to the General Election mainstream

Taking a step back, and looking at the big picture, where is Labour, meaning in general, beyond this General Election? Where is the Conservative Party? Where are the LibDems? I leave out “Brexit Party”, which has just been sacrificed by its progenitor.

I have often blogged about how Labour is now the party, almost exclusively, of the ethnic minorities (except Jews and now perhaps the wealthier Indians) and/or those who directly benefit from public funds (public service workers, NHS employees, State benefit recipients). There are of course other groups and individuals, but those are the core voters, added to which may be the minority of younger voters (under 35s) who actually bother to vote.

The Labour core vote is no more than 30% of the whole, nationally. That, with Labour’s connected propensity to stack up votes in a relatively small number of safe seats, makes it hard for Labour to get a Commons majority. Ever.

The “Centrists” (non-socialist, pro-Israel) in Labour look back wistfully at the 1997-2010 Blair “appeal to all demographics” years of huge Labour majorities in the Commons (crazed Gordon Brown being a tacked-on afterthought). That was then. Times have changed. The Labour Party’s deliberate encouragement of mass immigration (migration-invasion), blind eye turned to the mass rape of young English, Welsh and Scottish girls by (mainly) Pakistani Muslims, not to mention Labour’s sycophancy towards the ultra-wealthy and its toleration of zero-hours contracts, PFI scams etc, have over years alienated the voters.

It is worth remembering that the voters rejected “Centrist” Brown and then Ed Miliband, after which the (Jewish-controlled/influenced) newspapers and TV kept saying, in effect “Labour elected the wrong Jew brother” (i.e. not David Miliband). The UK msm is pathetic.

I just noticed that there have been a few hits today on this, that I wrote about 2.5 years ago: https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/06/08/general-election-day-2017/

Corbyn is not Labour’s only problem, though his image is one problem. Labour’s main problem (with apologies to those who have read my words time and again) is one of identity. The industrial proletariat no longer exists, replaced (alongside much of the “middle class”) by the “precariat“, volatile and angry but also disorganized and unfocussed.

Those scribblers like Owen Jones who try to label that “precariat” as “working class” are just wilfully missing the point. The “working class” of Owen Jones is a conflation of (a relatively small) “new proletariat”, a “lumpenproletariat wearing sports gear” and the “precariat”. That is why most people just laugh when post-Marxists like Jones try to call these surging, uncontrolled, msm-brainwashed masses, with their adulation of 15-minutes-of-fame “celebrity” (and that covers the waterfront from The Only Way Is Essex, Premier League footballers, pop music, even Harry and the Royal Mulatta) , “working class”.

…and Labour (whose MPs are very different from their voters) not only has little to say to those masses but in many instances has proven to have been their enemy, certainly since 1997, arguably since the 1980s and the days of that old humbug Michael Foot.

Below: I thought that Labour activists were all young now? Not in Edinburgh, it seems. It looks like a convention for Age UK!

One has to ask where Labour support is going to come from. The “blacks and browns”?Labour is not “national”(ist), and until Corbyn took over had also thrown away its “socialist” credentials. Its time may be running out. Which brings us to the Conservative Party.

The problem that the now-misnamed Conservative Party has is one of demographics. The average Conservative Party voter is a person of about 60-80 years of age, with many well beyond that. There are few young or even 35/50 y-o voters. The core Conservative vote consists of fairly affluent or wealthy persons of middle age or old age. Racial questions are not key, though most Conservative voters are white. The wealthy of non-white populations are believed to favour the Conservative Party, and 90%+ of Jews vote Conservative now, but the numbers are small in absolute terms.

The core Conservative vote is no more, as with Labour, than 25%-30% nationally. The battleground is for the remaining voters and particularly the extra 10%-15% and in swing or marginal seats, which are the only ones that usually matter.

The best argument that the Conservative Party now has is the exact reverse of Labour’s best argument: Con is not Lab; Lab is not Con. We are talking negatives. Voters are really voting negatively, against the party they hate the most.

Other Conservative Party policies are not likely to inspire: the Cons have been in charge for nearly 10 years, have talked a semi-good game on immigration but have failed miserably. As for Brexit, the pathetic lack of real progress has not changed. We are still in the throes of trying to leave (but not really leave).

When it comes to the economy, too, while the Cons sold their pathetic “austerity” nonsense to the masses via the msm from 2010, somehow persuading them that the unemployed, disabled and others on State benefits were responsible for the UK’s poor performance, the reality is —slowly— dawning: “austerity” (suffered only by the poor and fairly poor) actually held back the UK economy. Other countries (except semi-banana states like Greece) have done better by boosting their economies, not paring back everywhere. Well, if you will trust a stupid part-Jew trustafarian cokehead like George Osborne with the economy, what do you expect?

b-cisxdiqaa7qj_-jpg-large

The Conservatives are doomed, but not quite yet. It is hard to see them forming the government in, say, 2025 or 2030. As far as this general election is concerned, though, they are riding high because of the near-collapse of Labour. All the same, as we enter the last 4 weeks of this short election campaign, there is still all to play for. I do not yet regard the predicted massive Conservative victory (predicted by most, still) as inevitable, though it is clear that Labour is in serious trouble.

The LibDems have what the marketers call a “unique selling point” in that they are the sole hard-Remain party. Will that be enough? The withdrawal of Brexit Party from contesting Con-held seats will deprive the LibDems of a number of potential wins. The LibDems are languishing on around 15% nationally.

I begin to wonder whether the LibDems are going to slump. They may take a certain number, a small number, of seats, but I see no large breakthrough. At present, thanks to defections, they have (or had until the campaign started) 21 MPs; 12 from 2017, 9 defectors. I cannot see them having more than 20 after 12 December. They may even drop back to below a dozen. I may be wrong, but that is my feeling.

So with Con, Lab and LibDem all losing traction, what next? No country can be without a future, unless it is destroyed totally. It may have an unpleasant future, though, if the right choices are not made. Importation of inferior peoples— wrong choice. Maladministration to save money or kow-tow to special interest groups— wrong choice. Prioritization of quantity over quality in education— wrong choice. And so on.

Britain needs a social-national party and movement.

Update, 15 November 2019

The System parties now vie with each other in offering the voters “goodies”. For my money, the eyecatching offer today was that from Labour: free broadband for everyone. The other parties may say that it is “unaffordable” but that is just negative white noise. This is a potential gamechanger. In fact, I myself suggested this years ago. My idea was Basic Income, free local transport, free internet and utilities (all to a predetermined set maximum amount). Labour is catching up with me now; 5-10 years late, but better late than never.

The Conservatives are offering to reinstitute a few of the rail lines closed in the 1960s. Not a bad idea, but some mentioned (eg the Varsity Line

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Varsity_Line) are already in train (so to speak).

[Flanders and Swann, The Slow Train]

Brexit Party: well and truly washed-up. You heard it here first. The Guardian (like Labour) has taken its time in catching up with me, but here it is:

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/14/campaign-genius-nigel-farage-has-totally-self-partnered-himself

Brutal.

Returning to the parties that are really playing in this election, my sense, this cold morning, is that a new phase of the election campaign has started, a new front has opened up. Perhaps several new fronts.

The election campaign has so far been almost entirely about Brexit. I speculated, weeks ago, that there were other issues important to people. Now the narrative has (again) caught up with me. Whether it was the flooding in the North, the news about stresses on the NHS, or just that all three System parties are now talking about those other issues in society, there is a palpable change of atmosphere. Brexit is taking a back seat. That has to play more to Labour’s advantage.

The Conservatives and the Jewish-influenced msm are talking much about Labour’s supposed “anti-Semitism”, but I feel that that is “caviar to the general” and will not resonate much with most voters.

I shall be interested to see whether Labour makes up any ground in the next few opinion polls. My guess is that it will. If it does not, Labour really is facing a crisis bigger than any in recent history.

LibDems. Brexit.

The assumption has been made by many msm commentators and also by me to some extent, that the LibDems will get a boost by being the only unalloyed Remain party of any significance in this election. I still think that that is so, but the effect may well be limited.

As we know, less than 50% of UK voters voted Remain in 2016. If you leave out Northern Ireland and Scotland, the proportion was smaller in England and Wales. The figure now seems not much changed. Recent polls said that about 40% of the voters say that Brexit is the most important issue in this election. So, it is arguable that those

  • favouring Remain,
  • who also think that Brexit is the most important issue

might add up to around a fifth to a quarter of the electorate. Probably no more than a fifth. That might give the LibDems 20% of votes, as a maximum. Not enough for a breakthrough, but respectable, especially looking at the 4.9% the LibDems scored in 2015 and the 3.9% they received in 2017.

However, that 40%, the”most important issue” figure, comes from a poll taken some weeks ago. If that is now 30%, the LibDems may have a ceiling of 15%. For the LibDems everything now depends on getting in a large hard-core Remain vote. Failing that, the LibDems will slip below 10%, possibly below 5%, and the 2015-2017 decline will continue to LibDem oblivion.

Blind spot?

System scribbler Dan Hodges waxes indignant about supposed Russian interference in UK elections. Should he not cast his eyes toward the proven interference in UK elections and politics by Israel and its agents?

Newspaper comment:

https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/boris-johnson-brexit-bus-election-vote-leave-campaign-jeremy-corbyn-a9204591.html

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/general-election-brexit-party-candidates-20890815

Polling:

General Election 2019 Daily Updated Blog

I have already given a preliminary opinion piece about the upcoming general election:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/10/30/a-preliminary-look-at-the-2019-general-election/

and in other blog posts have examined Boris Johnson and his Cabinet, Corbyn, the various political parties contending, and some of the main issues in considerable detail.

I am now inclined to blog daily with any significant news. I start with the Daily Mail report below.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7638411/Nigel-Farage-prepares-unveil-Brexit-Party-election-hit-list-HUNDREDS-seats.html

The essence of the report is that Nigel Farage tried to form an electoral pact with the Conservatives, which has now been rejected by “leading Conservatives”. Farage has left the offer open until 14 November, like the businessman he is. The reason for the rejection seems to be that the Conservatives are unwilling to accede to Farage’s demands. Another connected reason would be that the Cons would have to give the Brexit Party a free run in at least some seats.

Since the 19th Century, the Conservative (and Unionist) Party has made it a point of honour to stand a candidate in every Westminster constituency. Another point is that, if Brexit Party were to end up with even a small bloc of seats, BP might later strike out from that citadel and be a far greater danger to the Conservatives. Once a party has more than a tiny number of Westminster seats, it’s launched, it’s a player.

Most Brexit Party members and candidates are far closer to Conservative Party ideology than that of the Labour Party. To some extent, that is true of BP voters too, at least in the South of England.

The Brexit Party has lost its mojo recently. By-election misses, poll doldrums (as Boris-Idiot tried to capture the Leave/Brexit vote). Brexit Party a few days ago was at its lowest in the polls since the Spring: only 7%.

However, one can never quite write off egregious Farage. His bold gambit in demanding that the Cons comply with conditions such as effectively gifting him a bloc of seats may energize Brexit Party now that the Conservatives have so contemptuously refused the proposal.

Boris Johnson is no “One Nation” Prime Minister. He was jeered and booed when leaving Addenbrooke’s Hospital, Cambridge, yesterday. The Conservatives may have been at 42% in the polls a few days ago (published yesterday but work done a week ago) but I doubt that that can be maintained.

Brexit Party has the power to hit Labour, but it has the ability to hit the Conservatives worse. There are large numbers of seats where a Brexit Party candidate can mean a Conservative candidate losing to a LibDem, or to Labour, or even, who knows, even to…a Brexit Party candidate.

If (at present, a big if) Farage and Brexit Party can pick up speed, increasing support from the recent 7% to 15% or more, Boris-Idiot is toast, along with the Conservative Party. The Conservatives may then find themselves, not with the solid majority they want but worse off than they are now.

The BBC’s outline:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-49826655

Update, 2 November 2019

(Mike Ashley is a barrow-boy “entrepreneur” who makes Alan Sugar look like Andrew Carnegie).

(might mean a Con majority of 90+, if accurate…)

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/nov/02/boris-johnson-brexit-populism-tories-lifeline

The polling website Britain Elects has interpreted these as showing a current Tory vote share of about 35%, roughly 10 points ahead of Labour; and the analytical website Electoral Calculus has extrapolated a Tory majority on 12 December of about 70. That would be by far the party’s largest since Margaret Thatcher’s third election victory in 1987. There are obvious flaws to this suggestion that Johnson will win decisively. In 2017, May had an even bigger initial poll lead, but it shrank to almost nothing by election day. And this year’s contest is potentially more volatile still.” [The Guardian]

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/oct/30/the-guardian-view-on-a-volatile-electorate-disunited-and-unpredictable

“The fanfare at the launch of a general election tends to obscure the reality that Britain’s voting system involves hundreds of very particular local elections. That constituency variation, combined with unusual volatility in party identification, makes the poll due on 12 December highly unpredictable. Brexit has shuffled conventional loyalties, forcing the Conservatives in particular to seek support on unfamiliar terms.” [The Guardian]

Update, 3 November 2019

In a sign of the increasing volatility and unpredictability of the UK electorate, the latest opinion poll now places Conservative Party on 36%, Labour Party 28%, LibDems 14%, Brexit Party 12%.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/11/02/tory-majority-doubt-telegraph-poll-shows-lead-just-eight-points/

By Electoral Calculus calculation, that could still give the Conservatives a Commons majority of 40+, but is a long way below other recent estimates. In 2017, the Conservatives started the General Election campaign very far ahead of Labour, but the advantage had almost disappeared by polling day. Another few days and Labour would have overtaken.

Jewish families will leave the UK if Jeremy Corbyn wins general election, Tory chair James Cleverly says” [Daily Telegraph]. Yay!

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/11/02/jewish-families-will-leave-uk-jeremy-corbyn-wins-general-election/?li_source=LI&li_medium=li-recommendation-widget

Update, 3 November 2019

These connected tweets made me laugh. Ghastly old Jewish “ho” Edwina Currie got a shock while canvassing for the “Conservative” candidate in the High Peak constituency of Derbyshire:

Surprisingly (perhaps not very), she ignores the occupier’s plea that he is very busy and engaged on a conference call; she just ploughs on regardless.

Jesus! If that ghastly apparition appeared outside my home on Halloween, after dark, I would arm myself with a mallet and a wooden stake!

Meanwhile, on the national stage, Nigel Farage has announced that he himself will not be contesting any seat, but that Brexit Party will now be contesting at least 600 seats.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7644269/Nigel-Farage-says-WONT-stand-MP-snap-election.html

This will obviously have an effect on Conservative vote-shares in those constituencies and on the number of Conservative MPs returned. To what extent that is so depends on how high the support for Brexit Party goes. If only 5%-10%, maybe not so serious. If 10%-15%, possibly enough to prevent a Conservative majority in the Commons. If anything like 20%+, it is Goodnight Vienna for the Conservatives, especially if Labour and the LibDems also increase their shares.

The Conservatives are taking the Brexit Party effect seriously, which is why they just offered the Brexit Party chairman, Richard Tice MEP, a safe rural Conservative seat if he would defect (he has, it seems, refused).

Update, 4 November 2019

Conservative Party candidate for Gower, one Francesca O’Brien, wrote that those living on State benefits should be “put down”:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-politics-50283520

and now it seems that Ross Thomson [Con, Aberdeen South] will not be standing for re-election after having been caught engaging in gay sex assaults.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7644987/Tory-MP-wont-fight-General-Election-Labour-MP-claims-tried-stick-hand-trousers.html

I have only one regret about this nasty little shit leaving the Commons: I was going to include him in my “Deadhead MPs— An Occasional Series”. Plenty of fish, though.

In a way, the Ross Thomson story is the tale of how the Conservative Party has become something totally alien. A few extracts from his Wikipedia entry:

Prior to entering politics, Thomson worked as a store trainer for department store Debenhams“;

On 5 October 2016, Thomson repaid expenses relating to a night’s stay in an Edinburgh hotel with a male friend whom he subsequently hired.[16]“;

[“hired” the “male friend” on his MP’s expenses, of course…was he giving the “male friend” a test drive?]

On 3 November 2019 MP Paul Sweeney accused Thomson of sexual assault in the Strangers’ Bar in October 2018.[22] Denying wrongdoing, later the same day Thomson announced that he would not stand for re-election as the Member of Parliament for Aberdeen South, saying that allegations of groping had made his life ‘a living hell’. [23] However, this was later contradicted when it emerged that he only stood down when the chairman of his local Conservative Association refused to sign his nomination papers to allow him to stand as a Conservative candidate.“;

On 6 February 2019, various newspapers reported unsubstantiated claims that Thomson had been escorted by police from the Strangers’ Bar of the House of Commons the previous evening. Initial reports indicated that police had attended following reports of “sexual touching” of patrons by the MP. Eyewitnesses claimed that Thomson had repeatedly groped several young men also present in the bar, grabbing their bottoms and genitals. No prosecutions followed and a Conservative Party investigation is yet to conclude, but the Parliamentary Commissioner on Standards dismissed the complaint.[28][29][30][31] Thomson has repeatedly denied any wrongdoing, citing the allegations as politically motivated.[32]

The damn cheek of the bastard! He has the gall (re. the above) to say that he is a victim! (because he has been “trolled” online about his degenerate behaviour).

Here he is, a couple of years ago, weaselling about the Bedroom Tax:

All that, and now I read that the bastard is in favour of mass immigration and wanted to make the UK a friendlier place for “refugees” and other migrant-invaders! This creature was (is still, for the next few days) a Conservative Party MP!

Breathing cleaner air, the latest news about Brexit Party seems to be that BP is going to put up 600+ candidates unless Boris-Idiot complies with several demands. Looks as though Brexit Party is going to rain on the “Conservative” parade (if Brexit Party can climb higher in the polls, at least)…

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/boris-johnson-news-live-brexit-party-farage-general-election-dup-corbyn-labour-a9183851.html

Back in the (((swamp))), I see that “they” have arranged a suitably well-paid safety net for sex-pest depressive and Israel mouthpiece, John Woodcock, who had to resign the Labour whip when he was exposed, so ending his political career(ism). He is going to be engaged in spying on social nationalists and trying to close down free speech. I blogged about this unpleasant individual a couple of years ago:

https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2017/05/04/john-woodcock-barrow-and-furness-and-the-general-election-2017/

The comments (hundreds of them) under that tweet are very amusing…(click on the tweet to read the thread).

https://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/john-woodcock-counter-far-right-extremism-home-office-job_uk_5dc07343e4b0615b8a9743e0

Update, 5 November 2019

I just noticed the date. How will history remember these years of our lives in England’s long history?

Remember remember

The 5th of November

Gunpowder, treason and plot,

Life is short and memory long

And traitors deserve to be shot

[I suppose that, in these febrile and unfree times, I should add that the poetic whimsy above does not constitute any injunction or incitement to anyone to be beastly to MPs, or indeed to anyone, whether mentioned in this blog post or not…]

Back to boring old General Election news, and it seems to me that today marks the start of the real campaign. Corbyn is at least vocalizing the reality, that the Boris-Idiot Cabinet of Israeli agents and doormats for the Jewish lobby plans to impose a “free market” dystopia on the British people. When/if enough people realize that, the Conservative Party lead will evaporate.

The government of David Cameron-Levita promised to build 200,000 new affordable houses. Not one was built. If the UK stopped importing unwanted blacks, browns etc, new houses would be unnecessary anyway, but that is another issue. The point is that promises are cheap and, in the mouth of Boris-Idiot, easily made.

I saw cocaine-abusing Israel doormat Michael Gove today on Sky News. One of the (in the end) five tweets by reason of which I was wrongfully disbarred in 2016 was that describing Michael Gove, entirely accurately, as a “pro-Israel, pro-Jew expenses cheat”. At that time, the public was unaware that Gove was also a cocaine-snorter. He looked drugged or drunk in the Chamber of the House of Commons recently. When will the British people wake up to the corrupt political/msm milieux, aka “the (((swamp)))”?

Seems that Robert Largan, “Conservative” candidate for High Peak (Derbyshire) is tweeting mostly about Alison Chabloz, with the odd negative attack on the Labour candidate and present MP, Ruth George. Largan seems obsessed with “anti-Semitism”, but then he is an accountant working for Marks & Spencer in London.

All Mr. Largan has to do now is learn to regularly shove cocaine up his nose (I shall be polite and assume that he does not already do so…) and he will be welcome at Gove’s degenerate parties…

Largan has tweeted or retweeted nine or ten times about Alison Chabloz in the past few days. His other tweets mostly try to attack the Labour candidate, Ruth George, using “guilt-by-association”. It is clear that Largan has nothing much useful to say to the voters of High Peak. He seems mostly interested in keeping in with a certain (((lobby))).

Here is what Largan and all “Conservative” MPs and candidates now support (click to listen):

High Peak’s “Conservative” candidate (who lives in a chi-chi part of London) is in fact a member of Conservative Friends of Israel. Quelle surprise…In fact, he went on a (subsidized?) trip to Israel only a few months ago. The cheek of the bastard! Surely he could wait until becoming an MP before freeloading?! I wonder whether he will be elected. I hope not. There are enough Israel-doormats in the Commons already.

https://cfoi.co.uk/cfi-coordinates-delegation-to-israel-with-conservative-parliamentary-candidates/

Some people are taking things into their own hands:

Meanwhile, there is movement in the opinion polls. While all polling shows that the Conservative Party is well ahead, a minority of polls are now showing a diminution in that lead.

That polling would result in a Conservative Party majority of about 16 seats, according to Electoral Calculus. Boris-Idiot would welcome that, though it is far from the recent predictions of 100-seat majorities. I sense a slight change in the air. Corbyn and Labour are never going to be flavour of the month with most voters, but I sense a new determination on the part of many to try to stop Boris-Idiot and his satraps from becoming an elected ZOG/NWO tyranny, as they assuredly would be, had they a majority in the Commons.

Another poll:

Brexit Party will have to get a long way up from 11% to make a really big impact. That YouGov poll would still give Boris-Idiot a Commons majority of as much as 126 seats; but things are now starting to move. The ice is beginning to melt.

Below: desperate…

This, below, from the Daily Mail Comments section, made me laugh! (capital letters in original)

“LABOUR ARE NO LONGER THE PARTY OF THE WORKER……..PREFERRING THE PROFESSIONAL SHIRKER….THE INCOMING(Postal vote) B>U>R>K>A …AND THE PIE MUNCHING BACK STREET LURKER!”

Latest: Phillip Hammond not seeking re-election.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/05/philip-hammond-to-step-down-as-tory-mp-after-22-years

Update, 6 November 2019

Yet another Conservative Party MP has decided to give up politics. Lazy half-Jew chancer and general waste of space Ed Vaizey will not be again contesting Wantage, a safe Conservative seat. He would undoubtedly have been re-elected, but his chance of further ministerial preferment (he was Secretary of State for Culture for several years, absurdly) would have been minimal, at least in the short term. He was obviously unwilling to stay on as a backbench MP for years, or indefinitely, and unlike many MPs, does not need the money.

Alison Chabloz has commented on the attack both on her and on Labour candidate Ruth George by prp-Israel Marks & Spencer accountant and “Conservative” candidate for High Peak, Robert Largan:

https://alisonchabloz.com/2019/11/06/why-the-entire-system-is-unfit-for-office/

What Is Brexit Party? Why Does It Exist? What Are Its Chances?

A comet has appeared in the UK’s political skies. Its name is Brexit Party. It is running at about 30% in the opinion polls re. the EU elections to be held on 23 May 2019, while in respect of Westminster elections, it is on about 15%. The EU elections may not be of much importance except as a popularity contest, but for a new party without any policies at all (except to get out from under the EU) to be at 15% indicates a groundswell of public disquiet which may have huge consequences one way or another in domestic UK politics.

[note: even as I write, the polling figures above are out of date! One very recent poll now has Brexit Party at 34% for the EU elections and 20% re Westminster voting intention, with Conservatives only on 19% for Westminster and 13% for the EU elections; has the Conservative vote ever been that low? I think not; even in the Blair-Labour landslide of 1997, the Conservatives polled in the actual election at 30.7%].

It now looks as though some of my early blogging was prescient indeed, if I myself may say so. “Give that man a cee-gar”!

There are signs of panic in the main System parties:

A ComRes poll for the Sunday Telegraph showed that if a Westminster general election were called, Labour would reap the largest share of the vote with 27%; the Brexit party would garner 20% ahead of the Conservatives on 19%. The Liberal Democrats would win 14%, followed by ChangeUK (7%) and the Greens (5%) with Ukip trailing on 2%.” [The Guardian]

I come from a certain direction: I recall the limited but real popularity of the National Front [NF] in the mid-1970s, and saw at first hand how outside forces made use of internal dissensions in order to destroy the NF as an effective party and movement. I believe (though without having any direct or personal knowledge) that similar events may have happened to explode the British National Party [BNP].

The National Front and BNP were both broadly social-nationalist, whereas UKIP is broadly nationalist but lacking the para-socialist element ideologically. Brexit Party has taken on UKIP’s “nationalist” or “patriotic” mantle despite having no published policies at all beyond leaving the EU.

It is easy to speculate about why the course of events happens, harder to pin down the exact or even approximate facts. Many casually blame, or designate as important, the operations of Zionists, Israel, MI5, SIS, MOSSAD, unnamed State agencies, freemasons, occult spiritual groups etc.

Every party or movement has internal tensions. As a John le Carre character remarked, “Jesus Christ only had 12 agents, and one of those was a double” [meaning “double-agent”].

The art of influencing events from the shadows is not to be identified or identifiable as a moving force.

Coming back to Brexit Party, there are known facts. The extraordinary political showman (as some would have it, “snake-oil salesman”), Nigel Farage, was leader of UKIP for decades. He in fact was in UKIP almost at the start, and is often termed one of the founders, though he was not the actual founder, who was an academic called Allan Sked.

Sked is a member of the British-American Project, which exists to promote Britain’s political ties to the U.S.” [Wikipedia].

During the administration of President Bill Clinton in the US, the Australian journalist John Pilger attacked the BAP as an example of “Atlanticist freemasonry.” He asserted in November 1998 that “many members are journalists, the essential foot soldiers in any network devoted to power and propaganda.” [Wikipedia].

Here is one msm drone who belongs to that British-American Project:

DEudsrrXUAAGEaZ

Yes, that’s right. Yasmin-Alibhai-Brown, the supposedly “radical”, “anti-imperialist” “journalist” (in fact, totally unqualified and inexperienced in true journalism, just a ranting loudmouth).

Another member of the very same organization is BBC journalist James Naughtie, most of whose views are, at least superficially, totally different from those of Yasmin Alibhai-Brown…

The British-American Project contains a large number of UK-based (and other) journalists (and others), of supposedly diverse views. I wonder if their views and motives are as “diverse” as they seem to be at first blush.

Only today, on the Andrew Marr Show [BBC 1 TV], Marr tried to trash Nigel Farage and Brexit Party, but Farage was able to crush Marr easily in the end.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/nigel-farage-andrew-marr-show-brexit-party-polls-interview-bbc-a8910206.html

System drones like Marr do not seem to understand that populist movements such as UKIP (a few years ago) or Brexit Party (now) are the last chance for the System to listen to the British people and so avert an explosion of justified political hatred which will, otherwise, roll over them like a tank over a cockroach.

Marr’s own (rarely admitted) views:

DMunAFrXUAAFG0P

CmyX3AtW8AE8GYC.jpg

A typical pro-NWO, pro-ZOG, pro-EU msm drone, paid until recently a million pounds a year by the BBC out of your “licence fee” (enforced tax) monies (apparently somewhat less now, after public uproar about the absurd salaries paid by the BBC to key propagandists).

Was the secret aim of UKIP to draw off nationalist sentiment from parties such as the BNP, i.e. to neutralize effective political opposition to NWO [New World Order] and ZOG [Zionist Occupation Government] in the UK by containing it, controlling it, monitoring it? Or was UKIP just a typically English amateur effort which mushroomed into something bigger. Or both of those?

Sked has since been a vocal critic of the “ racist” direction in which Farage has taken UKIP. He told the Guardian in 2014: “The party I founded has become a Frankenstein’s monster.

Already, in looking at UKIP, we see the difficulty of unravelling the skein of motives: secret forces, public faces, ambitions, ideals, various personalities etc.

As recently as last year, Alan Sked said that “I founded UKIP. It’s a national joke now and should disappear.” [The Guardian]. Is that just sour grapes from a founder left behind? Is there anything else there? Had UKIP “done its job”, and so could be binned?

Until 2010, the BNP did better in all or almost all elections than did UKIP. It is hard to recall that, now that the UKIP star has risen and fallen and now that the BNP is just a tiny handful of back-room zealots. In its heyday, the BNP was more successful by far than UKIP. The BNP even had two MEPs (Nick Griffin and Andrew Brons).

Brexit Party is UKIP, but a UKIP which, like a snake, has shed its “skin” of various unwanted people, unwanted history etc and, unlike the snake, miraculously become far far more powerful, far more slick, far more able to capitalize on its “unique selling point”, the sheer hatred which many many people now feel for UK society as it now is (and also for the EU dictatorship).

Farage is the star of Brexit Party, as he was when in UKIP. Look at the clip below. Farage enters a hall packed with supporters. It echoes in a minor key the entrance of Adolf Hitler into the hall at the end of the 1935 Leni Riefenstahl film Triumph of the Will.

Farage can draw large crowds, as in this recent rally at Peterborough, where 2,000 supporters are said to have paid £10 each just to hear Farage speak. Few other politicians in the UK could get 200 (or even 20, in many cases) to turn up to hear them, even for free!

Farage is the key to this. No Farage in UKIP means, effectively, no UKIP. Were there no Farage in Brexit Party, that party would also rapidly cease to exist.

Despite his public profile, Farage is to some degree an enigma. A metals trader, he was in employment as recently as 2003 and possibly even after that. He was elected as an MEP in 1999. He seems to have been a “Eurosceptic” (anti-EU) for a long time, voting Green Party in 1989: the Green Party was, at that time, Eurosceptic and not pro-mass-immigration. One wonders whether, had it not become a kind of middle class virtue-signallers’ party, Green Party might have had greater political success.

Farage created UKIP (not founded perhaps, but created) in his own image: anti-EU, free marketist (softened for tactical purposes), English more than British, not social-national, not “racist” (racialist), despite Farage making a few innocuous comments that only echoed what most white British people believe or feel. Brexit Party may or may not follow those lines, but we cannot say for sure, because Brexit Party, almost uniquely, has published literally no policies at all, save for Brexit itself.

I say “almost uniquely” because the surely-doomed Change UK, which can be taken to be the opposite pole to Brexit Party, also has no published policies (beyond staying in the EU). This is in fact consonant with earlier blogs and, until I was expelled from Twitter, tweets, i.e. that people in the UK, at least in England and Wales, are now voting against rather than for parties; voting tactically to block parties they dislike, rather than supporting the party they like. I have blogged before about this and how it is an outcome of the ludicrous UK electoral system.

I take Farage to be sincerely anti-EU, anti-socialist, possibly anti-immigration, but not to have any sophisticated socio-political or economic ideas. I have said before that Farage does not understand politics well, a surprising statement in view of his stellar public political performance. What I meant is that he has not developed any ideology, as such; neither has he a political programme; also, he has not much developed a party machine (with UKIP; we shall see what happens with Brexit Party).

I take Farage at face value, more or less; the same with his mass following. As to others, I am looking and seeing a strong Jewish element. Brexit Party already has a “Brexit Party Friends of Israel” group. There are other indications; the Brexit Party Treasurer is indirectly connected by marriage to the Rothschilds:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6984699/New-Brexit-Party-treasurer-father-ex-Page-Three-model-married-Nat-Rothschild.html

Brexit Party not only has Jewish influence but is open in general to persons of other and various ethnicities. Many candidates are not really British, certainly not of British origin.

Despite its paucity of policy and its multi-ethnic candidate list, many of those who support Brexit Party and also many of those who oppose it seem to think that it is somehow “nationalist”. It may be, but only in the very broadest sense.

In respect of candidates, one aspect I find very odd is that, out of about 60 or so Brexit Party EU election candidates, Brexit Party has no less than 3 who are former members of the (1978-1997) Revolutionary Communist Party. Remarkable from a tiny party which had so few members. If I were to suggest State involvement here, it would be without any real evidence, but it does give me pause all the same.

The Great Replacement, otherwise known as “migration-invasion” of Europe, is no mere “conspiracy theory”. United Nations and EU documents have laid out the conspiratorial globalist plan time and again. Only recently, EU and other political heads met in Marrakesh, Morocco, to pledge to assist African and Asian invasion of Europe, to replace European populations with alien black and brown populations.

This anti-white, anti-European campaign was built into the EU right from the start and conflated with the idea of a European “superstate”:

Brs-OUYIAAALv9K

Jean Monnet was one of the principal freemasonic architects of the EU:

Jean Omer Marie Gabriel Monnet (French: [ʒɑ̃ mɔnɛ]; 9 November 1888 – 16 March 1979) was a French political economist and diplomat.[1] An influential supporter of European unity, he is considered as one of the founding fathers of the European Union. Jean Monnet has been called “The Father of Europe” by those who see his innovative and pioneering efforts in the 1950s as the key to establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, the predecessor of today’s European Union.[2] Never elected to public office, Monnet worked behind the scenes of American and European governments as a well-connected pragmatic internationalist.” [Wikipedia]

He was the first to be bestowed Honorary Citizen of Europe by the European Council of the European Union, for extraordinary work to promote European cooperation on 2 April 1976. Following this he became the first person alive to be pictured on a German stamp who was not also a German head of state.” [Wikipedia]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Monnet

Another one was Coudenhove-Kalergi:

“In his book Praktischer Idealismus (Practical Idealism), written in 1925, he describes the future of Jews in Europe and of European racial composition with the following words:

The man of the future will be of mixed race. Today’s races and classes will gradually disappear owing to the vanishing of space, time, and prejudice. The Eurasian-Negroid race of the future, similar in its appearance to the Ancient Egyptians, will replace the diversity of peoples with a diversity of individuals. […]

Instead of destroying European Jewry, Europe, against its own will, refined and educated this people into a future leader-nation through this artificial selection process.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_von_Coudenhove-Kalergi

Nazis considered the Pan-European Union to be under the control of Freemasonry.[27] In 1938, a Nazi propaganda book Die Freimaurerei: Weltanschauung, Organisation und Politik was released in German.[28] It revealed Coudenhove-Kalergi’s membership of Freemasonry, the organization suppressed by Nazis.” [Wikipedia]

Hitler did not share the ideas of his Austrian compatriot. He argued in his 1928 Secret Book that they are unfit for the future defense of Europe against America. As America fills its North American lebensraum, “the natural activist urge that is peculiar to young nations will turn outward.” But then “a pacifist-democratic Pan-European hodgepodge statewould not be able to oppose the United States, as it is “according to the conception of that commonplace bastard, Coudenhove-Kalergi…”” [Wikipedia]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_von_Coudenhove-Kalergi

BhFozwVCQAAjLNT

There are secret occult forces behind the founding and expansion of both USA and EU. They are not exclusively Jewish or Zionist, but there is a strong link, as there is to Freemasonry, and also to other groupings not publicly named. Forces of Evil.

and see:

http://www.westernspring.co.uk/the-coudenhove-kalergi-plan-the-genocide-of-the-peoples-of-europe/

Look at the tweet below, from the World Economic Forum at Davos, and retweeted by a pro-EU public relations drone, and which purports to show a wonderful “economic plan” to create a “trade route” (corridor) from Malta and the Mediterranean to Scandinavia. What is the real purpose here? To create a funnel from Africa to Northern Europe, through which migrant-invaders will be funnelled through the heart of Europe to destroy it racially and culturally.

The EU was never meant to be just a mutual-benefit trade bloc. It was always meant to be a monolithic superstate in which the white European populations could be mixed, eventually, with blacks and browns. Of course, that was never conveyed to the peoples of Europe, only to the self-appointed “elite”. In fact, some naive people supported the EU (and still do) because they imagined that it was European in race and culture and not only in geography. Thus we see the deliberate conflation by Remain drones, in the msm or on social media, of “EU” and “Europe“, as in “if Brexit happens, we shall be leaving Europe“, rather than “…leaving the EU.” The UK is part of Europe and always will be; it need not be part of the already-dictatorial EU superstate, which is deliberately importing the culturally inferior by the million.

CSwbJ9yWwAAdQ73

How is it possible, though, for both EU and Brexit Party to be heavily influenced by the same forces (ZOG, NWO etc)? Think of a bet whereby you could, in a two-horse race, win whichever horse puts its nose in front. Likewise, in the UK there are or were two or three main parties. The fix was/is into all of those parties. It does not matter (or did not, until Corbyn took over Labour) which party wins, because ZOG/NWO is embedded in all three “main parties” (things are changing now, though).

Brexit Party may have been partly set up with secret aims in mind, but these plans do not always go as planned. Brexit Party has mushroomed, almost exploded, in a way which was perhaps unforeseen even by Farage himself. These things happen in history. The events of the Russian Revolution spiralled out of control, or to use a different metaphor, spread like a wildfire from its modest beginnings in one city in the corner of a huge empire.

Why are voters flocking to Brexit Party? It cannot be because of Brexit Party’s policies, because it has none, or at least only one. I identify these factors:

  • the wish to have the Referendum of 2016 properly respected and complied with; but beyond that
  • the wish to hit out at the System parties and especially the mis-named “Conservative” Party, which under the influence of Jewish Zionism and globalism has trashed the UK (especially England and Wales) to the point where nothing works properly, where most people have neither security nor freedom, where the population is only about half really British now, and where standards in all areas are dropping like a stone (NHS, transport, education, real pay, State welfare benefits, animal welfare, environment etc). There is also the repression on thought and socio-political expression. “Free speech” scarcely exists now in the UK.

scan25

The wish to lash out is very strong now. The people can see that Brexit Party has the popular support to make it a credible vote at both EU and (so far) Westminster elections. People know (whether intellectually or instinctively) that a vote for Brexit Party is one that hits the Conservatives hard, much harder than voting, say, Labour. In any case, Labour itself is not supported by most people (not so much for policy reasons as because white English people especially do not like what they see around Corbyn: the blacks and browns, the semi-literate Angela Rayner types who would be in Cabinet, the creaking 1970s comic-book “Marxism” etc).

A vote for Brexit Party hits the Conservative Party hard not only in areas where Labour is strong but in areas where the Conservatives have prevailed for decades. As I blogged previously, if (as polls suggest) the Conservatives lose 60% or even 50% of their votes, they will lose 50-200 seats, to Labour, to Brexit Party itself, and, here and there, to the Liberal Democrats. That means (as I also blogged previously and to which the msm is now catching up) that

  • Brexit Party may actually win some —possibly 50, even 100— seats at Westminster;
  • The Conservative Party, which has outlived its usefulness, will fade and go the way of the Liberal Party after the First World War; and
  • Labour will (as I have predicted for 2 years) probably be largest party in the Commons, but will be unable to do whatever it wants, because it will be a minority government (almost certainly). People may well prefer that to a majority Labour government.

It can probably be said that, in Westminster constituencies where Labour is not now the first or second party in elections, even former Labour voters would be better to vote Brexit Party than to vote Labour, because in “Conservative” Westminster constituencies, a vote for Labour is going to be a wasted vote, whereas a vote for Brexit Party will quite possibly help to unseat the Conservative MP in question.

Speaking now from a social-national viewpoint, why do I welcome Brexit Party?

That is a simple question to answer. No matter what forces may be behind Brexit Party, no matter what forces influence it, its importance to me lies in its ability to smash the “three main parties” scam-system in the UK. A weak government, esp. Labour, would open the way to real social nationalism in a way never seen before.

5b97c21dcc636

Notes

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Claire_Fox

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigel_Farage

https://news.sky.com/story/jeremy-hosking-former-conservative-donor-revealed-as-major-backer-of-brexit-party-11716597

https://www.ft.com/content/9f89051e-730f-11e9-bf5c-6eeb837566c5

https://thebrexitparty.org/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Front_(UK)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Sked

https://www.businessinsider.com/ukip-founder-alan-sked-the-party-should-dissolve-disappear-2016-7?r=US&IR=T

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/jan/22/founded-ukip-national-joke-disappear-henry-bolton-alan-sked

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/tony-blair/news/103814/tony-blair-says-labour-and-tories

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Monnet

http://www.dutchanarchy.com/coudenhove-kalergi-plan-genocide-white-peoples-europe/

http://www.westernspring.co.uk/the-coudenhove-kalergi-plan-the-genocide-of-the-peoples-of-europe/

The unreality of the “Remain” crowd can be gauged by the tweet below. Like so many of the twitterati, this fellow over-values Twitter. He actually thinks that he is achieving something by having a few hundred or a few thousand other Remain whiners in his echo-chamber retweet or “like” his pointless tweet. Result? Nothing, but he feels warm and justified. In fact, he is a public relations man whose Twitter output is largely a one-sided and pro-EU song of praise. I predict that 24 May 2019 will not be a pleasant day for him!

farage

Afterthought

Looks as if Boris Idiot and Amber Rudd might both lose their seats at the next General Election. Conservative MPs will not be voting for either of them to be leader if there is every chance that they might lose their seats…Happy day!

Update, 17 May 2019

Update, 18 May 2019

Someone called Casper Hughes, writing in The Independent [see below], says that Brexit Party will have no effect on Westminster elections. That statement, I think, is probably wrong. For the following reasons:

  • first of all, like most unthinking scribblers and talking heads of the present time, he has not managed to free himself from the idea that there is a spectrum going from “far left” through “hard left”, “soft left”, “centre-left”, “centrist”, then to “centre-right”, “rightwing”, “hard right” and finally the —demonized— “far right”;
  • Casper Hughes labels, simplistically, a huge group as “rightwing voters”. It’s a meaningless phrase; it shows lack of real understanding;
  • politics is more nuanced now. People from all parts of the outdated “right”/”left” spectrum can, for example, be allied on animal rights, environment, economic outcomes (and even policies: rail and utility renationalization for example). It was Jack London who said “I am a socialist, but a white man first”;
  • it is a mistake to imagine that Brexit Party support is all about Brexit. The System betrayal of the EU Referendum result is one example of how the System has, in vulgar terms, shat on the white British people over and over, especially in the past 30 years or so. The Brexit Party is a chance (like the 2016 EU Referendum itself) to kick the System “parties” (which form, to a large extent, one party with 2-3 faces).
  • people are currently (since at least 2015) voting against, not for. The article does to some extent acknowledge that. That means that people are voting not for Brexit Party and its sole policy, but to stamp on Con and Lab (and LibDem) as well as voting —yes— for Brexit, i.e. to leave the EU properly, without strings;
  • people generally now realize that a conspiracy is stealing Brexit, against the “democracy” we are supposed to have in the UK; they want to fight against that; the traditional voters for the “main parties” are not as dominant as they were. In 1950, 97% voted LibLabCon. Now? Maybe 50%;
  • also, many traditional voters feel betrayed: Labour betrayed its core vote by turning into the Blair finance-capitalist, mass immigration, “ignore-Pakistani-child-rapists” “New Labour” or fake-Labour party. The Conservatives betrayed their core vote by continuing with mass immigration, by increasing taxes to an extent not seen under Blair —or even Callaghan in the 1970s—, by destroying much of the mental landscape that made England England, by conspiring to dishonour the 2016 Referendum result, and in other ways;
  • the article says in terms that the present situation is a re-run of UKIP in 2014-2015. It is not. People saw that UKIP was cheated in 2015 (1 in 8 people voted UKIP in 2015 and were cheated by a rigged electoral system) and are angry at that, but even more angry at the corruption, freeloading and dishonesty of the main 2 parties, as well as at their incompetence and arrogance;
  • the article supposes that the so-called “right-wing” voters will “coalesce” around the misnamed “Conservatives” as a “stop Corbyn” tactic. Don’t count on it. After 3 years of Jewish propaganda contra Corbyn, Labour is riding higher than ever; and many former Con voters actually like many Corbyn-Labour policies;
  • the article says that Brexit Party is unlikely to win many if any Westminster seats. Let’s see. The SNP was founded in 1934, and did not get many MPs until 2015, before which it often had 0, 1, 2 or a few MPs most of the time (81 years!); then it reached that FPTP tipping point and had 59. Brexit Party may or may not get to the tipping point, but the idea is no longer ludicrous, if it opposes, say, Labour under Corbyn and Conservative Party under whoever (possibly Boris-Idiot);
  • the very fact that Boris Johnson is spoken of as possibly Prime Minister is proof enough that the System is sick and the Conservative Party terminally so;
  • the article seems to imagine that if Brexit Party gets only the same vote as UKIP in 2015, then its effect is meaningless. No, because even if Brexit Party gets the 12% UKIP got in 2015, and if the others stack up as Lab 35%, Con 35%, LibDem 10%, that leaves the Conservatives, though largest party, 32 seats off a majority: https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/userpoll.html (only a couple of points more for Labour and Labour are largest party, though 18 off a majority);
  • the article’s conclusion is predicated on traditional tribal Conservative loyalty, but that is breaking down fast and very many older voters are dying. A recent poll said that less than half of 2017 Conservative voters intend (at present…) to vote Con next time. That would cull anything up to 200 Conservative MPs if it were to become reality;
  • the EU elections will be a guide, the Peterborough by-election even more important.

I noticed that the article ends on an uncertain note.

Update, 19 May 2019

Brexit Party now on 24% for the next general election (Con 22%, Lab 29%).

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-party-poll-election-farage-tories-labour-lib-dems-change-uk-a8920371.html

If actual voting reflected that, the Conservatives would lose about 172 seats and be left with about 145; Labour would be the largest party in the Commons, with 297 MPs (up 35), and Brexit Party would have a bloc of 105 MPs. LibDems might have 18. That would mean Corbyn as Prime Minister of a minority (or coalition) government, 29 seats short of a Commons majority.

https://www.electoralcalculus.co.uk/userpoll.html

Brexit Party is now holding two rallies daily! Not pathetic little meetings like those of Change UK (a Change UK meeting yesterday had 9 people on the podium and 5 —yes, 5— people in the audience!) Here is the Thursday May 16 2019 Brexit Party meeting in Willenhall, West Midlands, a town with a population of about 29,000; the meeting had about 1,000 attending, obviously mostly locals:

and here (same day!), another Brexit Party meeting in the same region, in Wolverhampton, this time with 1,200 attending! So at least 2,200 people had turned out to support Brexit Party in the same region and on the same day! This seems unstoppable, whatever some msm twitterati and chatterati are saying!

Meanwhile, at a Change UK “rally” (8 members of the public and 2 reporters? Or was it 5 members of the public and 5 reporters?…)

Update, 23 May 2019

Here we are. Election day. Every indication shows Brexit Party powering ahead, leaving Con, Lab, LibDems, let alone Greens and Chukup, in its wake and floundering. I saw an interesting Twitter thread analysis about it all (see below):

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/conservative-party/news/104114/brexit-party-could-rout-senior-tories

Update, 27 May 2019

Update, 30 May 2019

The Peston show on ITV got a psephologist to work out what would happen in the (unlikely but possible) contingency that the next general election saw the same voting as the recent EU elections. The result? Brexit Party 441 seats, Conservatives 1 seat!

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1133780/Brexit-news-latest-Brexit-party-Nigel-Farage-ITV-Peston-Theresa-May-eu-elections

 

Update, 20 November 2019

Well, much water under the bridge! Brexit Party was polling around 12% when Farage decided to pull 317 Brexit Party candidates only 4 weeks before the election. That was followed by another 38. That, in return for a worthless promise from Boris Johnson, a man of no credibility, no integrity, a useless beneficiary of the UK’s sick political system.

Farage‘s ridiculous decision (taken unilaterally and without consultation with the candidates themselves, who had all paid to be considered as candidates) collapsed Brexit Party overnight. Farage killed his party as surely as if he had shot it in the neck.

Now, at time of writing, Brexit Party is in the polls at around 4% and, with 3 weeks to go, is not a serious contender in the General Election. Brexit Party might have won a number of seats while depriving the Conservatives (mainly) of a number of others, but now will be lucky to win even in those constituencies where it had a chance (e.g. Hartlepool).

Why did Farage destroy his own party? I am not the conspiracy theorist some imagine but I do speculate whether this is some kind of Russian operation.

Russia, we are told, wants the UK out of the EU (and, in Putin’s wildest dreams, NATO). Taking that as correct, it may be that Russian strategists were (are?) hoping for “hard Brexit” or “no deal Brexit” (real Brexit), because it weakens the EU (as part of the New World Order or “NWO”) and because a real Brexit might both cause economic/political discontent in the UK down the line and also stimulate Scottish nationalism, with the possibility that Scotland might break off from the UK, and then possibly (probably) decommission the nuclear missile submarine bases there. A break-up of the UK would be a stunning coup for the Russian state in terms of Atlantic geopolitics.

Still speculating, if an immediate “hard Brexit” seemed likely to be blocked by Parliament’s Remain majority in the event of another hung Parliament, then Russian strategists might have decided to strengthen Conservative Party chances by taking out Brexit Party.

Brexit Party is a dictatorship of one man, Farage. To take Brexit Party out of the General Election, Farage alone had to make that decision. He did. So the question is why did Farage take that decision? To my mind, there is no logical reason based on ordinary politics why Farage should take the word of a proven and continual liar such as Boris Johnson. On the other hand, if Farage is or has become an agent under control, then it makes perfect sense.

How do we know that Farage has not been promised (or even paid already) a large sum (£20M is good, £50M is even better) offshore? It makes sense in baldly venal terms but it also makes sense for Farage politically, if Farage has become convinced that a Boris prime ministership with a large majority would result, in a year or two, in a “hard” or even “no deal” Brexit. That way, Farage gets a secret fortune and the political result he has wanted to see since the early 1990s.

True, Farage is wealthy anyway (is supposed to be), but so what? As to whether the Russians would pay really large sums for such purposes…well, the wife of an “oligarch” paid the Conservative Party £160,000 just to have a tennis game with Boris Johnson and David Cameron-Levita. On that basis, £50M to change the whole course of British policy and strategy seems cheap at the price.

There is no direct evidence that Farage is an agent of the Russian state, but he has been shown to have close links with some leading “oligarchs” etc. The Russia of Putin is not the Soviet Union. It operates partly via the uber-wealthy who are beholden to Putin; the Soviet Union operated in this sense in a different way, bureaucratically, via the KGB and its predecessor agencies (NKVD etc), GRU and, pre-WW2, the Comintern.

As we have seen (google, or see my earlier blogs), Boris Johnson, like Farage, is or has been close to some Russian or Russian-Jew “oligarchs”. Then there is the role of Dominic Cummings, Johnson’s “adviser” (who however has been reported as having actually overruled Johnson on some occasions!). I blogged about Cummings a few months ago: https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/08/10/les-eminences-grises-of-dystopia/

There have been those who have implied that Cummings is a kind of Russian agent. My previous assumption was that he might have been an agent of SIS (British agent rather than salaried officer, perhaps, but who knows?) for a while (when he was in Russia for about 3 years after having graduated from university) but again that was just my speculative thought. Still, one would not necessarily preclude the other, especially over time.

I have no evidence that Farage has been paid a huge bribe by Russia; I have no evidence that Cummings has, either. Still, I do wonder. “Thoughts are duty free”, even in the EU…

There is, of course, also the fact that the British Intelligence assessment of some connected matters is not going to be released until after the General Election. It has been held up by Johnson and Cummings. Why?

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/oct/31/boris-johnson-accused-report-russia-dominic-grieve

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-48874147

https://www.politics.co.uk/news/2016/07/19/boris-johnson-once-outed-mi6-spy-for-a-laugh

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/boris-johnson-brexit-jeremy-corbyn-conservative-labour-1-6374964

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/dominic-cummings-links-to-russia-1-6355329

https://dominiccummings.com/about/

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/2019/09/12/dominic-cummings-playing-dangerous-game-relying-heavily-data/