John Demetriou has written eloquently of his despair at the current parlous state of our nation.
I sympathise with his sentiments - but I disagree with his conclusion.
Unlike JD, I haven't worked abroad - in my 39 years I've spent 23 working full-time in various careers, both in and out of uniform, and I've watched from the sidelines as in the last thirteen of those years the country I served and believed in disintegrated.
JD speaks of fairness, and like me notes that 'fairness' is a meaningless concept used only to deny and demean hope and aspiration, to drag everybody down to the same base level. Our 'legal system' has been made 'fair' also - used to achieve the same end. to make the law-abiding victim suffer and the 'poor, deprived' criminal safe.
John tells of returning to a surveillance state, a country of "ID cards, databases, DNA retention and anti-Terror laws. A place where "new 'Hate Crime' laws were in place so that people were criminalised for speaking words that were unpleasant towards certain minorities.". A land of "Health and Safety laws, green environment rules and taxes".
He misses, however, the connection between all these things - the connection between the use of fear to keep a population quiescent and cooperative, and the twisting of fairness to halt the desire for something better.
The link between the two - and make no mistake, it is a calculated process used by the Left since their ascent to power in 1997 - is the creation of apathy.
And it's worked.
We've become afraid to speak out, to say, "NO. We do NOT consent to be governed in this way." We daren't speak out for ourselves - the decent, hard-working people, raising our children as best we can despite the best efforts of the State to create functional illiterates of our offspring, doing our utmost to provide against the ever-encroaching taxation and costs that blight our lifestyles while the nomenklatura enjoy their expenses, hoping against hope we don't get kicked to death in the streets or burned to death in our homes by the feral mob created by the ubiquity of Labour's benefits system.
And because we were afraid to do so, we have begun to believe that there's no point in doing so. We've even allowed ourselves to become convinced that a Hung Parliament (note the recent spin twisting 'Hung' to 'Balanced') could be good for this nation. How? Even if you believe that by some miracle a Hung Parliament will not return Labour to the corridors of power they've abused for so long, how will a knife-edge balance of power, when all the politicians will be solely focused on retaining their own influence and power-base, make the hard and painful decisions that must be taken to repair this nation?
We've allowed ourselves to be convinced by the Left that somehow the true alternative to this systematic destruction of our society, our civil liberties, our finances and our children would be worse. How? How can it be worse than the last thirteen years? HOW?
Unlike JD, I do believe there is a solution. Unlike JD, I do believe there is hope.
Unlike JD, I do believe that a Conservative Government, with a strong majority, can begin to roll back the tide and begin to restore this country to something like it used to be.
There is something that can be done. There is something that you, me, JD and everyone can do. You can make a difference.
If like me, you look at your country and you want it back, then take responsibility and take action.
Vote for Change.
Vote Conservative.
I sympathise with his sentiments - but I disagree with his conclusion.
Unlike JD, I haven't worked abroad - in my 39 years I've spent 23 working full-time in various careers, both in and out of uniform, and I've watched from the sidelines as in the last thirteen of those years the country I served and believed in disintegrated.
JD speaks of fairness, and like me notes that 'fairness' is a meaningless concept used only to deny and demean hope and aspiration, to drag everybody down to the same base level. Our 'legal system' has been made 'fair' also - used to achieve the same end. to make the law-abiding victim suffer and the 'poor, deprived' criminal safe.
John tells of returning to a surveillance state, a country of "ID cards, databases, DNA retention and anti-Terror laws. A place where "new 'Hate Crime' laws were in place so that people were criminalised for speaking words that were unpleasant towards certain minorities.". A land of "Health and Safety laws, green environment rules and taxes".
He misses, however, the connection between all these things - the connection between the use of fear to keep a population quiescent and cooperative, and the twisting of fairness to halt the desire for something better.
The link between the two - and make no mistake, it is a calculated process used by the Left since their ascent to power in 1997 - is the creation of apathy.
And it's worked.
We've become afraid to speak out, to say, "NO. We do NOT consent to be governed in this way." We daren't speak out for ourselves - the decent, hard-working people, raising our children as best we can despite the best efforts of the State to create functional illiterates of our offspring, doing our utmost to provide against the ever-encroaching taxation and costs that blight our lifestyles while the nomenklatura enjoy their expenses, hoping against hope we don't get kicked to death in the streets or burned to death in our homes by the feral mob created by the ubiquity of Labour's benefits system.
And because we were afraid to do so, we have begun to believe that there's no point in doing so. We've even allowed ourselves to become convinced that a Hung Parliament (note the recent spin twisting 'Hung' to 'Balanced') could be good for this nation. How? Even if you believe that by some miracle a Hung Parliament will not return Labour to the corridors of power they've abused for so long, how will a knife-edge balance of power, when all the politicians will be solely focused on retaining their own influence and power-base, make the hard and painful decisions that must be taken to repair this nation?
We've allowed ourselves to be convinced by the Left that somehow the true alternative to this systematic destruction of our society, our civil liberties, our finances and our children would be worse. How? How can it be worse than the last thirteen years? HOW?
Unlike JD, I do believe there is a solution. Unlike JD, I do believe there is hope.
Unlike JD, I do believe that a Conservative Government, with a strong majority, can begin to roll back the tide and begin to restore this country to something like it used to be.
There is something that can be done. There is something that you, me, JD and everyone can do. You can make a difference.
If like me, you look at your country and you want it back, then take responsibility and take action.
Vote for Change.
Vote Conservative.
9 comments:
The only trouble, Mr D, is that the Tories have no interest in returning our nation to us. After all, they kicked off the great UK giveaway in 1972 with the ECA. CMD has reneged on his "cast iron gaurantee". No referendum (in or out) means I cannot in all conscience vote for them.
I am convinced that we have to leave the EU. Immediately. We should trade with our friends in Europe but I like habeas corpus, I like jury trials, I like being presumed innocent. And a whole swathe of other things that the EU has taken away from me. Or, more accurately, that the Labour government gave away. Things that were hundreds of years in the gathering.
I actually believe that the Tories will take the bull by the horns and right all sorts of wrongs perpetrated on us by the inept Labour party, but they aren't singing my song.
Not where the EU is concerned, and that is enough for me to place my little x next to someone else's party.
CR.
Thanks for taking the trouble to read and comment, CR. I should clarify.
I don't think that simply voting Conservative is some panacea that will create a land of milk and honey, with our cups running over and all that.
I don't agree with their stance on Europe either.
I don't think they're perfect.
But what I do believe is that with our political system, and with the situation we currently have, they are the only party with any chance of even starting to make the changes.
And, what's more, a vote for any other party simply dilutes the share in a system already skewed towards the party that has damaged this nation so much in the last thirteen years.
In my opinion, voting Conservative may not be the Utopian choice - but it's the only one that's right.
D
Well, as much as I agree with you, and I do, genuinely, a vote for the Tories up here in SNPLand won't help you guys south of the border. This constituency is controlled by the Nats. Last time around they got 51% of the votes. I don't even think we have a UKIP candidate.
Woe is me!
CR.
"We've become afraid to speak out, to say, "NO. We do NOT consent to be governed in this way."
Not entirely, there have been laws made that have prevented people saying what they think, and that have prevented people taking to the streets without prior consent from the Police.
If 'change' means rolling back state interference and suppression to pre-1997 then count me in - but I haven't yet been convinced that it can, and will, happen.
I'm not convinced that, for example, ACPO will be brought to heel.
Hi
Thanks for the references and an interesting piece.
I completely disagree that the Tories are any kind of option or alternative here, however.
Cameron has made it fairly clear that he doesn't intend to change much. A few tweaks here, a couple of 'exciting innovations' there - it's all window dressing and puff to distract from the fact they are useless social democrats who agree with Labour on the important issues.
The state will maintain the same extensive functions. The justice system will continue to be a joke. In short, they are part of the problem, not the solution.
And the alternative to the Tories are, to coin Hitchens's expression, a dad's army blazer and cravat party - UKIP. Which is what I'm going to vote for, knowing it'll make naff all difference to anything because they won't get anywhere.
I confess I've managed my aspirations down to "Let's hope they don't make it any worse". I'm not seriously expecting any improvement because I don't think the legal framework that Cameron sticks to will ever allow it.
I fit the Chihuahua profile - Conservative in my head, UKIP in my heart, but because of how this constituency divides, I'm anxious to stop the Lib Dems getting in.
Here, I can't get my first choice, but if I don't support my second choice I could end up with my least-preferred option. Moreover, if the seat went to the LDS that might not be enough to dislodge Labour nationally. No, in this constituency I can't risk it.
Interesting article. Personally I'd love to be able to support the Conservatives, but I just can't believe they're going to be any different. In David Cameron, I see the same vacuous salesmanship as Tony Blair.
There is a slight possibility that they might begin to change things. But consider their time in opposition. In the past few years, everything has been awful, and getting worse. And the Conservatives have said... what? Nothing. No criticism, no alternative ideas. Support for Labour on every issue.
Where is our new Thatcher, giving us confidence that things will get better, refusing to be quiet, speaking her mind no matter what the lefty media say?
Whoever wins this election, we'll get a social democrat government. Better for all of us if it's Labour or Liberal Democrat. At least that will teach the Tories that sucking up to the Guardianistas isn't a winning strategy: that it is time to stop appeasing the Left and start fighting properly.
Whatever the drawbacks and side effects of Cameron the Cancer Consultant and his Conservative chemo-therapy, it cannot possibly be worse that the baleful Brown tumour which has metastasised throughout our vital Organs of State. It may be too late to save the body politic, given the concomitant global epidemic vicious virus, Gramsci Hegemonius Syndrome - but removal of the Brown Tumour (by the electorate's scalpel) - followed by Cameron's chemo for a full 5-year term is the only rational option available and will give us a time. Who knows - something better may be discovered in the next five years and save the nation.
Certainly the queer quack cures of the light-on-their-loofahs LibDems must be resisted at all costs. 'Clegg's Cure-All'is crap; useful only as a skin lotion for Mark Oaten - WTF let him loose again for TV interviews, btw??? Ugghh!
Huxley had it right with soma and the feelies, though whether Labour deliberately created it or simply rode the wave of public anxiety and technology-induced popular apathy is debatable.
The reaction to the televised debate said it all - a substantial proportion of the electorate are making no attempt to use their brains, relying instead on televisual images to dictate an immediate, unreasoning reaction.
(After your impassioned rhetoric, can we hope for another song parody in the near future?)
Post a Comment