The Queen’s Active Role in the Right Wing Coup 1159

Our obsequious media is actively perpetuating the myth that the monarch can do no wrong, and is apolitical. In fact the monarchy has been active and absolutely central to the seizure of power from the Westminster parliament in a right wing coup. Yesterday’s collaboration at Balmoral between the Queen and Jacob Rees Mogg is only the latest phase.

The monarch appoints the UK Prime Minister. The convention is that this must be the person who can command the support of the majority in the House of Commons. That does not necessarily have to be from a single party, it can be via a coalition or pact with other parties, but the essential point, established since Hanoverian times, is that the individual must have a majority in the Commons.

The very appointment of Boris Johnson by Elizabeth Saxe Coburg Gotha was a constitutional outrage. Johnson may have been selected by Conservative Party members, but that is not the qualification to be PM. Johnson very plainly did not command a majority in the House of Commons, proven by the fact that still at no stage has he demonstrated that he does. I do not write merely with hindsight.

Johnson’s flagship policy was always No Deal Brexit. Contrary to the monarchist propaganda spewed out across the entire MSM, not only is it untrue that the Queen had “no constitutional choice” but to appoint Johnson, the Queen had a clear constitutional duty not to appoint a Prime Minister whose flagship policy had already been specifically voted down time and again by the House of Commons.

The Queen has now doubled down on this original outrage by proroguing the Westminster parliament in conspiracy with old Etonians Rees Mogg and Johnson, specifically so that the House of Commons cannot vote down Johnson.

The monarchy will always be an extremely useful institution in promoting the political aims of the upper classes, not least because of the ludicrous media promulgation of its infallibility. When you have former Prime Minister John Major, senior Tories like Philip Hammond and Michael Heseltine, and the Speaker of the House of Commons himself all talking of “consitutional outrage”, it is plainly preposterous to insist that the monarchy cannot, by definition, have done anything wrong.

The Queen has appointed a Prime Minister who does not have the support of the House of Commons and then has conspired to prevent the House of Commons from obstructing her Prime Minister. That is not the action of a politically neutral monarchy. The institution should have been abolished decades ago. I do hope that all those who recognise the constitutional outrage, will acknowledge the role of the monarchy and that the institution needs to be swiftly abolished.


Unlike our adversaries including the Integrity Initiative, the 77th Brigade, Bellingcat, the Atlantic Council and hundreds of other warmongering propaganda operations, this blog has no source of state, corporate or institutional finance whatsoever. It runs entirely on voluntary subscriptions from its readers – many of whom do not necessarily agree with the every article, but welcome the alternative voice, insider information and debate.

Subscriptions to keep this blog going are gratefully received.

Choose subscription amount from dropdown box:

Recurring Donations


Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

1,159 thoughts on “The Queen’s Active Role in the Right Wing Coup

1 3 4 5 6 7
    • Loony

      Probably best to stick with innuendo intended to smear the character of Priti Patel, as to do otherwise may require some serious analysis of Anglo-French aspect of the migrant crisis.

      If migrants in France are prepared to risk their lives crossing the channel then surely there must either be something very wrong with France or something very right with the UK. France being “bad” and the UK being “good” does not fit at all with endless prophesies of catastrophe made with regard to the UK leaving the EU.

      All experts seem united in their view that leaving the EU would be a bad thing. If this is accepted as being true then the only other explanation is that the migrants crossing the channel are basically stupid and unable to understand the benefits of being a migrant in the EU as opposed to a migrant in the UK. So the wonderful tolerant liberals so in love with the EU and limitless immigration are invited to state whether they believe migrants to be terminally stupid or whether they believe that the migrants are broadly correct when they consistently act as they could be expected to act should they believe that the EU is inimical to their interests.

      All ad-hominem responses gratefully received.

      • Republicofscotland

        “So the wonderful tolerant liberals so in love with the EU and limitless immigration ”

        Oh I wouldn’t say that, limitless immigration is seen by the EU as the way to go. Many immigrants arrive on the shores of Europe in jam packed boats that reach their destinations by the grace of god.

        With passports torn up and no real way to identify the immigrants countries of origin, what should the EU do? Throw them into the sea?

        In my opinion the rise in immigrantion to Europe is the fault of the West. We bombed and killed and pillaged their countries, and even now some like Libya are deliberately kept in a state of turmoil, the Blair’s and Bush’s of this world saw to that. We are reaping what we sowed as they say.

        As for immigrants wanting in the UK, they obviously feel that the UK can offer a better way of life than France, or they already have friends or family in the UK.

        • Ralph

          Except that somebody is PAYING them to come here, anybody else think that that would be soros (etc)?
          And again, why do some think they have the right to come here, yet we who are Brit, do not have the RIGHT to say we don’t want them? If somebody wants to enter your home, do you – or do you not – have the RIGHT to stop them doing so?
          Simple solution to those who destroy their passports/refuse to say which country they are from: have a recording in most/all languages, telling them they have ONE minute to say where they are from, or they get shipped to whatever country will take them. (Obviously, Britain would have to pay that country, but to ensure they can never come back anonymously, take biometrics etc).

          • Republicofscotland

            “telling them they have ONE minute to say where they are from, or they get shipped to whatever country will take them. ”

            And what if no country wants them, what then?

          • Ralph

            August 31, 2019 at 19:42 “we who are Brit”. The sun never sets on British hypocrisy…

            You obviously don’t do logic: kindly explain how I am responsible for what others did before me, or stfu.

          • Ralph

            Ros: As I said, pay a country. Obviously, if the illegal STUPIDLY refuses to want to get sent back to his own country, he’ll know he’ll probably not get treated as well as in his own, i.e. his own fault for acting dumb.

          • George

            “kindly explain how I am responsible for what others did before me ”

            By saying “We who are Brit” you are accepting collective responsibilty.

          • Ralph

            George August 31, 2019 at 22:07 “kindly explain how I am responsible for what others did before me”
            By saying “We who are Brit” you are accepting collective responsibilty.

            How obtuse are you? Obviously very. Am I responsible for the actions of those Brits before I was born? For warmongers and mass murderers like bliar et al??? Especially when I have been VERY critical of that PoS???

            If I say ‘I am an human’, does that make me responsible for all the negative actions for everybody on earth? Am I also responsible for your stupidity etc?

          • Bill Oldroyd

            If anyone is paying, apart from the poor migrants, it is definitely not Soros. The people promoting this dreadful trade are far more likely to be someone on the extreme right. The migrant crisis is an essential part of the undermining of Europe. It arises from the promotion of wars and disturbance on the periphery of Europe, something that Europe seeks to prevent, but is driven by the United States and some European leaders who go along with them. Why do you keep trotting out this Soros rubbish ? Can’t you see the bigger picture ?

          • giyane


            1/ The UK
            colonial collective has organised soft power in Eastern Europe by means of immigration.

            2/ Ditto with African and Middle Eastern nations who are amassed by MI6 as spies who one day can be used against their countries of origin .

            In both cases the bait us the UK’s benefit system.

            This is above our pay grade mate. It is organised by the collective bastardate of this colonizing nation.

      • Ian

        More superficial, scripted, weak, anodyne statements from someone who is so far from the action, they just repeat whatever members they have read on their favourite alt-right sites. If you don’t provide an actual argument, then don’t expect one back.

      • Mist001

        Part of the reason that migrants make their way to the UK is the common language of English. I live in France and many more immigrants speak English than French people do. If you go to a country where you can be understood and you can understand, then that makes your situation a whole lot easier.

      • SA

        This is all nonsense and you know it.
        The system is that of passing the buck with a touch of musical chairs. There is no reason why U.K. should not have had a strict policy with regards immigration harmonised and that the whole EU does not address the question collectively. Work it out for yourself.

      • nevermind

        Maybe they are in love with the rogue financial system, so fettered by the establishment and those who can’t be touched by unexplained wealth orders,UWA’s or the even blunter toothpick of Account freezing orders AFO. They appreciate that the vast sums they paid to come here and those who organised it, can be regained by simply opening a bank account or two, once they have a roof over their head and a job paying slave wages, and act as a clearing house for regular cash payments of unexplained wealth from second and third parties to stash away in ‘unexplained wealth islands under British jurisdiction, some 40% + of all ill gotten untaxed gains in the world, a very attractive goal for oligarch immigrants and others to expect and follow.

        they know that this arrangement used by the Crown; and those who just don’t want to pay taxes here, a never changing system that survived all reforms regulations and rules designed, regs and rules that have divided a country into haves and have nots. They might arrive poor and in need of help and what I have described might just be a small minority who are doing this, with the vast majority working hard in low paid jobs, living in hovels caravans if they are lucky, workers who are effectively slaves, with many having their passports seized in lieu of advanced debts agreed to.

        Foreign employers of the middle eastern hue owning much of London and the City cesspool controlling the above jealously, are known to treat their servants like slaves, a fact of life in the UK today, just as in the olden days many here hanker for to return.
        Many coming here have relatives and or friends that have settled here and are working, still able to fend for themselves and an attraction in itself, others are in sheer desperation to flee the increasing unfair/undemocratic/persecution for speaking out in their countries, governed by despots and crooks or ex bankers, who launder their moneys here, hallo Mr. and Mrs.Hajiyeva and others, they know why the City of London Corp. is such a magnet for all.

    • Laguerre

      It’s remarkable that there was no result announced from that meeting of Patel in France. I presume there was not that much enthusiasm to do what she wanted. Not surprising after what she’s said she’s going to do to French citizens in Britain.

      • michael norton

        Quite so Dungroanin,
        There was/is an Islamic State Enclave, nestled against the Israeli held Golan, that seemed to be magically protected.
        From this enclave you could cross into Jordan ( against Syria and Islamic State in the Syrian “Civil” War but very pro America)
        you could cross from Israeli held Golan into Syrian held Golan.
        It is speculated that the White Helmets were extracted from the Syrian held Golan into the Israeli held Golan, not long after “The Family Holiday of Priti Patel”
        some think she was representing Boris Johnson, her boss, in offering U.K. money to set up/run hospitals for “Syrian” escapees.

        Some think she was paving the way for Israel to join FIVE EYES

  • N_

    Writing in the Sunday Express, 13 Jan 2019, Michael Booker quotes a friend of Dominic Cummings’s at Oxford University who says that Cummings used to hang with a rowdy mob but nonetheless always avoided the ire of university officials, causing his pals to believe he was being “groomed for MI5 by one of the dons who had a reputation for recruiting would-be spies”.

    Presumably MI6 is meant, not MI5. But still. After university Cummings spent three years in Russia. That was in the time of Boris Yeltsin. WHO PAID? Did the money come through Oxford University or more likely through one of its colleges?

    As for the identity of the talent spotter, who have we got on the list? Robin Lane Fox? (Have a look at Augustus Pitt Rivers for some family links – for those who have got strong stomachs.) Norman Stone, who died this June. Anyone else?

    I suspect Cummings’s interest in regurgitating theories of command culture and “OODA loops” and in George Mueller at NASA and John Boyd the fighter pilot may have been put into his head by a single person.

    Perhaps Lane Fox poured the garbage into his nut and Stone, one-time adviser to Margaret Thatcher, got him the job with Michael Gove?

    What I would like to know is what he did in Russia for THREE YEARS. There is no way that setting up a small airline that failed because he fell out with the KGB can be the whole of the story. But the FSB will surely have a pretty good picture of what the main themes in the story were, and I can’t see how Cummings would have been allowed to move into his current post unless he had been in with at least a powerful faction in MI6 since his Oxford days.

    Who is the “horse” here and was Michael Gove himself another of its wagons?

    Meanwhile where did the Klute club gets its ecstasy and other illegal drugs from?

    • N_

      Was Dominic Cummings spotted for MI6 by Norman Stone?

      I originally wrote “Perhaps Lane Fox poured the garbage into his nut and Stone, one-time adviser to Margaret Thatcher, got him the job with Michael Gove?

      But further research suggests it was probably Norman Stone, the Scottish Tory drunkard who advised Margaret Thatcher and was known for abusing female students, who played both roles.

      There’s nothing some academics enjoy more than hearing students regurgitate their way of thinking back at them and then giving them a helping hand imagining they must be so clever. Stone had extensive contacts in Eastern Europe. After one wizard wheeze in which he tried to smuggle a person across the Czechoslovak border into Austria, he was caught and got jailed – albeit only for three months. It sounds highly relevant that Stone’s father was a fighter pilot, and not only that but it was the British airforce (“Royal Air Force”) that paid for Stone to be educated at the Glasgow Academy from which he then went to Caius College at Cambridge.

      My guess is that Stone put Cummings on to John Boyd or at least encouraged him. Boyd basically built from what makes a successful fighter pilot into a theory of what makes a well-functioning organisation and how evolution and human society work. (Yawn!)

      One of Stone’s main hate figures was Edward Heath.


      In Turkey Stone was involved in denying the Armenian holocaust. The same kind of vileness features in the backgrounds of many “right wing thinkers”, such as Roger Scruton for example. Give ’em money and they’ll say anything, and they’ll do it with an arrogant tone in their voice too.

      I have to wonder whether Michael Booker who wrote the article about Cummings that I cited is related to Norman Stone’s second wife Christine, who was formerly married to Christopher Booker. If so, one could imagine that Michael might not be too fond either of Norman Stone or of an arrogant “great mind” tosser student of Stone’s like Cummings.

      • N_

        Boyd originated the “OODA loop” (observe–orient–decide–act) that Dominic Cummings goes on and ON about, as if chimpanzees and dogs don’t do it.

        • David

          Brexit is one thing, I’m currently reading about AI moderated “hyperwar” where the OODA response time-cycle is reduced to near instantaneous action…absent human decision making.

          Cummings , with his particular focus on the details, will use as many valid models in whatever sphere he finds them, and cross-purpose them to reach his (internal) objective, whatever that is.

          I just spent the last week in the UK, and felt unable to post here on CM blog from there, my (internal) threat-warning indicators were screaming, the nice Brit is being kept in such a tight box, many people I met are so misled, there is a virtually single Pravda source of information.

          It was a seriously oppressive (controlled atmosphere) like my visit to the Soviet Union, just with better food and places like the IKEA at Loanhead offering better shopping, the lying UK politicos are manifestly now making it impossible to say which is which (SU/UK, man/pig)

      • lysias

        Did Norman Stone write anything about Bismarck? It struck me that Johnson’s coup is the sort of thing Bismarck did, e.g., in his handling of the Prussian legislature in the 1860s by taking advantage of a constitutional ambiguity. Then I read on Cummings’s Wikipedia page that he is a great admirer of Bismarck.

        • lysias

          I have discovered a review by Norman Stone of books by A.J.P. Taylor where he praises as masterpieces books by Taylor about Bismarck. But the review doesn’t say what Stone himself thought of Bismarck.

        • N_

          Norman Stone taught Dominic Cummings about Bismarck at Oxford, according to this source. I’m not sure in what capacity – whether he gave a course of lectures devoted to Germany under Bismarck or to “Europe transformed” in that period or whether he tutored Cummings for some other don’s lecture course. Cummings thinks PPE is crap and Ancient and Modern History is the dog’s doo-dahs. Perhaps he has had a worshippy attitude towards Stone for years. I wonder what kind of scrapes he got into in Russia during the three years he spent there after he graduated from Oxford. His airline project is described as having found itself on the wrong side of the KGB. Who paid for him to stay in Russia and who was investing in this stuff? You can’t just set up an airline because you want to or because you think you’d be good at doing it.

      • Laguerre

        Would Norman Stone have been considered sufficiently reliable? According to an obit I read, his first work, on the Eastern Front in the 1WW, was considered brilliant. Did I read it? I certainly planned to. But after that the work steadily declined, and his last publications were thought ridiculous. No doubt alcoholism, and too many weekends in Soho, from which he only emerged rarely to see his students in Oxford. Interfering with female students would have been part of that.

    • lysias

      Cummings ended getting a First in Ancient and Modern History. Presumably the authorities at Oxford were aware of how good a student he was.

      Robin Lane Fox has been mentioned. I happened to be studying for my final exams (Schools) at Oxford in Greats when he began his teaching career by holding a class for the students at my Oxford College, Worcester, who were about to take Greats exams. His advice was to follow Oxford received wisd om, which was no doubt a good way to get a Second, which is all most of the British students wanted. I instead said in my exam papers what I really thought, and got a First.

      • Laguerre

        Not that I would want to belittle your achievement, but getting a first in Oxford is not that exceptional these days. Myself I got a third, at about your time, a much more difficult achievement. No doubt the reason I subsequently became a professor in the Sorbonne (Habbabkuk and his successors, get out your notebooks, you need to record this admission, so you have something to attack me with.)

          • Laguerre

            Yes, I quite appreciate that. I equally don’t think Oxford is as great as it makes itself out to be, as seemed to be the background of your remark. Certainly in the field I worked in, they weren’t better than other universities, just well provided for in terms of finance and ease of life.

      • Deepgreenpuddock

        I have no polite way to put this but the impressive academic achievements just don’t ring true. You both(Lysias and Laguerre) sound like a pair of pub bore bullshitters. With such impressive academic prowess and scintillating political insight I wonder why you don’t set up your own blog.Unfortunately your comment below, Laguerre, is incoherent.

      • N_

        That’s a nice bit of info that says a lot in its nutshell, @lysias. It is reminiscent of Cambridge too. “What degree class are you aiming for? Okay, well you should answer the questions like this.” These guys believe so deeply in a natural social order and in sociobiology. Interestingly Cummings worked at the DfE with a “Maths for Presidents” idea with which the Old Etonian Timothy “I’m related to the author of the ‘Complete Plain Words’ but I can’t write for toffees” Gowers was also involved, and he is keen on the “education” of a small scientifically and mathematically clued-up elite as practised in Israel.

  • Baron

    It seems that nothing short of no-deal exit could deliver what the 17.4mn burghers of this country voted for in June 2016 (after four decades plus of brainwashing to extoll the benefits of the undemocratic construct), which is a full sovereignty – we will pass our own laws, our judges will have the final say, and we will control who is allowed to come join us here. Why the wailing, occupying of the Parliament building, obstructing traffic on highways and streets, an illegal activity anyway, the police should take note.

    • N_

      That’s rubbish. The brainwashing has been by the right wing press (which as Edward Heath noticed happens to be “foreign-owned”) which ever since the 1970s has portrayed the EEC and then the EC and the EU not as an international treaty organisation that Britain belongs to as a full member but as a foreign power. If I think of how many times I have read stories about some straight-backed British prime minister on his way to Brussels or somewhere else on the continent to tell those excitable foreign buggers what’s what, I’m going to vomit.

      I doubt you could really care less about the “sovereignty” that you claim to care about so much. Have you heard of the foreign military bases in Britain that are here as part of an arrangement with a foreign power that you never got to vote on in a referendum ? Do they annoy you at all? I doubt it. The right wing press hasn’t whipped up opposition to them or linked them in racists’ minds to immigrants swamping “us”/

      Britain is a sovereign country and could renege without notice from any treaty it has agreed. Of course its credibility among international lenders might then take a dive. Do you care much about diplomacy or law-making or trade? Or only when they impact on immigration?

      It seems that nothing short of no-deal exit could deliver what the 17.4mn burghers of this country voted for in June 2016 (after four decades plus of brainwashing to extoll the benefits of the undemocratic construct), which is a full sovereignty – we will pass our own laws, our judges will have the final say, and we will control who is allowed to come join us here.

      Yeah – that last one is the most important for you, isn’t it, as it is for 95% of Leave voters? Is there actually anything else you care about where Brexit is concerned? Do you want cucumbers to be less straight? Don’t you slice them into discs anyway?

      You want “us”, at long last, to decide “who comes here”, don’t you? And of course, who doesn’t come here.

      You don’t like it that so many people are here who either aren’t “from” here – or who may have been born here but their parents or grandparents weren’t and whose skins aren’t as pale as yours, or who strut around using non-native surnames, right? Who are they to walk along “our” streets as if they own the place? Who are they to tell “us” what to do?

      Let me ask you a question without putting words in your mouth. Do you think Enoch Powell was right or not? I mean in what he predicted about non-white immigration inevitably leading the way towards future racial conflict if it wasn’t curbed?

      And before any nicy lefty liberals jump on me, recall that the current British prime minister has used exactly the same racist word, “piccaninnies”, to describe black people as was used by Enoch Powell in his famous “blood” speech. Leave voters are almost exactly the same demographic as Powellites.

      “We care about sovereignty so much that we want to leave the EU in order that we can decide who comes here” equals “Enoch was right”.

      Why should people who hold such views be allowed to take our EU passports away from the other 40 million of us? Why can’t they be satisfied with scrawling “White Power” on their own British passports instead, over where it says “European Union”?

      • N_

        What cowards Leave voters are! They haven’t got the guts to put on white hoods, but they creep along to polling stations and put their “X” where it says “Leave the EU” instead. Screw your vote and your democracy!

      • Ralph

        N_: you don’t do simple arithmetic, do you? 1 voice in 27 is a minority, whereas being independent we decide our own country’s fate. The USE would be 1 country, namely places like England would cease to be a country; you also don’t understand the simple – yet profound – ‘ever closer union’.
        P.S. I hope you do a lot of (self-inflicted) vomiting.

        • N_

          @Ralph – Do you mean 1 in 28? The EU has 28 members and Britain is 1 of the 28. Countries can be inside other countries. England is inside Britain at the moment but doesn’t seem to be on its way to expiration.

          • Ralph

            N-: I’m obviously thinking ahead, on Nov 01, it should be 27. England is part of the United Kingdom.

          • N_

            @Ralph – So which “1 voice in 27” were you thinking of? Can you please tell me that.

            And England is not part of the United Kingdom. You were the one who introduced the concept of “country”. You should distinguish it from the concept of “political regime”.

            You clearly are not arguing from having marshalled your premises and then drawn logical conclusions. When you say “sovereignty” is the thing, you mean you think it’s been eroded by immigrants who haven’t integrated, and that if the jackboot doesn’t start its work then foreign hordes with dark skins, foreign languages, and in many cases with Islam as their religion, will overrun the place completely, don’t you?

          • Ralph

            N_September 1, 2019 at 13:24

            “@Ralph – So which “1 voice in 27” were you thinking of? Can you please tell me that.

            And England is not part of the United Kingdom.”

            Try again, this time forming a coherent argument with relevant facts.

      • Mr Shigemitsu

        “Of course its credibility among international lenders might then take a dive”

        The UK has no need of “international lenders”.

        The UK government owns the BoE, which is the monopoly issuer of Sterling.

        It certainly doesn’t need to be “lent” its own sovereign currency by anyone, let alone foreigners!

        Unless you are a supporter of neo-liberalism, its unwise to adopt and proselytise their memes.

    • Dungroanin

      ‘17.4mn burghers ‘
      Of which only 5.2 million are turkey burgers who voted for tha poundshop Enochs hard brexit party.

      What happened to the other 12.2 millions?

      No wonder you propagandists are shitting yourselves about a confirmatory vote and a general election and supporting a move that will suspend parliament and instigate a emergency so that a gnu can be foisted!

      Not just turkiee – scardy rabbits – run run,run!

  • Goose

    On who would make best Prime Minister:

    B. Johnson: 45%
    J. Swinson: 19%
    J. Corbyn: 17%

    via @Survation, 29 – 30 Aug

    George Galloway describes this as “catastrophic”. I can understand why he despairs.

    However, while it’s doubtless depressing, it isn’t catastrophic. I despair that 45% of the public think Johnson is the best person to PM when nobody even knows what policies he and his govt would pursue, aside from Brexit – and even on that it’s not even clear whether he wants to no-deal or to try to bring May’s deal back.

    • Goose

      To add..
      The reasons why I don’t think it catastrophic: Theresa May enjoyed similar if not higher ratings; Johnson is enjoying a honeymoon and the sort of press coverage that would make Kim Jong-un blush ; Corbyn and Labour are starved of publicity – the only time they get ink is in a deeply negative context.

      An election campaign and a popular manifesto plus TV leaders’ debates turned the tide from an equally gloomy position in 2017.

    • giyane


      Quis rogabit ipsos rogantes? . Who will check the opinions of the opinion checkers?

      not the pro-roguers of parliament I suspect.

      • Goose

        For IpsosMORI and YouGov idd, but Survation are usually more comforting.

        At least, based on this poll, Swinson can hardly crow about Corbyn’s unpopularity.

        We can all agree Corbyn has political problems. He leads a parliamentary party full of unreformed, unapologetic Blairites. And he and Seumas Milne don’t seem to have any strategy to change that situation.

  • nevermind

    All Labour Mp’s who vote with the Conservatives no deal option, should be deselected imediately.

    Getting a decision should be taken by a citizens assembly that does not consist of pundits and or unbalanced politicians.
    Hong Kong is here, as much as there, we knew for 5 years they could not get a free vote, here we are now in our 11th year of austerity, it feels as if soon many causes will combine as climate concerns demand drastic changes.that will not be reciprocated by big business.
    We have to control and bring the square mile to bear. Without controlling offshore no tax regimes for their detrimental effect to the world economy.
    Ecocide such as encouraging ‘development’ in internationally important regions such as Amazonia and or Kamchatka/ sibirian forrests, by slash and burn methods, should be instantly faced with sanctions, closing of all private accounts anywhere of those who carry out these deliberat acts.
    If such actions are free to be carried out, with two fingers to the future of our kids, then none of our politicians have an ounce of spine left.
    After the horrendous lab results showing that the deliberate induced earthquakes and poisoneous well fluids introduced into the strata, with unknown future outcomes known, to the springs and wells in the Bowland district, Fracking should not just be halted, but banned.
    Alternative energy production methods are advancing at a speed of knots and their risks, in comparrison, are negligible imho. Nuclear is too expensive, risky and artificially incentivised for other reasons than just energy, we should keep well away from it and replace it with CSPplants.

  • Lord Palmerston

    The voters in the Scottish independence referendum got it wrong. The voters in the Brexit referendum got it wrong. That’s established, right?

    So, are there any other popular votes whose result should, in the furtherance of democracy, be disregarded?

    • Rowan Berkeley

      ” are there any other popular votes whose result should, in the furtherance of democracy, be disregarded?”
      @Lord Palmerston: Yes. All referenda should be disregarded. They are incompatible with representative democracy.

      • Komodo

        But is representative democracy, democracy? Look at it. At least a referendum allows ne to express my own opinion, unfiltered through what ‘my’ party wants to think is my opinion, and it gives a clear answer to a simple question. Which representative democracy then declines to implement.

        I agree the two are incompatible, but that’s because our corrupt and mendacious representatives have stolen their power from its rightful owners. Us, by any ethical definition of democracy.

    • Laguerre

      The first referendum in 1975 was disregarded. The future of the EU was well announced at the time. Why should the 2nd referendum in 2016 be considered as sacred and disallowing a third, now we know more?

    • N_

      @Lord Palmerston – Well most people think it’s OK for the commodity economy and wage-labour to exist too, and social hierarchy. Popular vote – that’s like pressing a red button, right? Something like Eurovision, is it? Tell you what, let’s rerun the EURef and if you want to vote for Brexit you’ve got to show yourself in your true colours and turn up at the polling station wearing a white hood. Deal? Truth is good, right?

  • Tatyana

    I learned the opinion that the Queen is ceremonial and decorative figure. And earlier I learned that the Prime Minister is not elected, but appointed position. So, you do not have a head of state, which is chosen by the people? Something like presidential elections?

    • Rowan Berkeley

      “you do not have a head of state, which is chosen by the people? Something like presidential elections?”
      @Tatyana: nope. London mayors have sometines seemed to serve as popular tribunes. European parliamentary (MEP) elections have functioned as protest votes against Westminster, facilitating the Brexit agitation (and micro-targeted troublemaking from Bannon & Co).

      • RandomComment

        Generally the idea is we vote for representatives for the House of Commons (representing commoners)

        Every election cycle, political parties hoping to place their candidates into seats of power to “represent” us, produce a manifesto which details what they promise to do in government, if the people vote for them.

        Once people vote whatever promises they deem most worthy, these public servants slavishly toil day and night to enact the will of the people in their best interests, even if they’re too stupid to know what that is.

        A lucky consequence of this is being able to ignore everything you promised in your manifesto 😉

        • Tatyana

          the House of Commons is not the chief body of your country, isn’t it?

          I’ve already commented on the promises, it’s just the same in Russia 🙂 Sergey Shnur best expresses our attitude to it.

          • RandomComment

            Perhaps I could argue that the illusion of democracy is woven into our national fabric, at least more so than Russia? Perhaps not, would be happy to concede because…well you you better 🙂

            But assuming so, this is a powerful dynamic

          • Tatyana

            Well, you just name the date when the people of your country last protested en masse and thus forced the elites to change the course of events – as simple as that, @RandomComment.
            People of the West often refer to some abstract “rights” they have. I mean the right to protest 🙂 Oh, it makes me laugh 🙂 As if it ever helped 🙂
            *The same mechanism is in ‘the book of complaints and suggestions’ we have in every shop. Even if the complaints are read by the management, so what? there’s no mechanism for the management to react. Just a valve for annoyed customers these books are.

          • Tatyana

            mine was 1991, USSR dissolved, we accomodated the prevailing mood of the society with the general politics of the state’s management. Got rid of communism and started capitalism, private property etc.
            Sorry, cannot remember what exacly your great protest has changed?

          • Ralph

            Tatyana, we have the House of Conmen, and the House of Frauds, and they meet in ParLIEment, when we sometimes have democrazy or demoncracy.

          • Tatyana

            for starters – don’t believe me if I say I spent this Saturday making food preparations for my family – beef, pork, chicken, fish, cereals, potatoes and vegetables – do not believe that I even had time today to ship my Amazon order and to load dirty dishes in the dishwasher machine. it cannot be that a Russian woman can go to the supermarket for food and then cook them, and then pay the bill for gasoline, water and electricity – and all this is under Putin’s control 🙂

            of course we live here in the wild desert and get food by hunting with a gunб and by raising chickens in his backyard, chasing bears and escaping the terrible frost with vodka 🙂

            trust the people you like best. you will not get closer to the truth, but what difference does it make if you feel better that somewhere there’s a very backward country, and you are still doing very well in comparison?

          • RandomComment

            Putin – anyone who says “Europe and the West thrives on a culture of pedophilia and satanism” is someone I can respect

            That’s the only thing I have said to you tonight that is without irony

          • Dungroanin

            The last time a mass protest changed policy was the poll-tax riots.

            That will seem insignificant if a gnu is foisted upon us and we are deprived of an election much longer.

          • John2o2o


            Many of the people here are fervent Scottish nationalists. They consider their country to be Scotland and they bitterly resent the United Kingdom. (Chief among them being Mr Murray himself).

      • nevermind

        Simple answer Tatyana is, that during elections all policy description’s, promises and words in a manifesto are merely aspirational, according to judges these have not got to be followed up with real concrete implementations of said manifesto, so they can go around and promise.
        Independent candidates standing against the three main parties and other smaller ones are made to jump through hoops, are not covered by the media at all, who seem to have a ‘status quo filter’ that is very hard to puncture.
        I hope this helps.

    • Goose


      There is no debate permitted in the media. Literally no debate in the MSM or on TV about alternative arrangements to our constitutional monarchy or how our democracy could be improved by becoming a republic with a written constitution codifying things. Around 20-25 years ago, there was consensus among the political parties that the unelected second chamber – the House of Lords, had to be fully democratized. Today, even that isn’t talked about anymore. We are regressing if anything.

      And not many people here understand the difference between a ceremonial president eg. Ireland , Germany etc. And executive presidents like France, Russia and the US have. Executive presidents scare people ( think President Blair , Thatcher) – all that super concentrated power in one individual. Tbh, I don’t particularly like the idea of replacing the monarchy with an executive presidency either. But try explaining how we could simply have an elected, almost apolitical, ceremonial President, like Germany and Ireland and many don’t understand.

      • Tatyana

        errr… you’ve got some 25 archbishops in your Hous of Lords 🙂 I can feel the pain of contemporary people about the whole thing 🙂
        for me, as an outsider, this system looks like the people are obliged to get the approval of Muftis and Qadis somewhere in Saudi Arabia.
        How do you stand it?

        • Goose

          It’s what we’ve grown up with and gotten used to.. I suppose it’s like being born into a criminal family – you don’t ask too many questions. The British are a small ‘c’ conservative people – instinctively suspicious of those who want to change the status quo too. That doesn’t help as they reject change that could be hugely positive. I doubt they’d vote for proportional representation were it offered.

          So we have become comfortably numb as the Pink Floyd song goes. The UK is relatively prosperous and relatively free so people enjoy their gadgets and their holidays and don’t think too hard about constitutional or democratic reform.

          People are too busy worrying about paying the bills and making ends meet to worry about some unelected duffer in the HoL having a say on the laws of the land. And finally, to oppose anything is to be classed as a troublemaker so most people just keep their mouths shut and their heads down. I sure you know all about the costs of protesting living in Russia Tatyana.

          • Tatyana

            if you could be more detailed in ‘the cost of protesting’ I could possibly comment on this 🙂
            Around me, I see no obstacle to protest. Perhaps it is due to close attention of oppositional and foreign (oppositional on default) media, that I can express whatever opinion I have.
            It is not the same in your country, you’ve got only your ‘state’s pocket media’ and the dissent voices are oppressed.

          • Goose

            Yes, I don’t doubt the CIA activity is problematic in Russia and Turkey and elsewhere.

            To be honest, I don’t understand the logic behind such US interference. The US claim they support democracy and human rights. But such interference when found out eg. NGOs tends to set democracy and freedom back as leaders think ‘yes, they really are out to undermine us’ and then double down on authoritarian measures i.e., it seems totally counterproductive. Were I making the decisions I ‘d pull all such interference in other countries asap.

            As to your main point.

            There have been protests over Russia’s increasingly censored internet, has there not? Russia tried to ban encrypted chat message apps like Telegram(created by a Russian- he’s now based in Dubai) I even understand why the Russian state have made some infrastructure changes because of cyber attacks from foreign states.

            Also Russia is a bit of a one party state, is it not? United Russia? it holds 340 of the 450 seats in the State Duma.

            I have no ill-will for Russia or the Russian people I wish them well btw,

          • Tatyana

            oh, no, not the Telegram please 🙂 a bunch of “mommy’s home huckers” 🙂 this generation of idiots who have no idea of what opposition is, no idea how state control works, no idea what they ‘fight’ for – they could use Facebook for their purpose as well, and I guess with the same outcome. Some people prefer to stay silly and uneducated and to blame it on others.

            as to making the ends meet and to the daily needs of ordinary citizens – I understand it very well.

          • Tatyana

            well. we had an informativve conversation with the folks of my country discussing the problem of lasting on 3500 roubles a month (a possible money minimum, declared by one of our russian parlamentaries, about a year ago)


            here is how I commented on the distribution of roles in the family, extrapolate that to the whole society:
            “He doesn’t bother what level of starch has the potatoes, whether it is washed or not, does it need to be boiled with covers or do you need to peel it first, and how much is the peelers (comfortable or not?), and how much of potatoes should I buy and store for the winter….
            In return, I’m not worried whether I can physically pull the shutter of the gun, and whether tomorrow in fact, the mammoth would be put in front off my cave?”

            bonus. you can see the photos of russian food ))))

          • Deb O'Nair

            “The British are a small ‘c’ conservative people – instinctively suspicious of those who want to change the status quo too.”

            They’re small ‘f’ fascist and small ‘r’ racists more like. They’ve been brainwashed since they were kids into believing they live in a great nation and that it’s a privilege to be born British, and if it wasn’t for our “betters” lording it over us we’d be just another mediocre also-ran jostling for a place at the table with all those countless inferior nations.

        • M.J.

          What pain? Russia should also return to God and the Tsar, better than Putin! See the Frederick Forsyth novels “Icon” and “The Fox”.
          Bozhe Tsarya khrani!

        • pete

          re archbishops in the house of lords
          According to the unreliable wiki “The Lords Spiritual of the United Kingdom are the 26 bishops of the established Church of England who serve in the House of Lords, not counting bishops who sit by right of a peerage. The Church of Scotland, which is Presbyterian, and the Anglican churches in Wales and Northern Ireland, which are no longer established churches, are not represented.”
          The reform of the House of Lords is long overdue. Aside from being a cushy number for Brown-noses and a reward for toadying its purpose as a second chamber is not serving the people well. It needs to be a 100% elected chamber.
          Honouring real achievements does not mean giving someone a permanent seat in office.
          It is a constant source of irritation to me that we have such an institution, I do not understand why people seem happy for it to endure.

        • John2o2o


          There are a lot of people on this site that are Scottish nationalists. Traditionally many of them do not like the monarchy. Their opinions are strongly biased against the government of the United Kingdom.

          I am half Scottish and half English and I support Scottish independence. However I do not hate the monarchy.

          The Queen is head of state but her powers are very limited. It is like a game. The Prime Minister and Parliament are really in charge, the Queen cannot go against their wishes.

          So while the Queen is said to appoint the Prime Minister she really does not have any choice in the matter. That is how the system here works. The Queen is a constitutional monarch. Political scientist Vernon Bogdanor, paraphrasing Thomas Macaulay, has defined a constitutional monarch as “A sovereign who reigns but does not rule”.

          A lot of the people here being Scottish nationalists may angrily denounce me for saying this, but Scotland is not oppressed by the monarchy. If it is oppressed by anything it is Westminster, the parliament of the United Kingdom.

          The Queen has no power. She is obliged to say always say yes to the Prime Minister.

    • Pyewacket

      Hiya Tatyana, another element that could be mentioned in relation to the UK Monarchy, a subject you have recently been asking about, is the role of God, the devine creator of all things in heaven and on Earth. In brief, our Kings and Queens, for past centuries, have been through lines of heredity, appointed by God, who, to this day lends a supporting hand. Our national anthem mentions God many times, in fact God save our gracious Queen is the opening line. On the other hand, our serving PMs cannot rely on the support of the great Omnipresence.

          • Tatyana

            I know, I’ve seen with my own eyes the list of “Friends of Israel” on the British Parliament web-site.

            well, as soon as you have 25 archbishops sitting in the House of lords, and as soon as the Bible is the history of the Jewish people, Jesus Christ was a jew, and the Sanctum Sepulchrum is in Israel – they cannot be “Enemies of Israel” 🙂

    • Rhys Jaggar

      Tatyana, the position of Prime Minister is ‘First Lord of the Treasury’ and offered to that person in Parliament deemed most likely to be able to form a Government. That is a suitably flexible position, but whenever a General Election produces a majority for one party in the House of Commons, that person is deemed to be the Leader of that Majority party. Every voter in the UK knows that, so we know that if we have a GE in 2019 and the Conservatives get a majority, then Boris Johnson will be PM. Situations are more fluid in a Hung Parliament.

      The challenge to the Constitution arises if PMs regularly resign mid Parliament to bring in a new PM who tries to introduces policies not in the manifesto for the previous GE. In 2019, delivering Brexit was in 2017 manifesto, whatever the Dishonorable Member for Holborn and St Pancras might wish to put about through lying inconsistent with being a QC. However it would not include privatising the NHS, letting the US dump cheap chlorinated chickens here etc. No one should be in any doubt that 80% of MPs of all hues now show open contempt for Parliamentary convention.

      The thing is Tatiana, when DOES a PM step down? If it is at any time other than immediately prior to an election, there has to be a successor who has not contested a General Election as Leader. Gordon Brown was like that, John Major was like that, Jim Callaghan was like that. We do not see that as an affront to democracy, merely the way real life operates. The alternative is calling a General Election every time a PM wishes to retire.

  • Hatuey

    In a parallel universe far, far away, Britain voted to leave the EU and within weeks of the order being given it was carried out. The economy, as expected, tanked and 100s of thousands of people lost their jobs.

    The situation was so bad that the official opposition party changed its policy and proposed a new referendum in its manifesto, giving the people the chance to re-join the EU in the next general election.

    Compare that to what has actually happened…

    • Goose

      Without any antagonism meant.

      I don’t understand your point? What has actually happened?

      In your alternative universe are things better or worse than the present? It certainly sounds horrific for the hundreds of thousands. If things were that far gone, even rejoining wouldn’t miraculously transform things back to where they were.

      The UK has been treading water for three years, it’s true. But the real problems still aren’t resolved. There is still even a chance to stop Brexit altogether if Tory MPs want to.

  • Dave

    If Corbyn can make it to the General Election, Labour will win a landslide victory on a promise of holding a 2nd referendum with a choice between compromise Leave and Remain. Remainers will vote for a 2nd chance to vote Remain (they’ll lose), but No Dealers and compromise Leavers (and Remainers) will vote for a compromise deal. And there will have to be a General Election because Boris wont survive a confidence vote if No Deal happens without consent of Parliament.

    • Goose

      Only if Labour can claw back some of that the silly Lib Dem support and prevent them splitting the vote.

      In 2017 the Lib Dems got just 7.4%.

      Their current polling has them anywhere between 17-24%. That is obviously deeply problematic for Labour were it to continue into a GE campaign , especially if Johnson can get an electoral pact with Farage.

      Corbyn needs to get off the fence and start promoting that second referendum with a remain option loudly. The whole idea of him getting a better deal then putting that to people is absurd because the Tory party and the Tory press would oppose it, therefore the public would reject it. He may as well just commit to backing remain now, to put the Lib Dems back in their box.

      • leroy


        “especially if Johnson can get an electoral pact with Farage.”

        If Johnson delivers brexit, Farage is dead. Who needs a Brexit Party when you are out of the Union?

        It’s the ultimate “shot his fox”

        Cummings is brilliant. At the next General Election the Tories will get 100% of the Leave vote. The Remain vote will be split horribly. The Tories are going to walk it.

        • Goose

          Walking it could be when his problems began if things unfolded like that..

          Winning big would be like being granted enough rope…

          Assuming things go smoothly after no deal is a stretch. It could be disaster after disaster. And he’d have to talk to an EU demanding their £39bn.

        • nevermind

          Lerou means’ stealing it ‘ with the help of racist and fascist votes, mainly postal votes given in anonymity. Farrage is a spent force here and will spout his false talk of sovereign control somewhere else, like ‘Deutschland for the Deutsch’ an AFD slogan of old.

      • Dave

        The Lib Dems made an unexpected recovery, by casting themselves as the Remain Party in all but name and benefited because Change-UK lacked the wit to call themselves the Remain Party, which like the Brexit Party is the ideal name for a new group re-fighting the referendum in a European election. But like the Brexit Party their fortunes rest on what the other parties do, specifically Labour.

        Although Corbyn never wanted another divisive referendum, the establishment Remain saboteurs (includes Maybot and Starmer who wants the choice between No Deal and Remain for obvious reasons), have created a situation where one is needed, but ironically wont be divisive by including the popular (landslide) compromise choice missing from the first referendum, (Missing because Cameron wanted a Remain vote to take UK into the Euro). But having cast themselves as the Remain Party, the Lib Dems cannot but support (particularly their voters) a Labour promise of a 2nd referendum which includes the Remain option.

        Corbyn as a life long Bennite has always (de facto) said his/the Labour Party position should be to honour the manifesto promise to honour the referendum result whilst protecting jobs and growth. Such a compromise would appeal to Labour (all) leavers as well as its the “healing of the wounds of the referendum” that Corbyn casts as a Labour aim/duty.

        The compromise being leave the political institutions of ever closer union to create a European super-state (ensures UK doesn’t join Euro and restores powers of state aid), leave the single market (restores control of immigration and protects the NHS, because the rules aim to end nationalised industries as ‘nationalist’ impediments to a single market open to competition from all members), but remain in customs union (ensures soft-border in Ireland and protects jobs and growth), but can be revisited at a later date.

        And if a (tired) Corbyn can deliver that (and then have a rest) it will be an act of national leadership compared to the self-serving antics of the present PM.

    • Hatuey

      Nobody of any seriousness or any importance wants to leave without a deal. For that reason it almost certainly won’t happen. That includes the EU, Boris, Labour, Ireland, everybody really.

      The people who have talked most about “no deal” are those who want to browbeat parliament into accepting a deal, May and now Boris.

      The truth is that there’s a majority in Parliament who don’t want any deal or any Brexit. May’s strategy was to threaten them but everyone knew she wouldn’t or couldn’t deliver on that threat.

      Boris is going down the same road but is hoping to rig the process so that Parliament will have a real choice between his deal and no deal. This is where closing Parliament comes into things, with a few days left before the end of October for parliament to either support his deal or in effect choose to crash out.

      If we do crash out, Boris et al will blame Parliament but it’s highly unlikely.

      A window appears for Boris to make a deal with the SNP to secure enough votes for his deal. We all know what the price would be, a Scottish independence referendum. I think it’s time for people to argue for that.

    • J Galt

      If we’re out then what would a second referendum be about?

      If Boris delivers a “no deal” or WTO Brexit then he will be the one to win a landslide – you misjudge the mood – the remainers are noisier that’s all.

      I say this as somebody who is coming to the conclusion of not giving a damn either way.

  • mickc

    If Johnson does not command a majority his opponents should surely prove it in a vote of no confidence. They have not.
    Furthermore the result of the Referendum was to leave the EU. All parties confirmed they would abide by that democratic decision. They have not. That is the disgrace.

  • Sharp Ears

    Protests have been held throughout the country today against the Tory thugs’ takeover of OUR democracy.

    Ex-civil service chiefs join critics of Boris Johnson’s aide as protests against ‘coup’ spread across Britain
    31 Aug 2019

    Demonstrators fill Whitehall (photo)

    Senior politicians, a former cabinet secretary and an ex-head of the home civil service have called for a top-level inquiry into how Boris Johnson’s closest aide, Dominic Cummings, was able to sack an adviser to Sajid Javid, the chancellor of the exchequer, without Javid’s knowledge and then order an armed police officer to escort her out of Downing Street in front of staff.

    A former senior Metropolitan police officer, former Chief Superintendent Dal Babu, also said the episode should be subject to urgent twin investigations by the cabinet secretary, Mark Sedwill, and Scotland Yard.

    That is the extent of the biteback.

  • TonyT12


    Have you asked yourself whether Dominic Cummings may be acting under orders from outside No.10? He seems extraordinarily well connected and even more so enabled, well beyond what one would expect for someone of his status within Boris Johnson’s administration. Far more able and enabled than anyone in the Johnson cabinet.

    Cummings must be the man behind the hoodwinking or arm-twisting of Her Majesty in the prorogation. Cummings was certainly the man behind Ms. Khan being removed from the building by armed police. Cummings was almost certainly behind the notification to Conservative MPs that they would be deselected at the next General Election if they vote against Boris or abstain in the House.
    These are not ‘normal’ tactics at all, however unusual the circumstances might be at present.

    The minimal media coverage of today’s protests throughout the U.K. is also a great achievement. What coverage we see is swept under the carpet as a few “usual suspect” troublemakers who like a demo, when there were so many from all walks of life uniquely disquieted by the prorogation of Parliament, whether Remainers or Brexiters.

    One wonders what will come next. Whoever is instructing Cummings, there is for sure no concern for the consequences of NoDeal for Scotland as an integral component of the United Kingdom, let alone the damage to the island of Ireland. With NoDeal there has to be a border, and the UK will have as much responsibility as EU/Eire to enforce it under international law – with immediate contravention of the Good Friday Agreement.

      • Rhys Jaggar

        Well go and protest outside his house and threaten his wife and children then.

        Tell his wife her husband is not an elected PM, he is an unelected balding yob who would not survive five minutes in a riot….

  • Reg

    Could not care less, so Parliament has been shut down good, why should I care, they do not represent my interests and have not respected the results of the referendum. The EU has never supported interests of the less well off, and do not respect a democratic mandate, from Ireland being forced to bail out its banks by the ECB and retaking referenda twice, to installing an unelected premier on Italy (Mario Monti) to the ECB withdrawing liquidity from Greek private banks during the referendum.
    Read the EU withdrawal agreement, it allows the EU to impose new state aid rules without consulting the UK for up to 4 years after the UK exits the 2 year bridging agreement, the so called EU withdrawal agreement., this is why no deal is the only way to leave the EU.
    I fail to see what is progressive about discriminating between mostly white EU immigration and migration from outside the EU.
    Allowing immigration from EU countries without them being able to access benefits, and send them back when capital no longer wants them is not progressive, and only adds to labour flexibility reducing wages terms and conditions.

    • TonyT12

      I think you should care, Reg.
      Whatever weaknesses our democratic system has, I do not think you would enjoy a future of a Poliburo style of government run from No.10 by an unelected ‘consultant’ (D Cummings) pushing ministers and MPs around. That is the real prospect at present, and that is why there is an urgency to bring No.10 to the realisation that authority rests ultimately with Parliament. As voters we can choose where to put our crosses at the next General Election, and the sooner that happens the better.

      • michael norton

        There was a referendum a few years ago, the largest democratic vote ever in the United Kingdom,
        seventeen and a half million people voted to leave, which was more than one million more who indicated they wished to remain with the E.U.

        We are being prevented from leaving by parliamentarians, who think they know best.

        Democracy is non-existent in the U.K.
        unless we are allowed to be released from the evil E.U.

        • Hatuey

          Anyone who describes the EU as evil is probably pretty dumb but let me assure you that I for one have never stood in the way any dumb people and their dumb decisions.

          • TonyT12

            Agreed Hatuey.

            The EU isn’t evil. It would nonetheless benefit from reforms and adjustments to its direction.

            As obvious as Tony Blair’s ambition to deceive both public and parliament over the invasion of Iraq was to me and many others, there was no way I could stand in its way. Someone took a swing at me in our local pub when I voiced my opinion on this subject, and he was slow enough I was able to duck.

            Ever since then I have got used to the idea that dumb people do dumb things, and that most of the time there is little if anything we can do about it. If the mob wants NoDeal and they have been warned already too many times not to be so daft, then let them get on with it.

          • Ralph

            Hatuey, I can possibly cure your ignorance, but I would never try to cure you of your stupidity.

          • Hatuey

            “Heartening to know that you support the mandate of the 2016 referendum”

            Just as free speech is about putting up with ideas that you don’t agree with or find pleasant, democracy is about putting up with stupid decisions that the electorate makes.

          • RandomComment

            We’re in agreement it seems: free speech is about putting with stupid ideas that people think and say, and democracy is about putting up with decisions that you don’t agree with or find pleasant.

        • TonyT12

          If you are unhappy with parliamentarians, the way to deal with it is to vote them out in a General Election. When we leave the EU we shall be even more dependent on our elected parliamentarians. That is unless you want President Cummings to continue to decide everything as he is doing at present.

          There are many issues beyond Brexit and in accepting the precedent of disabling parliament as a manoeuvre by No.10, who knows what will happen with other major decisions in the future.

          In your urgent drive to get out of the EU at any price and under any conditions, you are giving licence to No.10 to make decisions in the future not only about Brexit but elsewhere in our society and economy. What if post-Brexit President Cummings likes the idea of bringing back the death penalty or sending our military into Iran or Hong Kong? What if President Cummings likes the idea of selling off more parts of the NHS, or abandoning HS2, or putting the pension age up to 75? Whatever your personal feelings on these issues, they merit balanced debate and lawmaking in Parliament thanks to our elected representatives.

          I fear the by now hysterical helter-skelter to get out of the EU at any price of self-harm has become very silly. Those who shout the loudest about wanting slamming the door on the EU with NoDeal are the people it will affect least, initially at least. Your shopping bill at Tesco might go up a bit and your holiday to Spain might cost a few pounds more. For others a NoDeal will be a disaster area.

          Before you brand me as a typical leftie Remainer making noise – I voted Leave. However I have never been one for self-harming and it pains me to see what is happening to our democracy and even more so to our common sense..

          • Hatuey

            Every point you make here is either hypocritical in the extreme or simply wrong in terms of explaining what has happened since 2016. Actually, in more than a few cases, your description of what has happened and is going on is the opposite of the truth.

            The parliamentarians you say we can vote out were voted in on the basis that they’d respect the EU vote (at least all the Labour and Tory ones were). The system depends on trust and honesty, traits in short supply these days.

            You talk about Boris disabling Parliament —Parliament has basically been disabled for 3 years because of remainers. On top of that, remainers also changed fundamental aspects of the legislative process in order to disable the normal functioning of government and Parliament.

            As for the urgent drive to leave the EU at any price, what a nerve… it’s been one of the most prolonged decisions in the history of politics, the exact opposite of urgent. And that’s down to remainers who pretend they will respect the decision but won’t.

          • N_

            I prefer Remainers who don’t respect the scummy decision and who admit they don’t respect it, but hey, at least those Remainers who pretend they respect it but don’t really respect it have got the second bit right. And at least they’re not “Enoch was right” types which is what Leave has been about since long before the referendum, except in an extremely tiny number of cases – for example Dennis Skinner is an honourable man.

          • Alyson

            The Queen did not sign the prorogation Order. She could have. But she didn’t. This is a coup against the Queen as much as against our democracy, of which she is an essential part. We have a triple lock democracy. Parliament initiates new law. The Lords work at it to make it fit with old law. They send it back to the Commons to amend it again, and so forth, until the Commons votes it through. And then the Queen signs it into law. She is a hands on monarch who meets with the Prime Minister and The Cabinet weekly. She will do what is right for the people of Great Britain. She did not sign the Order. One of her advisers, Richard Tillbrook, did

        • Republicofscotland

          “unless we are allowed to be released from the evil E.U.”

          Oh yes that bastion of bedevilment, that produced the ECHR, that protects you today, but might not after we leave the EU, as the British government has intimated that it will probably produce its own British bill of Rights post-Brexit.

        • Ishmael

          “Democracy is non-existent in the U.K.”

          What’s special about this vote ? If we don’t live in a democracy why does this mean more than others? It was members their political class who set this agenda.

          & how long ago was it? Going by your logic we should vote for a party & that’s it. & It’s not “a simple choice” & denying political process to force through “results” (all evidence suggest snake oil) is even less democratic.

    • Hatuey

      “they do not represent my interests”

      I’m guessing you’re rich, right? In that case, who could argue, you are probably going to be better represented by the Bullingdon billionaire boys.. that Singapore model, low tax, zero welfare, sweatshop labour relations, it’ll serve you and your privileged kids well into the future.

      • Ishmael

        The argument would hold more water if “they” were still the labour of 10 years ago, One could argue how much, but on policy it’s just a factually wrong statement.

  • N_

    Boris Johnson and Carrie Symonds are said to be set to move a rescued Jack Russell puppy into No. 10. I don’t believe that story for one minute. At least I don’t believe they are going to be looking after and caring for a puppy. I don’t know about Symonds, but Johnson has surely not got the sort of personality that tends to go together with a kindness to and love of pets, or for that matter with any kind of kindness or love.

    That the government will try to gain favour by promoting Lucy’s Law (which is a good law and deserves support) was predictable.

    • Bramble

      Oh goodness. A Jack Russell puppy? Do people really fall for this crap? Will this really buy people’s votes? I fear so. People who buy into Johnson’s lies after decades of him being proven a liar, a bully and a coward will swallow anything.

    • Stuart MacKay

      Carrie Symonds was also a guest speaker at BirdFair – known in the media as the Birdwatcher’s version of Glastonbury. She was billed as an expert on ocean conservation and spoke about her love of Puffins – which I guess, must be the bird equivalent of Jack Russell’s – small, cute and smart.

      However, BirdFair, is now becoming a rather political event (a recent development) where the likes of Chris Packham, Mark Avery and other activists are motivating the large numbers of birders to take a stand against unregulated hunting in places like Cypress and closer to home, driven grouse shooting – where rich people pay lots of money to mix with other rich people to blast hundreds of wild birds out of the sky for fun. The economics of the industry rely on large numbers of grouse so things like Hen Harriers, Golden Eagles, Mountain Hares, Foxes, Stoats etc., which might reduce the number of birds available to be shot, are ruthlessly eliminated by shooting, poisoning and trapping. Most of which is illegal and very, very, unlikely to be prosecuted – for a variety of reasons – one of which is that rich people like to do the things that rich people do and don’t want to be troubled by little details like the law.

      Carrie Symonds may or may not be a good person. However her attendance at BirdFair was probably not a coincidence.

      Shameless plug: Please sign the petition to ban driven grouse shooting, The suspension of parliament in a few days means all active petitions will be closed automatically. If the target of 100,000 signatures can be reached there is still a chance to keep this issue in front of parliament and the government.

      • Hatuey

        Everybody loves puffins. Something annoys me about that, I don’t know why. They’re like The Beatles of the birding world… I prefer kingfishers.

        Anyway, happy to support this petition. And Chris Packham is just brilliant these days.

        These “sports” that involve cruelty to animals trouble me more and more as I get older. The other day I read about some huntsman in England who was caught feeding live fox cubs to his hounds. I think subconsciously I’ve thrown in the towel with humanity.

    • JJ

      Bojo version attempt imitation of bulldog Churchill?
      Jack Russells are friendly but can be yappy but won’t hang on til grim death…..

    • Rhys Jaggar

      How do you inow about Johnson’s capability for love. Have you asked his children?

      He is certainly incapable of fidelity, but that is a very different thing. He seems to aspire to useful education for his children, he seems to have taken his children on holiday with monotonous regularity.

      But perhaps his children will you he regularly beat them up, even sexually molested his daughters?

      I would be very surprised if that were so, but you undoubtedly know better than me, being on such intimate terms with his inner sanctum…..

  • Sharp Ears

    Five ‘experts’ give their opinion.

    Westminster shutdown: is Britain facing a coup?
    The government stands accused of undermining democracy by proroguing parliament. Five experts assess a momentous political decision
    Robert Saunders, Peter Bone, Margaret Beckett, Michael Chessum and Meg Russell

    1 Sep 2019

    They are not saying anything that has not already been said.

  • Sharp Ears

    Tomorrow in the HoC

    2.30pm Prayers
    Afterwards Oral Questions: Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs
    Urgent Questions, Ministerial Statements (if any)
    Ten Minute Rule Motion: Clean Air (Chris Philp)
    Census (Return Particulars and Removal of Penalties) Bill [Lords]: Committee and Remaining Stages
    Election of Select Committee chairs (Notice of election) (Motion)
    Statutory Instruments (Motions for approval) Until 10.30pm or for half an hour
    Adjournment Debate: Implications for the sheep industry of the UK leaving the EU without a deal (Jenny Chapman)

    So very relevant to the current situation. Not.

  • Monster

    Tatyana 00:03 I might have to pop round to your place to have a Pikabu in your fridge. As a Guardian reader, I’m well acquainted with the empty shelves in Russian supermarkets, so I’m preparing for Operation Yellow Hammer and want some advice.

    • Tatyana

      Monster, you’re welcome 🙂 Lots of food in my fridge saves me time for my hobby, that is why.

      I forgot when the shelves were empty in this country. I daily walk from my house to my studio, about 400 meters inside the block of houses. I pass by:
      – vegetable and frosted fish shop
      – shawerma stall
      – bliny with stuffings tent
      – fresh meat and farmer’s products shop (nice handmade pelmeny and beef tenderloin, if you are lucky to pick it before chef from a nearby restaurant comes)
      – beer pub
      – bakery (they have a funny sign that mimics the accent of an Asian man)
      – icecream kiosk (and these are funny ice cream names, like “poor Jew” or “khokhol”)
      – food supermarket
      – another beer pub (good craft beer)
      – asian food with delivery service
      – tea and coffee shop (last week they had the sign “grab a coffee first, and then the whole world”)
      – another small food shop
      – food from Belorussia (very high quality standards for milk and meat products)
      – milk and chicken shop (by ex-governor Tkachev, who is the Minister of Agriculture now)
      – sweets and pastry shop, pure temptation.
      Cute small shops in the ground flore of a multy-storey building

      As to big supermarkets, normally they look like this

      * supermarkets try to be creative, but it is rather scary. Just look at this “art” by Auchan
      yet they sometimes fill their shelves with really weird stuff that I don’t know how to cook, and I’m not even sure it’s edible.
      Ha ha, you can be certain that the shelves of russian supermarkets are definetely not empty 🙂

      • Rhys Jaggar

        You will be telling us next that Russians like children and invite Babooshka over for lunch occasionally.

        All this humanity in Russia is really doing my head in.

        And as for Russians having a sense of humour: OVERTHROW PUTIN IMMEDIATELY!

        How can America go around the world killing everyone when Russians are vaguely normal people?

        • Tatyana

          🙂 the main feature of babushkas is cooking, they cook in large quantities, they are never afraid of “big bakery” they bake pirogy and bliny and make vareniki and pelmeny and in whole they cook a lot and always try to feed you to death 🙂

          in the list of shops I forgot special shop for alcohol whos name is Алкотека, it is translated something like ‘Alcothecary’

  • TonyT12

    Wires buzzing with news of impending announcement of UK General Election, possibly as soon as Oct 17.
    This will be messy.

    No.10 thoughts:
    Tories = Brexit at any cost
    Labour = no policy in either direction
    LibDems = Remain, but unlikely to get more than 40 or 50 seats
    BREXIT Party = waste of time because Boris has “sorted everything out”
    SNP = ready for IndyRef
    N. Ireland = who in No.10 cares

      • TonyT12

        I liked the Norway style exit, but my impression was that Labour had not wholly committed itself to anything except displeasure at the prospect of NoDeal. An October election would find Labour less well prepared than Chairman Cummings’ “New All Brexit Conservatives”.

        When I drove with professional equipment from Sweden into Norway and back into Sweden with my van, I needed papers by way of an ATA Carnet for the contents of my vehicle. Very amicable border control, but not a border which would go down well in Ireland.

          • N_

            Belonging or not belonging to a customs union is rather like being or not being pregnant. An EU member state isn’t allowed to agree a half-and-half customs arrangement with a third country.

            In other news, French air traffic control has been cyberattacked.

        • Rhys Jaggar

          Especially if the consignment were heroin and cocaine with the UC bunged with a cut of the profits, MI5 being a silent partner and both Loyalist and IRA retirees being the majority shareholders?

    • Ishmael

      I do get it btw, those who just want to stop this but at the same time if they were serious about reform? Could be a way to push the EU in a better direction.

      & I must say, even as someone who voted against leave (not to stay in the EU but as I saw the vote itself as just a vehicle for what it has become) i’m looking at a lot of “remainers” & thinking they are led by just other factions elite interest.

      Either way, both are serving their interests by being so divided, & played.

    • OnlyHalfALooney

      Labour = stay in European customs union and stay aligned with single market. Staying in a customs union would keep supply chains working and would also allow the UK to access all the FTA’s the EU already has with other countries.

      Note that this is not the same as a “Norway/EEA” arrangement. Norway is in the single market, but not in the Customs Union. Turkey is in the Customs Union but not in the single market.

      All reason and common sense has gone out of public discussion in the UK. And the situation has been seized by mad-hatter ultra-capitalists to seize power. Just look at the current cabinet. More reasonable voices like Sajiv Javid are being silenced – they even went so far as to fire assistants from under him. The ones running the show are crazy extreme capitalists. They don’t care about the British people, they don’t care about the NHS, they don’t care about Ireland, they don’t care about Gibraltar, they don’t care about British ex-pats in the EU, they don’t care about the environment, they don’t care about the UK’s future. All they care about is the free flow of capital and the unhindered exploitation of workers. They are against anything that reduces their ability to enrich themselves and avoid paying taxes. They don’t even try to hide it.

      How stupid are the British people if they let this go on? Just a few years ago the UK was prospering and everything was going fairly smoothly despite Cameron’s unnecessary austerity. And now look..

      In the meantime Corbyn is made out to be “extreme left” while his proposed policies are very similar to mainstream German/Dutch/ Scandinavian/French/Italian social democracy in the 70s and 80s. What is worse, members of his own party seem to be the worst at this, also making scandalous accusations that he is “anti-Semitic”.

      At least Mussolini and Hitler promised the masses prosperity. Now in the UK, the same mechanisms seem to be at work, but only based on hate-filled propaganda and nostalgic fantasies of restoring a failed and lost empire. No promise of a better tomorrow, nothing! Just “take back control” from “forrinners” who speak “funny languages”.

      It must be extremely distressing to live in the UK and realise what is happening around you. Of course, mostly people are lulled into numb subservience by happy BBC programmes and celebrity trivia as if everything were all just rosy and nothing was happening at all.

      We are seeing a great historical tragedy happen before our eyes. And I am becoming more pessimistic by the day!

      • Ishmael

        Don’t imo.

        We are doing better than in a long time. I think (& observation confirms this) most people willing to make a stand are not the right or far right. & it’s only getting better as more people work stuff out. This just highlights it for people & many are not accepting it. Who in their right mind can?

        There is political process taking place the nature of which we should be very happy about. & it’s not some false “simple choice” from above, it’s people engaging, boots on the ground, & on their terms. Iv even seen Tories accept & promote this basic premiss, Quote, “Option one, You can bring down the government”

        Yes, we can.

        • OnlyHalfALooney

          What sorts of stuff are people actually working out?

          All i see is complete chaos (in England at least).

          Go on then.. bring down the government.. of course you can!

          • Ishmael

            The political crisis we are in. There have been people out across the country. & I was just using that quote as one example, said during one encounter brought about by these issues we face. It’s encouraging engagement that doesn’t often happen.

            It’s politically educational when these issues come to the surface like this, more visible. This is why factions of the elite “hate” Trump, not because they could care less otherwise, he’s just so blatant.

            Iv learned loads during the past few days. & yea, quite encouraged really. & also my point was the same as is being highlighted by the left, that it’s up to us.

      • N_

        On paper Boris Johnson has promised a better tomorrow – a “New Golden Age”, no less. But I agree with you. That’s just what his words said a few weeks ago. Everyone knew he was laughing out the side of his mouth. In practice no politician is REALLY promising a better tomorrow. Pretty much everyone knows the world is f***ed. The smash and grab merchants are revving up their fork lifts and they have checked the fuel in their private getaway jets.

        No more “PIGS” or even “PIIGS”. This is going to outdo Greece, Iceland and Cyprus all rolled into one. We should be thinking more like Zimbabwe and Venezuela.

        C’mon, economics correspondents on the supposed qualities. See if you can coax any quotes out of Moody’s or Fitch. Or is that idea on the banned list along with references to the Great Depression and explainer boxes about hyperinflation anywhere near speculation about what might happen to sterling?

    • Dungroanin

      Well he’ll have to get a vote in the HoC then to dissolve parliament needing a two thirds majority and whipping the tories to vote for it – in the remaing hours before prorogation or ask the Queen to change her mind.

      • N_

        Rough arithmetic says that half of MPs are non-Tory and they will all vote for a general election, perhaps excluding one or two such as Kate Hoey. That means only a third of the other half (the Tories) is necessary to reach the two-thirds barrier. It’s not going to be a case of whips stepping into ambulances in parliamentary courtyard to check pulses.

        The racist right is in the ascendant and they want a general election. Various pieces have been positioned so as to cut Labour off from portions of the voteshare it won in 2017:

        * the Brexit Party for “Labour Leavers”,
        * the Lib Dems for Labour’s “strong, unequivocal Remainers” and those middle class types who “don’t like anti-Semitism” (by which they mean don’t like Muslims), and who aren’t too keen on any troubles that might Jeremy Corbyn might inflict on buy to let landlords either,
        * the Greenie Snotters with Pippi F*cking Longstocking as their mascot and Steinerite crazies as their “extreme” wing, for impressionable young people who “care about the environment”.

        A Tory majority of about 100 looks like it.

        • N_

          Hmm…it’s necessary to keep an open mind…and I’ve just read that Robert Peston says “an election is coming, and soon”. Peston, who went to Balliol and is the son of a life peer, usually talks absolute poo. That’s especially so when he reports that he has heard something from an insider. The Westminister village probably treats him as their kindly-regarded idiot. “Oh, look at what the poo talker has written now,” chortle chortle. But does this suggest that an election isn’t coming? Possibly. Or maybe he’s following the crowd and in this case the crowd is right. He writes “I am finding it hard to capture the scale of the parliamentary battle that will start on Tuesday – because what is at stake is huge, complicated and shifting. One of its more important combatants described it to me as a ‘once-in-a-century crisis’.” Sometimes you’ve just got to laugh! This is little more than a Trumpian remark that “This is great stuff”, dressed up in poncy language.

      • Rhys Jaggar

        You can have an election after a vote of no confidence passes, but maybe Jo Swinson claims she can form a government instead?

    • Alyson

      Labour policy is in their manifesto. Brexit is in there. As is a lot of other good stuff. Brexit democracy, and fairness, is in their Brexit plan, which would need Parliamentary approval. Britain needs a Labour government, led by a good and decent human being. Corbyn’s voting record is impeccable. Hundreds of thousands have died as a direct result of Tory Austerity policies. To even consider voting for more of this is shameful and unforgivable. Brexit may be a good thing, but only if it is negotiated lawfully and in good faith

  • Ishmael

    It’s really something the epitome of the “not in our interests” establishment is framed as anti establishment.

    Yea, I hate the elites, so let’s just lie down while one of them takes relatively unprecedented executive control. After all, he seems like such a nice bloke. ?

    These people don’t want to “take back control” they want to surrender it. Big daddy is going to save “democracy” for us. Then they will go on some rant against islam’o’fascism or the danger of RED JC & totalitarian regimes. ..


  • Sharp Ears

    Gauke, the former Justice Minister (and former DWP and Treasury minister), has been on the news channels today. He is saying that an extension to Article 50 will be created if a deal proves impossible, as is looking more and more likely hearing Monsieur Barnier yesterday. I always said that there might never be a ‘Brexit’.

    Tory Brexit rebels to hold showdown meeting with Johnson
    Planned talks come as David Gauke says national interest is priority when opposing no deal

    Gauke is a member of Conservative Friends of Israel. He also spent a lot of time this Summer at Lords with extensive hospitality provided by the England and Wales Cricket Board. Price Waterhouse Coopers subbed him £24.7k for .’Technical advice, analysis and drafting assistance in relation to scrutiny of the Finance Bill 2008 provided by PriceWaterhouseCoopers to the Conservative Shadow Treasury Team. (Registered 24 April 2008). There are two similar entries for 2008 and 2009. Not sure if PWC made two such donations or whether they are duplicates.

    Just a threat or a promise?

    • OnlyHalfALooney

      An extension by the EU is unlikely unless there is a prospect of a change in the political situation in the UK. Macron and Rutte were skeptical about the previous extension and Macron only accepted the extension after it was shortened.

  • remember kronstadt

    ah yes, the people’s democratic choice – after having to listen to puppet on a string for a whole year I soon dropped that notion.

  • John2o2o

    I’m also a bit disturbed by Craig’s associating the politically neutral head of state of the United Kingdom with the Right. Does having a monarch as heard of state automatically mean that the Right will be favoured?

    *The following offering – for any angry Scotsmen out there – is a humorous piece presented with the intention of getting you to challenge some of your preconceived notions*

    Let’s ignore for a moment the Scotsman (scary but true) who is currently running the United States and place our attentions a little closer to home.

    Vive La République!” (Heads will roll!)

    “So Pierre, how is republicanism working out for you these days? And why are you all going around with those high viz jackets on? What do you mean you don’t like Emmanuel Macron? You voted for him! And he doesn’t live in a gold palace – he’s not Donald Trump. The Elysee Palace that’s just for show. And besides next time you can just vote for that nice moderate Marine Le Pen. There’s never an extreme right winger in a republic.”

    Compare and contrast this if you will this with the experience of your average Frenchman living in French Canada, oppressed – according to some republicans – by having the Queen as head of state. “How is life for you Pierre?”…”Gee, thanks. We Ottowans are quite happy with Justin Trudeau. His ultra left wing liberal views do get a lot of us down though.”… “C’mom Pierre there’s never an extreme left wing government under a constitutional monarchy.”

    So there you go. Matière à réflexion. I wonder if perhaps Mr Trump might fancy a little retirement job as First President of Scotland after ruining the united states for 8 years. Well, IMO having the Highlands of Scotland carpeted with golf courses has got to be better than having them carpeted with those blasted electric windmills.

    • OnlyHalfALooney

      And why are you all going around with those high viz jackets on?

      As Laguerre has already pointed out, the Gilets Jaunes movement is stone dead. At the height of their popularity they had 280,000 followers and now less than 10,000.

      See also:

      Macron’s popularity is slowly improving. Also bear in mind the French “fall out of love” with each president. At one stage, Mitterand’s approval rating was 29% (Tonton Francois is now regarded with some fond nostalgia) and Chirac dropped to 26%. Sarkozy only dropped to 36%, but at the end of his presidency many French actively hated their “President Bling-Bling”.

    • N_

      To answer your first question, @John2o2o, you could reflect on which out of the right and the left you feel is more supportive of the inheritance of large amounts of wealth. Have you ever visited Blenhem Palace where Winston Churchill was born? Did you think the “royal” family play the “king of the castle” game for any other reason than money?

      • John2o2o

        Generally the right N_, but my point is that you can just as easily have right wing government in a republic as a constitutional monarchy.

        Because the UK is a constitutional monarchy and not an absolute monarchy the people can decide what sort of government they have.

        The National Health Service has been in existence here in the UK for over 70 years. The monarchy did not prevent it. It could not even if it wanted to. The decisions of parliament – the House of Commons – are final.

        England in particular fought a civil war in the mid seventeenth century between Parliamentarians and Royalists. Parliament won and King Charles I was beheaded in 1649. So unpopular was Cromwell’s austere puritan government though that after his death they brought back the new King – Charles II – from France in 1660.

        But still they fought for dominance. In the end the pro Catholic King James II was forcibly removed in 1688 and parliament became dominant. After that the monarch had much reduced powers and was not permitted to exceed the authority of parliament.

          • John2o2o

            I wonder if the purpose of parliament’s “importing” William of Orange from Holland to become king William III was to ensure that “royal assent” would be given.

            It was perhaps a case of – you can be king – just so long as you do as you are told and know who is really in charge around here. And please sign this piece of paper giving your “royal assent” your majesty …

            … and so it still is today.

          • defo

            Bill of Rights was English parly business John. 1689
            The Scottish parly Claim of Right 1689, was a continuation of the contractual nature of Scottish sovereignty as established by the Declaration of Arbroath 1320. i,e The people (represented by the ‘nobles’) can tell the monarch to sling their hook as and when they please.
            Act of Union 1707

            QE1 isn’t sovereign in Scotland, merely the monarch.

          • N_

            @Defo – Is there a list of the 113 Scottish kings in a line “unbroken by a single foreigner” as referred to in the Declaration of Arbroath? I find it hard to read into the document the idea that the nobles represent the people. Protect, yes, but not represent.

        • Republicofscotland

          “Generally the right N_, but my point is that you can just as easily have right wing government in a republic as a constitutional monarchy.”

          Yes John2o2o, that is true, however, if you remove the monarchy you no longer need to worry about their upkeep, just the right wing government.

          • Republicofscotland

            No John2o2o, I agree again the upkeep of the palace won’t be cheap. Louis VX bought it, and kept his mistress in it. The French public were outraged at this, and hung signs on the palace gates calling her the kings whore.

            I suppose there’s been a few French president in the past that fit that discription selling themselves for financial gain. However I’d say they’re much easier to remove than a monarch.

        • Ishmael

          Why would ANYONE be concerned about the monarchy? Is there really ANY foreseeable future that doesn’t see them (as people) doing fine?

          It’s kind of gross defending them. & they are NOT neutral, They only contain the ultra wealthy for a start, & there really is no need to go on.

      • lysias

        A friend of mine once asked Mountbatten why the British had quit India. His answer was simple: ruling India was no longer profitable. No doubt that also explains the haste of the departure.

        • Laguerre

          Not because India was no longer tenable, as I always presumed it to be? After all – and very relevant to today and English exceptionalism – you couldn’t expect Mountbatten to admit to British weakness. He wouldn’t have been capable of it. He did make a royal mess of India.

  • N_

    Propaganda news

    BBC Radio 4 will run episodes of a new programme called “The Political Butterfly Effect” every day this week from Monday to Friday. Presumably they are leading up to, and boozing up their “experts” to explain, that

    * some big change that happens (whatever it is) wasn’t expected

    * but now that it has happened, experts are so clever that we realise it was inevitable

    * and you must accept it as inevitable too, and you must only get angry or “active” along lines that we give you permission to

    * keep calm and starve, or if you have still got some energy left while your bodyweight goes down, think in terms of whatever is happening with “parliament”

    …and all the time, no references to the Great Depression, bank runs, or hyperinflation – OK, lads? – because they’re on the banned list.

    Those who listen to the Archers might like to tell us how Brexit is being handled in that long-running state propaganda vehicle. This has got to be far bigger than unemployment, the Countryside Alliance foxhunting front, and gay marriage. This month it’s probably even bigger than climate change. What Brexit-related ideas is regime media currently using that show to put into people’s heads?

  • N_

    @Craig – “(Boris Johnson was) selected by 90,000 racist old men mostly in the SE of England


    Southeast of England, excluding London: 21% of Tory members, 14% of the population of Great Britain
    London: 12% of Tory members, 13% of GB popn
    Scotland: 10% of Tory members, 9% of GB popn.

    So Scotland is more Tory than London is.

    To put that point more concretely: a person living in Scotland chosen at random is more likely to be a member of the Tory party than a person living in London chosen at random.

    That said, In the most recent British general election the voteshares won by the party in the two regions were the same, 29%.

    There are more men than women in each of the four main parties (Tories, Labour, LibDems, and SNP), although the imbalance is greatest in the Tory party (71% male).

    As for age, all four parties have an average age in the 50s. The Tory figure is oldest at 57; next comes the SNP at 54.

    The above analysis is based on Tory membership stats as reported in the Guardian piece I linked to. I do not have a breakdown of the members who voted in the leadership election, nor of those who cast their votes for Boris Johnson, but I doubt those stats would be much different.

    Let’s know our enemy better!

    • John A

      ‘Scotland is more Tory than London is.’

      Hmm, I suspect a far higher proportion of the population of London is foreign and therefore ineligible to vote and therefore unlikely to become a member of a political party.
      As 19th Century Tory PM Disraeli famously said, ‘there are lies, damn lies and statistics’.

      • N_

        there are lies, damn lies and statistics“.

        Yes, and there’s counting up how many people in a part of Great Britain belong to the Tory party, as a proportion of the whole population of that place, as against doing the same but refusing to count foreigners.

        The point is if you’re walking along the street and you meet someone in Scotland they’re more likely to belong to the Tory party than someone you meet in London is. That may well not apply if you can’t imagine meeting someone who is foreign or you don’t count them as a person or you find some other reason to exclude them.

        • Republicofscotland

          “The point is if you’re walking along the street and you meet someone in Scotland they’re more likely to belong to the Tory party than someone you meet in London is.”

          Depends where you are walking, Glasgows Calton area is a very unlikely place to find a Tory. Whereas in Edindurgh’s Morningside you’d probably meet one.

          However there’s never been a Tory FM in Scotland and you have to go way back to the 1950’s to find more than 30 Tory MP’s sent from Scotland to Westminster, and of the 13 Westminster MP’s constituencies held by the “Scottish Tory’s” (There is no such party registered with the Electoral Commission) not one is in the two largest cities in Scotland.

          I should add that the Lib/Dems, Tories and Labour in Scotland pool their votes, and vote for whichever parties candidate looks most likely to defeat the SNP candidate.

    • N_

      We can also list the constituent countries of Great Britain in order, by what proportion of their residents belong to the Tory party.

      * Scotland is the most Tory, with 1 person in 339 being a member of the Tory party.
      * England is in the middle, with 1 in 404.
      * And let’s hear it for Wales, the least Tory of the three, with only 1 in 488.

      Figures calculated from stats given in the above-referenced Guardian piece and widely available figures for the overall populations.

      Probably many Scots who come to London, where the figure is 1 in 423, enjoy getting away from all the Tories who infest where they came from!

          • RandomComment

            At least it appears that the HO has stopped preventing immigration to Scotland now 😉

            @BF, as I Northerner, it’s what I did myself. Do not be too quick too judge.

          • Brianfujisan

            Well, Ok RandomC

            many years ago when Thatcher was destroying Shipyards on the Clyde.. many of My friends went south.. Even did so myself, to work in Blackpool’s leisure beach..I did not last long, as I wound up in Hospital for a week with Silent Pneumonia.. I think it might have been due to a bunch of us fellow Scots celebrating Scotland exiting the world cup..( Gotta hold the head up regardless ) or Was it the wetting my hair every day to maintain the heavy rocker look..
            Was glad to get Home.

            P.s.. well done SNP for stepping in to save jobs in the last shipyard in the Lower Clyde.. Ferguson Marine.. in my home town of Port Glasgow.

          • RandomComment

            PS – Since we’re being personal, I left the North, when young, glad to get out of a parochial backwater. 30 years in London, seat of so much evil, glad to get back home too.

            While there, was a committed europhile and left-winger. As you say, glad to get back home 😉

  • Sharp Ears

    Speaking of the ‘Royal family’. Her Maj’s grandson, the one with the ginger hair and the cap motto ‘We Do Bad Things to Bad People’ on his way home fro, Afghanistan, is off to S Africa with his extravagant American wife and the baby, Archie. S Africa is his second home, we hear. Does he not know that the EmPyre has died?

    Many more £hundreds of thousands will be spent on this jolly, the travel, the staff, Meghan’s new wardrobe not forgetting the plods and so on. The couple have already had spent £2.4m of taxpayers’ money renovating their ‘cottage’ in Windsor Park. The ‘cottage’ was actually five dwellings.

    ‘In the early 21st century the cottage was a series of five separate units housing Windsor estate workers.
    In 2019, the house was converted to serve again as a 4-bedroom & nursery, single-family home, at a reported cost from the Sovereign Grant of £2.4 million “of taxpayer-funded costs, royal accounts show”, according to a BBC report. There was some criticism at this use of public money, however, as a property of a royal palace of state and designated heritage site, Frogmore Cottage was always scheduled to be renovated, regardless of occupant. The Duke and Duchess of Sussex, who had earlier held their wedding reception at nearby Frogmore House, moved from Nottingham Cottage to Frogmore Cottage in spring 2019, before the birth of their first child.’

    • Tatyana

      I supposed that the Queen gets something like ‘salary’ for her position, since you agree to have her as the Head of the State.

      But I never thought you are obliged to pay the expenses of other family members! Don’t they all have jobs? Personal capital? if it was about some standard pension for them, I would be able to understand it somehow. But they have Royal needs, that means luxury. And if they start breeding like rabbits, then should you pay for them all?

      • Republicofscotland

        “I supposed that the Queen gets something like ‘salary’ for her position, since you agree to have her as the Head of the State.”

        Old Lizzie the number one state sponger extraordinaire, gets a Privy Purse that always goes up by millions every year. No austerity or freezing of state benefits for this parasite.

      • fedup

        “I supposed that the Queen gets something like ‘salary’ for her position, since you agree to have her as the Head of the State.”

        Not at all!

        This is a unique situation of eating one’s cake and having it too. She owns most of the land in this country and is one of the richest on the planet, but to keep the said riches intact and add to it, the state ie tax payers help fund her lavish lifestyle. That is whilst the infirm, and the mentally ill, and disabled are being sanctioned for their “universal credit” because they are fit for work, or have a savings of above 50 pence in some jar or a piggy bank, or didn’t kowtow and genuflect to the little Hitlers* in the job centre that ironically carries the banner; “Lets’ make work pay” as in their view work is a kind of hobby, and a pastime.

        This is further made acceptable by the poverty porn that is a constant feature of the various TV channels in UK, that find the most odious and patently fraudulent characters and portray these as the recipient of generous “state hand outs”. In an effort to help state abrogate its responsibility of the duty of care of her citizens whom no longer can afford to pay the high costs of citizenship and are in increasing numbers becoming bankrupt; homeless, hungry and often ill and in pain.

        You are foreigner, hence you think she is employed, and those of the population here believe she is a ceremonial head of the state who is a tourism magnet, and has no say in anything at all. In any case it is good to be the Queen.

        * The said little Hitlers are on a bonus scheme for sanctioning the most applicants/”customers”.

        • Republicofscotland

          “This is a unique situation of eating one’s cake and having it too.”

          As you’re commenting to Tatyana, about cake and eating it. I wonder if she knows this Russian saying surrounding having your cake and eating it.

          The Russian equivalent of “to have your cake and eat it too” is “to eat a fish and sit on a [email protected]”. ?

          • Tatyana

            thank you RoS 🙂
            we’ve also got polite version of the saying ” to eat a fish and to not wash the pan” and “to climb the fur tree and not to scratch the ass”

      • Rhys Jaggar

        They have various functions and duties, which is effectively work. They act as titular heads of various organisations, they carry out behind the scenes diplomacy, they perform official openings all over the country, they open this, that and the other, they host foreign dignitaries etc etc.

        Princess Anne works damned hard for little publicity…..

    • Tatyana

      I see in Wiki:
      …Hours before the wedding, his grandmother Queen Elizabeth II conferred on him the titles Duke of Sussex, Earl of Dumbarton and Baron Kilkeel…
      Wiki says Dumbarton is a very small town in Scotland with population of about 20 thousand people. Population of Sussex is abot 380 thousands. In total it makes nearly the half of my city’s population. How do they feel about it?

      • Republicofscotland


        Its not just the royal parasites that bestow place names upon themselves, to give themselves a further sense of importance and majesty.

        The unelected undemocratic House of (Troughers) Lords have similar titles, such as Lord McConnell of Glenscorrodale, a disasterous Labour ex-FM of Scotland.

        Or Baroness Goldie of Bishopton, a mediocre ex-leader of the London Tory branch office in Scotland, or George Robertson, Baron Robertson of Port Ellen, a Scottish Labour die-hard unionist, who once headed up Nato.

        To be Ermine Vermin is the goal of many Scottish unionist acolytes, even if their political actions go against the benefit or welfare of the Scottish folk they represent.

        • Tatyana

          Wiki is a system of links and I just have read about Justin Welby, the Archbishop of Canterbury. Apalling. A child of Churchhill’s secretary and a Jewish migrant, alcoholic parents divorsed when he was 3 years old, supports gay marriaages, says about food banks ” a very sad fact that they’re there, but also it’s a great opportunity for the Church to demonstrate the love of Christ”, and he is in the House of Lords.
          A priest who baptised little Archie Mountbatten-Windsor 🙂 Good luck, Archie 🙂

          • Republicofscotland

            Yeah the HoL is the second largest chamber; only China has more, then again it serves over 1.5 billion people.

            The Church of England has 26 bishops in the HoL, the rest is made up of party cronies (donors etc) mediocre politicians etc, who live high on the hog, with subsided foods and drinks paid for by the taxpayer, and a tidy wee £300 per day just for jumping out your taxi, running in and signing the book, then running out again.

        • Goose


          What’s bizarre, is how they get into the Lords despite the HoL having no legislative revising role in Scotland, over Holyrood. The architects of the Scottish devolution legislation made sure of that.

          The most blatant of those appointees has to be Baron Darling of Roulanish, aka Alistair Darling who led vote Better together campaign against independence. He also landed various plumb city roles and now has an estimated net worth est. £10m+ . Politics seems to be a very lucrative path for some.

          As for Tatyana’s questions.

          One of the big hindrances to the UK moving to becoming a republic is the fact the Queen isn’t just head of state of the UK, she is Queen Elizabeth II is the official head of state for 16 different independent countries, known as the “Commonwealth realms”. Important countries like Canada , Australia and New Zealand.

          • Goose


            Believe it or not, Jack Straw was once quite radical too. Many of New Labour crew flirted with radical reform when they were younger ; Darling , Blunkett , Reid et al. But obviously they realised they are but small cogs in a big establishment wheel and toeing the line is not only the path of least resistance in terms of their careers, but the path to serious personal wealth. As Craig has mentioned previously.

          • Hatuey

            You shouldn’t be surprised to see people who were once communist crackpots evolving into pro-capitalist hawks. The structure and hierarchical underpinnings are essentially identical. That is to say, anyone who is willing to unquestioningly serve one steaming pile of dogma is a good candidate for serving another.

        • Iain Stewart

          Careful now, Rosco! You being the hereditary Laird of Ecclefechan, and me being a Royal Stewart (1) we should both avoid leading Tanya to think of suggesting traditional Russian methods of doing away with the upper crust.

          (1) Actually, not quite, but available in Hunting and Dress.

  • Jeremiah

    BBC news tonight had photographs of democracy protests accompanying Iain Watson report. No video. We have already transitioned to the dark side. 1984.

    • Ishmael

      As far as covering UK protest I don’t recall that it was ever not so. Such a bunch of spineless sycophants are the establishment. Utter creeps. & they say the left is bad in this regard. Positively saintly by comparison.

  • N_

    Well well… Tony Blair has urged Labour MPs NOT to support a motion for a general election, should Boris Johnson table one.

    Shall we call this the “Oh, Please Stay In Office, Tories – We Love You So Much” school of “opposition”?

    He says that Labour MPs should reject a Johnson move for a general election, and they should reject it “in favour of a referendum”. But section 2(2) of the Fixed-term Parliaments Act 2011 requires that for a motion to lead to a general election if backed by two-thirds of MPs it must take the following form:

    “That there shall be an early parliamentary general election.”

    If such a motion for a GE is tabled and voted on, its result can’t force any MP to vote one way or the other on a referendum motion. Moreover if there’s a GE motion you may find that you are prevented from invoking Standing Order 24 and tabling a referendum motion on Wednesday anyway. Jacob Rees-Mogg could wing his way to Balmoral and make the prorogation start before Wednesday even begins. John Bercow could pivot and stab you in the back. You don’t know what might happen. Blair’s idea should not be adopted. Bring this government down and fight the Tories. Sure the left’s back is against the wall and the chances of victory are meagre, but that’s the objective circumstances, comrades, and they’re coming for us.

    Is Blair seeking to return to No.10 as “caretaker” prime minister? His chum Peter Mandelson may have influence in LibDem circles. It’s possible.

    • Hatuey

      “Jacob Rees-Mogg could wing his way to Balmoral and make the prorogation start before Wednesday even begins.”

      I’m pretty sure that’s incorrect and there’s a 25 day period required between notifying the Queen and dissolving Parliament.

    • Ishmael

      “idea should not be adopted ”

      Safe bet. …It’s really something that they are circulated at all imo. That people still entertain a person critical & complicit in mass murder.

      That he walks free while Assange is in a high security prison says it all about the total moral bankruptcy of the party political classes & their institutions. Throughout the UK. Basically nobody says a word in any party.

1 3 4 5 6 7