Friday, November 04, 2011

E-petitions democracy in action? mob rule? accountability?

Taking a glance through yesterday's paper I read a reaction to one of those new fangled government e-petitions.  Since the example being written about concerns itself with the prospect of the UK population increaseing to seventy million people, no surprise that this was an ideal subject for a "liberal" journalist to slur, us the public with the dismissive comment "What passes for a debate on immigration". Of course there has been no open public  debate on migration for obvious reasons.

Without a doubt being able to register your opinion in a quick and easy way, does not form part of a comprehensive or considered debate on any subject, however the whole purpose of these e-petitions is to flag up issues of concern that may not have been covered during normal business of government, one such being something that is of major importance, here in Thanet,  the subject of  animal welfare which has generated its own  e-petition.

Looking through the list of e-petitions I don't doubt that some are just plain mad, but if someone is sufficiently concerned to register their support for a particular proposition then surely should be taken seriously if their view is shared by sufficient numbers.

Coming back to the petition "No to 70 million" I shall be signing up for this, and no doubt this will come as a surprise to journalists and Westminster politicians, I don't consider myself  in anyway right wing, for this reason, mass immigration Labour's policy,  part of a crazy social experiment to create "diversity"   has resulted in exploitation of both UK nationals and migrants who are paying the price of low wages, poor living conditions, poor education and an over subscribed health services the only beneficiaries being big business who've ruthlessly exploited the situation, while half wit middle class "liberals"have backed the policy with all manner of airy fairy notions of diversity, ignorant of the fact that this is not about racism but increasing poverty and deprivation.

Politicians and media bods, have a contempt for public opinion when it does not fall within their own narrow prejudices and experiences, I just wonder, how for the want of a better term, the establishment, would see things if they themselves were losing out on jobs, schools, homes etc despite having contributed to the economy all their lives just because a Labour government choose to experiment. 

Still not being a right wing bigot, I invite you to read an alternate take on that issue, who better than Tony Blair multi-millionnaire, who is not noted for his concern for working people and responcible for the unplanned and probably unsustainable policy to justify, read this article from the Mail

Since its unlikely that people like  Tony Blair or former colleagues in Labour are ever likely to meet with people like me, these e-petitions at least give the  opportunity of registering our concerns, admittedly it wont help the many thousands who've lost jobs in the last few years but maybe a few politicians will take note.

45 comments:

  1. Well that killed off that debate before it even started.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The answer to the immigration problem is more emmigration. All we need is another place like Australia to deport criminals. Antarctica perhaps?

    ReplyDelete
  3. 4 34 the two comments preceding have been removed. sorry if that offends child abductions. I've made this offer once before to these people (note i declined to call cranks) if they are so convinced of their case please email me with one cogent case explaining their problem.

    500 words approx will do with a begining an end, backed up with facts, and i'll consider posting it up.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I just wonder if Blair and Brown ever had a top figure of those it would allowing into the country.

    ReplyDelete
  5. The original problem stems from the decline of empire and former colonial peoples, unhappy with their new governments, seeking to come to the mother country.

    In more recent times the combination of the 'multi-cultural is best lobby' and the political advantages of a captive vote (the right will throw you out again) has caused governments, particularly Blair's, to throw open the gates. Anyone who question the policy was immediately dubbed racist!

    Then came the added problem of imposing no time contraints on the people of new EU member countries, leading to an influx of economic migrants and cheap labour.

    At no stage, not even right back when a Tory government brought in people from the West Indies to work on the tubes and buses, has anyone ever asked the indigenous population what they thought of the idea. When Powell spotted the potential for racial tensions and ethnic ghettos in the future he was castigated, branded a racist and kicked out of government.

    Whether an epetition will now lead to an open debate on the issue, where the opinions of the people are considered, remains to be seen. I suspect, however, that the screams of racisms will scare off politicians and the issue will again be swept under the carpet.

    Meantime the red squirrels continue to be pushed into the extremities of the UK, ultimately to face extinction.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Meaning precisely what, Peter, or is this yet another of your facetious comments!

    ReplyDelete
  7. It means life would be very dull without all these multi-cultural influences on our society. The more immigrants the better imo, as long as we can encourage emmigration too.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Pathetic logic, Peter, for this is a tiny island of limited resources which cannot stand 70 million people. Add the problems that diverse cultures bring and you have a recipe for trouble.

    I have served in several multi-cultural countries, usually in a peace keeping role to stop one ethnic group from cutting the throats of another. Please spare me the brotherly love nonsense for it can be very selective.

    ReplyDelete
  9. How's this for debate???Friday, 4 November 2011 at 21:34:00 GMT

    This is a global problem for all western nations, not just the UK. A problem germinated by the think-tanks of London and Washington.

    The elites want a slave class of mixed race drones, basically.

    Why? Well, because the elite are a bunch of inbred f*ckwits of course. Although they will probably mumble, in some twatty upper class accent, something along the lines of "thus ending racial problems, forever"

    Not only that, but as Tony mentions, exploitation, cheap labour, and generally driving down wages played an important role in the earlier stages of this agenda.

    Added to that, with the native population only reproducing at a rate of about 1.3 new births per two adults, the treasury department needed fresh 'subjects' upon which to float bonds on the credit market, necessary for the banking cartel's fiat ponzi scheme to succeed.

    There is also the matter of destroying the natives' feeling of national pride and unity on the way to the total destruction of our way of life and standard of living.

    In the case of muslim immigrants, it's also a damned handy tool for gaining public support for military invasions of the MENA countries. or even "kinetic peace missions", as in the case of the illegal Libyan slaughter.

    I am not saying that all immigrants are on welfare, although it does seem to be actively encouraged by western governments, mainly to try to garner a voting block loyal to the status quo, once naturalised.

    You see, for the sake of efficiency in this creeping, incremental globalist agenda, the think-tanks always come up with multi-purpose schemes, where one action will achieve a whole host of
    desired results. They always do it.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Which ultimately gives rise to an upsurge of extreme right wing politics, frequently gaining support on the race issue (per Mein Kamf), and, hey presto, here we go again and the fat cats get fatter whilst the cannon fodder slaughter each other.

    Then all the bleeding hearts, multi-cultural luvvies and limp wrists, leastways those that survive, can start all over again with their love and peace to all men, regardless of race colour or creed.

    ReplyDelete
  11. But most immigrants (the east Europeans at least) are a better class of people than the those born here, far more tolerant too.

    But much more importantly those women are so sexy with their high cheek bones, exotic accents & full mounds of pubic hair.

    Love 'n' Hugs!

    Peter Checksfield, a Spanish-Jewish-Antiguan-German-Englishman.

    ReplyDelete
  12. PS. Some of the males are cute too (yeah I too can be a bit limp-wristed given the right man!). ; )

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anon 09.48, specifically who do you mean when you refer to "limp wrists"?

    ReplyDelete
  14. Too much information info you ask me Peter

    Limp wristed Is reference to being effeminate 12 59

    ReplyDelete
  15. 09:48 I refer to those of a less than masculine stance who turn the other cheek, repeatedly fail to stand their ground on issues of importance and accept all kinds of outrages against the person in the cause of political correctness.

    Unfortunately our language has been hijacked to such an extent in recent years that many expressions are now perceived by some as indicative of some ism or phobia.

    Get real, not everyone is lovely, not every mixture produces the right result and, sometimes, men have to stand to the mealie bags.

    ReplyDelete
  16. PS Clearly Peter, from his comment at 10:07 sees "limp wristed" as indicative of sexual orientation. He is, perhaps, a prime example of a mixture (see his comment at 10:03) that did not work.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Clearly 09:34 you have sexual issues that you're suppressing, & Tony I just want to clarify that my comments weren't an offer (cuddly bear of a man that you are, you're just not my type!).

    ReplyDelete
  18. Some of us can drag our minds above the navel to consider more serious issues. Obviously, Peter, you can't!

    ReplyDelete
  19. Love conquers all! It just takes a REAL man to preach love instead of hate.

    ReplyDelete
  20. But when your love does not work and the object of it becomes aggressive towards you, to whom do you turn? The policeman or the soldier I would suggest for it was not 'love' that kept the freedom of our islands through the centuries. I am stopping there for folk like you seriously piss me off!

    ReplyDelete
  21. Just chill out & relax 10:02. It's a beautiful world out there.

    Anyway I'm off out for a run along the seafront & then I'm going to watch my new Showaddywaddy DVD that's just arrived in the post. Have a great weekend y'all!

    ReplyDelete
  22. Anon, I asked you a question with no preconditions and assumptions. You used a rather odd term. Sadly, in your answer you have shown yourself to be the thoroughly nasty individual I have long suspected you to be. No allegations of isms or phobias, so don't go off on that one. You just come across as a bit of a shit.

    And I thought so-called christians were supposed to turn the other cheek. Do you class them as lacking in masculinity? And what of the female "half" of society? Like so many of your previous expressed opinions, these are ill-formed and built on sand.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Surely it's obvious to everyone that the long rambling posts about Enoch, squirrels & gays can only be from (P)Rick. Why do they allow computers in nut houses?

    ReplyDelete
  24. You seem to have one in yours, fruitcake!

    ReplyDelete
  25. 12:17 You are so right so why don't you foxtrot oscar and leave me to my nastiness.

    ReplyDelete
  26. Anon, 12:17 PM, we seem to have some crossed wires here with more than just the two of us joining in this exchange. Problem, I guess, with identifying one anon fron another.

    Be that as it may, but, if it was you that asked a question at 12:59 AM, I gave an answer at 09:29 AM.
    That is my answer and if you don't like it, well tough. I can't change my opinions just to suit yours and if that makes me a shit in your view then so be it. I am not going to lose any sleep over it.

    ReplyDelete
  27. PS There are a lot of good Christians who take up arms when necessary to protect the lives and rights of others. Just get off your high amd mighty stance for it does not wash with me.

    ReplyDelete
  28. Hypercritical Christians.

    Do you think that Jesus thought it OK to kill others in certain circumstances?

    ReplyDelete
  29. Peter, if some did not take up arms when necessary you would not enjoy the freedom to have your say on here.

    ReplyDelete
  30. I must say I DO agree with Vera Lynn's recent statement that all people damaging war memorials should be thrown out of the country, though I'm not sure how that would work with UK nationals (take them out to sea & throw them overboard perhaps?).

    ReplyDelete
  31. Peter, you are beginning to sound like me. Great solution to the problem and saves the cost of compulsory repatriation.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Tony, you introduce the serious matter of immigration and open discussion on whether the epetition will make any difference and what happens?

    Whilst a couple of contributors comment with their thoughts on the matter, elsewhere there are sundry red herrings, ranging from the frivalous, silly comments to agggression towards others opinions. From the pinker member with the red flag mania comes an objection to the term limp wristed even though used in a collective sense aimed at the PC lobby.

    Whatever, the upshot is that yet again the subject is not discussed. As with the EU and capital punishment, it seems that the agents of the Islington elite have to stifle debate on immigration as well, so that public opinion is, as ever, ignored.

    ReplyDelete
  33. Wow, I've been called many things but I can safely say that this is the first time I've ever been called an "agent of the Islington elite".

    ReplyDelete
  34. Peter, would I ever use such a term to describe you, no way! An agent of the Botany Bay bare botty society perhaps, but Islington Elite, never. I was referring to our little red monkey who pops up everytime he thinks he gets a whiff of a Tory in his nostrils.

    You live in peace, man, and continue to enjoy your cycling and music.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I really must take exception to the comment on Nov 5 at 12:49 PM. I have read the long comments and nowhere is there reference to gays, they are not by my old man and he is not a nutter. He is also not a prick (even with viagra that part no longer functions) but his mind is sharp.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Anon of 06.33, you really have become completely offensive. Nobody complained about your reference to "limp wrists". I, as the - I presume - "red monkey" simply asked you what you meant by it. The closest to a "complaint" came from Peter Checksfield. The play you are making of your comment only serves to demonstrate that you intended to cause offence and complaint, and you are disappointed that others didn't rise to your bait.

    You have added lying to your list of accolades and you thoroughly earn the label I attached to you at 12.17 on 5 November.

    Now stop trying to provoke and get on with reminiscing over your military career and with your praying and praising.

    ReplyDelete
  37. And I suppose it is not offensive to refer to someone as a bit of a shit.

    You are unreal, totally one sided and seem to think it is OK for you to insult, describe another person as a thoroughly nasty individual and throw in accusations of lying. If the person responds you get all self righteous and up on your high horse.

    Frankly you are a prat although I appreciate it is all about diverting attention from the matter under discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  38. 2 39 what can I say I do my best, to encourage debate if Peter or
    Rick wish to go off on one, I can't monitor trivia all day and deleting stuff that I dont like, would be almost as tiresome as...

    ReplyDelete
  39. Tony, agreed and you do provide a service and an outlet perhaps not catered for elsewhere. Sadly, some hijack it for there own purposes, but, all in all, it is a good forum.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Thank you for your comments, Anon 10.47. If your behaviour and attitude are representative - not just in this exchange but in others too - of "christianity", then all my suspicions about religion are proven on one fell swoop. Mind, if you are in the right branch, you can always nip off for a quick confession, can't you?

    ReplyDelete
  41. Here we go again 2:58, for you totally ignore the fact that I was responding to your insults towards me and you have to introduce religion. Supposing I introduced race or sexual persuassion, I am sure you would be the first to kick off, but it is quite OK for you to have a dig a christianity.

    You seriously are a total hypocrite and typical of that Harmanese group who preach equality but exclude all the people they don't like from Tories to christians and, indeed, anyone remotely normal.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Ps 2:58, well I went along to confession so I am now in the clear but, you are in deep excreta for attacking us Christians. Believe me, your card is seriously marked down for the red place, mind you that should suit you fine.

    ReplyDelete
  43. This particular thread has descended into complete nonsense with anonymous people abusing other unknown anonymous in circular pattern of banality.

    Entertaining as it is moronic I'll draw a line on this.

    ReplyDelete