British politics is corrupt at every level

British politics is corrupt at every level. For an example of that let us consider what is usually taken for granted and never thought to be a form of corruption. Jim Murphy was elected leader of the Scottish Labour Party on Saturday and immediately tells us with every confidence that he will become an MSP in 2016. The tragedy is that he probably will. Similarly, David Miliband tells us that he is 'considering' a return to the House of Commons and says that in the full expectation that if he wants to he will be allowed to.

What kind of political system do we live under when incompetents, corrupt and mediocre non-entities decide that they are entitled to lay a claim to become a member of parliament and expect it to happen? Murphy is an arch neoliberal and an unthinking supporter of Mad Tony. He tells us that he will not be beholden to London and everyone guffaws with mirth. He promises a fair and just society when he was a central member of a government that went out of its way to do the opposite. He voted for war in Iraq and turned a blind eye to torture and kidnapping. David Miliband was a central player in a war mongering and torturing government, the Foreign Secretary who refused to reveal details of his government's involvement in political kidnapping and torture. Both these men were prominent members of  the governments that presided over the financial crisis and both demand fairness but refuse to be accountable for their decisions, nor allow the British people to know what they are doing and what decisions they were party to. Fair, in their lexicon, means what they interpret it to be and then expect that we all agree with them. They are both products of a political elite that tell us constantly that no-one has an absolute right to privacy then demand that they are entitled to it as we have no right to know what they did in government. These people are disgusting but are at the pinnacle of our political system. The only ray of light we have is that Murphy will almost certainly destroy the Scottish Labour Party single-handedly. Remember, when Johann Lamont resigned she cited Murphy as one of the main reasons. As I said before the man is barely articulate as he sound like a tape recorder that is set on an endless loop to deliver the same meaningless sound bites to order, a man who spent nine years at university but failed to graduate. He is quite incapable of independent thought, but is being hailed as the saviour of the Scottish people. You simply couldn't make it up!

That these people expect to be accomodated by the political system is not their fault by the way. It is a symptom of the endemic corruption that poses as politics in this poisoned nation of ours, and, as I said, the tragedy is that they will indeed be accomodated. Miliband is the man who took the huff and left British politics when he lost the Labour leadership to his brother. Now that his brother is making such a mess of it he thinks he will return and be welcomed back like the prodigal son. A big spoilt eejit who should be chased for his life for even thinking about returning to politics. When you consider that the two highest jobs in the country are held by Cameron and Osborne and that the Milibands are the only alternative on offer it is enough to make even the most hardened weep. You have been warned.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat  

Can't get a bus? It's all these pesky immigrants!!

On Question Time last night a question was asked if Britain was overcrowded and Farage as usual said yes because of immigration and cited congestion, housing, education and the NHS. As a result, the topic switched to immigration and nobody answered the question. I would ask you to consider the following.

The congestion on our roads and in our towns and cities is the direct result of Margaret Thatcher's quite deliberate destruction of our nationwide system of public transport. Thatcher told us that she was going to implement a 'car culture' and that is exactly what she did. A car became an essential for a great many people as their public transport disappeared and, under the subsequent privatisation, the trains and bus services became too expensive. I visit Stoke-on-Trent a lot and it is quite a large city. From where I live in Scotland it is impossible to get to Stoke and back on the same day by public transport. It is also difficult requiring going to first Glasgow, then Manchester and then changing again, and it is also too expensive. I need a car. I would remind you that Channel Four news last year discovered a £1000 train journey in Britain. Thatcher is directly responsible for the congestion we see today and it has nothing to do with immigrants.

With respect to housing, once again we must look to Thatcher as she quite deliberately created a housing crisis when she sold off our council house stock and refused to allow councils to replace them. Her stated goal was a 'property owning democracy' as she guessed that people who owned their own homes were more likely to vote Tory, and, trusting in what is laughingly called 'market forces' she forced the price of housing up to its now ridiculous levels by cutting supply in a situation of serious demand. In addition, she falsely rigged the 'market' by forcing up the price of council house rents by an average of 400% in order to make a mortgage attractive. She thereby exposed the lie that poses as 'the housing market' as no such market exists, it is an example of legalised gangsterism. As she also said, home owners were less likely to go on strike and she was right on both counts. Her other goal was the enrichment of house building firms in the private sector. The sale of council housing was the beginning of the destruction of Britain as a civilised society. Again the housing crisis has nothing to do with immigration. Immigrants have simply added to the crisis that was begun long before they impacted on it.

In education the reason is quite simply the refusal to invest in decent schools, teaching staff and infrastructure. There is no overcrowding or large classes in private and grammar schools. Why is that I wonder? Why is it only in the public comprehensive sector that we get such overcrowding and lack of discipline? It is self-evident and needs no further analysis. Schools are always in the front line of the Tories class warfare. Again, nothing to do with immigration.

The NHS? I wrote last time about the exodus of nurses under successive Westminster governments who have deliberately brought the NHS to crisis. You must never underestimate the Wesminster loathing of the public sector and its determination to destroy and undermine it as much as possible. Britain is floating on a sea of money whilst the politicians constantly tell us that there isn't any. The British elite and their international mates are siphoning off billions of pounds every day. If you don't see that then you are living in cloud cuckoo land. There is plenty of money available for transport, housing, the NHS etc if the will is there to use it for what it should be used for. Like all liars and people who are involved in criminality but don't want to get caught, Britain's political class utilise the scapegoat mentality, its always Johnny Foreigner to blame its never our own fault. What we are seeing in todays UK is the result of what we voted for. Britain's problems are of their own making and the result of a quite apalling political class who are motivated by greed and selfishness. But their principal motivation is the destruction of the public sector in order to make vast profits from its corpse. It appears to be a requirement of a Westminister politician to freely give up their common sense, their decency and their dignity. Westminster is totally disconnected, not only with the electorate, but with the real world and has become the real danger and threat to the nation, not our so-called terrorists, and certainly not immigrants. Holyrood has so far escaped the worst of this and I trust that we in Scotland make sure that it does not happen. I hope you are comforted by voting to remain in this wonderful union governed by our wise and humane Westminster political class. If you think there is any solution in sight by voting Labour, then you are truly deluded. But again, you have been warned.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

Let them eat cake!!

I sometimes wonder if I'm living in a different country from the rest of the British population? Alternatively, I wonder if I'm missing something really important. Official government data shows that since the coalition government were elected in 2010, the NHS has lost 4,400 matron and senior nursing posts. That is not the number of nurses, simply the number of senior nursing personnel. The NHS is on the point of collapse and it is being brought to this state deliberately. Am I the only person who is warning of the government's intention to completely destroy the NHS in order that they can then sell it to the private sector under the disguise of 'saving' it? I have been warning of this since I started this blog yet people continue to vote for the people doing this.

In addition, a report was published today by an All-Party Parliamentary Inquiry called Feeding Britain. This report is based on "the simple but devastating fact that hunger stalks this country." It is being endorsed by the Archbishop of Canterbury. The Report calls for the government to set up a network to coordinate foodbanks utilising voluntary organisations. The good Bish was reportedly shocked by the plight of the families he met at foodbanks. Welcome to the real world your Archbishopness! I cannot be too sarcastic because he is at least prepared to talk about it and do something. But I have to ask, where has he been for the past few years? Again, this situation is being deliberately engineered by the Westminster elite with the intention of reducing the British working class to a state of modern slavery where they will be prepared to work anywhere for anything.

However well-intentioned people like the good Bish are, they are entirely missing the point. If you want to cure poverty and hunger you have to challenge the people who are purposely bringing such conditions to bear. In addition you could easily solve it by giving people full-time permanent jobs with a decent wage, and make the benefits system serve the people instead of impoverishing them, which is again Westminster's intention. Anyone who doesn't like it can get lost and go live somewhere else, they will never be missed. However they will only be allowed to take a portion of their wealth with them. It is time for the British state to step in and solve these problems, and it wouldn't take long. A properly constituted system of local government would cure these problems in a short time, and the health service could be rescued quickly if the will to do so is there. I repeat without apology, the Westminster system of government is beyond saving, it has to go. It is totally corrupt both morally and politically. If the promised cuts materialise after the next election we could be quite genuinely looking at serious social disorder in the streets as the fabric of the society we live in begins to rapidly unravel.

I fully understand how people can genuinely disbelieve what I am saying as it seems too monstrous to be true that a British government would actually do things like this with deliberation? However, at least the good Archbish has started to notice reality, and I trust that you will too. I have just finished a book in which I explain why, but you will have to wait until next autumn till it is published. All I can say for the present is that you have been warned.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

How can you solve society's problems when you don't recognise society?

An article in today's Independent is called, "George Osborne is on a mission but I still don't know what it is". If you can give credit to the Tories for anything it is for consistency of purpose and for achieving their longterm goals. Osborne's mission is the same as Thatcher's and it is to bring about what sociologists call 'the weightless state'. Never underestimate the right-wing objective of transferring ownership of all public sector services and functions to the private sector and submit them to the imperatives of profit-making and market forces. However, Osborne's mission in the long-term is doomed to failure because the free market ideology that drives it is flawed and is based on a whole series of false hypotheses. The most fundamental of these is the neoliberal concept of human nature. The Thatcherite mantra that there is no such thing as society is simply wrong and is the result of this flawed notion of the nature of the human being.

The free market human being is an atomised aggressive individual. The free market economic being is rational with clear moral objectives. This being is also self-interested but in the free market universe self-interest is interpreted as selfishness. All of these concepts are wrong. Thus Osborne's mission is founded on a whole raft of false hypotheses and, if you base your programme on a false hypothesis then your outcomes will be wrong as well. That is the fundamental reason why none of the Westminster parties have a clue not only what caused the financial crisis, but how to remedy it. They are all locked into an ideological staitjacket from which they have no idea how to escape. If you deny the existence of society and think only in terms of individuals and families then you are denying yourself an understanding of the human reality. Social problems demand social solutions, you cannot solve a social problem with a series of policy options that are designed for individuals.

However, all of this is giving credit to the Tories and Labour for wanting to solve our social problems, but that is not the case. The truth is not that the Tories do not believe in society, it is that they have abandoned it. They deny society because their aim is not the greater social good, but the enrichment and benefit of a small section of society, the rest of society will have to get by as well as they can on what is left over. It is very difficult for the British people to come to terms with the actual aims and goals of the British elite. They cannot grasp the extent of their criminality as they find it difficult to believe that they would actually do such things, that they would actually use the system of government in such a despicable manner. It is not that the Westminster elite don't care about the poor and the disabled etc.it is that they hate them with a passion. They hold the poor and disadvantaged in utter contempt . The poor and disadvantaged are a cost, and in the free market universe costs are a constraint on profit and must be eliminated as much as possible. An example of their thinking is with reference to unemployment.

Free market economic theory argues that market forces operate in such a way that they establish what is known as ‘equilibrium’ in the economy. Equilibrium is balance, and it happens because, according to our free market economic geniuses, in a free competitive market system, the market efficiently establishes a harmonious relationship between the competing interests of individuals engaged in freely trading with one another. One area in which this will occur is in the labour market because, it is claimed, the free enterprise economic system will automatically establish equilibrium in a situation where there is no ‘voluntary’ unemployment. If there is any unemployment it will by necessity be temporary because unemployment will produce an excess of labour that will then result in a fall in the price of labour, ie. wages. As a result of the concept of marginal utility, the fall in wage rates will then create more employment, thus resolving the temporary problem of unemployment. However, the result of this theoretical construct is that any long-term unemployment in the economy must be, by definition voluntary, because the market has inbuilt mechanisms that automatically cure any structural forms of unemployment. Therefore, long-term unemployment is not real unemployment, it is voluntary and therefore artificial, and the result of lazy people who simply do not want to work; they volunteer to be unemployed, the skivers and shirkers, the benefit scroungers of British government mythology. Thus, society cannot be responsible for unemployment as there is no such thing as society, the market cannot be responsible for unemployment as it will cure it by itself if left alone, so, the responsibility for unemployment lies with individuals who simply don’t want to work, and trades unions who interfere with wages and the free workings of the labour market. As a result, both those groups will need to be subjected to the disciplines of the market and must not be rewarded for their selfish and anti-social behaviour. Now, I wonder who we are always listening to talking like that? This is of course simply garbage. This is what you voted for in September if you voted No. I trust you are comforted. You have been warned.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

Gordon Brown must be a proud man

When are the Westminster gang going to accept that the Scots are not completely stupid and can spot a lie when they see it? Labour and the Tories can tell us till they are blue in the face that they have fulfilled their 'vow' but it is blatantly obvious that they haven't even tried. Under the current proposals that have still to go before an unknown Westminster parliament after the 2015 general election, Scotland will still only have control over 30% of the taxes it is responsible for and a mere 15% of welfare. If this is home rule, or even vaguely close to federalism as promised by the three stooges, then I no longer understand the English language as these people are talking in a language I simply cannot recognise. I will also remind you that Britain operates by the principle of parliamentary sovereignty by which no parliament can bind its successors. Thus, we are not even guaranteed that the next parliament will honour the pledge to vote on the Smith proposals. Should the doomsday scenario materialise and UKIP form part of a coalition government, can you imagine them agreeing to anything that will enhance the powers of the Scottish parliament when they are committed to abolishing it? It should also be noted that whatever enhancement in tax revenues that Scotland can enjoy under the proposals should they actually be agreed, then that amount will be deducted from the block grant that Scotland receives from London meaning that we will not actually be getting any wealthier but will simply be treading water.

What is significant is that even the Tories were quite shocked by the conduct of the Labour party during the Smith Commission negotiations, as they were the main supporters of stripping Scotland's ability to control its own welfare spending and who blocked the devolution of the minimum wage. This is treachery of the worst kind because, as I have said before, it was always Labour who the Scots traditionally looked to to represent their case.

The Tories have been quite open that after the next election they are going to implement another £48 billion cuts whilst continuing to cut taxation. This is financial madness because tax is a government's only form of income. If they cut taxes they have to either borrow more, or make significant savage cuts to already existing budgets. What is going to happen is that there will be such a savage attack on welfare and health spending that both these departments will grind to a halt and Westminster will step in and say that the only remedy is to hand the lot over to the private sector to save it. That is their plan as I have been telling you for the past three years, the complete privatisation of the public sector. In order to sell it off they will first have to destroy it. I trust the people who voted No in September are proud of their achievements and that the grandmaster liar Brown enjoys his retirement. You have been warned and you read it here first.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

It's the Economy Stupid!

I am returning to the theme of how the dominant economic model that the UK operates by is the basis of almost of our problems and is the greatest barrier to any solutions. It is the dominant free market
economic model that is the driving force behind the increasing Scottish demands for more and more independence from Westminster. It's no use unionists continually telling us that we lost the referendum and should just get over it. It was the manner in which we lost that has caused such an upsurge of indignation since 18th September. The lies, the deceit, the fabled 'vow' that is now exposed as a complete fabrication. Indeed what is particularly galling for Scots is the manner in which it is Labour who are the biggest culprits in this web of lies and mendacity because the Scots have traditionally always looked to Labour to best represent their interests. I believe that they will suffer a backleash from the Scottish electorate that they may not recover from, and it will be fully deserved.

A good example of Labour's inability to offer anything positive comes from that intellectual giant Gordon Brown, who exhorts us to stop obsessing about constitutional change and start focusing on improving people's lives. What this titan of politics completely fails to understand is that the constitutional change is vital in the battle to improve people's lives and is a necessary prerequisite for creating the conditions that will allow us to change people's lives. Where does he think the drivers for demands for constitutional change come from? You see, Brown and his ilk are a major part of the problem and that is why there can be no solutions or improvement under the guidance of the Westminster elite. Brown was the biggest culprit in the deregulation of the financial and economic system which lies at the heart of our problems today. He is completely wedded to the free market model and is completely incapable of providing meaningful solutions. His statements today are ample proof of that.

This is because Labour are inexorably locked into the dominant economic gangsterism. The British free market model is centralist and exclusive. It demands control and is designed to exclude the majority from meaningful prosperity whilst ensuring that a minority are allowed to loot the national treasury at will. We therefore have unimaginable wealth built on exploitation and poverty for the majority. How can anyone be proud of a country that awards fantastic bonuses for criminality and incompetence whilst supporting a system that requires people in work to utilise foodbanks? The free market economic model is both fraudulent and simply wrong. It is founded on a whole raft of incorrect assumptions about economic behaviour and human nature. Should anyone wish me to eleborate on any of these points I would be happy to. What is now certain is that the fabled 'vow' has been exposed as a lie and that what the Scots are being offered is simply a sop as the Westminster gangsters are both incapable of any form of honesty and of relinquishing power and control in any meaningful way. British politics is in a seriously parlous state as it has neither integrity or self-respect. I sincerely hope Jim Murphy wins the Scottish Labour leadership election as he will most certainly finish the destruction of this once mighty party that is now simply a parody. Labour will have to suffer a catastrophe before it can even begin to recover any form of dignity and credibility. It will have to be humbled. You have been warned

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

The disease of race and class that is destroying us

We are witnessing truly damning evidence in the United States against the arguments for arming the police, and we are also witnessing the inevitable results of scapegoating minorities, of demonising minorities and ethnic groups and of presenting people and groups as outsiders and of being 'others'.
Another dangerous trend that we see in America that is being increasingly adopted in this country is that, regardless of what the police do they are never blamed nor held accountable. The police in America have a licence to do whatever they want to a black person.

When America enshrined the three-fifths clause in its Constitution that effectively designated black people as only being three-fifths human, they established a cultural attitude towards black people that became so embedded in American culture that it has still to be eradicated today. The three-fifths clause was infamously reinforced in 1857 by the judgement of the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case when Chief Justice Robert B Taney argued that the founders of the Constitution considered that black people were "beings of an inferior order and altogether unfit to associate with the white race, either in social or political relations; and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect". He went on to argue that to consider blacks on an equal basis in law with white people "would give to persons of the negro race, ...the right to enter every other State whenever they pleased, ...to sojourn there as long as they pleased, to go where they pleased ...the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and to keep and carry arms wherever they went". This, the Supreme Court argued, was completely unacceptable.

It is such attitudes that produced the Holocaust; the fear of, and the demonization of other people we don't like and portraying them as sub-human. That is the creeping disease that is affecting the UK and is the product of poisonous propaganda and lies by newspapers such as the Sun, the Express and the Daily Mail in collusion with the Tories and UKIP. We are scapegoating the 'others' - Muslims, immigrants and Europeans in general. As I have been writing on this blog the other great target is Russia.

In this country we have had centuries of working people and 'the lower orders' being portrayed as being of lesser value and worth than the middle and upper classes. I would remind you that there are no class, race, gender, or ethnic differences in the birth process. We all enter the world in exactly the same manner. All differences are artificial and social, they are man-made, and I mean man-made in a literal sense as the world is still even today dominated by males. In this country and the US it is white male dominated.

Do not be fooled or seduced by the dominant ideology, it is the source of all our troubles. There are alternatives, and never be conned by the argument that our rulers are all educated people, they may be well-schooled but that is a quite different thing from being educated. You have been warned

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat  

Our role models, the banking and political classes, so much for the rule of law!

There can be no doubt that the biggest organised crime syndicate in the UK must be the Royal Bank of Scotland. The catalogue of their criminality seems never-ending in the media as they are exposed on a weekly basis for their criminal activities. Today we are regaled with their bare faced lies to Parliament over their colluding to bankrupt companies in order that they can strip their assets for their own profit. RBS have been repeatedly exposed for fraud, theft, illegal financial activities and lying and yet, no-one is ever held to account or punished. As I wrote in my last post, the biggest collection of active criminality in this country is in Westminster, but they are at least not as organised as RBS as they are made up of disparate groups in competition with each other. That is why I suspect that Westminster refuses to act on RBS as they actually do not see that they are doing anything wrong. The behaviour of our financial class and our political class are an utter disgrace and are evidence of the catastrophic leadership that we are suffering from.

A Westminster MP is a pathological liar. That is not a sarcastic remark, it is meant quite seriously. Westminster politicians are quite incapable of honesty and so when they see that type of behaviour from people like bankers then they view it as the norm. That is how the British ruling elite conduct their daily business. We are witnessing the British government telling us that we are facing the biggest threat from terrorism in our history and we are expected to take that at face value from a creature like Theresa May who refuses to furnish even a scintilla of proof for her exaggerated claims. This Home Secretary is one of the most appalling politicians imaginable. How this person could ever get elected is astonishing, yet she has risen to the third office of state in this sorry country and wields colossal but unaccountable power. I say unaccountable because she is introducing a further set of draconian legislation that erodes even more of our liberties and rights without a single piece of sustainable evidence that it is necessary. Now, it may well be necessary but we need to see the evidence. I remind you, the onus is always on the legislator to demonstrate that the legislation is both necessary and required. We must never simply take the word of such appalling human specimens.

I have said before and I repeat it, it is only a question of time before they criminalise simply being a Muslim. Also, one of their goals is to stop radical speakers from being heard. I wonder how long it will take them to get to me? This is what we voted for on September 18th. I hope it was worth it. you have been warned

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat.       

Incompetence and stupidity are the default position of a Westminster MP

Not only is the Westminster parliament home to the largest collection of criminals in the country but it also boasts the biggest group of economic illiterates imaginable. As I've told you before, the task of the serious social scientist is to explain the unintended consequences of intentional social action. It is now cheaper for British students to study in the USA than it is in their own country. If the annual income of a family is below £38,000 then American universities are free for British undergraduates. In addition, they may get maintenance allowances. In order to save money the economic geniuses in Westminster hiked up tuition fees to £9000 and have produced a situation where a British student can attend Harvard, the top university in the world, eclipsing both Oxford and Cambridge, easier and cheaper than they can attend any course in higher education in the UK.

On top of that, Westminster's deliberate policy of suppressing wages means that 75% of British students will never pay their student debt, even after the 30 year repayment period. This is the findings of the Higher Education Commission. As a result, despite the intended aim of reducing the burden of higher education on the taxpayer, the government is now heavily subsidising British students whilst being forced to write off billions of pounds of debt. You really couldn't make it up. According to the Institute of Fiscal Studies, the average student debt is expected to be £44,015, higher even than in the USA, the home of free market neoliberal economics. This is incompetence on an Olympian scale. The government were well warned that this was the likely outcome of their hastily planned incompetence, but as with everything else they refused to listen. This applies to both major parties and to the Lib/Dems who ignored their own propaganda about tuition fees to agree to such a system.    

On another front, the Church of England have described the government's bedroom tax as "unjust, ineffective and deeply unfair." Both student fees and this tax are examples of policies designed to punish the poorer sectors of our society. Student fees are not an issue for the rich and the bedroom tax is not applied to them either as it is only designed to hurt people on benefits. I have written before, and am quite serious, that the biggest recipients of welfare in the UK are the royal family, so why aren't they subject to the bedroom tax with all the spare capacity available in Buckingham Palace, Balmoral, Windsor, etc.? As of now, the dangers to the health service that I outlined yesterday, tuition fees and the bedroom tax are only applicable in the barbarian sectors of Britain outside of Scotland. If the Better Together idiots get their way that will change and we must do everything in our power to prevent that. If the Westminster incompetents and imbeciles are capable of such things whilst we are members of the EU, can you imagine what life will be like once they take us out of it? You have been warned.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

Great Britain PLC the sale of the century

I have been writing since I started this blog about how the fundamental problem with our economic and social life is the persistent policies of deregulation that are at the heart of the Westminster neoliberal agenda. It was the absence of any form of meaningful regulation that caused the financial crisis in 2007 and today, seven years later Westminster has still made no meaningful moves to correct this. Just last week we witnessed another series of fines on banking malpractice that takes the global total of fines imposed on banks in the past six years to £200 billion. Yes that's billion. There can be no doubt left, even in the minds of the most rabid right-wing halfwit that the banking and financial community are the lowest form of life on the planet. However, they are no worse than the Conservatives who are down there at the bottom of the swamp along with them. That is why most conservatives are financiers and bankers.

It is beyond dispute that deregulation is a disaster, that it is a device to allow criminality and gangsterism to go unpunished and to transfer wealth from the poorest to the richest in our society. I have been writing this for many years and it has now been confirmed by official data that this has been the result of successive governmental policies dating back many years. The rich are getting richer and the poor poorer. This is official government policy and it is the policy of all Westminster parties. Today Cameron has announced that he is going to attempt to speed up the ratification of the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) trade deal. This is a signal that the solution to the crisis caused by deregulation is, according to our Conservative coalition government, even greater deregulation.

TTIP is designed to remove existing regulatory barriers to trade between the EU and the US. That in itself is not too radical, but included in this deal is the provision for foreign countries and firms to buy up large sectors of Britain's public service sector, and particularly its health and welfare sectors. Included in these contracts will be clauses that will guarantee that no future British government will be able to recover these services once they are sold off. I have repeatedly warned you that the Westminster parties are going to completely privatise the NHS, perhaps someone will now start to believe me.

This is deeply unconstitutional. It is an essential part of the concept of parliamentary sovereignty that no parliament can bind its successors. Thus, if this deal goes through, no future parliament will be able to reverse this policy and recover what was privatised. This is what you voted for on September 18th, and don't try to say you weren't warned. You voted for another financial crisis, the complete privatisation of the health and welfare sectors, the eventual privatisation of all public services, the transfer of the national wealth from the poor to the rich, the sale of all British assets to foreign companies, and the impotence of your parliament to do anything about it. I trust you feel very comfortably Better Together. You have been warned.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat 

Westminster - Britain's biggest threat since Hitler

I trust you saw the shambles in the Westminster Parliament last night over the non-vote on the European Arrest Warrant. The point of this post is not on that issue but on the degeneration of political life in this sorry country to the point that there is neither honesty, dignity or self-respect left in public life. This will result in inevitable and dangerous consequences.

We have reached a stage in our national life where honesty is regarded as a weakness that merits scorn and ridicule. Last night the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary were exposed as having systematically and cynically lied to Parliament. This was evidenced by the string of MPs from their own party who stood in the House to denounce them for it. One of the traditions of Parliament is that you are forbidden to call another Member a liar. If you do you are immediately ordered to withdraw the remark or suffer expulsion from the Chamber for punishment. This is because it is a cardinal rule that Members must always tell the truth. As a result, if you do lie you must get away with it because there is no mechanism for holding you to account. The result of this is that we now have the two most senior members of the British government who are quite prepared to give promises and assurances that they have no intention of keeping and who refuse to abide by the traditions and rules of the Parliament that they have sworn an oath to uphold, defend and protect. Both the Prime Minister and the Home Secretary had given their word that MPs would have a vote on the status of the Arrest Warrant and that was then withheld. This follows on from the Prime Minister renaging on his election promises with respect to immigration where he gave promises that the numbers would be at a certain level by this time. The Chancellor has also renaged on assurances about debt levels, interest rates etc. and the Lib/Dems famously lied through their teeth with respect to tuition fees.

This is not new of course. The most outrageous liars are the Labour Party as their entire personnel are practiced and gifted liars which they seem to think was one of Mad Tony's greatest characteristics and so worthy of being handed down as some form of gift. This specialism was then put to great use in order to win the Scottish Referendum when the Labour lie machine was seen to operate at its finest.

My point however is that what we are witnessing in modern Britain is the disintegration of morality and the characteristic of integrity. Westminster has abandoned all pretence of moral behaviour and are quite prepared to do anything that they choose if it will get them what they want. However, such behaviour does not go unnoticed and sends the message that if it is OK for our rulers then it is OK for the rest of us. As a result, Westminster has lost its moral authority and any trust that the British people ever had in it. That is why the electorate is abandoning the three major parties. Why on earth should anyone in Britain obey the law, the rules, or respect any form of authority when the people who make the laws, establish the rules and claim the authority refuse to obey them nor display any form of decency? We are witnessing a truly dangerous phase in our history because, if the people take their behavioural model from the ruling model there is a genuine threat of a breakdown in law and order. I again warn you, the increasing likelihood after the next election is a Tory/UKIP coalition. You should be afraid. You have been warned.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat 

You surely don't believe that our government would lie to you? Part 2

If I may return to the question of the right of the state to invade your privacy, I have said that states do not have rights only people have rights. One of the most important rights people have is to be protected from an overweening and misguided state. The method that has been developed over centuries for this protection is law. You see the state is simply a generic term for a bunch of people. We elect governments, who are simply people like you and I, to make the collective decisions for our comfortable and safe day-to-day living that we cannot make individually. The decisions that government make are then administered by another set of people, civil servants that we collectively call the state. These include the police, the military, the officials in government departments, both national and local etc. In order that we can be safe against the massive power that we entrust these people with we erect a system of law, ethics, morals, custom and practice that we call the rule of law.

Government is derivative, that is it derives from a source and that source is the social nature of the human being. The human being is what Aristotle described as a zoon politikon, a political animal. There is no such thing as an atomised individual, our individuality is all conditioned by our collective life, we are creatures of our environment. As a result, government derives its roles and its purpose from this fact. It is there to serve the people it represents and does not have any other purpose, and must be answerable and accountable to the people who entrust the personnel in government and the state with its administration. If the people who are charged with national security wish to take measures that, in effect, threaten the freedom and safety of the public then they must make a clear and definite case for it and receive the public's approval. It was Benjamin Franklin who told us, that if we are prepared to sacrifice our freedom on the alter of security then we will lose both and will deserve to lose both. We must never be fooled into trading our freedom for some notion that it is necessary for our security, that is the methodology of totalitarianism and is the argument of soundrels and liars. No-one, whether a politican or a government, can claim to speak for the people unless they have specifically asked the people, and they most certainly cannot know what is in our best interests.

Governments cannot and must not be trusted. Lord Acton warned us that power tends to corrupt and absolute power corrupts absolutely, and, if the past 30 years of British history tells us anything, it is that British government and politics is corrupt to its very core. All government actions must be demonstrably justified. We are being hoodwinked into thinking that governments have rights over the people they govern and that politicians have a right to deprive us of information or justification for their acts. I have said before, I find that Britain is beginning to mirror attitudes and conditions that existed in the 1930's and '40s and that I detect an increasing fascist mentality, particularly in sections of the right-wing press. We are increasingly applying a scapegoat mentality for the criminality and incompetence of our politicians that is being used as a smokescreen for ever increasing totalitarian methods of surveillance on our everyday activities. What is at stake is our freedom and the rule of law. You have been warned

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat.

You surely don't believe that our government would lie to you?

I was pondering the claim by the Director of GCHQ, a Mr Robert Hannigan, that we do not have an absolute right to privacy. Presumably this is to justify the revelation that they have been illegally intercepting privileged communications between lawyers and their clients who are in litigation with the British state, something that is quite illegal. I do not accept absolutes, and so have to agree that we do not have an absolute right to anything. However, in saying that, Hannigan's motive is that he is thereby claiming that the state does have an absolute right, the right to invade your privacy whenever it wants to. 

I do not believe in absolutes because I do not believe in absolute truth. Truth is always relative and we live our lives accepting many things as the truth with the proviso that it may change. I believe it is true that I cannot walk on water and so avoid trying to walk on water in case I drown, but I do not accept that it is true that humans will never be able to walk on water. Thus, whilst I hold it to be true that a human being cannot walk on water, I do not hold it as absolute, because, it is possible that humans may indeed evolve some day to walk on water, however unlikely it may appear at this point in history. As a result, I do not accept that the state has any absolute rights.

I believe, with the Sophist Thrasymachus, that justice is the interests of the strongest. That is why the strongest must be continually restrained and constrained in their actions and ability to impose their will on the rest of society. What is happening in Britain is the result of the Thatcher experiment to remove all restraints and constraints on the strongest in society, with the result that they are increasingly imposing their will and their domination on the rest of us. Thatcher told us that she had a mission to 'roll back the state'. What she in fact meant was that she wished to weaken the state to the point that she and her cohorts and successors could successfully impose their domination on that state, and, in so doing, on the whole of society. She was particularly successful. The British state is today exactly as Karl Marx described it, a committee for managing the affairs of the whole bourgeoisie. What I find hard to accept is all of the ordinary people who work at GCHQ willingly and enthusiastically supporting the states attempts at tyranny and illegality. Lenin called such people 'useful idiots' because, when the state has successfully used these people it will just as quickly discard them and begin tapping their phones and making their lives a misery in case they blow the whistle on all the activities they subscribed to whilst they were carrying out their masters wishes.

If you truly believe anything that the Hannigan's, the Cameron's and the Miliband's of this world tell you then you genuinely deserve all you get. You have been warned

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat   

Peoiple have tried to destroy the Scots and the Russians before

The good citizens of Lewes in East Sussex felt it appropriate to burn effigies of Alex Salmond, Vladimir Putin and the Loch Ness Monster for their Guy Fawkes night celebrations. At the last minute the were persuaded not to actually burn the effigy of Salmond which was adorned by a large badge with 45% on it, presumably with the symbolism of incinerating all those people who had voted Yes in the referendum,and instead blew it up. What we are witnessing here is the attitudes of the Westminster elite filtering down into the general population. Both Alex Salmond and Vladimir Putin represent movements of people who have had enough of Western eltitist bullying and are refusing to be intimidated any more. They are standing up to the West and to the Anglo-American domination and telling them to get lost and the Anglo-American powers will not accept any challenge to their dominance. As a result, the populations of these nations see such challenges as hostile and unacceptable and immediately regard such people as enemies that must be confronted.

The great Scottish philosopher David Hume described the English as 'stupid and factious barbarians' and it would appear that the English nation is descending into such a position once again. I have written on this blog before that, in my opinion, Vladimir Putin is quite right in the position he assumes towards the British and the Americans. Russia is a nation that cannot be bullied. We seem to be adopting the same attitudes to Russia that prevailed in the 1930s and '40s that Russia is weak, not to be trusted and can be told what to do at the risk of being punished if they don't. Hitler genuinely believed that the Soviet Union would fall like a pack of cards within weeks of invasion. Indeed the Soviets lost 3,000,000 men in the first six weeks of the German invasion and the Germans advanced to within 20 miles of Moscow, surrounded Leningrad and occupied almost the whole of Stalingrad. However, by 1944 the Soviets were actually outproducing the USA in war materials and invaded Germany with over 4,000,000 troops. It was the battles of Stalingrad and Kursk that turned the Second World War. You underestimate the Russians at your peril.

Similarly, you underestimate the Scots at your peril. Despite losing the referendum the SNP are the largest growing party in Britain, if not Europe. They may have lost a crucial battle, but appear to be winning the war. A revitalised Yes campaign has begun planning for the next referendum, and, if Labour lose the next Holyrood elections, they will be forced to adopt a Yes platform in order to simply survive. Remember, it was the Holyrood parliament and proportional representation that saved the Conservatives bacon in Scotland. They too were forced to accept something they bitterly opposed. I repeat something I have told you before, the task of the serious political and social analyst is to consider the unintended consequences of intentional human action. We are seeing the full fruits of that maxim taking shape before our eyes, the future is definitely not what it used to be. You have been warned.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

Perhaps losing the referendum was a blessing in disguise

I trust you will note how everything that a Westminster politician does is 'the right thing to do' even when the right thing that they are doing is in complete contradiction to the right thing they were doing a short while ago. It is the same when they tell us that they are acting in the interests of the British people. I am the British people and no-one has ever asked me if I agree with what they are doing in my best interests. I love it when they tell us that 'what the British people want is...' because no-one has ever asked me what I want and I genuinely have never met anyone else who has been asked either. So, how do these people know what is in Britain's best interests or what the British people want when they never make an attempt to find out?

When politicians tell us things like that they are simply telling us what they and their mates want. With regards to public policy, they persistently tell us that there is no alternative when anyone with a scintilla of intelligence knows that there are innumerable alternatives. Despite this, the British people as a whole sit and nod their heads and agree with such rubbish. I have written before about Labour's rising star, Chukka Ummuna. I watched him last night and he sat and simply denied every point that was put to him by three other people about the state of the Labour Party. You see he is symptomatic of the Westminster sickness. If reality does not agree with them, they simply deny reality and invent a new one. That is why Labour, and indeed the whole Westminster system, is in terminal decline. Not only do these people have no idea what is in Britain's best interests, they don't even know what is in their own best interests.

Thank goodness that the German's are standing up to Westminster's bullying and telling them that enough is enough. There are four fundamental principles built into the European Treaties and the Germans are telling us, quite correctly, that they are the red line we cannot cross. The British actually believe that they should determine what the fundamental principles of EU law should be and that those pesky foreigners had better listen up or we will take our ball and go home. I have written constantly about the Westminster attitude that they will not tolerate any form of constraint on their actions of desires and their determination to get their own way regardless of the consequences and the damage that they do to other people. This is a result of the fundamental ideological approach that drives them, the neoliberal free market fraud that passes for rational thinking in this sorry country. They know best and woe betide anyone who disagrees. I am sorry if you voted No in the referendum, because Independence is now almost certain as the Scottish people now realise that these people are going to ruin the country and the demand for seperation will grow unstoppable. I am coming to believe that losing the referendum was actually a good thing as it has exposed the charlatans in their true light. You have been warned

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat 

We are in a genuine crisis of leadership

I was reading a report on the Rochester and Strood by-election where a voter was asked why he was voting UKIP and he replied because the Tory MP for the constituency had done absolutely nothing for them. The UKIP candidate he is voting for is the same Tory MP who defected to UKIP, Mark Reckless. I concluded that the voters in Rochester are getting exactly what they deserve. I mean you genuinely couldn't make that up. It beggars belief that intelligent people can even consider voting for this bunch of nutters, but it is indicative of the alienation of the electorate from Westminster. To combat this trend the Tories are trying to outhate them over foreigners and the EU. This has led to Germany's President Merkel telling the British that if they do not stop trying to alter the basic rights and freedoms of the European settlement then she will support kicking Britain out of Europe. She told Cameron that he was reaching the point of no return. That is strong language indeed from another country's President and we should take careful note. I ask you to consider the implications of leaving Europe for employment rights, pensions, human rights in general, the welfare state, employment etc. Most of our multi-national companies are only located here because we are members of the EU and they would withdraw immediately were we to lose our membership. In addition we would be leaving a trading bloc of over 500 million people and would be subject to EU tariffs and all the barriers to entry of that bloc. In addition, if UKIP get a serious hold on British power they are committed to abolishing the Scottish Parliament.

Rather than counteract the bile and hatred pouring daily out of the Mail and Express, Westminster allows such bullying and attempts to appease it. In doing so, Britain becomes increasingly fascist in character. I continually warn you that we are ruled by intellectual misfits and that the political system in Britain is seriously flawed. We are ruled by incompetents and clowns, causing Will Hutton to call the Prime Minister incoherent, immoral and economically illiterate over his tax policies in yesterday's Observer. I urge you to read his article. I would extend that description to cover 90% of government policies. What gets me is why it has taken Will Hutton so long to see what I have been telling you for some years now? What we are witnessing is the enduring legacy of Margaret Thatcher and her determination to destroy the collective nature of British society and the engine of that society, the welfare state. I had a conversation with a friend of mine recently when he quite seriously described Ed Miliband as a Marxist. That is how illiterate political discourse is in this sorry mess of a country today. I asked him if he thought Miliband was a Marxist, what that made me? However, I am still being repeatedly assured that we are Better Together, so I must be wrong. I am in genuine despair that there is any solution to what I see are our deep-seated problems and am becoming resigned to the prospect of a corporate fascist style Britain leaving the EU and finishing the destruction of the welfare state, leaving us at the mercy of privatised foreign companies who take all their ill-gotten gains out of the country and leave us in a bankrupt mess. When that happens, the Thatcher revolution will be complete. You have been warned.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

The Strange Death of Labour

I have written before about the Greek concept of hubris, self-destruction brought on by overweening arrogance, and that is what we are seeing with regard to the Westminster parties, but in particular the Labour Party. The Westminster gangsters are so confident in the stupidity of the electorate that they genuinely believed that they could win the referendum by persistently lying and that there would be no consequences. I do not believe for a moment that the poll that gives the SNP 52% will be reflected come polling day, but it is nevertheless significant as to the deep hostility towards Labour and their behaviour towards the Scots over many years now, but with particular reference to their performance in the referendum. It immediately became clear that their promises and assurances were no more than hot air to the extent that polls now show that 1 in 4 and rising of people who voted No are now regretting it.

If you watch the Scots representatives of all Westminster parties it is quite a surreal experience. When asked a question it is as if someone switches a tape recorder on and the same stock phrases and responses come gushing out of empty mouths and empty minds. I cannot believe that anyone is genuinely promoting Jim Murphy as the saviour of the Scottish Labour Party, he is barely articulate and is a clone produced by Westminster. I watched him last night on Scotland Tonight when he told us that he agrees with everything Ed Miliband says and stands for, I mean, that is genuine braindeadness. His mate Anas Sarwar is, if anything worse and, in an interview on Scotland 2014 I counted 5 times in less than 5 minutes that he told us he only wanted to have "a genuine dialogue to move us forward". He was quite incapable of answering any kind of question spontaneously. Moving forward is, to such people, moving to their agenda, anything else is moving in the wrong direction because everything they do , "is the right thing to do" because "there is no alternative".

Politics in the UK is in serious crisis, and, as I have indicated before, the ideological thrust in England is moving, in my opinion, towards a form of fascism. The dominant discourse in England is hatred. Far too many sources of information have made the word 'foreigner' toxic. The tabloid press have stirred the embers of fascist xenophobia into a political movement that sees its expression in UKIP and the right-wing of the Tories. They hate immigrants, they hate Muslims, they hate Europe, they hate the poor, the disadvantaged and have a particular hatred for the disabled. As I have written many times, if you persist in the fallacy that there is no alternative, you are embedding a form of totalitarianism in society. If there is no alternative to something then that thing must be, by definition, true. Thus if I disagree with any course of action for which there is no alternative I am again by definition, wrong. The British better waken up. You have been warned

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

Labour - the politics of despair and scandal

It was George Orwell who told us that

“Political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity to pure wind".

I was prompted to remember Orwell when I was reading about the resignation of Johann Lamont, the leader of Scottish Labour who has spent all of her energies in the past two years telling us how wonderful the Labour Party is, how we must stay with and trust the Westminster elite, how we are so Better Together, and how Ed Miliband was the saviour of the human race. I hope she is proud of her role in the No campaign now that she feels impelled to tell us how hopelessly out of touch Westminster is, how the Labour Party is a bunch of control freaks who treat Scotland as some kind of branch office and how Miliband is so hopeless and a bully. Isn't it quite wonderful how she is now admitting what I have been telling you for some three years now? The Labour Party are shameless, particularly its Scottish branch who are now exposed as having lied shamelessly to us about our relationship to Westminster. That is what Westminster excels in, lying through their teeth and committing murder on an industrial scale in countries they have no business being in. Labour is a perfect example of pure wind having the appearance of solidity.

We must never forget that it was Scottish Labour and its so-called heavyweights who were at the heart of a campaign of fear, intimidation and outrights threats of reprisal. They shamelessly visited pensioners in their homes and told them their pensions would cease to be paid on the 19th September if Scotland voted Yes. They told us a Yes vote would trigger a recession, that mortgages would rise, that unemployment would soar, prices rise and all the banks would relocate. If you want to talk about a war of terror you need only look to Labour and the Better Together campaign as they attempted to terrorise the Scottish people about Independence.

This is a party in serious decline which may turn terminal. It is a deserved fate as it has abandoned all of its own principles, but most importantly all of its supporters and the people who look to it to protect them from the worse excesses of neoliberalism. Labour is quite simply a disgrace.

We are witnessing the same sort of Better Together onslaught against the EU. I have no longer any doubt that we will leave the EU. That will be a disaster and will herald the final demise of Britain as a civilised society. We can see without any doubt now the Westminster attitude to the disabled and the disadvantaged. Think what will happen to them once they lose the protection of EU legislation. This is what Scotland voted for on September 18th. You were warned, and you are again being warned.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

Britain is no longer civilised

Lord Freud has let the cat out of the bag and confirmed what I have been warning about in this blog since it started, how the Westminster elite has a hatred of the poor and disadvantaged and in particular the disabled, and are determined to beggar them and reduce them to modern forms of slavery. By claiming that as the disabled are not 'whole' people then they are not entitled to full benefits and should only get £2 per hour instead of the full minimum wage when they are in work, he is revealing the Westminster mindset that the disabled have been effectively dehumanised.

For the Westminster free market mentality, the only value that anything has is when it has a price attached. The only value they will admit to is that which produces their perception of wealth. If you don't visibly contribute to what they term wealth creation, then you have no value and are worthless. As a result, the unemployed, the sick, people on benefits and the disabled have no value to such people and are seen as a cost, and in the free market universe costs must be eliminated as a matter of priority.

Make no mistake, Lord Freud is not some sort of loose cannon. He has been tasked with floating such ideas in order to test the water. The fact that he has not been dismissed or disciplined for such talk is proof that he did so with the full knowledge of Downing Street. What he discussed will become government policy and the disabled will be restricted within the labour market in terms of what they are allowed to earn. Of course the disabled are just the first as the free marketeers in Westminster regard the poor and disadvantaged as what the Nazi's used to call 'useless eaters'.

We are returning to the mentality of the 18th century when many classes of people were not actually regarded as people at all, they were something else. When the Founding Fathers wrote the American Declaration of Independence they stated that “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. The man who wrote that was a slave owner. Four of the first five American Presidents were slave owners whilst in office and in total twelve Presidents were slave owners with eight of them owners whilst in office. Each of these men took an oath of office to uphold the American Constitution, a document which, at that point in history, was highly discriminatory to black people. Slavery in the United States at that time was of course the slavery of black people. Thus, the dominant thinking in the US at this time meant that these self-evident truths did not extend to black people. Black people were not included in the category of ‘all men.’ This ideology was then enshrined in the US Constitution which formally divested black people of two-fifths of their humanity as they were enshrined in the 'three-fifths clause'  Article 1 section 2 clause 3 of the Constitution. They were designated as three-fifths people and two-fifths property. As James Madison wrote in 'The Federalist Papers'

“Let the case of the slaves be considered as it is in truth a peculiar one. Let the compromising expedient of the Constitution be mutually adopted, which regards them as inhabitants but as debased by servitude below the level of free inhabitants; which regards the slave as divested of two-fifths of the man”.

I have become convinced that Britain is increasingly adopting fascism and this is evidenced by public policy and attitudes being increasingly by our leading politicians and opinion formers. You have been warned

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat


  

Hate trade unions? You deserve all you get!

I am writing this on the day that the NHS workers are on strike. One of the principal victories of Margaret Thatcher was her demonisation of trades unions and with them working people in general. It is fair to say that trades unions in Britain are hated and by producing this climate of opinion Thatcher was able to impose her will on working people and begin the process of destroying their working conditions, beggaring their incomes, removing their rights and subjecting them to the remorseless bullying that has become the dominant culture in the British workplace. Remember, her agenda was a massive transference of wealth from the bottom tom the top. It worked.

I wrote many years ago that the British working class would pay a very heavy price for buying into the Tory hatred of unions, a hatred that has been adopted with gusto by the Labour Party. Despite all of their failings, trades unions are the only defence working people have against the gradual descent into modern day slavery that I continually warn about, and this is evidenced on a daily basis with zero hours contracts, part-time and temporary working, reduced holidays, no pensions, etc etc. I have to say, however, that most of our working people brought that on themselves when they adopted the Westminster attitude. At first working people still had the law on their side, but that has gone. They were still in full-time permanent contracts, but they have gone. They could take a case to a tribunal, but that has gone. The only avenue left for working people today is Europe, but that is going to go soon.

Westminster managed this war against the working people of this country because people were naive enough to trust them, I cannot tell you how often people have looked at me in disbelief and responded that I was just talking nonsense because 'they' would never do such things; 'they' being their wise and noble rulers, but in particular the Labour Party. People still have difficulty accepting Labour's determination to subject the unions and destroy their influence, both in the workplace and in the party that the unions both founded and finance. Britain's working people were doomed the day the miners returned to work. You see when the British bought into the neoliberal free market ideology they were buying into a belief system that advocates individualism and despises collectivism. This ideology has a hatred for the state and all its systems that have been erected to protect the concept of a whole people. Any public service is bad and must be destroyed and replaced by private. The largest barrier to the destruction of the public sector is the union movement and so that was the first and principal target.

I am afraid I find it difficult to sympathise with people who tell me it is wrong to strike, that unions are a bad influence etc. and then complain bitterly about what they are experiencing at their work and how their living standards are suffering. As I constantly tell you, you get what you vote for, and I repeat without apology, the Scots will pay a heavy price for voting No. I warned you about UKIP. If you are an ordinary working person, or even if you are in a profession like medicine or education, be very afraid, if you think Britain could not get any worse, wait until after next years election. At least there is still a possibility of going on strike, how long do you think that will remain? Westminster and all of its odious personnel are coming to get you. You have been warned.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

Better Together - exposed as the hollow lie it always was

I have not been available for a few days and that is why I have not posted recently, however I have been contemplating developments and am responding to a dear friend who cannot come to terms with the results of the referendum and subsequent developments. My trusty Collins Dictionary and Thesaurus (2000) tells me that a vow is

a solemn or earnest pledge or promise binding the person making it to perform a specified act or behave in a certain way

The three main party leaders gave the Scottish people a vow before the referendum that they would deliver meaningful change guaranteeing stronger and sustainable rights and powers to the Scottish Parliament. Immediately the following day that vow was broken as it had been enshrined within a timetable that the Prime Minister failed to honour on day one. Within a week, we had Gordon Brown announce a petition to garner the support of the Scottish people to force Westminster to honour that vow. Gordon Brown is a typical Labour politician and is a compulsive liar and self-publicist, why? Because he did not start nor initiate that petition, it began on September 19th and had over 8.000 signatures before he was even made aware of it. What he was doing was trying to cover his back after instigating a massive confidence trick on the Scottish people. So, two of the three signatories to the vow lied to the Scots and we were only a week into the famous timetable. These are the type of personnel we were assured we would be Better Together under. I fail to understand how people like that can leave the house and face any normal respectable person. Brown has since announced that he wants to stand for the Scottish Parliament, surely no-one with a morsel of intelligence can vote for such an unprincipled incompetent. Have people actually already forgotten this man's performance in public office?

Brown was so alarmed by Westminster's behaviour, he in effect admitted, by raising the need for a petition, that the vow was already dead in the water. I wonder what a solemn pledge or promise means in Westminsterese? I have no idea but it bears no resemblance to the English language. But that's not his fault I hear you say, oh yes it is! What on earth did he discuss with Cameron and Clegg when they agreed on the wording of the vow? Did he not seek personal assurances? Or was he simply in such a panic at the thought of a Yes vote that he was prepared to do whatever was necessary to stop that with not a thought about the consequences? This man was a Labour Chancellor and Prime Minister who learned his trade under Tony Blair and was a member of the most unprincipled group of people ever to hold office in this sorry country. I would have thought that over 2 million No votes in the referendum was a sufficient enough petition to prick Westminster, and the Tory Party's conscience, but not a bit of it. Never underestimate the depth of contempt that Westminster holds for the British people and never underestimate its determination to do whatever it wants to regardless of the wishes of any section of the population. This is what Better Together meant, subjection to the biggest cadre of unprincipled scoundrels it is possible to imagine. These people have no intention of honouring their vow because they are completely devoid of honour, principle, or self-respect. A Westminster politician is the genuine scum of the earth. I also trust you are disgusted by the deafening silence of Westminster's Scottish Labour poodles. I can put it no better than the words of Robert Burns who tells us

“Go on sir. Lay bare with undaunted heart and steady hand that horrid mass of corruption, called Politics and Statecraft. Dare to draw in their native colours those ‘calm thinking villains whom no faith can fix’ whatever be the shibboleths of their pretended party.”

As to the content of their vow, as of now there has been no detail nor agreement as to what they are going to offer. They have still to get past Cameron's announcement that it will be dependent on denying Scottish MPs the right to vote on English matters. Cameron knew exactly what he was doing when he did that, he was killing the vow off before it even took root. I warned you before the referendum that Westminster would take its revenge, and I sincerely hope that the people who voted No on trust will take a good hard look at the people they trusted. You were warned.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

Adam Smith and his condemnation of today's Westminster Parliament

I have written many times in this blog about the Westminster Parliament's contempt for, and hatred of, working people, the poor and the disadvantaged. You can now be in no doubt about this following the speeches by the Prime Minister and the Chancellor at the Conservative Party Conference. There will be increasing cuts to benefits, a freeze on all wage rises in the public sector, but generous tax cuts for the top 15% of wage earners, the people who need help the least. This is a party that is taking a public and undisguised pleasure in being cruel to those who are already suffering from their cruelty. The displays of glee and applause from the conference delegates when the welfare cuts were being announced was quite nauseating, they were indeed a scandalous witness to what modern Britain has become. These people claim to be following the model of free market economics as designed by the classical economists, in particular Adam Smith. Let me tell you unequivocally that this is nonsense. For a start, Smith never uses the term, the free market. He never uses the term laissez faire, and he never uses the term perfect competition. These are modern neoliberal terms that have no relationship to the writings of Adam Smith. In response to the Tories plans for after the next election I give you a quote from Adam Smith from his book, "The Theory of Moral Sentiments"  

This disposition to admire—and almost to worship—the rich and the powerful, and to despise or at least neglect persons of poor and mean condition, is (on one hand) necessary to establish and maintain the distinction of ranks and the order of society, and (on the other) the great and most universal cause of the corruption of our moral sentiments. Moralists all down the centuries have complained that wealth and greatness are often given the respect and admiration that only wisdom and virtue should receive, and that poverty and weakness are quite wrongly treated with the contempt that should be reserved for vice and folly.

Smith wrote that in 1759 and it beggars belief that it sums up the United Kingdom and its Parliamentary representatives in the 21st century. As a nation we should curl up in shame when we read such things and realise it is as applicable today as it was when it was written. It demonstrates better than any modern commentary how far we have regressed since Thatcher came to power in 1979 and shows how Westminster is turning the clock back to conditions we thought had been abandoned to the history books.

What Smith is telling us here is that the dominant ideology is the source of our corruption. The contempt for the poor is the bedrock of a vicious class system, but also the breeding ground for selfishness, neglect, exploitation and downright villainy throughout society. Britain is a deeply sick society whose morality and ethical system is completely corrupt. Indeed, in response to such a situation, Smith wrote the Wealth of Nations as a guide as to how economics could be utilised for the benefit of the whole society. His economic writings were designed to show how economics could produce order, stability, fairness and good government. His economics would never have produced a situation where 45% of Scots want to be independent of Westminster. Remember, Smith was himself a Scot. Smith wasn't a Marxist, he wouldn't be writing for another 100 years after Smith wrote that. This is what Britain has become and it is going to get worse. How long the British tolerate it remains to be seen because as of now they are in agreement with it. This is what they vote for, and continue to vote for, but these are the social conditions that nurture crime, demonstrations, riots and revolution.

You have been warned.

Your Servant

Doktor Kommirat

A Conservative victory next year? Be very afraid.

I had intended following my post on Marx with one on democracy but I afraid that I cannot pass on the most recent development from the Conservative Party Conference. I trust you will have taken notice of Cameron's committment to abolish the Human Rights Act. I also trust that you are alarmed by this development and very afraid. Welcome to the Tories Better Together new Britain.

I have repeatedly commented on this blog how rights are a constraint on government, and that is of course what they are supposed to be. In addition I have consistenly told you that rights do not come from governments, they are an integral part of your humanity. They are your rights, they are not the governments who then loan them to you on condition that you behave yourself. The rights that impact on most people most of the time are employment rights. Since the Thatcher election Britain has degenerated into the worst country in the developed world in terms of employment rights and protection. In addition, they have scrapped the automatic right to trial by jury, habeas corpus, introduced closed and secret court proceedings, made it almost impossible to secure legal aid, privatised the probation service and made it almost impossible to access employment tribunals. I am going to give you a lengthy quote from Lord Neuberger, the President of the British Supreme Court from the 5th March 2013 and I hope you will forgive the length. Neuberger said

"Unless you have access to legal advice for poorer people, you have not got the rule of law...we are at risk of denying access to justice and that damages the rule of law...people end up being disillusioned with government and the whole democratic system. You get more and more people who don't believe in the government we have, which is very undermining, or who end up taking the law into their own hands, or a bit of both, which is not good for us, nor for the country....the two most important functions of government are to protect the country from invasion and attack from abroad and to ensure the rule of law at home. Unless you do those two things you might as well not bother with welfare, education, health and housing because it is not a country worth living in. Access to justice and an efficient justice system are an essential ingredient of the rule of law."

 Thus, according to the President of the Supreme Court, not Karl Marx, not Alex Salmond, not Doktor Kommirat or any other of the British establishment's pet hates, Britain is becoming a country not worth living in. Governments are tasked with protecting and upholding your rights, not abolishing them. I repeat, the government's determination to remove human rights has nothing to do with the European Court, the war on terror or any other political excuse. These are just that -  excuses. Their determination stems from the fact that our rights are constraints on the elite robbing as much of the country's wealth as possible. Everything Westminster does, and this applies to Labour as well, has an economic motive. They say they will introduce a British Bill of Rights, but what on earth will that be if you do not include habeas corpus, trial by jury etc. Social Security (I refuse to call it welfare) is a human right, it is the price the rich pay for their privilege of exploiting our human and physical resources for their own enrichment but you are being brainwashed into thinking that it is a gift of a benevolent state to mitigate the effects of you own incompetence and stupidity. The tragedy is that the gullible British public are buying this nonsense. You should be very afraid. I could write a book about such things, in fact I have done just that and am almost finished another. The Tories are going to implement another £7 billion of cuts on top of the £25 billion they announced yesterday, that is the result of their announcement on future tax cuts. These people are barbarians and that is what Scotland voted for on the 18th. Be under no illusions, you are going to get what you voted for. You have been warned

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

On your Marx, Get Set, Go!

I am not a Marxist, but neither am I blinded to the genius that is Karl Marx. I am continually irritated by people who automatically associate Marx with communism. Now that must seem very silly as Marx was the joint author of the Communist Manifesto, but my point is that when people today talk of communism they associate it with the Soviet Union, or China and Cuba etc. Those states are political systems that call themselves communist, but the important point is that their communism is the result of the writings of Lenin, not Marx.

In his writings Lenin, claiming to be the natural successor to Marx described what, in his opinion, a communist state should look like, and, to this end, he described the political concept of democratic centralism founded on what he termed the dictatorship of the proletariat which resulted in a one-party dictatorship. Marx never outlined the structure of a communist society except to stress that it would be classless, ruled by proletarian democracy under which, once the class nature of the state had been abolished, the state itself would wither away. At this point, I should explain that this is the principal reason why I do not consider myself a Marxist, because, I believe that the human being is a political animal and therefore a regulatory being, that is, the human being regulates its environment. It does this in many ways, through custom, habit, by establishing value systems that necessitate social norms, but importantly by establishing formal law. As the human is a regulatory being, it establishes formal regulatory bodies, the most obvious being decision-making forums such as the British Parliament. As a result, I cannot conceive of a situation whereby the state will ever wither away. In my view, both government and the state are derivative, that is they derive their existence and their functions from the social and regulatory nature of the human species. Thus there will always be some form of political and regulatory mechanisms such as parliaments and an administrative state. The important questions are therefore who should control such mechanisms and what should their roles and functions be? Not whether they should exist or not. That however does not make Marx wrong indeed it is more likely to be me. However, on that point Marx and I disagree.

Thus, it was Lenin who designed the fundamental structure of a communist, one party dictatorship, not Marx. This was later embedded even deeper by Stalin and that form and structure became the template for all future communist style governments. I therefore take the view that, from my readings of Marx, a communist state guided by a Marxist philosophy would look quite different. As a result I am neither a Marxist nor a communist.

I am however, an admirer of Marx's economics and sociology and am impatient with people who ignore his writings because they dislike what we see as communism in the modern world and proceed to blame him for it. I do not have the space to comment on his works here, but suffice it to say that it is impossible to understand the real nature of a blatantly class driven society such as the UK without understanding Marx. Equally if you do not consider Marx's theories of alienation you will never understand a modern capitalist economy. Marx's economics and sociology are brilliant, they are genius. I do not agree with everything he wrote, but that is natural and does not detract from his genius. He was a human being and therefore flawed and my reading of him and subsequent understanding of what I read will most certainly be similarly flawed. His explanation of the base and superstructure of society is, in my opinion, unparalleled.

So, don't be influenced by propaganda and lies. Marxism is not a dirty word, and, quite frankly, if you never read Marx you are denying yourself one of the keys to understanding the human condition. You will not be poisoned, I promise you, you will be enlightened as long as you remember to never confuse what we today call communism with Marxism. That's what Westminster and its lackeys in the media want you to do, because I promise you, none of these intellectual cripples even begin to understand it.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

The next election? Farewell to civilisation

Well, now we know a lot more about what Better Together means. The Chancellor told us today that we face £25 billion of cuts in the first two years of the next Parliament and, as we saw from the Labour Conference, we will get them under Labour as well. Osborne tells us that we have a choice to make between raising taxes and cutting benefits and that raising taxes is not even to be considered. So, when faced with redistributing Britain's wealth down fromthe rich to the poor, or up from the poor to the rich both the two major parties choose to benefit the rich at the expense of the poor. I have been warning you about this for over a year and I know that many people refused to believe me.The coming cuts will affect 10 million households, that's households not people. Given that the average family in Britain is 2.4 then that is going to affect 20,400,000 people. As I continually tell you, you get what you vote for and so, following the referendum it is impossible to have any sympathy for the bulk of those 20million people. It is just a tragedy that it will also hit those who do not deserve it.

At the same time, we are witnessing the inexorable rise of UKIP. This is a party that purports to represent the white working class, but whose personnel are almost exclusively disillusioned Tories for whom the Tory Party are not right-wing enough. It is understandable why people are turning to UKIP in the South because they are the only alternative to the Westminster poison. However what it also means is the increasing rise of a fascist mentality. Remember, Europe had fascism in both Spain and Italy before Nazism, so before I get accused of raising the spectre of Hitler, fascism takes many forms, all of which are unpleasant. It must always be remembered that the recent support for independence in Scotland was not fuelled by nationalism and that is the major difference between what happened in Scotland and what is happening in England. There is no hatred of foreigners or the EU in Scotland.

I keep saying that the root of the problem is that there is no alternative being offered to us. Osborne's speech revealed that there is an alternative. There are actually many alternatives, but one admitted by Osborne is to raise taxes rather than cut benefits, so the much repeated Westminster mantra that there is no alternative is now exposed as the lie I have been calling it for many years now. We now have the delights of the next election to look forward to and tyhe certainty of the slow but inexorable slavery of the British working class. You have been warned.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat. 

The Labour Party is a Tragic Farce

I have never made any secret of the fact that Westminster and the personnel within it disgusts me. I consider the political class in the UK both intellectually bankrupt and morally corrupt. There is not one Westminster politician that I would invite into my home or spend a convivial night with. I was reminded about this when I was listening to the farce that poses as the Labour Party Conference. Listening to their great plans for the Health Service I was driven into a rage when that grotesque parody of a politician, Andy Burnham was waxing lyrical about how the health service could only be saved under Labour's stewardship.

This is the man who was responsible for 221 Private Finance Initiatives (PFI's) when he was in government. A PFI is an arrangement where private companies build and operate social facilities such as schools, hospitals and prisons, and then lease them to the state on long-term contracts. As I have written in previous posts, neoliberalism considers raising personal taxation, principally income tax, as the ultimate sin. What a PFI delivers is a social provision such as a school, paid for by private industry, then rented to the public sector thus allowing the government to get new hospitals and schools etc. without having to raise taxes in the short term. Under the last Labour government 103 hospitals were built under PFI contracts worth £60billion. We will be paying for these PFIs for the next 30 years. In 2007 Burnham told us that they were “the right schemes and offer value for money."
These schemes have been a disaster and are costing the taxpayer a fortune. They are a good example of the licensed gangsterism that is Labour's relationship with the private sector and is exploited ruthlessly by the Tories. An example of a contract is the Queen Elizabeth Hospital in Woolwich in London who have to pay for 64 visits from pest controllers even if there are no pests to control. The Central Middlesex Hospital paid contractors £210 to install an electric socket.

The Daily Telegraph newspaper revealed in January 2011 that official figures gained through the Freedom of Information Act showed that over the terms of PFI contracts, capital projects that cost £56billion to build and maintain, will cost the British taxpayer £229billion. Several of the PFI contracts will run for 60 years, long after the projects themselves will last, with private contractors expecting profits of 71% on some of the PFI projects. The Telegraph revealed that one company that specialises in PFI contracts, Innisfree, owns or co-owns 28 NHS hospitals, 269 schools, the Headquarters of the Ministry of Defence in Whitehall and a Welsh jail (a growing PFI initiative is to build portable jail cells on sites and lease them to the police). A PFI was used to build a hospital for the NHS in Bromley at a cost of £118million under a contract that will see the taxpayer pay the PFI owners £1.2billion. So much for the cost saving efficient use of the market and private enterprise. The PFI provider Innisfree owns four-fifths of a school in Clacton which, at the time the article was published in early 2011, was already closed. However, despite there being no school any more, the British taxpayer is contracted to pay £1.4million per annum until 2035. The Telegraph noted that in 2010, the PFI provider Innisfree made 53% profit on its turnover compared to a highly successful FTSE company such as Tesco who expect to make 6%.

Burnham, who was in charge of 221 of such PFI projects at least admitted that “we made mistakes.” So that’s all right and we can tell our children that we mortgaged their future to legalised gangsters because in the constantly repeated mantra of the Labour government and all its apologists “it was the right thing to do” as well as “there is no alternative” even though they now acknowledge it as a mistake. This is an example of the complete failure of parliamentary accountability, the refusal of the legislative branch of parliament to hold the executive to account. It is a powerful example of deregulation and the refusal of a ruling elite to be held accountable to parliament, the electorate or anyone else. It is also a glaring example of the fraud that is being perpetrated on the British public under the guise of ‘the free market.’ Of course the fault really lies with the British public for letting them get away with it. This is what Scotland voted for when they told us we were Better Together. This is the Labour Party that tells us they can be trusted on the issues of fairness and accountability. What a pathetic joke. You have been warned and don't blame me,I voted Yes.

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat

We need a new economics

After the referendum I am afraid I am returning to the tedious, but necessary task of commenting on the futility of the UK pursuing the Westminster style of political economy. It has failed and will continue to fail and I will continue to provide you with reasons why it is failing. There is simply no hope for ordinary people of any meaningful recovery under our present system, and, if I can interest people in such things then I will be satisfied. If anyone dislikes what I say, I will be grateful for their comments. For example, it is reported in the press this morning that Labour plan to raise the minimum wage to £8 per hour if they win the next election and that they plan a large-scale housing programme which Miliband tells us will be delivered by

A network of "new homes corporations" will be accountable to their communities and will work closely with private sector partners and housing associations to deliver more ambitious home building projects.

This is welcome, but completely misses the point and will not make any fundamental difference to the real and concrete problems we face as a society. Britain's problems are rooted in the economic model that dominates policy-making, and until we begin to transform the economy to embrace a new model and a new economics nothing will make much difference.

You see the way to help the working people of the country is to give them work, but not any work, real work on a full-time permanent contract. If Miliband genuinely wishes to promote a meaningful recovery he will promise to outlaw zero-hours contracts, restore employment rights to combat the bullying of unaccountable managers, and he will direct the public sector to create work and build council housing. As his statement on house building shows, he is still wedded to the private sector. If local authorities are once again tasked with providing essential services they could and would solve the employment and security problems that are an essential factor in the free market determination to maintain a semi-slave labour economy. I know it sounds fanciful and invites accusations of communism, but this country needs to begin redistributing wealth downwards. For example, a simple but effective way of immediately helping the poorest sectors of our society would be a reduction in VAT. There is no economic necessity for VAT to be 20%, just as there is no economic necessity for the levels of income tax, the taxes we pay today are designed to suit a particular economic model and are not fit for purpose when we consider the benefits to the whole society. It is essential that people come to the realisation that British politics and economics are designed to serve only one section of our society. Britain is an exclusive society in that British decision-makers quite deliberately exclude the majority of the society from any real decision-making and prosperity. I understand why people find it hard to believe that their government would do such things but when you cleanse yourself of the poison of patriotism and deference it becomes quite obvious. 

Housing is a very good example of the lie that is the free market. Thatcher forced up council house rents by 400% to make the purchase of private sector housing economic. The great home ownership society she envisaged was built on a lie and a fraud. She then forbade councils to spend any of the receipts they got from selling council houses except for repair and maintenance. In this way she quite deliberately created a housing shortage to satisfy the free market laws of supply and demand and drive up the price of housing. The result is, of course, the crisis in housing we have today and the criminal state of the housing market. The free market is a lie and a fraud and until Labour and everyone else understands that there will be no recovery in a meaningful sense. You have been warned

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat