The Daily Mail resurrects its fascist leanings

I have been warning you for years now that Britain is in danger of descending into fascism. Today the Daily Mail has a front page that demonises the three high court judges who ruled that the Brexit legislation should be debated in parliament as enemies of the people. I remind you that this is the newspaper that openly supported Hitler. This has to stop and it has to stop now. What these three judges did was give a legal ruling on a constitutional matter, a ruling that I have argued in my last post was so obvious that it was impossible for the judiciary to do anything else. The rest of the British gutter press, led by the Daily Express are in universal condemnation of the judges for attempting to block Britain's exit from the EU. That is either a barefaced lie or the inability to understand the English language, and as the tabloid press in Britain exist by serial lying then I suspect the former. The one thing Britain's press and politicians can be relied upon is to never allow facts to interfere with a good theory. As I argued yesterday, all that the judiciary said was that the government does not have the authority to arbitrarily overrule parliamentary legislation. As it was parliament who took us into Europe, then it has to be parliament who takes us out. Nothing in their ruling remotely resembles any kind of attempt to block, slow down or put any sort of barrier in the way. It is a matter of constitutional law. The attempts to argue that the courts were making a political decision with respect to the Brexit situation are not merely irresponsible, they are sinister. They are also an example of the breathtaking hypocrisy of the right-wing press and their fellows in the political circus. We have had another Tory MP resign today because of the lies and hypocrisy of the government, that is not Kommirat's interpretation, it is the reason he gave himself. 

All of the leave people parrot that if you seek to criticise the referendum result you are somehow subverting the will of the people, that wonderful phrase that sustains every scoundrel and mountebank. Yes, 17,410,742 people, 51.9% of votes cast, voted to leave, but 16,141,241, 48.1% voted to remain, hardly an overwhelming mandate. These votes represented a 72.2% turnout and so the leave vote represents 37.47% of the electorate, whilst the remain vote represents 34.47%. Thus, whilst the leave vote was a majority of the votes cast, it was not a majority and so it is pushing it a bit to call it the will of the people. In addition, as I have spoken about in earlier posts, these are the same hypocritical liars who refused to recognise the legality of the Crimean referendum in 2014 that resulted in a 96.77% vote on an 83.1% turnout to join the Russian Federation in Crimea and a 95.6% vote on an 89.5% turnout in the City of Sevastopol. That means that the Crimean result represented 80.4% of the Crimean electorate and 85.56% of the people of Sevastopol. That must surely go some way to representing the will of the people, but not in Britain's eyes. The will of the people only applies if they decide it does.

Britain is a supposed to be a system of constitutional limited government in which the executive, which includes the monarchy, is subordinate to the elected parliament. The parliament represents the will of the people. The key phrase there is limited government which is designed to prevent centralisation and tyranny. As I repeatedly warn you, centralised and unrepresentative government breeds intolerance which is the abiding characteristic of modern Britain as exemplified by the Brexit vote, the tabloid press and the Tory Party. The whole purpose of government is to provide a stable, peaceful and ordered society that enables the people to pursue their own interests without doing harm to anyone else. The purpose of government is not to make people good or to preach to them, government is functional and should never be ideological. Its role is to provide the parameters within which people have as much freedom as possible without harming others. The executive can therefore only rule with the consent of, and for the benefit of, the people. The real ruler of a democratic nation is the law, and it is parliament that makes the law, not the executive. The executive may design the law, but it is the elected parliament that makes it. As a result, any attack on the judiciary is an attack on the law and therefore the rule of law. That an attack on the judiciary for exercising its constitutional duty is deemed acceptable is the result of how the forces of reaction and authoritarianism have been attacking the legal processes of the European Union for the past fifty years and getting away with it. Thus, the pigsty gangsters have not only demonised the judiciary in general, but whatever law they disagree with, and I remind you again, their target is our human rights with the goal of virtual slavery for working people. If they need to demonise the British judiciary then so be it. The Daily Mail is beginning to resemble Der Sturmer in its attitude to immigrants, foreigners in general and the rights of ordinary working people. Do not minimise the implications embodied in labelling people the enemy of the people. In a proper democratic system, government and the press must be subject to moral constraints. We have rights that are superior to parliamentary approval or disapproval, rights that exist prior to government, which I remind you is derivative, and any exercise of state power that threatens such rights is, by definition, illegitimate. Power must be constrained by such moral rights, by the law, and subject to both constitutional and traditional conventions. In the absence of a written constitution, governmental authority rests on trust, and that is what successive governments, beginning with Thatcher, has forfeited. We are indeed in perilous times, you have been warned

Your Servant
Doktor Kommirat