Brexit: Who will speak for us?
David Lindsay
It gives me no pleasure to say this, but it is clearly the case. No Deal is already off the table. That assurance has been given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer to the financial backers of the Conservative Party. Those people, unlike the trade unions, have no sentimental attachment to any political party. Routinely, they work in and with countries where much of what Jeremy Corbyn proposes is already in place. They have more than survived British Governments that were well to the left of his present position, Governments that in any case have to hold General Elections within five years. They would be at the front of the queue for State Aid. He holds no terrors for them.
And the Liberal Democrats have undertaken not to support any future Motion of No Confidence in the present Government. Officially, that is unless Corbyn came out in favour of a second referendum. But that is like saying, “unless the Moon turned into green cheese.” The only real reason can be that Theresa May has given Vince Cable, who is her former Cabinet colleague, the same assurance that Philip Hammond has given to her party’s paymasters. After all, she is still emphatically ruling out a second referendum, too. So why, if that were the real reason, would the Lib Dems not vote to bring her down? If “No Deal is the legal default position,” then which body do you expect to uphold it as such? The Supreme Court? Its record is such that its likelihood of ruling that the United Kingdom automatically left the European Union on 29th March is simply nil.
Corbyn is right that the job of the Opposition is to oppose. We are not governed by Grand Coalitions in this country, and we never should be. Even during the War, the Independent Labour Party held to that principle. But this is a different situation, and if you are not at the table, then you are on the menu. Corbyn, far more than any Labour MP who might be co-opted into this admittedly sorry process, is the voice of the people whose votes determined the outcome of the EU referendum. Had we voted the other way, then Remain would have won, as the entire British Establishment, including the tactical pretend Leavers, had expected. We revolted against 39 years of economic dispossession and political oppression, under all three parties and beginning with the Callaghan Government’s turn to monetarism in 1977. The result from Sunderland stunned Boris Johnson and shook the international money markets. Dozens more such results followed through the night, and decided the overall outcome. Most of those areas then elected Corbyn’s Labour Party a year later. But who will speak for us now?
For that matter, who will speak for the equally dispossessed and oppressed areas of London that voted Remain as a revolt against the British Establishment in general and Johnson in particular? Living cheek by jowl with it had subjected them to ludicrously inflated prices and to endless petty “security” measures. Eight years of rule by him had made them sure that they were never going to give him any other kind of victory. Nor were they ever going to give the Establishment any more power, even power that was currently exercised by the EU.
Within and beyond the Labour whip, there are members of both House of Parliament who could indeed give voice to these positions. They need to organise in order to do so. Beyond that, another hung Parliament is coming, and we need our people to hold the balance of power in it.
SUPPORT OFFGUARDIAN
If you enjoy OffG's content, please help us make our monthly fund-raising goal and keep the site alive.
For other ways to donate, including direct-transfer bank details click HERE.
An excellent book has just been translated from French. It’s called Twilight of the Elites by Christophe Guilluy.
Here’s an excerpt from it:
“Ever since the national referendum to ratify the European Union in 1992, the real divide has been between neoliberals and sovereignists, between the winners in the contest of globalization and the losers, between the great cities and peripheral France.
This sociocultural split is not specific to France; with the steady adaptation to a global economic regime and the reaction of the working class against it, the same cleavage has appeared in all developed countries.
Everywhere the system of open markets and free trade creates its own internal resistance. From peripheral America to peripheral England to peripheral France, dissent has grown in areas that are now home to a majority of people of modest means, people who used to belong to the middle class.
The social and cultural crisis of identity that affects the whole of the developed world today is a consequence of the hollowing out of the middle class in a majority of professional categories. Government policies have been powerless to stem the rising tide of globalization. France has become an American society like the others, an inegalitarian and multicultural society in which the middle class shrinks, social and geographical imbalances become more destabilizing, and a tense standoff between the classes takes the place of shared interests. …”
It puts Brexit in proper perspective
“…The dominant classes now realize that they have lost control over the least well-off. The panic is perceptible. The mayors of Paris and London are now prepared to suggest that “truly global cities” emancipate themselves from their host countries. In a joint letter to the editor of newspapers in the French and British capitals published four days after the Brexit vote, Anne Hidalgo and Sadiq Khan praised the dynamism and the openness of their cities, contrasting these qualities to “the lethargy of nation states,” seen as an outmoded framework for international relations and a perilous source of isolationist ignorance.1 In effect, then, the proponents of the global order, who constitute a structural minority in their homelands, have issued a declaration of independence on behalf of the new metropolitan citadels—abandoning the working-class peripheries to their fate as deplorable back-waters. The retreat of England and France from Europe is therefore answered by the retreat of the cosmopolitan bourgeoisie from England and France. And yet, while awaiting the doubtful advent of a new age of city-states, the upper classes will have to confront an existential problem: how is a global model that has been rejected by a majority of citizens to be assured of a future?…”
In sum ‘Twilight’ is a perceptive and profound essay. In the current circumstances of Gilets Jaunes marches it is prophetic.
The trouble with the idea that “the people hold the balance of power” in a hung government, is that the people have to be organized and have representatives. But those representatives are always tempted to succumb to corrupt influences – why else would they seek political influence themselves? – and so nothing essentially changes. That’s why I hope Corbyn gets his chance. He does seem far less likely to say to the rabid philistines who seem to control everything today, “Okay, it looks as if I’ll have to give in and do what you want, since who could resist an offer like that? Thank you very much.”… Not to mention the fabled, “offer he couldn’t refuse”… One lives in hope.
But I fear the coming revolution will not be well organized at all and that some sort of violent movement will overpower everything else. Then we’ll have to start learning all over again the same lessons the French learned in 1789. The pre-conditions are all practically the same.
My bet is on chaos followed by fascism. Unfortunately.
This is why the original democracy with authentic Trial by Jury was installed to ensure that the people would have control and sovereignty of the laws/statutes under which they lived in real time. It is detailed here by a leading constitutional law and real democracy (not voting which is suffrage) specialist: http://www.democracydefined.org/2trialbyjury.htm
Making the UK Turks and Caicos on Thames seems to be behind Cameron and the Tories plans for leaving the EU.
Lochearn, As you say . The referendum was called after Cameron was refused an opt out clause for the UK. It is all to much of an unlikely coincidence to believe that the timing has no connection to the new EU,s Anti Tax Avoidance Directive.
Sorry. Ive messed up again. This post was intended as a comment to Lochearns comment in reply to Binra at the bottom of the page.
Euroland is an occupied territory ruled by comprador Vichy/Petainist regimes from Dublin to Warsaw and Stockholm to Athens and controlled by the US through NATO. Let that fact sink in. It was a US construction from the start and its ultimate aim is the conquest of Russia and China which will serve to create the neo-con wet-dream of an American global empire. This has been a long-term geo-strategy set in motion since 1945. All the vacuous talk in the media is so much hot-air which is designed to obscure the basis of long-term Anglo-zionist strategy.
Yup. The EU is merely the banking arm of NATO.
No, Seamus, it’s worse than that. The EU is expanding from credit imperialism into civil/military occupation of NATO ‘democratised’ territories. Have a look at the range of interventions on the European Union ‘external action service’ website: particularly its Common Defence and Security Policy (CDSP) applied to Libya. It is creating a unified military force (henceforth: the “European Defence Union” – see link (also ‘PESCO’; CARD; EDA on the ‘eeas’ website)) to extend those activities. To NATO’s ‘bad cop’; the EU is the state-rebuilding ‘good cop’. That Libya already had the highest living standard in Africa is beyond the psychopathy of these fascists. Libya is now a neoliberal paradise to them.
https://eeas.europa.eu/headquarters/headquarters-homepage_en
In case you missed it: Germany returned to interventionist foreign policy on Tuesday …with the signing of the bi-lateral Aachen Treaty with France. This was after a lapse, since 1945, for, ahem – ‘historical reasons’! Now it is merging its mission in Mali with the French and forging security and defence into a single plenipotentiary policy. Ipso facto, the new German/French integrated border “Eurodistrict” (a de facto singular nation state; with its own integrated diplomatic ties – with provision for “derogation” from EU law – i.e. one rule for us, another for you – see link) is the new core of (two-tier) European integration.
The French already have bi-lateral Treaties with the UK (the Lancaster House Treaties); the UK with the Dutch; the Dutch with the Germans; the Germans with the UK; plus 23 countries within PESCO with coordinated defence policies …the EU is federalising and integrating into a civil-militarised proto-fascist suprastate. With a European Defence Union for its expansionist ethos. Did I mention EUROGENDFOR: its paramilitary cross-border reaction force (deployed in France?)? Or the Action Plan against Disinformation (clue: that’s us)?
And Labour want us to be permanently aligned (hint: we already are)? That would be the end of socialism in this country. People think it is an exaggeration to call the EU a fascist superstate. If we review the facts, which are all verifiable. is that an exaggeration? I think you and Francis would be in agreement that it is not.
https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/aachen-treaty-germany-and-france-become-all-single-state
Almost correct,except you missed out the jew banker.
It’s pretty clear to me that Brexit is a neoliberal project, propagated by the upper class Etonian / Bulingdon Club Tory twats who are the same types who sent the rest of us to fight their wars in the trenches and deserts, to enrich them even further.
How any person with a social conscience fails to see that, let alone goes along with supporting their odious venture, is bizarre. Their good intentions and hopes for a better life have been massively misplaced, right into the hands of these parasites, warmongers and abusers of workers and human rights.
If you drop the invective, and review the facts, you might review your POV. Did you even know that Germany and France federalised on Tuesday? Review the Aachen Treaty (linked to above) and tell me what “odious venture” really means?
As for the new Franco-Germany – with linked policy and singular plenipotentiary representation (which means that Franco-Germany/EU has a permanent seat at the United Nations Security Council – though this is not mentioned for some reason) …let us consider your last sentence again in this new light (of the Aachen Treaty)?
“Their good intentions and hopes for a better life have been massively misplaced, right into the hands of these parasites, warmongers and abusers of workers and human rights.”
Now under de facto Franco-German administration: what would the Gilet Jaunes make of this new “odious venture”?
Sorry BigB, my venom is really aimed at “upper class Etonian / Bulingdon Club Tory twats who are the same types who sent the rest of us to fight their wars in the trenches and deserts, to enrich them even further”, all I want is peace not war.
For better of for worse, for richer or poorer, the EU has kept its members free of war for decades, a great achievement that should not be ignored.
Yes, I do get frustrated with some of you here for what I see as binary thinking regarding the EU, don’t intent to be invective, apart from the odd character who gets back as good as they gave me in the first place.
“For better of for worse, for richer or poorer, the EU has kept its members free of war for decades, a great achievement that should not be ignored”
It would have been a great achievement if its current representatives had actually had that achievement as their goal. But their present goal is war, in Washington’s service. That is the opposite of achievement.
It is cowardice and short-term greed, at great cost to us all.
There have been wars a plenty. Georgia, Yugoslavia, Ukraine.
But most have been exported to Africa, Asia, Latin America.
Ask the people of Iraq, Syria, Libya, Palestine, Yemen, Somalia, Congo, Indochina, Nicaragua, and 100 other places how they have benefitted from the great Pax EU.
“..another hung Parliament is coming..”
FAIL
I’d say a hundred + majority for Labour.
That is why the establishment is refusing to have the election.
If Theresa May so awful, then why is Jeremy Corbyn not 10 or 20 points ahead? Well, if Jeremy Corbyn is so awful, then why is Theresa May not 10 or 20 points ahead? It has nothing to do with who leads either party that all polls have pointed to a hung Parliament since the day that the present one was elected. The polity of England and Wales is becoming, if it has not already become, pillarised to an extent that recalls Northern Ireland or Lebanon. The same is true, but in a different way, of the polity of Scotland. Therefore, a General Election across the three polities of England and Wales, of Scotland, and of Northern Ireland, is not merely likely to produce a hung Parliament. It is bound to do so. Such an outcome is inevitable.
No one has become Prime Minister on the back of having just won an overall majority since 1997, 22 years ago. No party has won an overall majority within the law since 2005, 14 years ago; in 2015, the prosecution service that the Conservatives had nationalised decided not to prosecute that party for criminality that it openly admitted then and which it openly admits now. Within the law, the Conservative Party has not won an overall majority since 1992, a whopping 27 years ago. This side of Scottish independence, British withdrawal from Northern Ireland, and up to a dozen other improbable or impossible things besides, to all of which the electoral system itself is immaterial, no party that did not simply cheat could possibly win an overall majority for many decades to come.
Another hung Parliament is coming, then, and we need our people to hold the balance of power in it.
Why is Jezza not 20 points ahead?
Maybe the non stop Blairite backstabbing by 80% of the PLP has something to do with it.
Maybe the millions spent by the Board of Deputies and the Mossad folk at the Israeli embassy has something to do with it.
Maybe the non stop smear campaigns by the presstitute MSM has something to do with it.
Or maybe 20 points ahead would put him between 55 and 60 per cent?
A party on 55 or 60 per cent? In Britain? Don’t be silly.
I like Corbyn, however, not enough people across the land like him enought for him to become PM, unless Labour are part of a coalition. I have no problem with coalition governments, the last one was not ideal, but it tempered the absolute worst intents of the Tory psychopaths, at least.
History has shown that any electorate within EU who votes against the grand plan gets another vote, and another, until they vote the ‘right’ way. We live in an elected dictatorship whose head of state has given up her role as guarantor of the constitution in return for the media giving her family an easy time as a ‘Hello Magazine’ monarchy.
Our Western ‘democracy’ is now run by dirty, low-life people making dirty deals with useful idiots standing by under coercion, bribery or threats. USA and poodles (what would one call Alan Partridge look-a-like Gavin Williamson?) openly encourage illegal coups in Ukraine, Syria and currently Venezuela but their total contempt for international law ignored by our bought-off, MI5/6 ridden media who impost as journalists.
Very sad.
Our western democracies have as always been run by self serving war mongering empire builders. They hide behind the lie that we the people have democracy. They give us the vote. Knowing full well that it will never change their agenda. Like peeling an onion we get tears in our eyes and there is always another layer underneath.
Yep. Time to stop them.
A psyop. A divisive distraction To keep the people of the UK arguing among themselves while the agenda is privately being played out..
According to irish leprechaun and U2 frontman Bono at Davos 2019,
“Capitalism is a ‘wild beast’ that if not tamed can chew up a lot of lives.”
Says the capitalist pig who’s best friends include the Clintons, Obama’s and most every DemonRat around the world.
“We need to re-imagine it, remake it, in our own image and the image of the new generation.”
“It’s a wild beast, and if not tamed, can and has chewed up a lot of lives.”
“Though it has taken more people out of extreme poverty that any other ‘ism,’ it’s caused a lot of damage, a lot of harm.”
“We need to re-imagine it, repurpose it, remake it, in our own image and the image of this new generation coming through that really, really want their world back.”
Bono and private equity giant TPG are partnering on a new organization, called Y Analytics, to develop metrics for analyzing the impact of social and environmental investments. The goal is for economists and researchers to work with investors to make decisions that benefit society in addition to scoring high financial returns.
So where did all the money from “ONE” organization go? Or all that money from Live Aid 1 – 2 & 3 to “Feed The World” aka Africa?
“It’s just not going to be possible with public funds,” Bono said. “We need public funds, but we’re going to need the private sector, too.”
Yeah right, more tax payer billions to send to third world Dictators who party up in London, NY, …….showing off their Gold plated Rolls, Lamborghini, Ferrari with high paid hookers.
What a narcissistic POS.
Is he not allowed to grow up, mature and change his opions?
I don’t think Bono has changed at all. He always spouted vacuous self-deceiving crud. I recall a speech he made in front of the Blairites where he said something like “I then became what everyone most feared: a rock star with a conscience” while Blair and co. smiled. Did Bono honestly think that if his audience there feared him, they would have invited him? They like to be told they’re afraid of rock stars. It creates the impression they actually give a shit.
More like a cock with a rock star conscience or ego. Theres nothing cheaper than a multi millionaire asking for money to help the poor. How can he relate to the everyday struggles of anyone, tell you what bono dip into yours and your buddies Swiss bank accounts.
Life’s too short to wait for ignorant celebrities to mature and change their opinions.
Time has actually run out.
Like Di Caprio jetsetting around the world in his private jet to collect his climate change awards.
Yeah, he should travel by luxury yatch instead, it’s far more environmentally friendly.
The finer details lose me somewhat.
I think Brexit was initiated in co-ordination with a long term plan for the consolidation of Europe into a super state.
I don’t buy the schtick about a significant divide in the British ruling elite, as in a world of globalised capital, anyone with serious money and power is an internationalist by definition. They’re at Davos this week.
Some were pretenders, others elevated beyond their importance to serve a purpose, that is, to create a crisis, and out of it to forge a new paradigm.
The details will not alter the intended end game, which is a re-ordered world with a new monetary platform, a new belt and road trade corridor, with Israel pre-eminent in controlling the sphere of cybernetics and communication (and through that, money, intelligence, media and trade – even ‘religion’ of a kind). Asia, Africa and Europe as those petals of a trefoil.
Slaves to a racist clique.
Who will speak for us?
or
Who controls the kill switch on the microphone ?
Lindsay is a funny old bird. He is in his forties and lives at home with his mummy because he has never found a job. He got expelled from university and then crept back in but failed his degree. He had a 2 week job as unpaid blogger for the telegraph in 2009 because he faked his Cv by claiming to be an academic. He was exposed and sacked. He has never had a job since and is going on trial in April for making death threats. He hates gays and women because he is gay.
As someone who usually has no problems with ad hominens (in fact rather enjoys most of them as part of the how the world is in everyday reality, rather than the how it isn’t of irono-intellectuo-politeco society), I’d like to address the above poster rather than the topic of Brexit (maybe more on the latter, but in a very indirect, if directly admonitory way, and in “Main Street, Brexitland” rather than here, in the morning).
Meanwhile, I’d like to say that I’ve found Lindsay’s articles Delphic to the point of being hopelessly obscure and probably confusing to even the oracle herself but the nasty, vicious kunt (DD, c1978: “You mustn’t call anybody a ‘cunt’ – ‘cunt’ is a nice word.” Me: I wasn’t calling him a ‘cunt’, I was calling him a ‘kunt’ – a sleazy, vile little kunt“) who posted the through-and-through vicious heap of shit above (whether true or not doesn’t matter) from the utterly ugly choice of pseudonym to the absolutely despicable content, should have his or her balls excised and shoved up hir slimy little throat as far down as they will go. Have I been blunt enough yet? For the sake of brevity, I’ll assume so.
To displace Lao Tzu’s saying from the sublime to the temporal and stretching his context to its limit, though hopefully without losing its basic integrity:
He is an excellent writer however and a superb controversialist whose daily blog is often as good as any on the web. http://davidaslindsay.blogspot.com/
As to his private affairs you have the advantage here: he comes here with his opinions on government. No doubt if he were privy to some of your private affairs he could cobble together a nasty little tissue of half truths and misrepresentations himself. But I suspect he has better things to work on, such as his country’s affairs, on which his musings are always entertaining and often profound. I cannot understand the sort of mind that gets pleasure from writing the poison that you have produced. In fact Lindsay, who is a severe critic of the corrupt Durham County Council has been demanding that he be tried on the ludicrous charges he faces. In the meantime I presume him to be, as he claims, innocent.
Thanks for that link – it’s clear he can write well, even if the few examples I had previously come across (or bothered to read) were tortured enough to be difficult (to put it politely) to follow. My opinion on his general writing style considerably revised, opinion on his previously (for me) fairly undefined socio-political position now favourably clarified, opinion on the OP above accordingly lowered even further.
Get out of the wrong side of bed hey?
That would be wall that hit you in the face Boohoo.
The wall’s fault of course.
Chillax grumpy.
You really have confused me with someone else. Although I shudder to think who. By the way, and not that I normally do this kind of thing, I hold two degrees. Durham, if it matters. Do you?
Could David please verify his main claim that the Tories have taken no deal out of the negotiations? It’s been a long week already, maybe I missed it, but I can find no verification now. I found another Labour amendment, from Rachel Reeves, pressuring May to do so. Plus her own party (some who back the Cooper amendment). I’ll reserve judgement for the moment …but it looks like Labour are set to betray us.
Who will speak for us now?
The Chancellor of the Exchequer has publicly refused to rule out resigning in the event of a No Deal Brexit. Of course it is off the table.
I’m confused. It has been Labour policy for two months to make sure ‘no deal’ was off the table. To whit: the Cobyn/Starmer frontbench amendment to rule out “disastrous no deal” in favour of permanent Customs Union and Single Market (with Brakes LibDem additional amendment to stay in the EU): JC stamping his feet, doing a little jig, and refusing to negotiate with May – unless she does take ‘no deal’ off the table; Cooper’s Article 50 extension amendment to rule out no deal. And Starmer, speaking at the Fabian Society, has said that a second referendum has to be an option for Labour. Which, ipso facto means that Corbyn is behind a second referendum. And is closer to declaring so.
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/brexit-news-live-labour-calls-for-open-and-frank-debate-as-corbyn-accuses-may-of-playing-for-time-a4043461.html
A few links for clarification might help decipher this piece. Is David talking of Hammond’s conference call to business leaders after the landslide record defeat? Because there has been pushback from that by the Tories themselves. If they have taken no deal off the table (which I have yet to hear) – it was inline with Labour policy. At least partly due to Labour’s right to oppose.
https://www.conservativehome.com/thetorydiary/2019/01/no-deal-cannot-be-taken-off-the-table.html
So who will speak for us now? Now that it is a bi-partisan (tri-partisan if you include Cable) Brexit betrayal. Certainly not Corbyn.
I’m just a minimum wage grunt, but from my perspective, the Fabian’s are just as bad as the Tories. Their members are a who’s who of undesired politicians and others. Blair, Toynbee, Campbell to name just a few. They certainly don’t speak for me or my ilk.
If the article is correct (and I have little reason to doubt such a fudge) then I hope the establishment is better prepared than when the brexit vote won.
No one speaks for us, that’s why the result was such a shock
If we stay in the EU, as Labour want – no one ever speaks for us again.
It’s becoming clearer and clearer that Labour will not speak for it’s original base. There will be consequences for their choice, simply because they have proven themselves untrustworthy.
However, whilst Momentum hasn’t turned out to be quite what we hoped, it has shown that we can raise a grassroots party very, very quickly.
Westminster arrogance is sloshing around in bottles currently.
Bottles of pish, as they say North of the border.
Momentum not turning out as hoped is a very modest understatement, my friend. I’d like to think that for every new member gained, at least one was orphaned by the betrayal. I can count three or four among the regulars here, myself included. By my calculation, or possibly wishful imagination, there is a latent force of socialists who prefer their socialism without EU/NATO neoliberal imperialism. Unfortunately, we, the peaceful, are the homeless of de facto British two warparty militarised neoliberalism. But Corbyn is not a neoliberal, they, the fooled, say. No, but most of his party are. And they will all be effectively constitutionally and institutionally neoliberal within a permanent Customs Union.
Do you read Bill Mitchell’s blog? The facts are clear. Despite all the project fear remonstration – no deal is the best deal available. Anything else – the invented ‘soft’ option – will be deleterious to any chance of progressive socialist reconstruction of our country. What do yo call a socialist who betrays socialism? I have a few answers, I’ll keep them to myself for now.
Haven’t stumbled across the blog you mention. Modern monetary theory?
Being a council estate dweller, I can think of lots of names. But people seem decent here, so I’ll keep mine too.
Compared to much of the internet, where every third reply is a death threat …It’s very civilised! I can recommended Mitchell’s book “Restructuring the State” if you are interested. You might want to wait until this Brexit mess is resolved. Progessive socialist policy will be of academic interest only within EU treaty-law. The way it is going, our best hope is the EU collapses before we make up our mind!
“Haven’t stumbled across the blog you mention.”
http://bilbo.economicoutlook.net/blog/
Is ‘brexit’ basically a psyop? That is – only nominally relating to what is seems to be at face value, and operating a hidden agenda?
Is a phishing ruse a bait to react by which to suffer ‘identity’ theft?
Who directed Cameron to call it – and why?
No one will speak for us until we can speak for ourselves.
Insofar as the ‘brexit’ program is being unfolded, it is via secret meetings, and reported through only a nominal or token journalism. Who knows what is being staged or fronted out for mainstream consumption?
Europe is being deconstructed (towards a restructuring). So perhaps is the United Kingdom – and indeed the United States of America. All the goalposts have been moved upstream of anyone’s ability to catch up.
What’s the point of seeing it as a script unfolding?
Perhaps to recognize where I am or choose to be within it – rather than ‘rail against fate’.
So I feel the need is for true foundations – from which a different script unfolds.
But this will seem absurd, heretical or dangerous to the ‘war effort’ of anyone on any side of any kind of conflict.
A Corporate-cartel technocracy is a ‘globalist’ ambition or perhaps compulsion. But under systemic rule we have only the voice we are incentivised to have. Politicians likewise. Nations likewise. Corporations likewise. Ruling elites and system admins likewise.
Life is thus subject to a ‘death-mind’ that seeks power over Life and so cannot be anything else – regardless the promise of victory. Is that true? We may think we ‘see’ this enemy in others but it is forever shifting and reappearing in different forms.
Who directed Cameron to call it – and why?
“One month after the EU’s Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive was presented David Cameron announced a referendum on Britain’s relationship with the EU, and three days after it was adopted the vote to Leave had been cast.”
From the article “The Brexit undertones of the EU’s impending anti tax avoidance legislation.”
Maybe but it’s a lot to accept. How to account for the overwhelming anti Brexit propaganda? It would require that they knew the Brexit support was considerably bigger than they were letting on. It would be the weirdest sort of double bluff.
A couple of spooky BBC documentaries revealing what the fascist EU is really about would have assured a safe and non controversial victory for Leave however.