The Swell of the Peoples Sovereignty
“We are too wee, too insignificant; even as a Nation, to feature in the world’s balance sheet?”
That may well be true in the world as it is today but as anybody who’s ever been in business will tell you and the crash of 2008 has exposed, balance sheets are often a poor measure of the values, let alone the worth, of the business to which they refer.
I mention this because the measures listed will not be restricted to the cabal of Westminster and Whitehall. To class the adversary as the ‘establishment’ without giving some definition, no matter how crude or imprecise, means we’re attacking effects while ignoring the cause.
I believe the democratic process of all the Western World is being systematically drawn into a position of degradation to where the institutions of governance are no more than human resource (horrible term, but indicative) controllers for the global manipulators. The US as the forge for this process has already lost any claim to being a meaningful democracy as underlined by 33% of its population being below the poverty line. The EU is a cabal of unknowns, who I suspect are placemen for the global manipulators; who have, through the connivance of creating the biggest pretendy parliament in the world, turned democracy into a farce. Meantime the UK, by trying to keep a foot in both camps while it’s in leg irons, and having sold the family jewels thirty years ago, is now selling (or at least pawning) the family as a going concern incorporating a pliant easily controlled work force as a sales pitch.
How has this happened? Easy, our democratic representatives and administrators have taken their eyes off the democratic ball to become the stewards of a wealth based meritocracy. Either that or they’re incompetent or corrupt, or incompetently corrupt. (To save some time I would recommend Ian Bells article 21st Nov – Herald Scotland: Why don’t we tax the rich? It contains some interesting figures and comparisons, if figures of this magnitude can ever be believed.)
Do I believe this was part of a cunning plan? Absolutely not. Even if there were only 100,000 of these super rich they wouldn’t have the brains or the cooperation between them; they just followed a trend and couldn’t believe their luck. This accelerated when the technology of IT could whizz figures round the globe and they could use their wealth and assets to create corporate Ponzi schemes that, because of the lack of responsibility and regulation (a lack they lobbied and wheedled for and our politicians ‘bought’ in to?) , developed a mirage of reality that became the norm. Like the sub prime people who they enticed into mortgages, these sub prime prospectors and speculators believed they’d found the formula to turn literally nothing into gold. And the damnable part of all this is that the response of the politicians to the 2008 crises has proved them right.
What started this trend? Well you would have to dig deep into the human psyche to pin point that one. You could say it was when Adam took the apple; or the first time a member of the oldest profession offered her/his services by promising a good time; or the concepts of religion; or the struggle of the alchemists to turn base metals into gold; and, while we’re at it, why gold?
As a metal it has some industrial uses today because of its resistance to oxidisation and most chemicals; but it was totally useless then as now for spears, arrowheads, cooking pots, banding round masts, or nailing wood to form a boat. In fact it was so useless its probable somebody decided to make something pretty out of it. Then his woman wanted one; seeing this the tribal leader thought it would be a good idea to have something that would mark his position; then when Kings came on the scene he had to have more and in due time they took this malleable, not very rare commodity, and called it precious which gave it a value worth stealing and killing for.
However you rate it today, gold is a pretty good example of the human psyche’s ability to adopt the irrational over the rational and this schism of rationality has been exploited ever since; but never to the extent that it is today.
C’mon you say we’re educated, wise to the ways of the world: tutored in the universities of hard knocks called life.
Are we?
Believe it or not Americans are not fools. How do you think the relatives and loved ones of the thousands of servicemen killed or maimed in Iraq and Afghanistan are feeling, now that Wikileak has exposed their loved one died not for the protection of democracy under the euphemism of a War on Terror, but for the protection demanded by Arab Potentates? Potentates who now want the US to send more coffin fodder over to their part of the world to take a swipe at Iran.
I’m no fan of Iran, but I’m not a fan of Potentates, Israel or any form of regime, no matter how it labels itself, that practices racial, religious, political or commercial apartheid. Such practices are just a devious form of eugenics practiced without schedules, rail cars or ovens.
What if Bush Jnr was in office now, along with the same bunch of puppeteers; would the PR machines and the Media factories not be in the process of building a full head of steam demonizing Iran, in preparation for an invasion during his second term? He’s not, so the question is rhetorical; at least until the next puppet come along. But the question that isn’t rhetorical, is why the use of war, with all its de-structive qualities and the carnage of human life, is the western world's favoured practice when it has patently failed in every theatre where its been applied; either overtly such as in Vietnam or Iraq or covertly – though the two are often intermingled - by the supply of arms and logistics as in Indonesia and South America? Calling violence peace, and those that practice it peacekeepers, is giving form, meaning and twisted legitimacy to a nonsense; what could possibly be more irrational than that.
Knowing the costs that will be involved isn’t it conceivable that some “smart”, compassion, empathy and, above all, example, would achieve better results with fewer casualties and less destruction than the gung-ho crap of “smart” bombs? Now we know generals like to fight wars – what else are they going to talk about in their dotage – but surely that can’t be enough of a reason, nor can it be the results they achieve, or the political gains that accrue; so is it possible this is the favoured method because the profit made on weapons and warfare are greater than those of compassion and ploughshares? If that’s the rational, then you have to ask, who is calling the tune, and who is paying?
I suspect we all know the answer to the purse the price is being prised out of but, before we name it, let’s take a look at who profits. The Lockhead Corp, who incidentally, are a major shareholder in the UK Atomic Research facility; Halliburton Corp, also involved in the UK defence programme; with an ex-CEO the VP in the Bush administration. The Carlyle Corp, heavily involved with Bush Snr, and ex-PM Major on the board of subsidiaries on a reputed £500,000 per year. On the home front we have our ‘own’ BAE systems, who get paid billions to rehash a commercial airliner that was superseded in the 70s? And, just to add to the diversity and comprehensiveness of the mix, throw in IBM and any or all of the other 99% not listed. What do they all have in common?
They all claim to be commercial operations and go to a great deal of trouble to substantiate that claim – quoted in stock markets, declaring dividends etc - but if any were to rely on the normal cut and thrust of commercial markets, few would have reached the prominence they enjoy today. When was the last time you flew in a Lockheed airliner, have an IBM pc or bought a BAE product? They all rely on the defence budgets allocated to the Pentagon, or in the UK case the MoD, whereby the costs of research and production are met by ever increasing budgets from the public purse, while the profit margins and innovations gained are left to the corporation to exploit and benefit from.
Add into that mix the privatisation of a (any) Nations resources whether they’re natural or innovative and you have bankrupted the nation to benefit the few – and the maxim of socialising the costs and privatising the profits, becomes, potentially, apocalyptic for the ‘us’ who have to meet the costs. Think about it, it doesn’t take much commercial acumen to run a business that doesn’t have to meet the costs of the product it sells. And, just to add insult to injury, is able to market these products through a heavily supported media – staffed by many, but controlled by few – whose sole purpose is to manufacture consent by the suppression of truth through the drip of lies forming into opiates of suppression.
That said, this is not intended as a polemic against capitalism. Capitalism has its place, just as entrepreneurship, innovation and commitment have the right to be recognised and rewarded. But capitalism without responsibility and commitment to the moral and social wellbeing of the culture the community and the natural elements it relies on for its existence, is a cancer hell bent on its own destruction and stupidly oblivious to the fact it will bring the body with it.
Now where’s the rational for the ‘body’, whether as molecules or miracles, of nations or specie, to allow that state of affairs or affairs of State to continue?
This, in my opinion, is the world we live in; a fact that’s underlined by the various international polls that question the quality of life in different countries. What these tend to show is that it’s the smaller countries who adopt a more egalitarian and domestic approach to their citizenries’ wellbeing and who don’t get into power games with their neighbours, who occupy the top rungs of the contentment ladder.
So against all these formidable odds and despite the paucity of our arsenal how do we go about not only gaining the independence of Scotland but shaping the form that independence will take?
Undoubtedly the SNP have earned the right to take Scotland towards independence. But neither they, nor any other ‘would-be’ political party have earned the right as yet to govern an independent Scotland. Even the systems of political blocks called parties forming governments has to be opened to detailed analysis and possible development since time and results have exposed the distortions and weaknesses inherent in their practices. That said it would be the usual Scottish suicidal malaise to start squabbling before the games started let alone won so – What can we do!
First we must win the democratic battle – that’s the petard from which empires were hung and lost. And we don’t need organisations, institutions, media backing or huge logistical armouries; nor, while we obviously have a strategy, do we need a tactical blueprint that limits (other than moral imperatives) the individuality of our preparation and approach. The fight is for independence, not for any political party nor yet, political bias or the political process or concept. For most politics is a viper’s nest, best left alone.
My proposal is we, the exponents of independence, arm ourselves –as many already are - with the facts and flaws of the present system and through acts of neighbourly kinship, compassion, concern: any form of cooperation based on humanities better values, take it upon ourselves to encourage one individual a month to either convert to the cause or climb down from the apathy fence.
I’m not going to suggest the amount of time or the methods you should employ – though the exposure and listing of ideas in a positive manner could fire the inspirational synapse in others – by definition the methods must be as variable as the circumstance, capabilities, expertise and commitment invested in and by the individual; but it is the tremor that creates the groundswell over which the arsenal of establishment can neither prevent or control.
We have five months to an election and by adopting this approach we may, this time, only save the SNPs bacon. But, by then they will be aware of the ground swell and the power and aspirations driving it. Keep it up until 2015 and the exponential potential alone could turn independence from an abstract notion into an irrevocable fact.
Add the additional factor of the SNP adding meat to its inspirational backbone and we could have a government of whom we are proud to have serve us; reason to be proud as a nation; but, most important of all, a little pride in ourselves as human beings.
Any other business?
Ideas/Listing: thorn in the flesh techniques – civil disobedience.
Pensioners report to job centres – need work in order to survive.
Learn the benefits labyrinth – actively help to maximise claimant’s rights.
Send all your tax returns to R & C Dept Scottish Government.
If Calman is adopted send the 10p to Scotland the rest to HMRC.
In any argument with bureaucracy demand, politely, to see the top man.
Grow your own vegetables it saves paying VAT. What you can’t eat give to neighbours, it saves them paying VAT.
Add as you will, keep it legal – the potential and list is endless.
Posts
20 comments:
I was finding this quite interesting until you descended into tinfoil-hat global conspiracy theories and knee-jerk anti-Americanism; I don't think you've mentioned Bilderberg, but it can't be far away.
I heard quite enough of this sort of stuff when I was a student back in the 70's. Yawn.
fwiw, if your lot were actually advocating independence for Scotland, you could count on my vote; but as what you're actually advocating is for Scotland just to remain a province of Brussels, but without the additional UK layer, then sorry but that is no real change - since Westminster is now really only a shell, left there by the EU to mask their progress.
Weekend Yachtsman-
"Do I believe this was part of a cunning plan? Absolutely not. Even if there were only 100,000 of these super rich they wouldn’t have the brains or the cooperation between them"
It's a hard thing to do, but try to read what's there without submerging it in what you already think.
Tinfoil hat, liebor, libdums - yawn.
Weekend Yachtsman:
You must be reading context that doesn't exist. The tin-foil and knee jerk insults I'll ignore.
The question you have to ask yourself is; when a theory develops into a fact where does the pejorative use of 'conspiracy' lie?
Where are the anti American contents, other than the use, by example, of their empire building and commercial practices which are, through pressure or adoption, intertwined with those of the UK?
Where do I support the EU, or argue for an independent Scotland to be incorporated in it?
In all probability there's much to criticise, debate, argue and contribute over the article but I fail to find any reasoned argument for the inclusion of yours.
Is not the greatest conspiracy that which government dishes out to the people courtesy of their offices and through the main stream media?
Did not Ted Heath conspire against the people of Britain when he said our National Sovereignty was safe and unaffected back in the early seventies - when all the time he knew the truth was the very opposite? We have had traitors in our midst ever since, and the charge is treason to all who have aided and abetted the handing over to a foreign power, yet bring an action and it is ignored, filed, forgotten, 'take no action'. Even our monarch has reneged on her Coronation oath in allowing an act that passed power to a foreign based organisation and giving it her assent.
Knowledgable words there Crinkly, but your part three has not hit the button. Democracy itself is also a scam - certainly what we have as democracy is. With mankind as he is, democracy just cannot work, it leaves too many unintelligent people in control. It is the smartest people that should be in charge and not for personal gain or position. Where are they? Perhaps they are not strange trousered yachtsmen, but they ARE amongst the people.
http://www.thebcgroup.org.uk/
Thanks for putting that up Subrosa.
justme:
Thanks for the comment.
I've neither the wit, wisdom nor inclination to ignore constructive criticism. I can even accept some cliché's and aphorisms have value as refined truths - All power corrupts etc., to name but one that is as pertinent today as it was the first time it was uttered.
The article is one man's opinion. With no ulterior motive other than to enlighten and hopefully provoke a conversation on the peaceful methods at our disposal to advance the cause of independence, and the form we would like to see that independence take.
Derek: Absolutely agree with you, Democracy has been reduced to the level of a scam.
Which is exactly my reason for questioning the hegemonies of political grouping and the present political process, which devoid of principle or ideology has developed into a bear-pit of feuding
corruption.
For instance - Why have we no say into who will be our Prime Minister, or who will form the executive (Cabinet) of his governance. What is the need for those to be chosen from one political faction?
If as we all should know by now power has a habit of leaning towards corruption; what measure(s) should be incorporated to prevent it and punishments decreed when it's exposed.
Do we pass a statute that any matter raised in parliament that has been supported by 'lobby' groups should be declared by the representative(s) raising it?
Should we take the word 'Avoidance' out of the tax lexicon?
The list goes on - but of one thing I'm certain, take democracy out of the equation and all you're left with is tyranny.
Fact or fiction I dont know!
Part 1 Aust Constitution invalid The Vinny Eastwood Show 15 10 10 1 3
cynicalHighlander.
Interesting and cause for thought.
Wouldn't put it past the deviance of Westminster at the time; and is relevant to the demands placed on Ireland in 1920 to swear allegiance to the British Crown.
The tape ended before the reasoning of the Woodrow Wilson/League of Nation scenario was explained but could the obfuscation on nation v colony status not be down to Britain trying to maintain a dominant role in the League?
There are 3 parts bit confusing as the 2nd part is same length and 3rd much shorter. These things often take others to investigate down different avenues before the truth hopefully prevails.
There is not doubt that this is well written but the advice given is irresponsible in places. Sending Tax Returns to R& C Scottish Government is a good example. Anyone who does something so foolish should be prepared to
a)have the tax return lost and have to do another.
b)have the tax return successfully redirected to your Tax Office so that it can be processed in time to avoid your having to pay fines for late submission.
The point I'm making here is that there is currently NO R&C Scottish Government and by attempting to wreck submission and collection processes of HMRC, and subsequently, HM Treasury you are advocating childish, and foolish, tactics which will lead people to pay even less attention to the cause of independence than some already do. That is not helpful.
How about challenging the opposition Parties at Holyrood on giving us the right to access an an actual referendum on independence?
How about talking policy?
How about getting the focus on to Scotland's strengths?
How about getting prominent pro-Scottish independents to pool their resources in order to produce a documentary type programme covering all of these things?
Be positive, be brave. But if the best we can do is tell people to send their Tax Returns to Edinburgh then we should give up right now. You are wasting everyone's time with ideas like that and ultimately the person who will lose out most is the person whose Tax Return you're talking about. You may also cost them financially.
I'm afraid you're avoiding the elephant in the room. The Jews. They own the Fed, the bank of England and most national banks in Europe. Through the Inter-Alpha group they control 70% of World banking. This includes RBS and we're bailing them out, so they can buy the bonds that the Government issues at another profit. Of course they also own most of the MSM and the movie industry, that always portrays the Jew as being heroic, rather than the grasping bastards they really are.
JoG; just to tell you i spent considerable time this morning answering your post. Only to have it dissapear into cyberspace when I attempted to send it.
Allow me a little time and I'll re-write it and try again.
Regards John Souter.
DL: A wee parable concerning a Jewish Shiloh.
Very rich and very successful, he wanted to repent and spend his time and efforts doing good.
His Rabbi was aghast: "No, no my boy that's exactly what you shouldn't do.
'Look at you, you're very good, very clever at making money. Anybody can do the work you want to do, but your choice is not the amount of money you make but the method, manner and objectives you choose for its use!
And always remember DL a virus can fell an elephant.
Right JoG -i'll try again.
Your comment regarding the Tax Returns, may well be right.(It is a 'discussion' article) However I'd like you to consider a couple of points.
There are in Scotland a couple of major hubs used by HMRC. One is in Cumbernauld, the other, i think, is in Ayrshire. In Niall Aslans document The Great Obfuscation (circa 2008, but still available) he made clear that while these centres handled tax returns from all over the UK, all the establishment and running costs were shown as costs to the Scottish Account.
Second, in the 60s a black woman refused to move from the white section of a segregated bus. Childish, or simply tired of the injustice inherent in a segregated system?
Whatever her motive it was the spark that ignited the Civil Rights movement, that led to some men having dreams and others nightmares.
I'm not finished but I'll stop now and follow up.
JoG -part 2.
I have 'talked policy' in both the article and in my replies to the comments. Talk without action or purpose is meaningless.
What are Scotland's strengths other than an egalitarian disposition that presently is enjoyed by a duplicitous Labour party who are not going to give it up easily.
Prominent Scots to fund a documentary. I'm sure it's been done and Rosa has probably some in her archives. They may well stir the blood of the converted and I wouldn't for a second belittle or deride them, but can their effect be measured?
It asking a lot for the people we want to collect to be brave. Bravery means they have something to fear.
In my one -a - month in the article I've recommended the use of neighbourly kindness to achieve our aims. Some trips to the shops or surgery, maybe help with the groceries, a chat over a cuppa; any act that can allay the fears of change and the shells of habit. Believe it or not I've given much thought to the subject and believe it to be constructive, proactive within everyone's capability and gan gain the results that will produce productivity.
Down here in the Lancashire Mill towns there's a growing demand for an inquiry into postal voting. At the last election this has grown to 35+% of the vote in some areas - areas which have a high proportion of immigrant Indian/Pakistani families.
Rumour has it these were heavily canvassed by a certain party and the voters told of the postal vote facility and the canvassers would be back to help fill them in properly?
'Just put your name here Mr Gandhi. and we'll see its posted for you.'
Could well be the script, and with some minor embellishments could be the answer to why the West Central abyss is so hard to cross?
Just a thought; but it could be you
that prevents it, then bridges it.
I appreciate the time taken to answer my post. Thank you for that.
I worked for the Revenue for 25 years. The Department is split into regions throughout the UK with various Revenue establishments included within each Region obviously. Those in Scotland will form what you call "the Scottish account" I would imagine. But the Revenue is one UK department which is why Edinburgh and the Scottish Government are not involved in its workings. Anything Holyrood receives on behalf of Scotland comes from the UK Treasury.
Many of my former colleagues tell me I am "well out of it" such is the chaos that reigns these days in what is now known as HMRC. Staff within what was the Inland Revenue in my day were fully taxes trained from the lowest grades up. Taxpayers had direct access to the actual person dealing with their tax affairs and could write and speak to them personally by phone. These days call centres field calls and are not trained in taxation. Those still in the Department who were originals are being told they must stop "thinking taxes" and just trust the computer. It is a mess. Centre 1 once dealt with Scotland's PAYE. It is now handling post from all over the UK for some reason and Scottish mail going to Centre 1 is re-directed and farmed out all over the UK depending on the nature of the enquiry. Chaos! Not sure what the thinking is behind it. Expertise has been sacrificed and the end result is not good.
When I mentioned a documentary I'm not sure it has been done in the way I envisage. I would like to see an investigation Team from, say Channel 4, to head north to do some work on Scottish Politics. You raised one very interesting area in your response to me: vote fixing. I wrote to the Electoral Commission last year after news came out of people arriving at poll stations to vote only to be told they had voted already. I raised another issue where in an election in Fife a Council claimed the voting papers had been "lost". I pointed out too that in my own constituency people often arrived with no ballot paper, no ID and were permitted to quote a name and address and then vote. I said that the Scottish system (and possibly the wider UK) was ripe for fraud and that new arrangements were needed urgently. I didn't even get a reply. And yet, I know I am right about this.
I could list ten major concerns that any committed investigative journalist could spend a couple of years working through. BBC Scotland breaches its own code of conduct regularly, and defiantly, in order to indulge in political bias. A sharp team from Channel 4 could take the sewer that is Scottish Politics apart very quickly and easily. And maybe if Scots saw ourselves as we really are, when it comes to politics here, it would shock a good many into getting involved and believing we deserve better.
JoG, I've every reason to believe your comments on the internal situation of the IR.
I have 3 box files of correspondence with the revenue claiming back what they classed as an underpayment on my wife's returns. She in fact has always been within the precepts of PAYE, but first we had the highly overestimated demand, which after months of wrangling and court action was reduced to a reasonable figure, which, was paid though we made it clear as the mistake was in fact the act of one of her employers and HMRC's agent we would refer the case to the Special Commissioner. The case is ongoing, but since its conception has been handled by Crewe, Warrington, London, Edinburgh and is presently back with Warrington. None of whom seem ever to have the complete file passed on to them. In truth it is an exercise in tenacity; where any commercial firm would balance the cost between the administration costs and the sum involved to right a wrong.
As to Channel4, while I agree their product is far more comprehensive than the BBC, I've seen a couple of presentations, especially by Jon Snow, when their comments on Scotland's independence have been more derisory than complimentary.
We have another investigative journalist who lives in London NW1.
John Pilger I have a lot of time for. His exposes of American tactics in South America and Indonesia and his reports on Australia's handling of the Maori's
show his values. Yet he hasn't said or written a word on Scotland's issues?
So perhaps Channel4 and John Snow have a stronger belief in the aphorism of not passing fecal matter in their own nests?
Crinkly I was thinking of the Dispatches team myself. I know what you mean about Jon Snow.
Pilger is in a class of his own and no mistake.
JoG
I think the arithmetic of percentages are against us, UK wise, on this one.
Post a Comment