A Parliament of Fools

In 1265 Simon de Montfort instigated the body which is referred to as the first representative English parliament, because of its inclusion of both the knights and the burgesses.

Since those days we have had parliaments who have earned for themselves a specific name, particularly in the tumultuous seventeenth century, when there was the Useless, the Long, the Short, the Rump, Barebone's and then the First, Second and Third Protectorate Parliaments.

Unfortunately we now have a parliament which could source its name from Chaucer's 14th century poem 'The Parliament of Foules'. The poem depicts a gathering of birds who come together to discuss matters of love and courtship, but the name 'The Parliament of Fools' can be applied to what we now have in the 21st Century.

Thanks to the utter incompetence of the Conservatives we now have on the government benches one of the worse so called Labour administrations ever. Unlike the days of Attlee and Wilson it does not represent the real working class of Britain, but is stuffed full of the middle class, virtue signalling, woke, whose priorities are the insane drive to net zero, when this country only contributes less than one per cent of global emissions of carbon dioxide, of promoting the claims of mentally ill people, who deny biological reality, and to appease every last public sector worker at the expense of the productive workers of private enterprise.

When I think of the great parliamentarians of the past it is dispiriting to look at those who now occupy the benches. Whether or not you agreed with their policies it was undeniable that Cromwell and Churchill changed the course of history, lesser men such as Birkenhead and Attlee were of enormous significance, and Mrs Thatcher paved the way for women in the highest political offices. Although there are still a few hardworking political figures it is hard to think of any who deserve the sort of respect these giants of the past deserved, while now so many, on all sides, are nothing more than pygmies, and lobby fodder for the party whips.

On issue after issue Starmer's morons can be relied upon to chose completely the wrong side. Must we be forced to learn the lessons of the 1970s all over again? Quite apart from the fact that Labour always taxes more, spends more, fuels inflation, and bankrupts the country, we now have a government which is prepared to send innocent citizens to prison merely for expressing an opinion.

That the journalist Allison Pearson should be doorstepped by the police concerning a so called 'non criminal hate crime', the details of which they refused to reveal to her, shows that free speech in this county is under immense threat. It appears that all it takes for the Thought Police to come calling is one complaint from an unnamed member of the public. This time pressure from decent people has forced them to retreat, but they will be back.

Starmer seems unable to comprehend the difference between allies, as he talks of being even handed when dealing with the USA and the EU.

America is the greatest military power in the world, its largest, and most successful economy, shares with us a common language, and a respect for democratic institutions, and will shortly have again a President who is an Anglophile, and would almost certainly be open to a trade deal with us. America is our largest trading partner.

The EU is a declining, sclerotic, bureaucratic and failing organisation, which possesses neither the means, nor the will, to have a significant military, whose main economies of France and Germany are in trouble, which has little in common with us in either language, or a history of democracy, while most members having been either occupied by, or were the actual occupiers of, fascist or communist regimes. They resent us, and would be very happy to undermine our economy, both as a punishment for daring to escape their clutches, and because they have a centuries long dislike for this country. The European Commission is a group of unelected bureaucrats, who claim for themselves the right to determine the policies of the constituent countries.

So why would the Commons, with certain honourable exceptions, be full of those who would rejoin the EU at the drop of a hat? Because these self interested politicians always saw the European Parliament as a job creation scheme for themselves, where, if they kept their noses clean, and gave lip service to the European bureaucracy, they might be able to obtain sinecures, which paid obscenely well, and involved little or no real work. In addition, by passing so much of the power previously enjoyed by the elected parliaments of the UK to Brussels, they could avoid taking responsibility for actually running the country, and fob off their constituents with the statement that there was nothing they could do as the competence lay with Brussels.

Of course there were a few who actually believed the rubbish about European unity, ignoring the reality that the very different nations of Europe have too long a history of conflict for it to ever work, but of course we always have the idealists with us, idiots thorough they may be.

Starmer has always been one of those who put Brussels above Westminster, as is evidenced by his attempts to undermine the result of the 2016 referendum, but he is also motivated by the fact that he is a lawyer, who believes that people such as himself should run the country, and indeed the world, ignoring the democratic aspirations of those who think it should be the people.

He attacks populists, as if to wish to endorse the desires of the majority were reprehensible, this being the defence the liberal elite use to prevent the policies they favour being opposed: for example the refusal to recognize that there is, and always has been, massive support of capital punishment, as every poll taken on the issue has showed a majority in favour of restoration. The attempt to muddy the waters by, as is now a refrain from liberals, of claiming that their opponents somehow support the dictatorship of North Korea, is nonsense, as the latter execute political dissidents, not necessarily murderers. When decent people see those who may have tormented, and then killed little children, escaping the just punishment for their crimes, and totally innocent people increasingly being knifed to death on our streets, they are sick of those whose seem to be more concerned for the welfare of the killers.

Recent rulings from the Supreme Court expose the ineffectiveness of our political class, as it brings to the fore the question of whether this county is a democracy, run by elected representatives, or one which is actually controlled by unelected lawyers. We are in the position that, whatever the people vote for in a general election, the courts can just overrule any attempt to implement the polices supported by the electorate. There is no point in parties putting forward a manifesto, which is then successful at the polls, if a small group of unelected functionaries can prevent its implementation.

Unfortunately the judicial profession is drawn from essentially the same strata of society, and its members share similar assumptions with each other, but not with the ordinary people. Judges may be very confident that however many people enter this country illegally none will threaten their own jobs, unlike those of the working class being faced with unfair competition for limited posts. Nor will they live in areas the very nature of which are changed by massive influx of those with a different cultural inheritance, and it seems unlikely that the neighbourhoods where supreme court judges live will host many who regard women as second class citizens. Judges are just as likely as anyone else to allow personal circumstances, and prejudices, to influence their decisions, and they cannot be immune from challenge.

Obviously any reasonable British government could stop the boats in a few days. Make it clear that any found approaching our shores will be turned back, while if they should reach England, they will be indefinitely detained until they accept a return to abroad.

The excuse resorted to is that international law and treaties limit what the government is permitted to enact, yet this runs contrary to the principle that parliament in this country is sovereign, and cannot be restricted by decisions taken by previous parliaments. In addition arrogant lawyers, working in the dubious field of international law, have declared certain treaties to be living documents. In other words, while we may have agreed to the initial treaty, it can then be amended without our agreement, and we are then supposedly to abide by whatever it then contains.

This extension of the powers of courts is unacceptable in a democracy, and, if our votes are to mean anything, the former ought to be prevented from acting in this manner, if necessary by withdrawing from any, and all of those treaties and agreements, which are responsible for this growing ability of the self interested legal profession to increase its own power at the expense of that of the people.

The other parties of the Left are just pale imitations of the socialists, while the Conservatives have so lost their way that, even now, having seen the results of appeasing the wets in their party, they still do so.

This country is rapidly descending into anarchy. Despite risible claims by politicians, and the woke leaders of the police force, that crime is falling, the general public is well aware that, in reality, we are seeing an ever increasing rise in criminality.

Commuters endure interrupted journeys because of thefts of valuable wiring from railway infrastructure, some cars are becoming uninsurable because of the growing menace of catalytic converters being stolen, shoplifting is an almost risk free activity, and anyone who has sought police attention for burglary knows that, in most cases, they will just receive a crime number.

Despite having GCHQ available the authorities do not pursue internet fraudsters who batten on the vulnerable. Offences such as riding scooters on pavements, putting pedestrians at risk, are just ignored by police, who anyway are never around to patrol high streets.

Serious crimes such as murder, with an increasing number of youngsters stabbed to death, are on the rise, but the authorities seek to conceal this fact by redesignating them as manslaughter, proving that there are lies, damn lies and statistics. Thousands of aliens break our laws by crossing the Channel in small boats, but the political class does nothing but wring its hands.

The causes of all this are easy to see. The police have been redirected to pursue anyone who dares to question the received wisdom of the liberal elite, destroying free speech, and thought, as they do so. The courts hand down pathetically weak punishments on real criminals, when they should impose deterrent sentences. The authorities claim they they do not have enough prison places, when they should be building more. Worst of all the politicians either bury their heads in the sand, or regard criminals as misunderstood victims, rather than those who thrive on the miseries of others.

Of course nothing will be done, until perhaps the tide of crime washes up against the homes of those who have caused this, when they will no doubt suddenly discover that they are to reap what they have sown.

We now have a House of Commons, and a House of Lords, dominated by a political class which is a disgrace, and which is betraying the democracy they have inherited, and the ordinary people they treat with contempt. Unless there can be a Herculean cleansing of these it may be necessary for a repeat of the action taken by Cromwell in 1653 when he declared Ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government. Which of you have not bartered your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation. You were deputed here by the people to get grievances redressed, are yourselves become the greatest grievance. Go, get you out! Make haste! Ye venal slaves be gone! In the name of God, go!.