Failure on Failure

The poem "In the Bleak Winter" by Christina Rossetti contains the phrase "snow on snow". What we see now is "failure on failure" by the political and bureaucratic class, as on issue after issue they prove themselves to be incompetent bunglers, or worse. It is noticeable that Rishi Sunak, not merely content with aping Tony Blair in his approach, is also, like him, despite being a graduate of Oxford, following the latter, also a graduate of Oxford, in hypocritically using glottalisation to make him seem more like a man of the people. Do they really think that we are so stupid? Every day matters of concern are arising, to which the so called elite has no solutions beyond meaningless platitudes.

The most important of all is the one which threatens our very survival. It is the first duty of a government to ensure the defence of the realm, yet all the major parties have failed this test over decades, as every time the Chancellor is short of money the amounts allocated to defence have been the targets for reduction, to the point where we now have the smallest army in centuries, the navy is no more than a shadow of its former self, and the air force could not sustain an effective defence of this country for any length of time. We are told that some senior British and American officers are saying that, in the event of a major war, the British defence forces are on the cusp of being unable to defend this country. Only the threat of using our nuclear weapons would remain, but, as a reaction to conventional attack, this could not be used.

The Americans might decide to retreat to Fortress America, and who could blame them in the light of the failure of the European nations to spend enough in their own defence. The continual cutting back of our defence forces in the name of economy, means that, should the American umbrella be withdrawn, we would inevitably go down to defeat.There are straws in the wind which indicate that isolationism is gaining strength in the US, as is evidenced by recent statements that were made by Ronald DeSantis, a contender for president in 2024, now retired from the race, who dismissed US support for Ukraine and other allies as a waste of resources, and said that leaders should pay more attention to issues at home.

As was proven in the 1930s we would not save ourselves by throwing others to the wolves, and a triumphant Russia would not be content with conquering Ukraine. Must we see history repeated as first the Baltic States, and then the nations of Eastern Europe are attacked one by one, before Putin turns his baleful eye on Western Europe and the UK, as, if Ukraine falls, then the protections offered by NATO may very well be proven illusory.

Those, over decades, who have presided over this debacle, have not merely betrayed those living, but all those who died defending this country over the centuries. There is no point in saving money to spend on welfare etc. if our whole society was to be overwhelmed by enemy forces, who would care nothing about such matters.

I, and millions of others, were recently horrified by the ITV series on the Post Office Horizon scandal which highlighted the manner in which unaccountable bureaucracies have undermined democracy, and been allowed to treat decent, hard working people with contempt. Most literate people will know of Orwell's 1984, which so accurately predicated the nightmare of lies, and the twisting of reality, we now see in the ideology of woke, but it is the lesser known works by Kafka, such as The Trial, which invoke a world where innocent people are persecuted by arrogant apparatchiks of the state without effective means to defend themselves against false, or even unspecified, claims, of having committed offences for which they must endure punishment.

It is such bureaucracies, which have grown like Topsy, that are sucking the economy dry in order to provide obscene incomes for those who are basically parasites, contributing nothing to organisations, but obstructing those who are trying to fulfil the actual tasks for which the ministry or company exists. These executives, in private companies as well as the state, have corrupted major institutions such as the police, where ordinary coppers are diverted from fighting crime to policing private thought, the BBC which is now merely a mouthpiece for the extreme liberal left, and of course the NHS. Increased funding for the latter is wasted on extra meeting rooms for executives, and the army of HR staff, whose only contribution is to impose policies based on their ideology such as Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, which are divisive, and do nothing for patient care. Taxpayers are forced to pay for pointless pen-pushers to write endless memos to each other, while holding countless valueless meetings.

To drive back this tide of entitled and incompetent  administrators would be a task worthy of Hercules when cleansing the Augean stables, and our cowardly political class will not make the attempt. The innocents whose lives were disrupted, and in some cases ended, by the disgusting behaviour of Post Office executives, will not be the last victims. Although it is not the fault of the current government the response is the usual prevarications, and unfulfilled promises, rather than, as Churchill would have said "Action this Day". It is obvious that all the postmasters affected should be fully compensated for every penny they have lost, plus additional large payments for any who have endured criminal punishments, while they should be totally exonerated, their reputations being cleared of any stain. Those bullying bureaucrats who pursued innocents should be sacked, while any who lied should be prosecuted, and sent to prison. The totally useless former CEO has lost her CBE, but this is insufficient punishment. Every effort should be made to penalise FuJitsu, no further contracts being signed with this company.

The crisis of illegal immigration continues unaddressed, as our gutless politicians refuse to take on the European courts which are interfering with our right to guard our own borders. In addition, when discussing immigration it is often said that the solution is integration of migrants providing a solution to the problem. However this assumes that such integration is possible, and the fact is that, for some, it is not. Integrating those from cultures very similar to ours is easily achievable, for Europeans, such as Poles, and Ukrainians, are from basically Christian nations, as indeed for the same reason it is for those from places such as the West Indies, who also have the advantage of speaking English. It is harder when the migrants come from countries with very different attitudes, largely based on centuries old beliefs, but, for most, any such differences cause minimal friction with the host community. We welcome valiant allies such as the Gurkhas, admire the qualities of those such as the Sikhs, and have no issues with the Hindus, whose lifestyle is peaceful. Over the centuries we have assimilated many minority groups, such as the Huguenots and Jews, who have become part of our nation.

Where everything fails is with those who have come in large numbers from the Middle East, and the subcontinent. Many are of course able to fit in, but regrettably there are also many who cannot, or will not, accept British values, even though they intend to live here, as their fundamental beliefs, and actions, cannot be reconciled with ours. Those who come from countries where women are treated as second class citizens, those of a different sexual orientation are excluded from society, parents can dictate the lives of their children to the extent that for the latter to disobey may risk honour killing, and to wish to leave their religion is to risk death, cannot be expected to integrate with a people who reject all such beliefs, and indeed it becomes more obvious every day that not only in the UK, but across Europe, attempts to square this circle are failing. The recent demonstrations in our cities where calls have been made for attacks on our Jewish compatriots are proof enough of this, as is the attitude to young British girls displayed by grooming gangs. Those who claim that this is not so are deceiving themselves, and creating a situation which will result in misery for many from both communities, while laying the foundations of a conflict which will undermine our society.

Those virtue signalling liberals viewing the world through rose tinted spectacles claim that judges must be free to overrule the wishes of the people and parliament. Unfortunately the judicial profession is drawn from essentially the same elite 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.

One of my opponents in our local press claimed that the immigrants are needed because British people are too lazy to work. The former are in the tradition of those, ostensibly liberal, who have nothing but contempt for the working class. I remember how, in the 1960s, my father lost his job as a postman due to acute kidney disease, and how he struggled to find another, while my mother was trying to raise two teenage boys on five pounds a week. In those days some people were wont, as they are now, to describe the unemployed as work shy, and as the undeserving poor. My wife comes from a steel worker's family in Teesside, and, from our many visits to the area, it has been clear that youngsters are faced with a total lack of decent jobs, something that afflicts the whole of the old industrial regions of the North. No doubt arrogant liberals would also condemn them as lazy. Anyone not determined to close their eyes to reality can see that, apart from a token sprinkling of women and children, the vast majority of those arriving on our shores illegally are young men, and are obviously economic migrants, not genuine refugees. This government's response has been to transfer the majority to areas such as Teesside, to ensure that their own supporters in more prosperous areas avoid the impact of such an influx.

The solution to any labour shortages is not to allow vast numbers to arrive from overseas, but to ensure that the wages of those indigenous workers performing the tasks required are properly paid what they are worth. The laws of supply and demand mean that, if demand for something, be it goods, or labour, exceeds supply, then its price should rise. This would ensure that there was an incentive for those currently drawing unemployment benefit to seek positions in employment, even in less attractive posts. Clearly it is easier for the liberal left to belittle their fellow citizens than to admit that our politicians prefer to virtue signal, rather than protect the interests of the British people.

It should not be necessary to constantly repeat facts but any neutral observer, who was not aware of the facts, would conclude from the chants at the pro Palestinian marches, the reporting by the broadcast media, and the propaganda emanating from Western universities that Israel had launched an unprovoked attack on Gaza, with the intention of committing genocide. The reality is that, on the 7th October, hundreds of innocent Israeli civilians were assaulted by a barbarous enemy, who murdered indiscriminately, raped women, and butchered babies, and that Israel is taking action to prevent a repeat of such an outrage.

The  BBC still refuses to refer to these killers as terrorists, and, while Israel attempts to limit civilian deaths, antisemitic student groups at Harvard University in the US have been calling for the total eradication of all Jews, posting emojis of a Jewish baby who has been beheaded, and calling October 2023 a great month. The president of that university has resigned, who, after being asked a question as to whether calling for the genocide of the Jewish people would violate Harvard's code of conduct, answered that it depended on the context. She may have resigned as president, but continues to be paid enormous amounts as a so called professor. This university, together with similar woke institutions in the USA and the UK, including Oxford and Cambridge, should be purged of these antisemites, and woke lunatics.

These sick morons find common cause with naive liberals who only see one side of the conflict, so march with those who chant "Death to Jews". The neutral observer might wonder why those who always have a knee jerk anti Israeli attitude do not march in support of the Uyghurs and Tibetans oppressed by China, the Muslim minority persecuted in Burma, or the millions of Afghans expelled by Pakistan back into the tender clutches of the Taliban. The answer is simple, in that the Left regard Jews as white, and Israel as firm allies of the West, so instinctively support any who wish them ill. They are total hypocrites, whom Dr Goebbels would have regarded as allies.

On other fronts somewhat simple activists for various causes always seem to think that there are easy solutions to major problems. Those who like to think of themselves as peace campaigners love John Lennon's song "All we are saying, is give peace a chance". At first glance this seems a benign sentiment, but unfortunately that is not all they are saying. In the face of implacable enemies, who desire our destruction, the peace advocates would throw away our weapons, put flowers in their hair, and expect our opponents to do likewise. In reality the latter would then trample us underfoot. In the 4th Century AD St Augustine formulated the theory of a just war, asserting that peacefulness, in the face of a grave wrong that could be stopped by only violence, would be a sin, while in the early 5th Century AD Roman writer Renatus created the Latin adage "Si vis pacem, para bellum" translating as "If you want peace, prepare for war" and meaning that if you face an aggressive adversary, build your military strength so that the adversary knows that, if it launches an attack, it will receive a punishing response, and will therefore be deterred. Near our own time in 1900 Theodore Roosevelt, before becoming the 26th US President said "speak softly and carry a big stick".

Similarly the "Just Stop Oil" group seem to asking for one straightforward action to prevent what they regard as a climate emergency. Rather than "Just" anything, what it would mean is that the industrial infrastructure upon which millions rely would be destroyed, we would lose the means of heating our homes, or, unless living in big cities, be unable to travel any distance. It would wreck our civilisation, kill millions, and put humanity on the road back to the caves. The sensible approach would be to encourage scientific developments which, in a reasonable time period, would produce viable alternatives to using most fossil fuels, although it will never be possible to abandon them entirely.

A majority of those who are most vocal in support of irrational reactions to these issues tend to be young, and the problem is that they have been indulged by parents, who allow them to think that their opinions are both original and brilliant, while they have been brainwashed within our poor educational system into believing the nostrums of the extremists. Good teachers are intimidated by ideologues to not dare to oppose fashionable opinions, while bad ones are committed to the hard left.

If we are to survive as a society we must cease to tolerate disruption caused by those who shout the loudest. Empty vessels make the most noise.