Sunday, 25 May 2014
Despite continuous exposure in the mainstream media, none more so than the BBC, UKIP's self-proclaimed "earthquake" in the elections on May 23rd measured as a out-of-tune fart on the Richter scale. A fraction over 6% of the registered voters chose to vote for UKIP in the contested council wards, the party took control of no councils and it acquired only a handful of council seats in the large cities; 11% of registered voters chose UKIP in European elections, though many such votes were more anti-EU than pro-UKIP. However, the aforesaid media, led enthusiastically again by the BBC, is ejaculating over the "success" of UKIP, like an observer of Hans Christian Andersen's emperor who sees fine clothes and not flaccid nudity. The absurdity of the misinterpretation of UKIP's results in the elections isn't only shoddy journalism and a relentless desire to dumb-down political analysis; there is a clear objective.
In order to continue to fuel the unlimited appetite of capitalism's grotesques via the ongoing assault on public services including access to education and the privatisation of the NHS, and the accompanying and necessary removal of rights of opposition including union rights and access to legal aid, any future government requires some assistance from perceived public opinion, particularly in a coalition government. A convenient perception of public opinion is fed by many entities: media, spurious "think-tanks", sock puppet charities, etc. It is useful that UKIP is presented as having had considerable success in the elections in order to feed the view that the public support further unshackling of capitalist force.
UKIP's contribution to the nourishment of this convenient public opinion is enhanced by a simple con trick. Alongside genuine support for anti-immigration, anti-Islam, anti-gay, anti-trades' union, denial of workers' rights, privatisation of NHS, huge increase in workfare, tax cuts for wealthy, there are many votes for UKIP from people who have (too easily) allowed themselves to be conned by the depiction of the party as an alternative to the Westminster elite. Many of the latter group of voters have not switched their vote from another party - they are infrequent voters. Thus, UKIP isn't only a vehicle for the promotion of rancid prejudices, it presents its aims as distinct from those of the main political parties. Capitalism's enablers in the Tory and Labour parties, in the media and elsewhere are very happy to pretend to believe in this false distinction because casting UKIP apart from a Westminster elite means the latter can claim that their decisions and policies are in part driven by populist desires. A simple con trick whereby the criminal cites the convenient public opinion as permission to commit further crimes.
A raggedy esoteric clump of disaffected Tories, be-suited racists, people-haters and the living dead, Borg-like clowns with soulless smirks, Farage's mob's role is that simple con trick: Combine an unashamed assault on social progress and present it as an alternative. UKIP is capitalism's gimp.
Monday, 21 April 2014
Taking a break from the latest piss up, the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), has wet-farted some random thoughts on the backs of a couple of fag packets. It is four years since these twerps had a published manifesto; the last one was quietly deleted after its pro-wealthy contents and proposals violently contradicted UKIP's erroneous claim to represent ordinary people.
The new brief 'manifesto', (here: UKIP Farts), is anodyne and predictable while simultaneously, as is often the case with UKIP utterances, having the ambience of a spoof. Severe economic illiteracy, obsessive repetition and bizarre connections exhaust the document, all underpinned by shameless lies.
As everyone knows, UKIP has two policies: Stop immigration and leave the EU. UKIP's 'manifesto' juxtaposes these two policies with issues that form part of its campaign to win council seats, or, as UKIP repeatedly stresses, "local" services; indeed, the word "local" or its derivatives appears forty-one times in twelve pages. Whether this weird fusion of European election issues and council election issues is merely an attempt to save time and energy by not producing two manifestos or else is just general crass stupidity is not clear.
Ignorance and imbecilic obfuscation are the mentors of UKIP's document. Paul Sykes, the multi-millionaire owner of UKIP, continues to assume the party's target voters are thick and intellectually malleable.
Tuesday, 27 August 2013
Tomorrow, (Thursday August 28th 2013), David Cameron and his funny little bald friend will present to the House Of Commons the reasons why the British government want to attack Syria. In a memo, leaked by a backbench Tory MP with a small majority, Cameron and Hague bullet point the case for war. Said bullet points are reproduced below.
- The catastrophic failure of Osborne's economic plan is becoming increasingly difficult to hide underneath false statistics, so we need a better distraction.
- Arms manufacturers, major donors to the Conservative Party, are demanding a massive handout of tax-payer funding.
- Our good friends and donors in Saudi Arabia, Qatar and Bahrain are worried that a peaceful solution to conflict in Syria may encourage people to seek emancipation in those countries.
- Lynton Crosby said so.
- Israel, a persistent donor to individual Conservative MPs via sock puppets, wants an enhanced escalation of conflict in Syria in order to confuse its enemies and to help Israel's arms industry.
- We have to show we have bigger dicks than France.
Monday, 7 January 2013
The Rt. Hon. Grant Shapps MP, Conservative Party chairman, continues to execute welfare reform. His army of immoral minions populating the Conservative Party propose a variety of methods to reduce the cost of welfare. The justification for such reductions is inspired by highlighting behavioural anomalies of the unemployed that prove 'skiving' is so much more appealing than 'striving'. Recent examples of these welfare reductions are the distribution of food vouchers rather than money to some claimants and Westminster Council's plan to reduce benefits for obese people. Both these schemes prevent the claimant from spending tax-payers money on entertainment, fun and other perversities.
Now, Shapps has devised an umbrella policy that canopies all the anti-fun schemes. Entitled 'Misery: The Road To Wealth', it is a forthright and unashamed ejaculation of intent. Unemployment, 'Misery' states, is an avoidable temporary scenario and during such a scenario all energies of the claimant should be assigned to finding employment. Any deviation to fun is opposition to the jobhunt. Fatty junk food, or 'comfort' food as it is knowingly ascribed, smoking, drinking and other vices have already been identified by aforesaid schemes, and 'Misery' takes a holistic approach, tackling exhaustively all deviations to fun and entertainment, and even regulates against fun itself: "Happiness is incompatible with unemployment and any attempts to create joy in ones heart when claiming benefit is unacceptable. Happiness isn't free," is a key proclamation in 'Misery'.
'Misery' removes every temptation from the claimant that would divert his gaze from finding work. Only vital food is allowed, smoking and drinking alcohol are prohibited, as are televisions, music players and pulp fiction books. Pets must be put in specially-assigned pens or put down, and friends must be registered as 'jobhunt helpers'. Laughter, grinning, skipping and dancing are restricted in frequency and volume; however, the frequency and volume is variable and depends on sexuality of claimant and on cultural ancestry. Sexual release and satisfaction can occur only between 9pm and 11pm.
Monitoring adherence to the rules of 'Misery' will be straightforward as all claimants will be labelled as monitors and all will monitor one another. Monitors' debriefing sessions will occur daily. At these sessions monitors will be expected to supply violations of the rules of 'Misery' by other claimants; failure to supply any violations will mean benefit restrictions for the monitor.
Reaction to 'Misery' has been plentiful: Psychotic undead weirdo Iain Duncan-Smith is excited about 'Misery', "at its core, 'Misery' focuses the mind of the claimant; the removal of distractions is a huge benefit - no pun intended," and Murdoch rentboy Jeremy Hunt asserts "no-one enjoys seeing a scrounger with a smile on his face, it is an affront to hard-working skivvies." Rotund arsewipe Eric Pickles cannot control his orgasmic thrill: "I am absolutely massively huge about 'Misery'", and Chancellor George Osborne yelled "we are spanking these lazy bastards." For Labour, Ed Miliband promised that Labour would "continue", and Dianne Abbott said something about Sugar Puffs. Nick Clegg is the leader of Liberal Democrat Party.
Shapps, seen below in relaxed mood, hopes that 'Misery' will be injected into the unemployed soon.
Thursday, 27 December 2012
The Football Association (FA) has gifted a document to us, 'English Football’s Inclusion and Anti-Discrimination Action Plan', FA Action Plan. A response to the FA's comical mishandling of a few race-related incidents, un-elected FA chairman David Bernstein claims the Action Plan is "a commitment on behalf of English football to ensure the game is inclusive and free of discrimination".
The Action Plan is a long list of "commitments" from various administrative bodies within football, including leagues, players' union, managers' union and referees' association. However, it can be reduced to two "commitments": 'Positive discrimination' in the workforce in football, and equality/discrimination policing.
In a section entitled 'Widening the diversity of football’s workforce' the Action Plan includes "setting targets" for female and for disabled coaches, ensuring that 10% of coaches and 10% of referees are non-white, and a general desire to "capacity build the diversity of the football workforce" to ensure it "remains reflective of national demographics and does not fall below 10%". Clearly, race, religion, gender or sexuality should not be reasons to be obstructed in one's chosen career or occupation, but imposition of quotas and targets is absurd. Any fool can ensure that the decisions he makes regarding recruitment satisfy some arbitrary quota or target, but such adherence to a target does not eradicate any prejudice that may exist and is an dampener to ensuring the highest quality. Quotas and targets are fraudulent replies to prejudice. Further, as more than 10% of footballers are non-white, does the FA propose there should be more white footballers to address an lack of adherence to "national demographics"?
Equality and discrimination policing
In sport many of the normal accepted codes of etiquette and social niceties can be set aside when competing and when supporting one's team. Determining whether the divergence from polite behaviour becomes offensive is assessment informed by both an opinion and by intelligence. Commentary on race issues in football recently have ranged from a resolution of a dispute with a handshake, (Blatter), to police intrusion on every utterance, (Peter Herbert). In the Action Plan, in a section called 'Regulation and Reporting', the FA offers no clue how strict or otherwise it intends to be; in particular, it ascribes no definition of what it considers offensive or not. All it does is suggest that policing of whatever it thinks is unacceptable will be more easily available.
Social media use
Social media such as twitter, facebook, message boards, and blogging provide a platform for free exchange of ideas and for information to be passed on quickly. The use of social media as a subversive tool has true relevance. Unsurprisingly, such freedom of speech is problematic for many, including governments. However, it is convenient for a government if the call for social media control comes from a third party. The Action Plan has a section called 'How government can support the plan' within which is a bullet point on social media: "Legislation and other action to ensure greater responsibility is taken by social media companies to monitor and take action when their platforms are used inappropriately". Of course, when the FA says how government can support the plan, in the case of social media control the FA means how the FA can support the government.
'English Football’s Inclusion and Anti-Discrimination Action Plan' is a woolly, vacuous, bloated document, imbued with hideous garbled PR-speak and Bernstein's predilection for mangling the English language; one of its "commitments" is misguided, the second is undefined. The only point of note is the willingness of the FA to pretend to be asking the government for social media control that the government would like to impose.
Friday, 14 September 2012
One of the pointless Middleton sisters, Kate, has been photographed sunbathing and the photographs published in the French edition of a gossip magazine, Closer.
This is an event of no interest at all. However, the British media is full of bizarre condemnations of the publication of said photos. The frenzy of faux outrage includes a lot of whingeing about her privacy.
Middleton married into the royal scroungers in order to live a life of luxury at tax-payers' expense. She has no right to any privacy at all.
Tuesday, 7 August 2012
Slick persuasive Alex Salmond may succeed. Old-fashioned Scottish nationalism is insufficient to attain a positive vote for independence, but the continuing shambolic and incompetent behaviour of the British government is making Salmond's goal easily achievable. The array of inadequate ministers of state, the sequence of laughable about-turns in policy, the exposure of the rampant criminality in the banking system and the undiminished perception of utter detachment have weakened severely the integrity of a British government. A Scottish alternative becomes more appealing each day.
Allegedly, in principle, the Tories oppose Scottish independence. However, principles are often the cheapest items to buy. If Scotland became independent then, without all the Labour seats from Scottish constituencies, the Conservative party would be certain to have an endless tenure as the British government.
An independent Scotland may be right for Scottish people, but it would be hell for the remainder of Britain who would be swiftly downtrodden and shat upon by an unchallenged Conservative majority in parliament.