Unionist Nigel Farage ducks the English Question. At a meeting of the Institute for Government his keynote speech was followed by questions. Listen to what he says!

Nigel Farage ducks the English Question! Again!

English Nationalists take note!

Here is the key clip >>>>

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WqQe3KJDhQY&list=UULXT-HuPORYWUC57YbKryQg&index=1

At (the 23rd June 2014) event, Nigel Farage ... spoke at the Institute for Government on the role of the state and how (UKIP) would run a government.

Mr Farage opened by acknowledging that .... UKIP was highly unlikely to form the next government (but he claimed) it would be in a position to affect other parties’ manifestos and may even gain some MPs at the next general election. Its view on the role of government was, he said, potentially very important.

See more at: http://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/events/nigel-farage-keynote-speech-role-state#sthash.sNZSFzyr.dpuf

12th July is English National Unity Day - On the 12th July 927AD

Eamont in an old map

Our Press Release:- 12th July is English National Unity Day

On the 12th July 927AD King Athelstan of the Royal House of Wessex, was recognised as the first King of all England at the Council of Eamont, Cumberland. The English Democrats will be holding celebrations on the 12th July 2014 across England to mark English Unity Day and to call for an English Unity National Holiday.

Robin Tilbrook, Chairman of the English Democrats said:-

“This 12th July will be the one thousand and eighty seventh anniversary of English Unity. It was the day on which King Athelstan realised the dream of the Venerable Bede and Alfred the Great and completed the mission of the Royal House of Wessex to unite England into a single united Nation State.

“England is by far the oldest Nation State in Europe and arguably the oldest Nation State on earth.

“The 12th July is an anniversary of history and pride for all patriotic Englishmen and Englishwomen and should be celebrated with all the enthusiasm that the Americans bring to their Independence Day or the French bring to Bastille Day.”

Notes to Editors
The 2011 Census showed that England has over 32 million (32,007,983) people (or 60.4%) who have stated they have only English National Identity. A further 4.8 million (4,820,181) people (or 9.1%) stated that their National Identity is 'English and British'.

In sharp contrast with this nearly 70% being English there were only a mere 10 million (10,171,834) people (or 19.2%) who claimed to be 'British Only'. A substantial proportion of these 'British Only' appear, from cross referencing with the results of the Census' ethnicity question, to be of non English ethnicity (ie Scottish, Welsh or Irish).

The Office for National Statistics nationality statistics can be found here)>>>http://www.ons.gov.uk/ons/publications/re-reference-tables.html?edition=tcm%3A77-286262. The Nationality results are at: 2011 Census: KS202EW National identity, local authorities in England and Wales.

Also demand for English Independence is increasing rapidly in England and although reactive to the movement for Scottish Independence it is not dependent on it. The June 2011 ComRes survey done for the BBC showed that then there was 36% support for England to be a fully Independent Country irrespective of the result of the Scottish Independence Referendum later this year.

BIASED OR A JOKE? THE NEWSPAPER THAT SUPPORTS EDDIE IZZARD FOR MAYOR OF LONDON

IS A NEWSPAPER THAT SUPPORTS EDDIE IZZARD FOR MAYOR OF LONDON BIASED OR A JOKE?

The London 'newspaper', the Evening Standard, recently announced that it is supporting the unfunny Leftist 'comedian' Eddie Izzard to be the next Mayor of London for Labour. So much for their editorial team's commonsense - clearly a JOKE! But what about their BIAS?

I recently put out this:-

“Scottish Independence: London and Scotland need each other” Debate - June 30 in London's Guild Hall London Evening Standard | Scotland

"So do London and Scotland need each other in a Union, or will both manage just fine if Scotland votes for independence? That is the topic for a major public debate, jointly hosted by the Evening Standard and the City of London at Guildhall. Leading public figures taking part as panellists (sic) include:-" NOT ONE SINGLE ENGLISHMAN OR ENGLISHWOMAN!

Parody and/or Propaganda? Bias and/or B.......?"

As ever with the usual Media/Political Class arrogance the event went ahead unchanged and the CEP staged a very effective demonstration as reported here:-

Three members of the Campaign team for the CEP attended the Evening Standard Scottish Independence event in London on Monday night (30 June 2014) where six Scottish speakers (three Brit Scots and three Nationalist Scots) debated the relationship between England and Scotland. Not one clearly defined English voice was included on the debating panel. We highlighted the incongruity of a debate where only one side is represented.

Just imagine if six Englishman went to Edinburgh to debate Scotland's relationship with England and suggested that Scotland could be better governed by breaking her up into smaller pieces, or regionalised. There would be outrage and rightly so. As such the debate was biased and missed several obvious points. To show how this debate failed the people of England we stood with a huge St George cross, mounted on a 10ft pole at the back of the Guildhall where the event was held and stuck tape over our mouths. We were mentioned by the debating panel no less than three times but still we were otherwise ignored.

We have attempted to contact the Evening Standard's editor, both before and after the event but currently we have been met with silence. Maybe it’s the silence of the guilty. IF NOT IT SHOULD BE!

I was asked to comment by the Evening Standard and did so as follows:-

All English Nationalists should join the English Democrats in supporting a YES vote in Scotland on the 18th September because it will trigger the dissolution of the United Kingdom. Since the end of the era great power politics, the UK has been a persistent drag on the English Nation.

The United Kingdom State is expensive, incompetently authoritarian and vain-gloriously addicted to its great power status whilst draining the wealth of England with its debts, its vanity projects, its international interventionism and its failure to focus on the best interests of the English Nation.

For the mathematically minded, the UK’s dissolution can be put as a formula:- E + S = GB therefore GB – S = E.

As the EU Commission has regularly confirmed it is only the UK which is a member of the EU. This means dissolution of the UK means that we are also all automatically out of the EU. Also the debts are those of the UK and not England or Scotland. So the English Nation will get independence not only from the UK and from its debts but also from the EU in one easy step.

The UK failure to operate in the best interests of English people is easily shown by the extra £10,000 it spends on the average Scottish family.

If this extra money tempts Scots to vote NO then all the so called Unionist Parties are promising them yet further Devolution so all the unfairness and discrimination against the English Nation will quickly get far worse.

So come on Scotland vote YES on the 18th September and give us all a fresh start as friendly neighbours outside the UK and its debts and outside of the EU!

Here is the Standard's report. Not only no mention of the CEP or the lack of an English voice but also an emasculated version of my comment at the end. So never mind Greeks bearing Gifts - watch out for the Standard telling tall tales!

Scottish Independence: England must send 'love letter' north of the border

David Churchill      Published: 01 July 2014

England needs to send a “love letter” to Scotland if it wants to save the marriage of the UK, a major debate on independence heard.

The plea to show Scots more respect and affection came from Penrith and The Border MP Rory Stewart and human rights lawyer Helena Kennedy QC at a packed Guildhall for the Evening Standard debate ahead of September’s referendum.

“What is England doing?” asked Tory MP Mr Stewart. “It seems to be dealing with the situation much as if your partner tells you they are going to leave you.

In the chair: Emily Maitlis directed the passionate debate at Guildhall (Picture: Nigel Howard) “England seems to be doing one of two things, either saying ‘oh you’ll never be able to afford it, you’re never going to be able to go out on your own, you’ll regret it, you’ll come back soon’.

“Or even worse, we seem to be sitting in our armchair saying ‘well, it’s up to you if you want to do it, but it’s nothing to do with me’.

“If we wish to keep this country together, we need to say something else. We need to say ‘we love you’.”

The panel, chaired by the BBC Newsnight presenter Emily Maitlis, included Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander, Scottish National Party MP Stewart Hosie, businesswoman Michelle Thomson and Scottish comedian Hardeep Singh Kohli.

Baroness Kennedy, a “proud” Scot who would “hate” to see a severance, urged: “We have to say to them, ‘your contribution is vital and hasn’t been listened to enough’, let’s talk about liberal democracy, let’s talk about the values we all share?…?that’s the love letter that will bring Scots together with the English to create a better kind of United Kingdom.”

Today, a new poll claimed Scottish voters are turning away from Alex Salmond’s dream of independence. Excluding the don’t knows, the Yes vote is trailing by 39 per cent to 61 percent, said the YouGov/Times survey. That was a shift from 42 and 58 in March, suggesting the No campaign is pulling ahead.

Scotland’s ability to control its own tax revenues, welfare and economic growth were at the heart of passionate clashes in last night’s debate. Mr Alexander promised extra powers if Scotland stays, including control over income tax, capital gains and inheritance taxes — giving it the power to raise “over half” of revenues.

He added: “Nationalism is fundamentally about putting up barriers, liberalism is about taking those barriers down. In the UK we have the best of both worlds, let’s keep it that way.”

But Mr Hosie retorted: “What we are seeking is not segregation, it’s not ethnic nationalism.

“It’s about equipping our [Scottish] government with all the tools and powers it needs to improve the life chances of the people of Scotland.”

He said Scotland was not dependent on London or the UK, saying that for the last 50 years “every man woman and child in Scotland has contributed £1,500 more every year in tax than the UK average”.

Ms Thomson, representing the business community, said: “As Vince Cable said, London is becoming a giant sucking machine draining the life out of the rest of the country. Does London need Scotland to thrive? No. Does Scotland need London to thrive? No.”

Hardeep Singh Kohli joked that hatred for the English dissipated “a few weeks ago” when England was knocked out of the World Cup, adding: “The reason why Scottish independence is so important is?…?we [Scots] know who we are. The single biggest beneficiary of Scottish independence will be England. Your body politic is rotting, your House of Commons is full of charlatans and thieves. That’s the truth.”

For the Union

Helena Kennedy, Barrister and member of the Lords:

“I am a proud Scot. I love Scotland. But I love London and I am very clear it is my city. I love its diversity, entrepreneurialism, cultural capacity, pulse and its power. This city is very much one young Scots look to and are stimulated by and they bring the experience they’ve had with them. I would hate to see a severance of the links. The cost of structural change is an issue. No one has clear figures as to what it would cost to create embassies around the world, the creation of security services an independent Scotland would need. The way forward is about working together to solve the problems that are confronting us in the face of globalisation.”

Danny Alexander. Chief Secretary to the Treasury:

“We in Scotland face the most important decision we will ever make. A decision in which there is no going back. We are much better, stronger and influential together than apart. Scotland, England, Wales and Northern Ireland are the most successful family of nations ever known, with a stronger future united. Scotland is a hugely successful nation. London is a hugely successful city. And we’re successful because we are part of one United Kingdom. Success comes, for example, from the deep-rooted links between London and Scotland, deep links in science, finance and the arts.”

Rory Stewart, Tory MP for Penrith and the Border:

“This campaign has unlocked a real energy in Scottish politics. Scots have never been so serious and so engaged, in fact in some ways coming back into England can feel like a deflating experience. What we need to find is not an event that is temporary, 15 minutes of holding hands, but something much more permanent, something symbolic but which in the end has to be the rebuilding of our country, which recognises that in the end the arguments are on the side of union, not division. The challenge is reaching out and embracing the North and embracing the areas that are doing less well [than London].”

For Independence

Hardeep Singh Kohli, Scottish comedian:

“This isn’t about our hatred of the English, that dissipated when you got knocked out [of the World Cup]. I’m the child of an immigrant. My people come from north-west India, surely by extension of a ‘better together’ argument, India should have stayed together with Britain? There was a documentary on BBC Scotland some years ago about what the English really think of the Scots, and the reality is, not a great deal.We’re just not on their radar. We know who we are. The biggest beneficiary of Scottish independence will be England. Your body politic is rotting, your House of Commons is full of charlatans and thieves.”

Michelle Thomson, MD Business for Scotland:

“Given that we recognise the Scots as a nation and the current UK as a grouping of nations, then we must also recognise the right of those nations within that union to exercise self-determination. London is an economic powerhouse, perhaps even a city state. As Vince Cable said, London is becoming a giant sucking machine draining the life out of the rest of the country. Shouldn’t Scotland embrace the healthy ambition that suggests it should be so much more? Independence is about the sovereign nation of Scotland taking accountability.”

Stewart Hosie, SNP MP:

“Do we need each other? Probably. Every nation, every city, every region on the face of the planet is interconnected. We all need each other in every way. But what we are seeking is not segregation, it’s not ethnic nationalism, it’s not putting up a wall, we’re not going to dig a trench across the border. Independence is normal, absolutely normal. The ability of our nation to elect its own government, to get the government it elects, every time, not just some of the time, and for that government to have all the powers every other government takes for granted, to improve the lot of the Scottish people.”

Letters to the editor: The issues in the Scottish debate

Last night’s debate illustrated the myth of the Scottish Yes campaign’s supposed positivity.
Stewart Hosie MP’s defence of a break-up on the grounds of “increased prosperity, social justice and fairness” is an exclusive vision of prosperity and social justice for Scots alone.
The Yes side argued that the UK is broken, corrupt and finished, and Scotland is therefore justified in seeking an exit. Even if the UK fitted that description, it would be even more reason for staying together and cooperating to find solutions in future.
The main policies proposed by the Scottish government (tax “competition”, possible national debt default, North Sea oil reallocation, Trident relocation, for example) is to extract resources from UK taxpayers and population. Trying to frame it as a struggle for liberty and freedom is beyond absurd.
A vote for No is a vote against intolerance, exclusivity and division. I hope the majority of Scots, for all our sakes, feel the same way.
Ollie Shipway

Since the end of the era of great power politics, the UK has been a persistent drag on the English nation.
The UK State, vaingloriously addicted to great power status, drains England’s wealth through prodigal spending and international interventionism.
As the European Commission has regularly confirmed, it is the UK not its constituent nations which is a member of the EU. Scottish independence also means the untying of the relationship with Northern Ireland, which postdates the 1707 Union of Parliaments. The dissolution of the UK by this means implies we are automatically out of the EU.
The UK’s failure to operate in the best interests of English people is amply demonstrated by the extra £10,000 it spends on the average Scottish family.
The promise of yet further devolution by all the main parties in the event of a No vote means all the unfairness and discrimination against the English is set to worsen.
All proud Englishmen and women should hope Scotland votes Yes in September to give us all a fresh start as friendly neighbours outside the UK.
Robin Tilbrook, English Democrats

Here is a link to the original >>> http://www.standard.co.uk/news/politics/scottish-independence-england-should-send-scotland-a-love-letter-to-save-our-marriage-9576568.html?=version1

No Murdo! Keep your nose out of English Business!

PRESS RELEASE

No Murdo!  Keep your nose out of English Business!

Murdo Fraser, the Conservatives' “Enterprise spokesman” in the Scottish Parliament told Glasgow University on Thursday that devolution to the UK nations must be balanced with greater powers to the English regions.

He claimed it would be "straightforward" to create a federal system for the nations by devolving tax-varying powers but full UK federalism would not work "on the basis of England as a single unit".

"It is quite possible to envisage a network of strong cities, or city regions, emerging to which powers could be devolved.”

"We can then add into the mix historic counties with a strong local identity, such as Yorkshire or Cornwall.”

"We do have areas such as the North-East or North-West, or East Midlands, which already have a coherent regional identity, and very quickly the map of England is filled up with a patchwork of local units, maybe not identical in geographic size, population or wealth, but all having an identifiable local focus."

Federalism would also resolve the "West Lothian Question" - the right of non-English MPs to vote on purely English matters - and reform of the Lords, Mr Fraser claims.

According to the Government’s own MacKay Commission Report there is much less support for breaking England up into such “Regions” than for outright English Independence from the UK. 

Perhaps Murdo Fraser MSP is promoting this new attempt to break up England for the same reason as the Liberal Democrats, “Charlie” Kennedy told Dunfermline Lib Dems in 1999 that he supported Regionalisation for England because it was “bringing into question the idea of England itself!”

Robin Tilbrook, the Chairman of the English Democrats said:-  “We don’t want Scottish politicians telling the English that England should be broken up. My message to any such Scottish politicians is keep your nose out of English business.”

Robin continued:- “The sooner the UK is dissolved the quicker the Nations of the former UK can live as friendly neighbours!”

Robin also said:-  “Dissolution of the UK is why the English Democrats are supporting a ‘YES’ vote for Scotland on the 18^th September.  Mr Murdo Fraser claims that “UK federalism would not work on the basis of England as a single unit”.  I say ‘so be it’!  Let’s dissolve a Union which  is in any case well past its sell by date!”

Robin Tilbrook

Chairman,

The English Democrats

The Scot’s poll can give hope to English patriots

The Scot’s poll can give hope to English patriots

I read with interest recently an article by Irvine Welsh, a Scottish author and socialist. The article published in the Evening Standard and was entitled “Scots poll can give hope to the Left across Britain. That issue is more than independence – this is about the journey of modernisation of these island’s political systems”

It seems to me that much of what Irvine Welsh says could be adapted for England, with a new title as above “The Scot’s poll can give hope to English patriots”. The article starts as follows:-

“Something strange and beautiful is happening in Scotland. The country is re-inventing itself from the inside out. People are talking about their futures as if they actually have them. It is that exhilarating, intoxicating, occasionally exasperating phenomena at work: welcome back participatory democracy. How these islands have missed you! To recap what’s happened in your absence: Everything has been set up in favour of a small, trans-national global elite. Most citizens are being or have already been reduced to the level of poorly paid, debt ridden servitude. Yes, many are still unemployed, but many more are underemployed, over-employed and set to work on barely liveable wages.

Within this context, looking at traditional indices of economic prosperity like unemployment rates, inflation, GNP is severely limited, as those don’t account for the reality of the past 35 years. The growing penury and financial instability suffered by everybody outside of society’s elites is the true political narrative of our times. It needs to be addressed locally and globally. This hasn’t happened in the UK. The main political parties remain complicit in the transfer of resources from our citizens to the super rich elite, under the advocacy of a private media, and through the constant lobbying of elected representatives. The “pragmatism” touted by politicians is one that solely addresses how to manage this movement of resources to the wealthy, to the constant reward of their corporate emissaries.

As a nation state the United Kingdom was an imperialist construct, and to this day it retains these undemocratic trappings: a hereditary principle, an un-elected second chamber, no written constitution and a ruling elite drawn from a narrow, privately educated strata of society …”

Irvine Welsh carries on in this way which many English nationalists would recognise as being equally true of England. Below is the whole article. I have inserted my comments in brackets.

Something strange and beautiful is happening in Scotland. The country is reinventing itself from the inside out. People are talking about their futures as if they actually have them. It’s that exhilarating, intoxicating and occasionally exasperating phenomenon at work: welcome back participatory democracy. How these islands have missed you.

To recap what’s happened in your absence: everything has been set up in favour of a small, transnational global elite. Most citizens are being or have already been reduced to the level of poorly paid, debt-ridden servitude. Yes, many are still unemployed, but many more are underemployed, overemployed and set to work on barely liveable wages.

Within this context, looking at traditional indices of economic prosperity like unemployment rates, inflation, GNP is severely limited, as those don’t account for the reality of the past 35 years. The growing penury and financial instability suffered by everyone outside of society’s elites is the true political narrative of our times. It needs to be addressed locally and globally.

This hasn’t happened in the UK. The main political parties remain complicit in the transfer of resources from our citizens to this super-rich elite, under the advocacy of a private media, and through the constant lobbying of elected representatives. The “pragmatism” touted by politicians is one that solely addresses how to manage this movement of resources to the wealthy, through the constant rewarding of their corporate emissaries.

As a nation state the United Kingdom was an imperialist construct, and to this day it retains these undemocratic trappings: a hereditary principle, an unelected second chamber, no written constitution and a ruling elite drawn from a narrow, privately educated strata of society.

In Scotland, voters have traditionally sent a block of Labour MPs to Westminster to represent them. Labour originated in Scotland as the party of Keir Hardie and had a strong home rule ethos. (Kier Hardie first made his name and came to prominence as a campaigner against mass immigration into his area of Scotland. In his day the mass immigration in question was of unskilled and semi-skilled Irish workers. He led a noisy campaign against importation of Irish workers which was reducing the wages paid to Scotland’s). 

 As it grew from a party of protest to one of power, Labour changed its view: the best way to govern was to send representatives down to London. Thus a career structure emerged, whereby “ambitious” politicians could move from local council to a safe Labour seat, then perhaps become a minister. When the party lurched to the Right in the Eighties, it was usurped on the “Left” by the SNP, a bourgeois nationalist party which had taken on social-democratic trappings.

Since then we’ve seen the rapid de-industrialisation of Britain, the sale of national assets, the dismantling of the welfare state, the squandering of oil revenues on dole payments and bread-and-circus foreign wars, and the steady erosion of the democratic, participatory spirit in politics.

Politicians changed. They were less likely to have trade union, industry or even professional backgrounds, more inclined to be career politicians, and people are now more alienated from them than ever. These changes took place under both Labour and Conservative governments.

Now Scotland, through the independence debate, is leading the way in the reassertion of the democratic ethos. The actual result of the referendum in September, while massively important, is less significant than the fact that this process has gained such traction.

Whether Scotland votes Yes or No, its people have got used to having a say in how their lives are run, outside of the self-interested and morally bankrupt party system. The drive for more of the same will continue. (The same could happen in England if we were successful in getting our independence referendum, or may be even if the Scots vote ‘YES’ and England is thereby reborn as an independent State following the dissolution of the UK.)

English protest politics have been of the Right in recent years: “Eurosceptic” Conservatives, Ukip, the BNP and EDL. But without the distraction of Scotland, England will have to look seriously at what it is and what it aspires to be. I would expect that narrative to change and the country to shake off its weary attachment to the cabal of centre-Right/Right-wing parties and their tired platitudes. Rather than enabling its political progression, Scotland holds England back by sending it more lobby-fodder careerists invested in zero substantive change. (England’s political traditions and culture are different from Scotland’s and I would think in any case the way which our politics will develop post-independence is likely to be very different to Scotland’s. I would not necessarily expect, as someone as steeped in the Scottish political culture as Mr Irvine is, to be fully aware of the difference or necessarily the different circumstances which brought it about.)

The Yes campaign’s biggest strengths are its vigorous grass-roots support, mainly from people who have felt disenfranchised by party politics. They are bolstered by the activities of the No campaign, with its unappetising coalition of the elite, the self-interested and the perennially servile, with the honourable but misguided exception of those who still believe, in spite of all evidence to the contrary, that the British state can deliver social progress and economic justice.

The No campaign’s main asset is people’s intrinsic fear of change. The anti-independence campaign is, in tone and substantive argument, the same as any other throughout history. It seeks to make administrative procedural arrangements of varying awkwardness into compelling reasons for maintaining the status quo. The same arguments, citing different processes, were used in America, Africa and Ireland (and practically every independent nation in the world) with the same dire consequences predicted if they were ignored. Of course they were, and yes, life went on much the same as ever.

It isn’t in the nature of any state to want to cede territory but it begs the broader question: why is the British Establishment so desperate to keep Scotland? Well, if there’s a Yes vote, north of the border instantly gets rid of the hereditary second chamber, the City of London and Britain’s public-school elites, all those forces superfluous to good government but expensively grandfathered into our current system. There will also be a proper constitution drawn up, conferring citizen rights and designating responsibilities. It’s inevitable that people in England will then look north and think: “I fancy a bit of that.”

So Scottish independence is about a lot more than self-determination for that country: it is about the genuine modernisation of these islands’ political systems, conducted through the restitution of participative democracy. I don’t know whether September will offer up a vote of hope or fear. But I am convinced that those who pushed themselves to the forefront of the debate on their futures are unlikely to cede that power back to the elites, as represented by the Camerons, Cleggs and Milibands of this world. And that might be contagious.

(Here is the link to the original>>> http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/irvine-welsh-the-scots-poll-can-give-hope-to-the-left-across-britain-9559111.html

Shhh! Lib Dems are about!

There seems to be something about Liberal Democrats that makes them hate England. At the moment they are, I don’t think the word is too strong to use, conspiring to find another way of breaking England up into “Regions”.

Their behind the scenes activity in think-tanks and discussion groups is all about trying to find another way of energising the “Regionalisation” of England. Their talk is all about trying to confuse people between talking about counties and “Regions” in the same breath so that people do not look at the small print to see that in fact what is intended is nothing to do with counties but everything to do with “Regionalisation”. In their desperation they are even trying to say that the North-east referendum result was not a vote against “Regionalistion”!

Now we have two Liberal Democrat Lords, Lord Purvis of Tweed and Lord William Wallace of Saltaire who arranged a debate for Monday, 16th June in the House of Lords entitled “Plans for further de-centralisation of the UK in the event of a “No” vote in the Scottish Independence Referendum”. Observers of the oily disingenuousness of our LibDem political masters will find no surprise that the key element of the discussion was about how to break up England.

The names that they have chosen to give their titles suggest that these two noble Lords loyalties might lie North of the Border, but Lord William Wallace of Saltaire is in fact an academic who has spent most of his life in England, but has distinguished himself politically by his desire to advance the cause of European integration for which reason he has been awarded the Légion d'Honneur.

So far as Lord Purvis of Tweed is concerned, the Scottish newspaper, the Sunday Post, reported on the 20th October 2013 that “Purvis returns as Lord Jazzer despite ballot box defeat” who reported that “Purvis, a MSP until the SNP landslide in 2011 is a man steeped in constitutional concerns. Nick Clegg has made him Lord Purvis of Tweed to act as a bridge-man between the Westminster and Holyrood parties. Even his title straddles the border. Said Purvis:- “I’ll bring the respect of someone who has been a Member of the Scottish Parliament as a fan of the procedures in Holyrood. It will provide a platform to work on the growing middle ground as an alternative to independence.”” The paper rightly continues “The problem for Purvis, with his talk of accountability, democracy and constitution, is that on Tuesday he will don an outrageous ermine cloak and take his place in the least accountable or democratic place in British politics. This is, after all, a man rejected by the voters returning to front line politics without the need for an election.”

So there we have it, the classic Westminster farce in which people talk about democracy, accountability, citizenship and community, whilst trying to work to deny the English their sense of a national community.

Never forget that a former LibDem leader, Charlie Kennedy told an enthusiastic meeting of Liberal Democrats in Dunfermline in 1999 that he supported the break-up of England into Regions because he said “In England Regionalisation is calling into question the idea of England itself”!

So what should an Englishman do when the LibDems are about? Perhaps we could use US President Teddy Roosevelt’s famous saying: “speak softly and carry a big stick”? 

What do you think?


 

Karl Marx’s views of England and the English

Karl Marx’s views of England and the English

I have recently been reading a book about Karl Marx. Although I have read some of his works before I have never read a full biography of him. I could heartily recommend, as an interesting and informative read:- KARL MARX by Francis Wheen.

For those interested in Karl Marx’s views of England and the English, he was, of course, one of those refugees, a bit like, Abu Hamza, who lived here for many years but yet never integrated, nor had any great love for us. Just consider the following comments on page 142:-

“After brooding on the lessons of the previous year, (Marx) published a revised revolutionary menu on 1 January 1849:

The overthrow of the bourgeoisie in France, the triumph of the French working class, the emancipation of the working class in general, is therefore the rallying cry of European liberation.

But England, the country that turns whole nations into its proletarians, that takes the whole world within its immense embrace …England seems to be the rock against which the revolutionary waves break, the country where the new society is stifled in the womb.

Every social upheaval in France was bound to be thwarted by the industrial and commercial power of the English middle class, ‘and only a world war can overthrow the Old England, as only this can provide the Chartists, the party of the organised English workers, with the conditions for a successful rising against their gigantic oppressors!. This seasonal game of consequences – which, more than a century later, would come to be known as the domino theory – led to an inescapable and apocalyptic conclusion. ‘The table of contents for 1849 reads: Revolutionary uprising of the French working class, world war.”