Total Visits

Wednesday, 21 May 2014



In this EU election the media have openly behaved with shameless and blatant bias in consistently attacking UKIP as if their role was purely as propagandarists for the British Political Establishment and have no role as a public information service. More understandably the British Establishment parties have also behaved appallingly.

The attacks were very obviously grossly unfair, but also to anyone who has carefully thought about the spectrum of opinion amongst our People is likely to be highly counterproductive.

For instance, they regularly insisted that UKIP is racist for being against mass immigration. Interestingly UKIP has repeatedly said it is not against mass immigration merely against the EU making the rules on immigration. This much more technical and constitutionally orientated point is of course of far less interest to a large proportion of the population than being outright against mass immigration. So in this situation the media and Establishment have unintentionally and ironically given a dramatic boost to UKIP!

One of the significant things however in this election has been that the Leftist, multi-culturalist, internationalist, globalist, “diversity” obsessed, media luvvies have come out from cover and exposed themselves and their agenda to the extent that hardly anybody that I have met for some weeks now has failed to notice just how biased and politically attached the media has become.

Indeed, in a recent comment on the Daily Politics Show, Andrew Neal told that particularly objectionable and shrill, multi-culturalist, Mary Creagh, Labour MP, that in the last few weeks the media had thrown all the usual smears against UKIP but that their support had proved “teflon” and that it was simply not working. The most interesting aspect of this comment is of course the open acknowledgement that the media as a whole had adopted a deliberate strategy of trying to influence the outcome of the EU elections.

Some people have said to me that the media should be all about reporting the facts so that people can make up their minds. Whilst of course this would be a good thing if they were like that, the simple reality is that that is not at all the way in which the media behaves, any more than our MPs behave as if they are democratic representatives of the People! (rather than our masters!)

The media has degenerated into a state where its commitment to democracy is mere lip service and its actual aim is to push its own agenda. The most brilliant exponent of this fact of British political life is that of Peter Oborne who is the author of the idea that we are in fact ruled by a “Political Class” (

This political class includes the most important people within the “national” mass media and also establishment party politicians and who do not compete with each other but rather cooperate. Such differences that there appears to be between them are usually both minuscular and concocted.

An interesting insight into the consequences of people at last opening their eyes to what is actually going on around them is given in the article below in which the two Leftist academic authors fret that the “white working class”, who have so long continued to imagine that the multi-culturalist, internationalist, pro mass immigration, Europhile, Labour Party in any way represents their interests, might be now awakening.

The realisation that Labour no longer cares for them, which inevitably accompanies the first time that such voters have not drifted along and voted tribally as their father and grandfather before them will, the authors think, and I would agree, lead to all such people never again idly voting upon the old tribal basis, but instead they will be starting to think which party they cast their vote for.

What do you think?

Here is the article:-

Ukip has divided the left, not the right, and cut Labour off from its 'old' support

Labour and Ukip voters agree on more economic issues than you might think, presenting a strategic problem for Ed Miliband

According to conventional wisdom, Ukip has "divided the right". By targeting Europe, immigration and politicians in Westminster, Nigel Farage is tearing off a section of the Conservative base that David Cameron desperately needs if he is to triumph in 2015.

But while it is true that Ukip is currently winning over most of its support from people who voted Conservative in 2010, this actually tells us less than commentators often claim.

In 2010 Labour was at a low ebb, Gordon Brown was extremely unpopular and traditional Labour voters were angry about immigration and the financial crisis. Defining "the right" as 2010 Conservative voters is therefore risky. A lot of those who voted Conservative in 2010 may not have been natural Conservatives at all, backing Cameron despite their misgivings about his party, as a vote against a failed and unpopular Labour government.

A more sensible way of defining left and right is in ideological terms. Ever since Clement Attlee's 1945 Labour victory, British politics has been structured around a conflict over the economy and the proper role of the state.

The left has favoured higher taxation, redistribution and greater state intervention. The right has favoured free markets, low taxes and a small state. This is still a central dividing line today.

Ed Miliband's most celebrated policy announcement called for state regulation of gas and electricity prices, and he has shown a distrust of big business, and a desire for greater taxation of the rich, and greater government help for the less well-off. The Conservatives, meanwhile, retain their traditional faith in free markets and private enterprise.

If Ukip is just dividing the right then we would expect to see Ukip voters falling consistently on the Conservative side of this longstanding divide. But as our chart below shows (based on new data from the British Election Study), the opposite is in fact true.

An average of 71% of Ukip voters agree with five leftwing ideological statements, far above the Conservatives (43%) or even the Liberal Democrats (65%). They are only a little behind Labour (81%).

When Ed Miliband argues that big business takes advantage of ordinary people, employees on zero-hour contracts are being exploited by management, that the rich exempt themselves from the rules that apply to others, and that ordinary workers are not benefitting from a recovery for the rich, Ukip voters agree with him. On these core economic issues, Farage and Ukip do not divide the right. They divide the left.

This raises an obvious but also awkward question for progressives. If Ukip's struggling, pessimistic and left-behind voters find these economic messages appealing, why are they supporting Farage, not Miliband?

The problem for Labour is that these voters no longer think about politics in general, or Labour in particular, in economic terms. Labour has encouraged this: New Labour played down traditional leftwing ideology in favour of social liberalism and pragmatic centrism. Now many voters with longstanding "old left" economic values associate Labour more with "new left" social liberalism: feminism, multiculturalism and support for immigration.

Ukip's rise has exposed this division on the left and made it harder to heal. Many of the "new left" voters attracted to Labour by its social liberalism cannot stomach Ukip voters' strong opposition to immigration, which they regard as an expression of ignorance and prejudice, and so refuse to engage with "old left" voters on the economic issues where the two groups share common ground.

Conversely, "old left" voters retain a strong distrust of Labour's middle-class elites, after decades of feeling ignored and marginalised as New Labour chased the middle-class swing vote, and cannot abide lectures from privileged "new left" activists about the virtues of immigration and diversity.

Tony Blair's winning recipe in 1997 was to bury the traditional "old left" Labour ideology, gambling that he could expand Labour's coalition without losing traditional support, as the voters who endorsed it had nowhere else to go. Nigel Farage's rise has made this Blairite balancing act impossible. Ukip has divided the left, splitting the old from the new, and cutting Labour off from struggling voters it seeks to champion.

(Click here to see the original >>> ).


  1. dateline - Weds. 21/5/2014
    Guardian - John Harris, "the existence of the English Democrats, a rather nasty pro-English political party, who advocate an English parliament [has a sharp significance.for the use of the word English] - they're a kind of Poundland Ukip".
    Also in g2, 'A New England', Billy Bragg calls for an English parliament in York (or Bristol), and Frank Field MP calls for an English parliament in York (or Manchester)
    Harris is wrong about Ukip which has no interest in England or Englishness. the clue is in the name "UK" Independence Party.
    Ukip having mopped up the right wing of the Tory Party in the south who think of themselve as British, is now targetting the working classs Labour voters in the north who think of themselves as English. These disgruntled Labour voters are the English Democrats natural supporters. The English Democrats will languish until they wake up to that fact and stop wasting their efforts on the south.

  2. Once again, the English Democrats have failed to contest where they should. The latest failure is the Newark by-election. The seem to want to give Ukip a leg up in the north.
    Is there no-one who understands strategy among the party's leaders?.

  3. Yep ! shrewd assessment UKIP breaks the ice and " The English "
    swim up the middle ( with thermals on )wriggle through like a Salmon !

    1. Yes, but don't let Ukip's icebreaker swamp the English Democrats' frigate.
      Ukip's votes have come from "Old Labour" and "Traditional Conservatives". It cannot contain the two.
      Ukip is full of contradictions. The most important, as far as the EDs are concerned, is revealed in the name UNITED KINGDOM Independence Party.
      It has next to no support in Scotland or London.

  4. Something we can learn from Mr Farage's campaigning is how to deal with the Politically Correct. The prpose of Political Correctness is not to avoid "offending" people but to stifle debate. This is done by jumping on a quote from a candidate or official, often twisting it, then making out that by saying the "appalling" thing the individual in question must be a "racist" or an "exremist" or a "xenophobe" (the list goes on!) and there is no need to listen to anything else he might have to say.
    Nigel Farage was having none of it! He stood up well to Andrew Marr and Jeremy Paxman and made THEM stick to the issues.
    Opposing uncontrolled, mass immigration does NOT mean you hate immigrants. It simply means that you don't want our green and pleasant countyside turned into one vast building-site!

    1. Clive, unfortunately, human beings are tribal and cleave to their own. The greater the number of other tribes, the more they feel threatened. As Roger Scruton has said, multiculturalism will fail because like communism, of which it is another Marxist form, it denies human nature.

      At a recent UKIP meeting a prospective UKIP euro-mp said we could have handled 5%, 10% or even 15% immigration but when we learn that 50% of those living in London were born abroad and that therefore the native English are in a minority then it is not sustainable.

      I do not hate immigrants, they have been used, as we all have, for reasons of the immature, utopianist ideology of the Marxist Left; for political gain through garnering the immigrant vote as elsewhere in Europe; but mostly to enable the destruction of Europeans and their culture for the benefit of the oligarchy that had manipulated us all for their own ends.

      It is not only a question of the concreting over of England but also of the retention of a European identity; as the Chinese and the Indians and black Africa are being allowed to retain for themselves. Europe is being destroyed because of political corruption and to benefit the plutocratic few. Sadly the time is now approaching when some form of reverse immigration policy will have to be begun if England and most of the rest of Europe are not going to collapse into chaos, bloodshed and anarchy; but hopefully it can be dealt with in a civilised manner and the true instigators, the bloated plutocrats and their political puppets can then be brought to justice.

    2. Clive,
      You are right that we don't want our green and pleasant land turned into one vast building site - neither do we want it turned into an industrial moonscape by the US backed fracking lobby, as advocated by the Tories and Ukip.
      Ukip cares nothing for England. the only party which loves England, as England, is the English Democrats.

    3. "The prpose of Political Correctness is not to avoid "offending" people but to stifle debate. This is done by jumping on a quote from a candidate or official, often twisting it, then making out that by saying the "appalling" thing the individual in question must be a "racist" or an "extremist" or a "xenophobe" (the list goes on!) and there is no need to listen to anything else he might have to say."
      You forgot to say "bigot".
      Yes your'e right, that's exactly what they do and the aim is to silence all dissent and bury it under a heap of abuse.

  5. You will be pleased to know that I put my cross against the EDs yesterdaybut any except the mainstream parties was the aim. The results from the local elections show that the mainstream parties have been decimated. The Lib Dems have lost massively but have held on to Eastleigh which UKIP still hope to take at the general election.
    The Tories and Labour both lost to UKIP with the Beeb telling us that Labour council seats have gone to UKIP. As for the euro-elections, as I had thought, we cannot have the results until the rest of the EU have voted on Sunday. As regards the local elections, Hammersmith and Fulham have/has fallen to Labour. This should be no surprise. My late brother lived in Hammersmith and on the day of his funeral even my Guardian reading brother was aghast at how the New British settlers were seeping in from nearby Shepherd's Bush. There seemed to be a row of shops all owned by Afghans. Perhaps the New British vote explains why Labour are meant still to get 22% in the euro-elections. Considering the New British are about 15% of the population then there are still some Old Labour English voting for New Labour but more and more are defecting to the parties of the "far right" as elsewhere in Europe. For the first time we have police guarding our polling stations to stop - probably pro-Labour - vote rigging and voter intimation. Sky news homed in on Tower Hamlets as England becomes the Third World.

    Watching Max Keiser last night in front of that hideous collection of concrete monstrosities that the plutocrats have been allowed to plant in the City of London behind that symbol of the Norman British establishment, the Tower of London - perhaps there is some significance there - both Max and his guest Mitch Feierstein, the author of Planet Ponzi, agreed that an oligarchy has now taken the place of democracy both in North America and Europe. Meanwhile Eurasia is closing ranks against the New World Order but with the Russia/China gas deal gas prices in Europe will increase. This is probably all part of American oil's plan to entice us into taking their variety. Max also told us that the Sunday Times is predicting a world-wide revolution against the oligarchs; so the revolting English are not alone. We live in a Marxist totalitarian oligarchy as I have said.

    This brings us to fracking which is how they plan to wean us off Russian gas. Today we learn that a geological survey has shown that there are vast reserves in Kent, Sussex, Surrey and Hampshire. Mr Cameron would have preferred the fracking to take place in the North of England, but in those areas to which the Cockneys have fled and the rich have their playgrounds. Friends of the Earth have voiced alarm. I predict many many Battles of Balcombe and hopefully Chevron et al will be stopped in their tracks.

    Finally, in yet another Cross Talk on RT about the Ukraine and Russophobia there was a commentator called Caleb Maupin - probably of the Left but with Guardian writer Neil Clark supporting supposedly Neo-Nazi Jobbik in Hungary we know that the Left and the "far right" ,provided the Left are not globalist, meet around the back - told us that he and his cohorts are organising mass demonstrations against American policy in the Ukraine and against its instigators who, he said, are the major Wall Street banks. That might be a certain banking cartel. He said that said banks are engaged in total economic hegemony and will not allow the existence of any nation with an independent economy. These same psychopaths have now turned America and Europe into a wasteland and together with their Marxist idiots brought down European Christian Civilisation for their own ends - apart from in Holy Russia. So those who told me this was the plan 30 years ago, including the indefatigable Lady Jane Birdwood, that scourge of Searchlight, will be shown not to have been total lunatics after all. She was told then by West Indians that they did not believe that multiracialism worked either.

  6. The lesson of the local elections is that the English Democrats have to beat Ukip in the English Democrats' natural homeland where the sense of Englishness is greatest, e.g., Rotherham, Sunderland and Skegness. Englishness is the EDs' most powerful weapon against Ukip (the real English nationalism of the EDs trumps the phoney English nationalism of Ukip).
    They need to make a strategic withdrawal from Kent and Eassex. They must realise that the south will have to be left in Ukip hands until the EDs have established themselves in the north.
    The danger is that if the EDs stretch their resources of men and capital too far, Ukip will become dug in in the north as well as in the south.
    It will be difficult for the EDs to become the opposition to the Tories in the true blue (pro-British) south.
    It will be easier to become the opposition to Labour in the (pro-English) north.
    Take on the enemy where he is weakest; don't try to take him on where he is strongest.

    1. Farage has revealed that Ukip will now work on "clustering". That is what the Lib Dems did, beginning in the South West.
      Rather than regarding it as a slur the English Democrats should make a virtue of 'Little England', which is the pundits' favourite put down (e.g., when talking about the Ukip results).
      In the meantime, Ukip is embracing multiculturalism in recognition of the changing demographics.
      The only party speaking for the English now is the English Democrats. Ukip's lack of success in Londonistan will cause them to rethink their image, which is something they have been doing for a while in an effort to appeal to the growing diverse population.

  7. There isn 't a shadow of doubt that the media are very biassed in the UK. The BBC takes money from the EU and all the TV channels are Labour-leaning. There is a lack of quality conservative newspapers, the Telegraph being in free fall after lurching into the middle and losing its habitual readership. The Daily Express is the only paper that supports UKIP. Have no doubt at all that the media in this country like all its other institutions, are controlled by Common Purpose and ILGA. They long ago realized that getting their journalists into key positions was a route to power - along with getting control of the political parties, professional bodies and churches.
    Children grow up saturated by their propaganda, and George Orwell's warnings have been proved right.

  8. After wasting thousands of pounds on his new party, Mike Nattrass must be regretting not throwing in his lot with the English Democrats

  9. Today, we read of Tony Blair adding his twopence worth, by describing UKIP as "something nasty and unpleasant." By implication, then, the millions who voted for them are nasty and unpleasant.
    To use one of Miliband's favourite expessions, "he just doesn't get it." The electorate is not stupid, and is no longer willing to listen to those who simply direct abusive language at anyone with whom they disagree, or of whom they are afraid.
    LibLabCon does not have some sort of Divine Right to be voted for.

    1. Clive,
      Right on about the LibLabCon not having a divine right to rule, but Ukip's leadership has deliberately misled the electorate, particulary about England. It is a unionist party, its expressed "concern" about an English parliament is as phoney as the "concern" expressed by the Tories, and in that respect it is no different from the others.

  10. To paraphrase Tony Blair, "Why is London such a great city? - because it is a foreign country."
    London (aka Britain) is England's colonial master.
    More wisdom from Mr Blair - "the Lib Dems did so badly in the EU elections because they positioned themselves to the left of Labour in the 2010 general election, joined the Tories and went back on everything."
    Ukip faces a similar dilemma. They went into this election without any policies (Because Farage had torn them up for being rubbish). They were able to get the vote of Old Labour in the north and true blue Tories in the south. They won't be able to pull that trick again in the general election in 2015.

  11. The PrangWizard27 May 2014 at 18:55

    Much has been said about 'political earthquakes'. This is a deceit, UKIP is just another Unionist party which if it gains any real influence or power will simply slip into Establishment positions that others have vacated, and with a very short time it will be 'business as usual'.

    There will never be real change for the better until England gets its own parliament, where MPs are directly elected to it and to no other. We must oppose the plan for dual role MPs being promoted by Conservative John Redwood MP who would have the same people operating some days in the UK parliament as now, and then on other days in the same chamber pretending they were English MPs - complete nonsense. This should not be allowed to gain traction. Thus will the British/UK Establishment fight tooth and nail to stop a proper English parliament because they know that this will end their cosy life, as the base of their power will be gone.

    With our own parliament we, the people of England will then be properly in charge of our own destiny. That will be the earthquake.

    1. Both Billy Bragg and Frank Field both suggest that the English parliament might be in York. That would get well away from London's liberal elite.

  12. 'ENGLISH NOT BRITISH' - wipe the smile off Nigel's face.
    Farage intends to launch Ukip's manefesto for the 2015 General election in DONCASTER in September. What a great opportunity to expose Ukip's hypocrisy and lies THERE, and to give them a bloody nose. They can't take the UK out of the EU and their leaders must know it. Only sovereign and independent England without Scotland, Northern Ireland, Wales AND London can get out. Nor could England have a sovereign parliament under Ukip.

  13. Interested to read elsewhere that Robin is prepared to talk to Marine Le Pen. I don't know how Geert Wilders did as there has been no mention of it but he was due to increase his share of the vote. UKIP have ruled out talking to Marine Le Pen but as Robin has said, Marine is not her father. Watching the election programme on BBC2 I heard a member of a tory think tank say he was going to vote UKIP as Mr Cameron will never leave the EU, being a bankers' boy he will not be allowed to. Plus we learn that he will never abandon the free movement of labour in re-negociation. Apparently this was already in the Treaty of Rome.

    As for UKIP, from many UKIP supporters I have met, they would not have a problem with Marine Le Pen. Being a Breton, she is probably more British than Nigel Farage as the Huguenots tended to come from the south of France. Dimitry Babitch on Russia Today said that the Western Liberal Elites think, as they do with the Ukraine, that you can ignore race, culture, religion and history and mix us all up as individuals but it does not work. As for the Ukraine, about which the BBC maintains a silence, time to send Victoria Nuland to the ICC in the Hague for war crimes and civilian genocide in Eastern Ukraine.

    As the survey on racial prejudice this morning has revealed you cannot use the Marxist tack of claiming you get rid of it through education as the chief "offenders" are educated professionals. Man is tribal by nature and the more the other tribes brought here by the elites, financial and political grow exponentially, the more the native tribe closes ranks. Hence, UKIP might now begin to see that they are on a loser embracing muliticulturalism. It cannot last; it is now so last century and as with the EU the whole thing is about to collapse.

    Denmark looks like a good place to flee to. The Danish People's Party did as well as Marine Le Pen. Lars Hedegard, who was almost assassinated by islamists, said that people did not want the mass immigration imposed on them to make the EU - and the one world - work and are now rejecting it. Their people, their history, their culture and their flag is what they cling to and they do not want their national identity taken away. So Robin you are now ahead of UKIP who are heading in the wrong direction. They will lose their support at at time when the whole of Europe is rising up in revolt against globalism and globalisation. As with fracking, UKIP have got it wrong. There is now a minority pro-fracking. National identities all over Europe will now begin to re-assert themselves not matter now much the Marxist monetarists wanted to obliterate them. UKIP is going to find itself in a cleft stick and behind the times if they continue in this direction. By the way I watched Meera Syall on Who do you think you are expressing her pride in the way that her family opposed the Raj. So what the hell are they doing here then?

  14. I stumbled upon Ed Miliband's speech to the good people of Thurrock on Tuesday. It was being relayed via the Richard Bacon afternoon programme on Radio Five. Miliband insisted that the Labour Party, under his leadership would never advocate leaving the E.U.
    He then went on to acknowledge the electorate's concern over uncontrolled mass immigration (or "immigration", as advocates of the "come-one-come-all" approach choose to misrepresent the public mood,) and endeavoured to set out his own immigration policy.
    HE doesn't "get it" either! If you want to stay in the E.U., you advocate the come-one-come-all immigration policy. THERE IS NO OTHER, for an E.U. member.
    Bacon, in another blatant misrepresentation of the public mood, referred to UKIP, (and therefore us,) as "anti-immigrant". We're not, Mr Bacon. We're opposed to UNCONTROLLED, MASS immigration. Not just "immigration" and not "immigrants".
    Take the trouble to LISTEN to what people have to say and DON'T misquote them for your Politically Correct ends.

  15. What the founder of Ukip says about the party (Ukip) today, "The leader is a dimwitted political failure", "If you elect a Ukip MEP, you're going to turn an incompotent charlatan into a millionaire", "All they [Ukip] are good for is taking public money".

  16. In order to maximise his party's results among the New British, and make it "respectable", Farage is keen to portray it as anything but English