LEFTISTS DON’T UNDERSTAND DEMOCRACY OR NATIONALISM
I recently had this exchange of views on Twitter with a Leftist troll:-
What are British Laws when there are several jurisdictions in the UK? look at >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rNu8XDBSn10
The Difference between the United Kingdom, Great Britain and England Explained
British Laws are the collective laws of the UK over which the Supreme Court has jurisdiction.
Tilbrook Jan 24
Not so. It isn't a proper "Supreme Court" like the US one. It has jurisdiction over the parameters of eg Scots' Devolved Powers
“Chris” Jan 24
think you need to do a bit more research on their jurisdiction. Either way, UK Supreme Court, not of E&W, so British correct
Tilbrook Jan 24
As a litigation solicitor, I suspect I know more about the "Supreme Court's" jurisdictions than most. http://robintilbrook.blogspot.co.uk/2016/11/brexit-befuddled-and-be-judged.html …
“Chris” Jan 24
As a member of a fascist group, I suspect you're more blinded by ideological hatred than anything else, but there we are.
Robin Tilbrook Jan 24
Not true and shows what a hypocrite you are, being that you are the one who is blinded.
so, despite your profile, you're not a member of a far right party with fascist beliefs?
The English Democrats are:- "Not Right, Not Left, Just ENGLISH!"
Are you even English? Have you had a DNA test? How long have your family been in this country? Do you test members?
Now who is being the Nazi?
Pointing out the absurdity of your ideology. Personally, I'm proud of my mixed background - Norman, Anglo-Saxon, Irish
Whilst it would be hard to summon much sympathy for “Chris”, as an individual, in fact he does express, albeit “through a glass, darkly” the commonly held Left-wing confusion between Racism, Nationalism, Nazism and Democracy.
Of course, as I put into the exchange, many Leftists, like “Chris”, are not interested in engaging in a sensible discussion about these matters. Their only purpose is to use what they think are ‘nasty’ words to smear people who they regard as political opponents. For this purpose Nationalist, Fascist and Nazi are all interchangeable, even if that usage tells you nothing about the real meaning of those words or the differences of political outlook that these words encompass.
We should try to be more sensible than “Chris” and have a look at the meanings of these words. Let's start with "Democracy". The word “Democracy” derives from the ancient Greek word for the rule of the “Demos” which means “the People”.
As regards the modern movement for democracy, whilst there were strands of it in the English tradition, which burst forth into full bloom in the foundation of the United States, the real impetus for much of democratic development comes from the French Revolution. The Revolutionaries talked of the “People” aka le Peuple”, and "liberté, égalité, fraternité". The Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars overturned the assumptions, practices and politics of most of Europe.
The history of the remainder of the 19th Century and quite a bit of the 20th Century can be referred back to the forces of Democracy and Nationalism which had been unleashed by the French Revolution and by Napoleon.
In particular Democracy and Nationalism were seen by people as two sides of the same coin. Nationalists wanted to see their national group and its interests properly represented in Governmental systems and the “Nation” was seen as the same thing as the “People”. The rule of the “People” was thus expanded to be the rule of the “People of the Nation.”
One of the things we see in the modern world is that where a state occupies territory over which there is no concept of a single nation, it is impossible for that state to be democratic.
It is also worth observing that while nationalism and democracy have a large overlap there are of course versions of nationalism which are undemocratic, such as Fascism. Fascist leaders tended to claim that they were doing what the people of the nation wanted or was in their interest. Nevertheless Fascism was always opposed to representative parliamentary democracy.
Nazism and Fascism are basically both heretical offshoots of Marxist/Leninism. I would remind everybody that in 1932 Hitler made a well publicised speech in which he stated:-
We are socialists, we are enemies of today's capitalistic economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and performance, and we are all determined to destroy this system under all conditions.
And of course Hitler’s Party’s proper name translated into English, was the “National Socialist German Workers Party”.
Where Hitler departed from the basis on which nationalism had previously proceeded was in his ideology that there was an objective "Aryan" race the struggles of which are the basis of history. This is an idea in some respects similar to the Marxist delusion of there being an objective class, the “International Proletariat”. It’s also perhaps not all that surprising that Hitler wasn’t a German nationalist since he was after all Austrian!
Before we leave the subject of Democracy and Nationalism it is perhaps worth considering what Count Klemens von Metternich said in the early 19th Century about the Italian nationalist movement. He said:-
“The word “Italy” is a geographical expression, a description which is useful shorthand, but has none of the political significance the efforts of the revolutionary ideologues try to put on it, which is full of dangers for the very existence of the states which make up the peninsular”.
So comprehensively has that early 19th Century Statesman’s view of Italy been swept aside that I have met quite a few people who think that Italy has always been a nation! That Italy is a single nation state going back to ancient Rome.
It is worth remembering that Mussolini’s political objective was partly to try to bolster a sense of Italy being an united nation state, when in fact Italy had only become united in 1863 and the First World War had tested the idea of Italy almost to destruction. But he then went on to found the first nationalist movement which was not avowedly democratic i.e. the Fascists.
On the other side of the concept of representative democracy we have the emerging idea of “Liberal Democracy”, which “Chris” mentioned.
In England “Liberal Democracy” was really formed on the ideas of, amongst others, John Locke. The right to vote and to hold office was mostly dependent on owning property and therefore on being somebody with a stake in society. It was after all only in the late 19th Century in England that the right to vote was no longer limited to those people with property. Even until the 1960’s those who served on juries had to be rate payers and therefore householders.
Liberal Democracy's roots therefore are not in Nationalism.
We have seen this very clearly in the outcome of the Brexit case, in which most of the judges have firmly stated that legally the terms of the constitution is not a “Democracy” in which the “People” would be the sovereign body. Instead the Judges ruled that the “Crown in Parliament” is “Sovereign”, the “People’s” view therefore merely advisory. This is the position of Liberal Democracy clearly expressed.
Nationalists and Democrats on the other hand would say with one voice that it is the “People” that should be “Sovereign” not the Crown in Parliament. Both would also say that Parliament, the Monarchy, Councillors, Local Government, etc., should be seen as all merely the institutions by which the Peoples’ Will is expressed.
As we are seeing the development of Brexit is exposing one of the great divides in the world!