Saturday, 17 November 2012

They're just not that into you

For those of you with a masochistic streak in them, Thursday evening's Question Time was very telling about our political class and even more so about one particular party.

Someone among the audience asked the question around the notion of should we boycott those corporations who pay a very low rate of tax in the UK.  The response was first offered to Labour's Harriet Harman who slightly danced around it, but somewhere in there put out something about how they should pay their fair share.  Then Chris Grayling offered something a bit weaselly as well in which he threw in a "I don't drink at Starbucks".

Smiling wryly through all of this was Nigel Farage.  He started to point out the Euro angle to this which seemed originally to be met with groans suggestive of "here we go again", but his finish was quite revealing about the others.

In his reply he essentially pointed out the gaping hole in their arguments when he stated that these corporations were only taking advantage of a EU wide agreement that permits them to choose which EU member state they pay their corporation tax to.  He further explained that's why so many organisations choose either Ireland or Luxembourg because they've priced theirs to attract business.

Now this post is not about Farage, the EU or the rights and wrongs of tax payments of international corporations.

It's about politicians.  It's about the fact that Farage wasn't the only one on that panel who knew what the arrangement was for these companies.  They pretty much all knew it.  If they didn't, well that's a whole new issue.  In reality they will have known, yet when asked the question, not one of them (excepting Farage) gave the audience the honest answer.  They danced around it with grandstanding pronouncements that give the impression they too are outraged are efforts to wriggle out of paying the British Exchequer what it's owed.  They could have told you straight but they didn't.  Anything but the truth was fine by them when answering to the public.

It was bad of all of them to omit this, but worse still I think for Labour.  Regular readers will know I am scornful of Labour in their pretence to stand for the "working" man and woman which they wear like a cloak to hide all manner of views that run counter to such a philosophy.  Harman knew the answer as well as Farage and Grayling did, but she carried on the pretence to promote herself and her party with the notion of taking the fight to big bad business.  The truth was secondary to that need.

My point?  It's this.  They're just not that into you whatever their window dressing might suggest.  In fact the more they suggest they're for the everyday man and woman, the more it seems the counter is true.  Telling you what's real and letting you decide doesn't even come in to it because their need is more power for them.  You're little people.  When they want your opinion they'll give it to you, so you just sit down sonny and wait until you're told what to do.  You don't matter to them except for the fact that you're currency, a down payment on their place at the trough. The only time they really want you is when they want your vote.  They'll roll their meaningless manifesto in a bit of fairy dust, grab your vote and crack on with what they wanted to do in the first place. they don't care about you because you have given them permission to.

Now I don't say that to depress you.  I don't want you to decide it's all pointless return to the electronic mogadon in the corner of your lounge.  That's the worse thing you can do.  Those we think of as "in charge" are being overtaken by events across the world.  We've seen they're not really cut out for responsibility.  They ballsing up the simple things so let's have a think about how well they're really managing the difficult stuff.  Well, one example of how they handle it is evidenced in the QT example that leads this post. They tell a different story altogether and hope you don't notice.  Returning to your comfy chair however is the worst thing you can do.  You see they're breaking things so badly that if they're left unchecked, or we don't find leaders who are cut out for handling serious issues, the whole thing is going to go bang.  When I say go bang, I mean break, shatter, collapse.  If you think it's bad now, wait till it goes bang then you'll see a definition of bad. 

If it goes that wrong, you won't be watching riots like they have in Greece and Spain on your television, you'll be watching them from your lounge window.

Have a think about that and decide whether it's back to the television or if you need to think about what you can do to put this nation back on the right track to prosperity and liberty.

Sunday, 4 November 2012


One of the things I've being thinking about and trying to do with this blog is to get large numbers of every day people to take action to get Britain off the track it appears to be on and back onto a track that has a better long term future for all.  Its a numbers game.  I believe the mess we currently find ourselves in is down to a campaign that has been in action over several decades.  As such it has riddled our institutes and therefore the people we have running them.  Turning this around therefore takes numbers.  I believe the numbers are out there but they're either slumbering or overwhelmed by the organisation of it all, made worse by everyday "useful idiots" who enable their narrative.

The result is I try to think about how I can use this blog to give practical advice to everyday folk, to counter it and push back. Hopefully I've found something to help with that.

One such area of that philosophy is man made global warming(AGW).  Yes I know, I've got the words wrong. It now doesn't get called that. The new phrase is man made climate change.  I'm sticking with my term for this article because this is what its proponents are still really arguing, they're just trying to dress it up in confusing language (note to self - post some entries on Propaganda) so they can claim any piece of odd weather is evidence for their claim.

AGW is all pervading.  When you hear about it, it's often positioned as a subject in which "The Science is Settled".  The truth of the matter their version of the science is settled at all.  In fact (and I wish I could find the link), that science is settled phrase was a recommendation in a strategy document by a PR agency that did a lot of work for pro AGW bodies.  The science isn't settled.  It's possible to learn if you do some background in to it that the AGW story is a tale of manipulation, fudge, lies and corruption of science.  If it was so self evident why would this manipulation need to take place?

As I say it's all pervading.  Everything you see about nature has a reference to it.  It runs through our institutions and includes the indoctrination of our children with junk science so that they develop an entrenched mindset about it in which they are unable to question the orthodoxy. 

I have to concede this to those advocates.  They've been very successful in turning logic on its head.  They've even got the man and woman in the street trotting out their nonsense without really knowing whether it's true or not.  I say that because they simply repeat the orthodoxy, without having questioned it.  These people are what Lenin termed "useful idiots".

Some of them however I suspect aren't really sure.  They kind of laugh it off with a air of resignation in the same way we did about political correctness in the 80's.  They laugh it off because they still see the contradictions so know something isn't right, but because it's all they hear they eventually become lost to the orthodoxy and get in line like the rest of the herd.

So here's what I have.  If you're one of those who aren't sure go over to this site and have a quick learn or download the PDF file.  It's a nice boiled down version of facts to rebut the tosh that's trotted out day after day to progress the AGW narrative.  It's a great little read.

Don't worry about the simplicity because that's what makes it perfect for me.  The average man and woman in the street isn't bothered abut the complex science.  Keeping it complex helps the AGW advocates.  It gives them a cloak to hide behind.  I believe the complexity argument helps the sheep get into line and swallow the narrative.  That's how the the herd reconcile the contradictions they see all around the story as they presume these contradictions must be explainable by something a bit complicated and only the AGW scientists understand, so what they say must be true (see how it works?).

Simplicity is the key.  Despite being in the list of all time reprehensible list of characters, Adolf Hitler did make one astute observation.  If you want a message to gather traction amongst the masses, you have to simplify it to the point that even the least clever amongst us can grasp it.  The site I mentioned enables you to do that,  It's pitched at a level you need to see the flaws in the AGW argument so that you can counter the onslaught that's thrown at you each and every day.

So take it and use it to push back with simple clear arguments.  The advocates who push the narrative for malign reasons need the useful idiots.  Losing these useful idiots is the first step in the erosion of their narrative.  They're relying on being unchallenged or in such small numbers as to be insignificant.  So use it and take back some ground and then take back a bit more and a bit more. 

Talk to people and politely correct them and show them where they've been had and been conned.  Eventually you'll find someone who sees the light.  Then there will be two of you pushing back and before you know it there will be four pushing back and so on.  Eventually you'll come across one of the corrupt and there will be enough of you to send them running for the hills because like all bullies, they're not after a challenge, they're after a victim.

Push back and bring your mates along.  They don't like that and they're not ready for it.  Let them know the day of the dog is here.

Friday, 2 November 2012

A Change of Theme

Regular readers might notice the imagery has changed.  I've decided to go with a poppy theme.

It felt so apt given that it's November.  It felt apt for a blog that laments what has become of a nation that so many laid down their lives for. 

One wonders if they had possesed the ability to see into the future, they would have refused to go into battle because they would have decided we weren't worth their sacrifice given what Britain has become.

Some of us still want to say thank you and hope that we too can one day give you the nation you died to protect.


I'm trying a small experiment.  I don't know which way it will go and some might think it a bit odd for someone whose blogging can be a bit erratic to say the least.

As readers will know I've been going on about local voting blocs.  My premise is that that is where the real power base of the electorate lies.  Local crops up time and time again.  Richard North over at EUreferendum writes about local "battlegrounds" and I know David over at Witterings from Witney has a fair bit to say on the matter as well, to name just a few.  I've written numerous entries calling on people to get themselves involved on establishing their local power base.  I even offered to list their blogs in the sidebar of Restoring Britain.  Unfortunately such calls have gone nowhere

Because of that I'm running a small experiment.  There's a new sister blog to Restoring Britain now starting.  I'm calling it Restoring Nottingham (how imaginative).  Strangely enough it bring the focus from the national level to the local level aimed at the people of Nottinghamshire. 

The reason is that sometimes I wonder if because as bloggers, we comment on things of a national / international level, people don't always see the connection them despite our efforts to tell them exactly how it applies to them.

So I'm going to try and put my money where my mouth is (so to speak) and begin something to try and wake the people of Nottinghamshire up.  It might work but it might fall flat on its face with the only thing passing through being an empty Stella can. 

It won't just be politics.  I'm also looking at commenting on other things.  Things that strike me as being potentially beneficial to the place as a place to live and visit.  My comment is going to try and appeal to the people that live there.  Nottingham won't change if the people don't change.  If the people do what they did yesterday, they'll get what they got today.  That applies to their lives and their politics.  National or local, it's a numbers game.  I'll also try and bring some of those national / international things into their homes and help them to see that it's not something out there and unrelated to them, but is pushing them around.  Hopefully some of them will decide it's time to establish their own long march through the institutions.

I hope ultimately they get it and that some of the things we've talked about here such as local voting blocs start to take hold where I live for their sake and for their children's sakes. I'm also hoping to introduce them to things like the Harrogate agenda to move the debate out of the blogsphere into everyday homes.  

Restoring Britain won't be disappearing.  I'm going to try both blogs and see where we go. Hopefully new bloggers will come to the fore to spread the word.  The offer still stands to link to local blogs as well (as long as they keep it legal).  I still intend to find practical advice for those who want to become our Mia Love and make a difference as well as getting the whole local movement going.

Let's hope the folk of Nottingham are ready for it and they find my little blog.