In my view, the Britain of 1912 was more democratic than the Britain of 1932. And every succeeding year up to the outbreak of war saw us retreating farther and farther away. It was of course mainly the fault of the people themselves. Too few of them took a critical interest in public affairs. Too many allowed themselves to be gulled by any nonsense, chiefly appearing in newspapers that could no longer be regarded as serious organs of opinion but were simply a mixture of propaganda sheets and comic turns.

View full article here

Le plus ca change......

I am not sure that I agree with the premise that the country was more democratic in 1912. Please can I see some evidence? No doubt many would agree that the democratic deficit has grown since the war, but the question is - how can this trend be reversed? It's easy to blame the people, but people only take to the streets when they are desparate. Politicians will never give away power down to the people, though they seem only too ready to push it upwards, perhaps in the hope that they will in due course be themselves the beneficiary of it. I am afraid I do not have an answer to my question. I pose it as a rhetorical question, though any answers would be of interest.

One thing is without doubt imo, and that is that our politicians wield less power now than in 1912, which is related to the loss of empire and the rise of other nations and of course the EU and the UN.

I don't think I know enough of that period to be able to argue about 1912. But I do accept Priestley's more general premise ... it is the point I keep making: democracy is not a spectator sport. If we, as a people, treat participation as an optional extra, we get what we deserve.

Are you sure every demographic needs to be tarred with the same brush? If you're under 30 you've known nothing but corrupt, unaccountable government, dominated by post-Maastricht EU, beginning with Tony Blair.

You've grown up recognising the politicians have no connection with us and are just the playmates of the mass media. The only reason why you've not got more angry yet is because to date the consequences of this reality have not directly affected you, the individual who gained the vote under Tony Blair, personally.

I mean, when we first got the vote the economy seemed to be ticking along okay and Europe and the whole world was at peace, so what's the problem guys?

This is why the younger generations, specifically the under-25s, are so valuable and possibility different to what has come before. They gained the vote when it was pretty obvious it had become worthless. They've never even had the illusion of voting in a government that has done something for them. Now even their £27k degrees are worthless.

The government is their enemy.

That is a simple enough concept to understand. The problem is that too many people have forgotten that simple truth. We have to re-learn it.

Those under 25 believe the government is their enemy, but they're so steeped in socialist nonsense that they are incapable of seeing the way out. Their solution is the same, only bigger, because they define their enemy not in terms of "the state" but merely the front bench. They're different from the previous generation in that they're willing to do something about it, but they don't know what to do, because they're demanding what they already have. They mark a change in quality, but without the knowledge that Richard has spoken, the knowledge that it's the entire apparatus of government that is their enemy, they will not make any real difference.

>
> THE PEOPLE WHO ARE STARTING UNIVERSITY THIS YEAR WERE BORN IN 1991.
> THEY ARE TOO YOUNG TO REMEMBER THE SPACE SHUTTLE BLOWING UP.
> THEIR LIFETIME HAS ALWAYS INCLUDED AIDS.
> THE CD WAS INTRODUCED EIGHT YEARS BEFORE THEY WERE BORN.
> THEY HAVE ALWAYS HAD AN ANSWERING MACHINE.
> THEY HAVE ALWAYS HAD EMAIL.
> THEY HAVE ALWAYS HAD CELL PHONES.
> THEY HAVE ALWAYS HAD THE INTERNET.
> THEY HAVE ALWAYS HAD VCRS, AND VIDEO CAMERAS.
> THEY HAVE ALWAYS HAD CABLE.
> POPCORN HAS ALWAYS BEEN MICRO-WAVED.
> THEY NEVER TOOK A SWIM AND THOUGHT ABOUT JAWS.
> MCDONALD'S NEVER CAME IN STYROFOAM CONTAINERS.
> THEY DON'T HAVE A CLUE HOW TO USE A TYPEWRITER.
................to name but a few. Sort of gives substance to the expression 'Generation Gap'

When I was a kid, the old rotary dial phones were a rare luxury & the radio required a license.Till about 15 years ago I used to write real letters with a calligraphic fountain pen and took the time to make simple birthday cards for family & friends.

Today my 17 year old nephew calls me old-fashioned, something which I used to describe my grandfather at one time. And I haven't crossed 40 yet.

My generation is probably the first which has lived across 2 generations.

Derek, you wrote:



As others have pointed out, the government is our enemy. But that is not all. Any current government must be the enemy because it is the creature of the party political system which ensures that democracy in any real sense is eclipsed by the party in power with a majority in the H of C .
The government, and in particular the Cabinet which meets and makes decisions in secret is the very antithesis of any real democratic process as it is only the will of the party under the PM and his close Cabinet colleagues which alone decide policy and its form of implementation irrespective of the opinion of individual MPs. It is the Party whip system which ensures the strictest conformity to the party line, so that in effect the voters are all but ignored, by-passed or counted irrelevant in the process. So, the cliche of an "elected dictatorship" remains true.
Thus democracy CANNOT survive whilst the party system is in place. The problem is exacerbated when all three "parties" are in agreement to perpetuate particular policies, such as membership of the EU, and all that flows from it, overriding all opportunity to voice dissent or the will of the people. The party system permits only its own policy to be given effective suppression. This is the position we are in, and until reversed, nothing will change.

I shouldn't worry. Some people were born that way. But strangely, it is often the kids who are most reactionary when it comes to embracing real change.

This encapsulates my perception of this crowd.

Hmm, sorry, haven't got the hang of uploading attachments yet.....

Should be a bigger pic ....without all that dross around it...

There was a time, some of you may even remember it, when the differences between the Political Parties were as clear as those between a pork butcher & a Rabbi.....no offence to either intended.
In those far off days the Civil Service was the constant upon which whichever Party was in power could fairly confidently rely for advice & guidance, it (the CS) being apolitical or non-political.
That today there is little or nothing that the Traditional Triumvirate do not have in common should pose the question: Where do the loyalties of the Civil Service lie today, there being no change in the master/servant relationship?
My guess is that, with their comfortable sinecures garanteed, the role of safeguarding the country by proffering good advice to those in power is only self-serving. The CS is now the gumment's creature & is equally the enemy of those who want freedom.
Local Councils & the Police are visible examples of the low esteem in which the citizenry is held....but the grey, shadowy Mandarins & Judiciary, bought & paid for, are the puppet-masters. Let them not slip quietly away when we have all had enough.

The government is now the CS's creature controlled from Brussels. It is the Civil Service who've slid us into 'ever closer Union'.