Not in My Name
Contents:
Campaign Statement
18 Arguments
The Petition to The King
A Better Political System
UK Blueprint (a vision for Britain – British vision)
Dissemination
Campaign Statement:
The objective of this campaign is to get voter turnout for Labour, Tories and, to a lesser extent, the Lib-dems, SNP and other narcissistic political parties down to 30% of the electorate, meaning that 70% of the electorate – a super-majority – sends out the clear message that it is sick of the established, self-serving, anti-democratic party-political system, which results in a two-horse race (an either-or choice, being no choice, if both choices are rotten – a two-party state, being only one party better than a one-party state…. until both parties adopt a singular position [of which we’ve seen a lot of late!])
If this can be achieved then, as per the Petition to The King, below, we will look to the Crown to commence a process of orderly political reform, by establishing a Royal Commission, or other public body, to devise a contra-factional political system, through professional consideration and public consultation – in short, the parties party will be over.
To expand upon the problem at hand:
A parasite is an organism that lives in or on another organism (its host), surviving and growing at its expense.
In keeping with this definition, political parties are parasites, in as much as they are relatively small groups who live off the general population, through parliamentary control, and its attendant benefits (indeed, the clubs that run the country are truly known as parties as they have a good, lucrative time at our expense).
A cancer is a disease in which abnormal cells grow and spread to other healthy parts off the body (so as to sicken, and ultimately kill it).
In keeping with this definition, political parties are cancers, as they seek to insidiously impose their beliefs on those who, if it wasn’t for government compulsion, would have no truck with them (indeed, if the boss-eyed designs, pipe-dreams and extreme schemes that the parties privately harbour were ever made known to the public at large, most people would be aghast and would never vote for them – this truth being truer for Labour, Lib-dems and the SNP, but is nevertheless applicable to the Tories, and others too).
As it stands, in some ways parasitically, in others cancerously, roughly 170,000 Tories, 300,000 Labourites, and 90,000 Lib-dems rule over circa 70,000,000 other people – thus it came to pass, for example, that a mere 70,000 Tories picked Liss Truss to govern the remaining 69,930,000 of us (‘chumps’ being what the parties call us, when partying in their clubhouses).
If you think there is nothing wrong in this, if you yourself are a party member, then vote for it – if you are Tory member, vote Tory. And if you are a Labour member, vote Labour. And in both cases, stuff the rest of us.
If however you are neither, then do not demean yourself by voting for a party that, in truth, holds you in contempt – that sees non-members, like yourself, as mugs to be run and governed by them (them that know best).
Instead, either vote for an independent candidate who you have faith in, or do not vote, and thereby ensure that, if nothing else, you have no hand in the gross misgovernment of our country – that though our country is run badly, it is not done so in your name.
Many of course will understandably ask:
‘If the electoral boycott is successful, what if the Petition is ignored by Parliament and the King?’
To which we answer: In the case of the latter, it is not the business of the citizen to second guess their King – King Charles will consider the Petition, and will act as his conscience and his attitude to the People dictates. The People will then respond accordingly.
In the case of the former, if Parliament ignores the will of the People, then it will have broken the social contract, post which each individual would have to decide if they themselves should still honour it (should still engage with a state that denies them; should neither go on strike or – though sickened by their government – take sick leave, and so on).
To conclude, if you want things to keep getting worse, then vote Labour, Tory or Liberal etcetera – vote for those who have made things as they are. If you want change though, if you want things to get better, don’t vote! (Or vote for an independent candidate. And if you’re an MP who thinks independently, who puts the good of your constituents and the People before that of your party, then stop acting as a sock puppet for the latter – grow a backbone and stand on your own!)
You may of course be scared that by not voting, the party that is most opposed to you and your family will get elected, to which we say show courage! Don’t be bullied into supporting a group you are not a member of and who you do not believe in (such that their every bad act is done in your name). Stand firm! Do not vote for a political party. And, if you can, convince five others to do likewise – if every individual acts according to their conscience, collectively we will prevail, and take back Britain from the self-serving clubs that unjustly misgovern us (though even if you alone don’t vote, at least you won’t have sullied yourself).
In summary:
Don’t discredit yourself by supporting a group that you dislike!
Don’t, with a hee-haw, demean yourself and endorse gangs of liars, cheats and schemers, who hold non-members like yourself in contempt!
Don’t live within the lie that party politics is democratic – the system only survives because you are prepared to do this!
Do make a stand, keep your dignity, and be one of the people who bring about reform!
18 Arguments:
The arguments against the current, rotten way of governing this country are extensive, but here’s 18 to begin with…
Non-democracy: How can it be right that the people we get to vote for – in our party-politically rigged system – are chosen for us by tiny minorities, by local, narrow-minded, no-life party members (petty groups, whose view are obviously at odds with those of the majority, otherwise there’d be more of the buggers). The undemocratic injustice of this is especially shown by the nomination of our national leader, the Prime Minister, who is usually chosen by less than 100,000 members of either the Tory or the Labour club (clubs, incidentally that YOU help fund through your taxes [a fact many are unaware of]). Likewise, by choosing who can run for seats, political parties restrict the options of most voters, and thereby skew and ruin the democratic process from the outset (your MP being chosen on the basis of their party credentials, their devotion to their party’s current ideology, and the backsides they have kissed, not upon their quality for office).
Good government is about wrong and right, not left or right, to which end, long, long before this campaign started, many have opted not to vote, indeed more people don’t vote than vote for either party, yet still they control us, and seek to divide us by their jealous beliefs – whatever they may be, as they shift sometimes to suit situations (and don’t ask a party-obedient MP a difficult or awkward question, for the answers they give when so challenged, bear little, if any relation to the question put to them [listening to these dissembling fibbers when they’re interviewed, being irritating and risible in equal measure]).
Unity: We are not a people divided. We become a divided people due to the left or right option of a two-party system, that forces complex individuals into one of two camps. And so, stitching up society, the parties sew social division (a truth, for once, they don’t deny) as they seek to exacerbate and capitalise upon social difference, through polarising views, and honing opposition (making people enemies, and/or rivals, being vital for their survival – the worst party for this type of nastiness being the SNP).
Waste of time (& energy): It is wrong that, rather than running the Country – as they are paid by us to do – party MP’s spend endless time, effort and energy, on fighting with the rival club, and infighting among themselves, regardless of what their handbag battle costs the populace, irrespective of how much upset their scaremongering and pessimism brings (party politicos happily causing sadness, if it furthers their shabby ambitions – their bitter bitching, and criticism of Britain, damaging both the spirit, and economic prospects of the nation).
Loyalty: The parties first loyalty is to their members – for them to pretend otherwise is to insult us. They run Britain to please their people, not the People, and put the interests of their party before the country. For example – and a minor one at that – why aren’t election dates regularly set? Why is there a mystery as to their timing? The answer: because it suits the party in power to have an election at a time that is best for it – whatever this unpredictability costs the country. As it stands, the parties are run: Bottom-up, in keeping with the blinkered interests and political wishes of their relatively tiny, swivel-eyed memberships. Top-down, in line with the material interests, and social goals of their financial backers – be they businesses, unions or rich individuals – and the international organisations, and cliques of elites, who party politicians wish to ingratiate themselves with.
Con politics: Don’t be duped! Tory-Labour are each a cheek of the same backside (while other parties battle to own the gap between them). Supposedly adversarial, Parliament is a pantomime, a charade, at best a playfight, where each villain takes turns at being in charge or being in opposition (and either way, are well paid). Consequently, Labour’s greatest ally is the Tories, and vice versa as, by dint of people being frightened by their rivals, they garner the votes of those who dislike them. In this respect we, the People, are like a battered woman, misused by two abusers, each of whom woos her back once the other has blacked her eyes! (Thus we say, don’t vote for the lesser evil, for you’re still abetting evil if you do – instead state plainly, sanely and bravely, NOT IN MY NAME!)
Unjust funding (A): People who support neither Tory nor Labour nor any other mob, are still made to pay for them by way of their taxes, for the parties unsurprisingly decided that the state should give vast sums to them (unjust to the point of criminality, but true – strange how Tory, Labour, Liberal and SNP MP’s, though all supposedly foes, are all in agreement when it comes to the public funding them!) Worse yet, people who support independent candidates, effectively pay for their opposition.
Unjust funding (B): The parties are given money by wealthy, powerful people, special interest groups, corporations, businesses and unions, but claim these doners do so for love, and that the said benevolence in no way sways their political positions or decisions. Yet everyone knows that he who pays the piper calls the tune. And as the piper’s payer calls the tune, the funding of political parties by the aforesaid minorities must be anti-democratic (as it makes Parliament place private interests above public ones – e.g. Labour is given money by the unions; Labour then awards the unionised occupations the state controls taxpayer-funded pay rises/benefits; the unions then give money to Labour… or maybe they give money to Labour for the sheer joy of it!) Any politician or party who denies that funding buys influence is lying, plain and simple – and anyone who believes them must be an idiot. Yet though party politics, by its very nature, both invites and facilitates this and other malpractices, it would be hard for independents to act thus, as any private bias on their part would be limited, and countered by the collective integrity of their assembly (the members of which would act as watchmen, each upon the other).
Protest voting: Don’t protest vote so as to reward Starmer, a man who endorses, supports and has had a hand in most of what has brought us to this present mess – as it stands, Starmer is sitting smugly back thinking he must be elected by default due to Tory failure, when in truth it is Parliament that has failed us (the hard place Labour’s put us in in the past, and will put us in again, being just as unwelcome as the Tory rock!) Protest votes are pointless, for the supposedly ‘punished’ party knows it’ll soon be its go again, and simply looks upon being out of power as a time of recreation – and for many MP’s, paid leave – during which they can leisurely channel their energies into sabotaging the country so as to make their opponents look bad. So if you want to use your vote to protest, like some did with Brexit, withholding it in line with this campaign is a much better way to do it. NB Brexit didn’t hurt elites, just the People; the parties carried on as usual; the music didn’t stop for them – on the subject of which: From a Remain perspective, remember that, even though neither Labour, Conservative, SNP or the Lib-dems wanted to leave the EU, they brought about the weather that meant Brexit. From a Leave perspective, know that, as none of these parties wants to leave the EU, as things are it will never properly happen – the only place we’ve been left in truth is in a worst-of-all-worlds limbo, courtesy of the political parties.
Hostage to ideology (the past): As identity is crucial to political parties, they end up beholden to their own image and, thus branded, they are forever in thrall to the past, and have to advance their traditional stances – or leastwise accommodate them – regardless of their current, and future suitability. So, hostage to their past positions and actions, political parties cannot implement proper reform (for the admission of their historical errors, incompetence, etcetera, would sully their brand too much).
Hostage to ideology (the present): Political ideologies warp government, through twisting decisions to fit or advance what are for their followers pseudo-religions (every issue being forced to fit the procrustean bed of their limited thinking). Cult fixations, and the factions, cartels and intrigues they bring with them, have no place in public matters.
Hostage to ideology (the future): Adversarial parties will never bequeath success to their opponents, and thus shun long-term remedies – opting to peddle saccharine snake-oil, instead of administering bitter restoratives – as the ‘future’ for them spans a mere five years; beyond this shifting electoral horizon, there is no tomorrow for them, hence they squander the nation’s wealth away, on anything that relates to today (especially projects that boost ministerial egos, and/or result in strategic votes – the national debt having principally arisen, through bankrolling the hollow ambitions of the parties, and the inadequates that manage them).
Wilful Mismanagement: The solutions, or leastwise improvements, to practically all major problems – immigration, the NHS etcetera – are common knowledge to most MP’s and civil servants (such solutions usually being, in truth, no more than common sense would suggest). They do not get actioned though due to the posturing, non-cooperation, media-pandering and fear-mongering of the political parties (as neither party wishes to see the other succeed, they thwart each other when not in office – and sabotage society in the process [being happy to see the state derail when the other schmucks are running it]). In this way a vast national debt has been incurred by dint of bitter politicking.
Social media: The internet has exponentially worsened party-political ills – to wit: imagine a triangle whereupon each point are the terms: Functional government; Social media; Party-political system – you can have any two these, but never all three, for the parties are in thrall to the shifting whims of unconsidered, knee-jerk, quickly-clicked opinion (ill-informed trends on the web – led by emotion and tittle-tattle, more than thought and fact – now, undemocratically, shape the path the parties, and so the nation takes).
History: After WWII, the political parties are responsible for almost every ill the country has suffered. Consequently, party politics can be considered the principal upstream problem that causes, or worsens every downstream one – to spell it out, almost ALL the problems our country suffers from stem from these weaselly, scheming coteries, for it is they who have their grasping, groping hands on Britain’s tiller, and have had so for decades. Thus, whatever the difficulty, commonly its root, or exacerbating factor, is the party-political system (through sins of commission or omission, by those supposed to represent us).
Short-termism (political myopia): Courting present support, whatever the cost to tomorrow, parties can’t dispense the restorative bad medicine that’s necessary for a country to healthily function and grow, for any attempt on the part of an incumbent party to do so, merely gives their rivals the opportunity to promise an opposite, sweet but ineffectual nostrum, and so usurp them (the principal concern of political parties being power, not for a purpose, but as an end in itself – particularly when politics is a career); thus, in thrall to electoral cycles, party politics can only function on a short-term basis, and cannot undertake the long-term, and very long-term schemes needed for proper social progress (a problem exacerbated by the fact that, painfully conscious of the often-slim majorities that keep them in office, parties duck or pass the buck on matters that could upset certain minorities, and swing constituencies – thus good for the many is neglected, for fear of offending the few).
Tyranny: Party politics is creating a new tyranny, for parties err to love big government, whilst independent representatives tend to resent it, viz: government control = party control = a way to impose a party ideology upon those who don’t want it – conversely, intrusive government can’t benefit individual representatives in the same way, even if they follow a credo. Likewise, crises suit the business of professional party-politics (as crises empower the parties, the parties like crises).
No choice: Some say that the party-political system, however divisive, works in practice because it is adversarial, to wit, that each of the creatures holds the other to account, keeps the other in check, etcetera. Notwithstanding that this is a sorry way for a modern, civilised country to be run, as it stands both of the parties are in complete agreement it seems in the respect of some issues, meaning that, with regard to them, Britain is a one-party state (baring again the fact that each party is a cheek of the same backside).
For example:
Net 0: Both parties believe we must hit the Net 0 target re carbon emissions, whatever the cost (to ordinary people), and regardless of what efforts other, rival countries make to this end. Both parties believe the UK taxpayer should pay billions each year to subsidise the non-cost-effective green energy sector. Despite both parties predicting that international turmoil lies ahead, neither party believes the UK should have fuel or food independence, or have an independent industrial capacity.
Lockdowns: Both parties believe we should have repeatedly locked-down in respect of Covid-19, irrespective of the cost of doing so (of which they were, and remain, well aware – NB there will never be an honest inquiry into Parliament’s response to Covid-19 while those responsible control the country).
Ukraine: Both parties believe we should give unconditional support to Ukraine, regardless of Ukrainian corruption, the financial cost (to ordinary people), and whether it leads us into a war with Russia.
Political funding: Both parties feel there is nothing wrong with individuals and companies donating money to both of them at once, or in swift succession. Both parties likewise think it is fine for the taxpayer to contribute to their coffers.
Taiwan: Both parties believe we should give unconditional support to Taiwan, regardless of the financial cost (to ordinary people), and whether it leads us into a war with China.
Israel: Both parties believe we should give unconditional support to Israel, however it acts.
Transgenderism: Both parties endorse the transgender agenda, and thereby deny womanhood.
Public honours: Both parties believe that people who donate large sums of money to political parties should receive public honours for so doing (peerages, knighthoods etcetera).
Fracking: Both parties will not access the UK’s vast gas reserves by way of fracking, believing instead that it is better we import fracked gas from the USA (thereby creating a much bigger carbon footprint due to the transport of the gas). This approach costs every British household thousands a year in additional fuel costs, while denying the treasury countless billions in tax revenue (the money being trousered instead by the US government), and rendering the UK energy-dependent, and so a vassal of other countries (countries we could be selling gas to).
Sovereignty: Internationally, both parties believe that the UK Courts should be subordinate to international courts, such that the UK cannot have ultimate control over its own borders. Nationally, both parties seek to outsource political decision-making to Courts, solicitors, inquiries and Judges, such that democracy is subverted, productivity is hobbled, and overwrought law often thwarts justice.
Free speech: Both parties want freedom of expression reduced and regulated by the state. Both parties increasingly seek to dictate the definition and meaning of speech (and so demean the People).
Suffocating government: Both parties seek, and achieve, greater regulation year after year – thereby ceaselessly increasing government reach – while UK productivity, social mobility, and individual freedom, correspondingly decreases year after year (as power is insidiously stripped from the People, and given to vain Judges, slick solicitors, and supercilious civil servants). Where this never-ending growth of government control leads to, neither party has yet said (though we know where it led the communist bloc) – NB while the People want individual freedom and accountable government, the government wants freedom from accountability and obedience from the People.
Now it may be that you believe that both the parties are right in respect of some or all of the above issues, and you are well entitled to think so.
That however is not our issue.
Our issue is that, if both parties decide upon the same course of action, then who are those who disagree with it to look to? For example, if you are opposed to Net Zero, tough – you’re getting it foisted on you; if you think that the transgender agenda is misogynistic, tough – you and your kids must live with it; and so on (and know that any who disagree with any cross-party agenda face public persecution and even criminal prosecution – which you may think is fine…. until it is your turn).
Whatever way you dress it up though, this is not democracy.
The Petition to the King –
Most gracious Sovereign,
Parliament has become dysfunctional. The parties that run the country are not fit to do so – serving neither the People, nor the Crown, but themselves.
Consequently we, the People, look to you, the Crown, to reform the political system, by way of the following ten measures:
A Royal Commission, or some other body that answers to the Crown, must be established to devise a contra-factional democratic system (this to be achieved through private submission, public consultation, and professional consideration).
While this process is ongoing, Parliament entire, not any particular party, must elect a Prime Minister – ideally a qualified independent MP – and likewise decide ministerial appointments (each position being held for the full parliamentary term, unless the minister resigns, or loses a vote of no confidence).
All whipping activity within parties must cease forthwith, so that every member of Parliament votes according to their conscience.
All political lobbying on the part of corporations, organizations or unions must be prohibited forthwith (until such time that an acceptable, regulated system of petitioning is put in place).
All public subsidies to political parties must cease forthwith.
Political donations are to be capped at £1,000 per annum per UK citizen, and must only be given to one MP by them. Donations from corporations, organizations or unions to parties or individual MP’s must be prohibited.
A Royal Commission, or some other body that answers to the Crown, must be established to reform the House of Lords (initially though, all party-political cronies – viz non-hereditary peers or Lords Spiritual – must have their peerages reviewed and approved by 120-person citizen juries, while all new peerages must likewise be decided).
A Royal Commission, or some other body that answers to the Crown, must be established to create a constitution that renders individual freedom inviolable, and makes the corporate and political imposition of beliefs illegal.
All directly elected mayors must be unaffiliated to any political party – where incumbent mayors are party stooges, new mayoral elections must be held.
General elections are to be held on the 21st June, every five years, unless the Sovereign opts to dissolve Parliament in the interest of the People.
A Better Political System
Though we have to hand an alternative, moderate system of representative democracy – which would operate within existing civil structures – it would be prejudicial to present it before a Royal Commission for parliamentary reform is appointed, and its terms of reference are set out (it is only fair that the system we propose is considered in conjunction with other alternatives).
What can however be said with utter certainty, is that the system we have is better than the current system (a low bar to clear, admittedly).
To be added/watch this space.
UK Blueprint (a vision for Britain – British vision)
Though we have to hand an alternative future for Britain, it would be prejudicial to present it before the process of parliamentary reform is underway (suffice it to say though, it is far, far brighter than the dismal one we face at present).
To be added/watch this space.
Dissemination
As per the request made in the Campaign statement, please bring this campaign to the attention of five other people – even if you are not sold on our approach, others have a right to know of it.
To assist, here is the above text in a PDF format, that can be attached to emails, WhatsApp messages etcetera.
