Friday, March 11, 2011

Shoring up Nick Clegg


That is the task of Deputy Prime Minister’s fan cub at The Independent today: he’s had a bit of kicking in Barnsley, his back-benchers are fractious and the troops are mutinous. Mr Clegg’s response?
“Hold your nerve... We are in this for the long haul. We are going to keep our nerve. We are not going to flinch. We were right to go into government. We are doing the right things in government... Keep your head up high. Be proud of what we are doing. Don't be cowed by what people are saying about us. Stick to the course."
And he lists his reasons to be cheerful; the policies he has instituted which would never have seen the light of day if he had not agreed to form a coalition with the Conservatives:
"Without the Liberal Democrats, you would not have got a huge restoration of civil liberties; a balanced approach to Europe; a ferocious protection of human rights; a very heavy emphasis on more resources to our schools; the pupil premium; lifting thousands and thousands of people out of income tax; a £10bn levy on the banks; a crackdown on tax loopholes, a referendum in May on the voting system.”
To that, His Grace would add constitutional reform: it is something of a Liberal holy grail.

O, and Mr Clegg is able to tell the Prime Minister that he (the Prime Minister) sometimes talks ‘complete bilge’.

That is the advantage of being in coalition, you see: you can have Punch & Judy politics while getting your way in some policy areas.

The reality is, if this coalition is to last the course, Nick Clegg urgently needs shoring up, and David Cameron isn’t going to begrudge the sort of headline which will have millions leaping to agree: “Yes, of course her talks bilge, etc., etc.” He is fully aware that if his Deputy falls, the Government falls with him. Mr Cameron’s priorities are repayment of the national debt, balancing the fiscal deficit, education reform, welfare reform and sundry ‘events’ in North Africa and the Middle East. And things are going quite well for him on most of these fronts. The last thing he needs is a general election, which, with Labour presently 11 per cent ahead, he would probably lose.

As Mr Clegg journeys to his annual Spring Conference in Sheffield to revive the sick parrot, it is important to the Conservatives that the Liberal Democrats are not blamed solely for the (modest) programme of cuts, and it is equally important that they do not endure the disproportionate wrath of the electorate. David Cameron’s reforms are real and will endure: if he achieves his revolutionary objectives in welfare and education alone, he will go down in history as a great reforming prime minister. And that agenda is fundamentally Conservative. Considering the Party did not win the 2010 General Election, the prize is delicious.

Mr Clegg said tomorrow's conference vote could not unilaterally change government policy but reassured his party it would carry ‘significant influence’.

Thus is the nature of coalition.

Doubtless this thread will descend into the usual drivel about His Grace's delusion and the urgent need to vote UKIP on BNP. Proponents for either party appear not to be able to come to terms with the reality. While Nigel Farage has aspirations to become the county’s new third party, he seems oblivious to the fact that at least the Greens have one MP. Certainly, UKIP do well in Euro elections, but Mr Farage’s own performance in Buckingham ought to remind him that Westminster is not an easy nut to crack. And if the LibDems are obliterated over the next four years, the DUP are actually next in line to become the country’s third party. And as for the BNP, well, they are shackled with a leader who is a manifest liability, and research has shown that people are not inclined to vote for them – as much as they may agree with many of their core policies – because of the party’s long association with racism.

The Conservative Party did not win the 2010 General Election: they cannot therefore expect to govern as though they had. The compromises over the EU, the ECHR, marriage allowance and the AV referendum are all deeply painful. But they are a price worth paying not to have five more years of Labour. Whatever you think about the Cameron-Clegg coalition, it is without doubt the lesser evil; the least worst option; the best that could have been made out of the electorate’s unclear verdict last April. The alternative in not Nick Griffin, and neither is it Nigel Farage or even the Rt Hon David Davis: it is Ed Miliband.

Or Ed Balls.

We would do well to remember that, and wish the Deputy Prime Minister Godspeed in Sheffield: it may not be his constituency home for very much longer.

65 Comments:

Anonymous Wing-Tsit Chong said...

I hope that you have negociated a good fee from central office for writing blog posts such as these...

11 March 2011 at 09:52  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Having the Tories in is better than the socialists!

11 March 2011 at 09:53  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

‘And there was a good way off from them an herd of many swine feeding. So the devils besought him, saying, If thou cast us out, suffer us to go away into the herd of swine. And he said unto them, Go. And when they were come out, they went into the herd of swine: and, behold, the whole herd of swine ran violently down a steep place into the sea,…’

‘“Hold your nerve... We are in this for the long haul. We are going to keep our nerve. We are not going to flinch. We were right to go into government. We are doing the right things in government... Keep your head up high. Be proud of what we are doing. Don't be cowed by what people are saying about us. Stick to the course."

‘…and perished in the waters’.

11 March 2011 at 10:16  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

HG would't have to fret about the likes of the BNP or UKIP if Dave and the CP took it upon themselves to respond honestly to the wide-spread feeling of the electorate anout loss of sovereignity, the imposition of crazy human rights compliances and the world image of this country as a soft touch for immigrants.

11 March 2011 at 10:17  
Anonymous Zach Johnstone said...

Wing-Tsit Chong,

So anybody expounding the idea that the coalition is better than Labour must be a government confidant?

Utter tosh.

Anybody with any Conservative (or, indeed, conservative) conviction should be readily agreeing with His Grace. Given the constraints of coalition it is quite remarkable that Cameron has been able to push such a radical agenda, especially in education, health and welfare provision. One does not need to be on the government payroll to recognise this.

Given the state of the polls, such a sequence of events would almost certainly result in a 5-year term for Labour. I implore all Conservatives to remind critics of the coalition of this harrowing fact.

11 March 2011 at 11:01  
Anonymous bluedog said...

'Doubtless this thread will descend into the usual drivel about His Grace's delusion and the urgent need to vote UKIP on BNP.'

So how does it all end? The UK is not a happy place, either in terms of within or without. Cometh the hour and cometh nobody. So cometh which man or which woman and when?

Is there anyone there?

11 March 2011 at 11:05  
Blogger D. Singh said...

bluedog

We have no leader.

Now is the time when we need Judaeo-Christian writers, journalists, novelists, lawyers, poets, statesmen.

We have no leader and yet there are millions of us.

Why?

11 March 2011 at 11:19  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good one your Grace. As the chink said, I hope you get a fair fee for these posts- if Mehdi Hassan gets paid for what he writes, then it is only fair that what you write is also paid for. It does not matter if it correct as Johnstone likes to think it is or if it is bull as doubtless others will, the point is that you should be paid a fair days wage for a fair days bit of propoganda. That's capitalism at work!

11 March 2011 at 11:30  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Good one your Grace. As the chink said, I hope you get a fair fee for these posts- if Mehdi Hassan gets paid for what he writes, then it is only fair that what you write is also paid for. It does not matter if it correct as Johnstone likes to think it is or if it is bull as doubtless others will, the point is that you should be paid a fair days wage for a fair days bit of propoganda. That's capitalism at work!

11 March 2011 at 11:30  
Anonymous Cameron, Great Tory, Great Briton said...

Zack Johnstone is right.

Look at the benefits to the tory party of this coalition :

1)the liberals- they have been the great wind break for the tory party and are taking the full force of the publics rage over the tory governments cuts and workhouse agenda; why the lib dims are becoming almost tory, not the swivil eyed Euro -Skeptic ones, but the moderate pre-thatcher one nation tories. Thus they do need at least some help, so they can keep going for another 4 years, by which time the economy will have recovered and we can rule on our own, but the key thing is the public will blame the liberals and not the tories if it all goes wrong.

2) Being with the liberals means that we get to isolate our lunatic right wing fraction and allow us to follow the big society agenda.

3) The threat- vote me out and get labour- bullying always works!

4) The coalition allows the tories to go beyond thatcher, something which Cameron is desperate to do, in order to finished the de-tox of the tory brand (see above points).

5) It allows us to cut, cut and cut, which is what we have always wanted to do (because it is tory ideology, just as labour is wedded to the state). The only problem is that the tories should never have ring fenced the NHS (which is being cut anyway, but we're not advertising the fact).

6) Also conservative like minded people should also welcome the cuts to the armed forces (no carriers, no carriers with aircraft) which, as possible intervention in Libya will show, demonstrates that our armed forces can do anything with nothing (that is no guns, tanks, helicopters, communications) .

So Cranny and Johnstone are right- and any one else is nothing more than a left wing stooge, who is trying to overthrown the glorious cameron leadership and replace it with right wing, thatcher loving, patrotic, anti-EU Conservative party of old.

OR you'll get the two Ed's!!

11 March 2011 at 11:45  
Anonymous Wing-Tsit Chong said...

The radical agenda of Cameron is a dog's breakfast. Can anyone actually tell me what the "big society" is anyway (aside from being a smokescreen for the government cuts). I just cannot understand what this is, how it is meant to work or how it will work. Please do tell.

11 March 2011 at 11:47  
Anonymous Cranny is not on the tory party payroll but a free thinker said...

Cranny, don't worry, the money will be wired to your account shortly. Thanks again.

Baroness W-

11 March 2011 at 11:48  
Anonymous Ralph Hiltich said...

All well and good.

But your writing to the wrong people. You need to convince the lib-dem "centre left beardy weirdy activists" to keep Clegg "orange book centre right liberal" in power as leader, even as their party faces oblivion.

The tories, by and large and see the excellent benefits of the coalition, especially the fact that their partners have taken most of the flack for the unpopular- but necessary- decisions.

The liberal leadership can also see the benefits-

1) Power and associated comforts
2) More news coverage than ever- helps their vanity- as well as being taken seriously for the first time in 80 years.
3) Pay increase (although Clegg clocks off at 3).
4)A seat at the cabinet table, first time since 1922.
5)Being Cameron's whipping boy (just like Oxbridge fags).

So off you go. Write something to Charlie Kennedy or something or Paddy Pantsdown etc

11 March 2011 at 12:02  
Anonymous MrJ said...

Well (as before mentioned) MrJ has not been coming here long, but has been entertained this morning by the results above of blogmaster Cranmer putting the drivel-cat among the pigeons on this square. Best of all the heavy irony of "Cameron, Great Tory, Great Briton" who wound himself up with "...any one else is nothing more than a left wing stooge, who is trying to overthrown the glorious cameron leadership and replace it with right wing, thatcher loving, patrotic, anti-EU Conservative party of old."

D. Singh mentions "We have no leader and yet there are millions of us." and asks "Why?". Will it be friutless for any member of that multitude to look for an answer here? A truthful answer may excite fear and trembling.

11 March 2011 at 12:20  
Anonymous John Thomas said...

YG reports Clegg's claim to have provided: "...huge restoration of civil liberties..." (try telling that to the Derby adoptionists or the Cornish hoteliers, or the various arrested street preachers)(creeping Neo-Stalinism, more like) - and this from the man who called homosexualist practices "healthy and natural", or suchlike (my guess is that Aflame's description of the horrors of gay practices is more accurate: http://aflame.blog.co.uk/2011/03/01/why-i-m-proud-of-my-19th-century-morality-10727978/ ); Clegg should be in jail, not in government. This lot a bit better the Labour? Well, perhaps a very tiny bit.

11 March 2011 at 12:22  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

Oh, dear. There is none so blind… Would somebody please explain to His Grace that, for the past fifty or more years, the Conservative Party has not been the answer to our problems—it has been the problem.

It’s really not that difficult to grasp. A party that was committed to the well-being of the British people, to the preservation of their freedoms and liberties, and that recognized the overwhelming importance of true democracy in promoting the stability of a country would never even contemplate membership of the thinly disguised dictatorship that is the European Union.

The fact that the Conservatives not only took us into Europe but have kept us there shows them for what they are: traitors and quislings.

11 March 2011 at 14:10  
Blogger D. Singh said...

Your Grace

The Conservatives are losing their nerve.

A+B=C

If Clegg goes down the Coalition is finished and a General Election will be imminent. More and more conservatives are walking over to UKIP.

The second inescapable problem is the looming referendum on AV. If the people vote for AV then the system is likely to deliver UKIP.

And Cameron really oughtn’t to worry about Tripolitania and Cyrenaica: the once mighty Royal Navy is in the knacker’s yard.

11 March 2011 at 14:14  
Anonymous Voyager said...

As Mr Clegg journeys to his annual Spring Conference in Sheffield

or.....as the ratepayers of Sheffield receive a £2,000,000 bill to police and fence in the local constituency MP from angry voters........


another way of expressing Democracy as it is practised on Devil's Island

11 March 2011 at 14:44  
Anonymous non mouse said...

Somewhat confusing, Your Grace. But then, the fusion/coalition may account for that.

Perhaps it would be less difficult if some of us could believe we had a leader - Cameron doesn't cut that mustard, even if he cuts everything else (except the euSSR).
As to his being "a great reforming Prime Minister" ----- well, if education and health survive his day....

As to Nickers. I understand his bullet-proof glass, armour-plating, body guards etc. are saving him from the barbarians of Sheffield. The students won't get near enough to kidnap him this time.

Presumably the cuts that fund his 'safety' aren't too unkind to the rest of us.

11 March 2011 at 15:02  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

The church has a leader that cannot lead and the C of E appears to be falling apart, the government has a leader(s) that just wants power but cannot lead and does not listen to the people, the alternative (Labour) gave us a government that ruined this country and yet they stayed in for three terms...

The country is in serious trouble.

11 March 2011 at 15:11  
Anonymous berserker-nkl said...

Clegg knows which side his bread is buttered. After all the Lib Dems had five fewer seats than in the previous GE. And that was after Clegg's undoubtably superior performance on the box. This makes their GE result pretty dire. Whereas...Cameron's lot got a third more seats than the previous GE.

So I get annoyed at the bearded wonders of the LIb left moaning and groaning. They are very lucky to have any sort of say in the way the Country is run.

Is there anyone out there who can tell me of one single benefit that being in the EU gives us?

I won't vote for Cameron because of his EU stance.

11 March 2011 at 15:13  
Anonymous Dreadnaught said...

Is there anyone out there who can tell me of one single benefit that being in the EU gives us?

I'm no fan of the EU as it operates, but since its inception and with redard to its raison d'etre, we do seem to have enjoyed 65 years of peace between European nations.

11 March 2011 at 15:24  
Blogger D. Singh said...

That was because of NATO.

11 March 2011 at 15:30  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

"a huge restoration of civil liberties"

A little tinkering that made little difference.

11 March 2011 at 15:54  
Anonymous John Wrake said...

YG,

Comparisons are odious, particularly when they relate to three political parties concerned solely with their own chances of power.

We might get a proper government when the individuals in Parliament become men and women of integrity. Until then, it doesn't matter what they call themselves.

11 March 2011 at 16:36  
Anonymous not a machine said...

My first thoughts are for Japan , it has been one the great givers of aid and the long awaited big earthquake has happened to them .I would imagine food will be the medium to long problem as it seems to have destroyed the low lying agriculture as well as fisheries no doubt which will be contaminated with the backwash.

however to the post , your grace may ,as am I, be slightly amused by ring of steel and £2mn security . Mr Clegg has now said he "is more convinced than in May that the coalition was the right thing to do" and yet many in his party do not see this . The vitriol of the few lib dems that I knew before the general elections was definitely more pro Labour than conservative , so for the Libs to accomplished this feat of muscular liberalism in the face an acceptence of Thatcherie debt handling , is somthing I never thought they would do .

It is astonishing that some of his disgruntled party members still believe that the debt has magical properties of not affecting the future , perhaps they have not explained with the same gusto as the conservatives just how damaging huge debts are , using words like repair , show a worrying lack of grasp of the non service sector. As for if he thinks his left leaning compardres dislike the coalition , he should spare a thought for what being a conservative right is like in the coalition , who are suspicious of belezeebub selling expensive ice cream at the best of times .

We have had to struggle and grim and bear it , often taking discipline from our own party , which perhaps was the worst aspect , when we still had doubts that socialism mk2 wasnt hoping to gain merits .

I will wait and see , if the concept of the coalition candidate or merged party , starts excercising its wings , in which case , we shall perhaps have our tears to shed , rent our garments and be given the telephone number for mental health services , as thankyou.

Is a price worth paying to keep Labour out ?, who have been the ruinous goverment I can recall is a desperate question , when it is clear who has done the heavy lift.
Politics is funny old business , one can be ruined for being right , and made a saint for taxing ones life to death and removing there liberties/faith.

The right may have a wish list that is unpalletable , but with so many people having to suffer the legacy of the socialist terror , and a country near ruined , you cannot help but wonder that if this goverment slips , then people may not be so inclined to vote for nice things and soundbites , for there vote and livelyhoods were spun and wasted consectevily.
The conservatives have a difficult task I do not deny it , Labour intend to use there propoganda and not be of much help, we do not need strikes , we need every patch of sail going to keep us from the rocks , so they are still sending the UK down the sewer in that respect .
The coalition is wrong in the respect it sees what people vote on decreasing turnouts , the festering non voters are symptom of the terrors legacy , if the socialists dont chage there tune , they will birth somthing so resolute that it will make sense and the country ruptures , not to socialism, but to finishing it and its lies off .

11 March 2011 at 17:13  
Anonymous Oswin said...

It's all a 'barrel of fish' with a sell-by date ...

11 March 2011 at 19:01  
Blogger English Viking said...

Your Grace,

'... wish the Deputy Prime Minister Godspeed (sic)...'

I draw your attention to the good word of God's opinion on your suggestion.

If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into [your] house, neither bid him God speed: for he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.

2 John 1 vv 10,11

11 March 2011 at 21:24  
Blogger Gnostic said...

Your Grace, now that people are beginning to smell the stench of climate alarmist BS how long do you think Brighton will remain Global Warmington-on-Sea? I'd put money on Caroline Lucas being out of public office come the next GE because I figure the only reason she's an MP is because no one wanted to vote for the LibLabCon artists. They didn't reckon on getting a watermelon whose agenda is even more extreme. Serves 'em right for paying heed to the Grauniad and Al Jabeeba.

11 March 2011 at 21:38  
Anonymous bluedog said...

Gnostic @ 21.38 said 'Al Jabeeba'. Brilliant.

11 March 2011 at 21:47  
Anonymous malvoisin said...

You state that people will not vote for the BNP because of their long association with racism. What racism is that? Telling the truth about what is happening in the UK when the media wont? Six years ago Nick Griffin was taken to court for telling the truth over the muslim rape of young white girls, how many more girls have been raped because the lib/lab/con trick stayed quiet so as not to upset community relations.
It seems hypocritical that you slate the BNP for racism yet the party you seem to support along with Liberals and Labour bar one or two notable exceptions have been quite happy to wage three illegal wars killing, maiming and wounding millions of people.
You should hang your head in shame not because you voted for them, but because you still vote for them and will do so again whilst knowing the truth.
It may seem you were premature, BNP come secong in Burnley beating both Liberals and Tories.

11 March 2011 at 22:02  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ Gnostic—This may be a first for His Grace’s ashes: a link to Pink News. The Green Party is apparently ‘ranked the best for gay equality issues’. With Brighton Pavilion having a large gay population, the friends of Dorothy must have closed their eyes to the Greens’ anti-capitalism. Whether they’ll be open by the next election…

11 March 2011 at 22:14  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

malvoisin (22:02) is right, Your Grace. The BNP takes a stand on race because the indigenous British are being replaced by races from the Third World, with the side effect that the Christianity on which England was founded and prospered will be superseded by Islam. I am sorry to speak bluntly. Neither you nor your communicants may wish to hear such statements but they are the stark truth.

11 March 2011 at 23:18  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Well said Johnny Rotten but to be honest my own brother was a tory who switches to labour when it suits, much like Churchill. My auntie a born again christian who God told in her prayers she had to vote tory, when she had a small business under Thatcher, Gods message was what suited her own interest, despite me being made jobless and homeless at the time.

If I cannot wake my own family up to the need for unity and loyalty then you are wasting your time reaching out, that is why we are stuck in a rut of preaching to the converted.

I resigned myself to the fact its going to be an everyman for himself, last man standing, evening dinner dance long ago.

I just hope those left standing are decent folk who know how to start over again and not the pretenders presently in power.

12 March 2011 at 00:08  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ Bred in the bone—Thanks. The Brits have never been that keen on unity and loyalty, save in time of war, but a resurrection of that tribal loyalty will be essential if we’re to survive what lies ahead. A man in his seventies who used to post on the Telegraph blogs once said something that really brought things home to me:

❛The end of the British peoples, our culture and our homeland. … I’ll be dead of course but when I see little white children running around in the supermarket, having a great time, I could cry. I wonder what will become of them.❜

12 March 2011 at 00:27  
Anonymous Voyager said...

my own brother was a tory who switches to labour when it suits, much like Churchill.

I think you confuse Churchill with Mosley

12 March 2011 at 05:31  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"The BNP takes a stand on race because the indigenous British are being replaced by races from the Third World, with the side effect that the Christianity on which England was founded and prospered will be superseded by Islam."

If it wasn't for the side effect you say then why would that actually matter?

12 March 2011 at 08:18  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Bad news for Clegg and Cameron as the British National Party beat both Limp Dems and Tories in Burnley on Thursday coming second to Labour.

12 March 2011 at 10:08  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

DanJ0 said..."If it wasn't for the side effect you say then why would that actually matter?"

Now you point it out Danjo the comment does seem to propose Christanity being under threat is more important than our slow and steady genocide.

Voyager said..."I think you confuse Churchill with Mosley"

No I refer to Churchill crossing the floor but I must correct myself in that it was the liberals he joined, my point though is a brother of mine who has been a card carrying true blue Thatcher worshiper for years suddenly decided to vote labour last year, as he felt his job would be threatened by the cuts.

12 March 2011 at 10:13  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"Now you point it out Danjo the comment does seem to propose Christanity being under threat is more important than our slow and steady genocide."

I'll ignore the hyperbole to focus of the 'our' there. The culture is not as it was in 1950, and the culture in 1950 was not the same as it was in 1900. In fact, to all intents and purposes, we're a different 'people' to those alive in 1900. We live through the changes in our lifetimes, and inherit the changes from past generations.

If we're invaded and a new culture imposed in a few sort years then there might be some notion of cultural death. But we've not been invaded, despite what certain groups and certain newspaper say. Our new-found love of food in the shape of gastro-porn, for instance, does not mark the death of our British culture, it marks a cultural shift in some aspects of it.

12 March 2011 at 10:39  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

A Comanche does not believe he is Apache, when I asked an American Indian the difference between the two he retorted is an Englishman a Scotsman

12 March 2011 at 12:27  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ DanJ0 (08:18)—If it wasn’t for the side effect you say then why would that [the replacement of the indigenous British by the Third World] actually matter?

There’s the practical argument: the Third World has been markedly less successful than the First World; why should we import failure? And then there’s the moral argument: ethnic cleansing is wrong, even when the victims have white skins.

12 March 2011 at 13:54  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"A Comanche does not believe he is Apache, when I asked an American Indian the difference between the two he retorted is an Englishman a Scotsman"

Is a black Scotsman a Scotsman?

12 March 2011 at 15:12  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"There’s the practical argument: the Third World has been markedly less successful than the First World; why should we import failure?"

Blimey, there's a whole raft of arguments to be made there. But they're bog standard ones and no doubt argued to death all over the place.

12 March 2011 at 15:14  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

DanJ0 said..."Is a black Scotsman a Scotsman?"

Only in so much as a white zulu is a zulu, which would mean we can wipe out the black zulus and it would not matter.

Your ideology is up against truth, it is due to die out because it cannot comprehend the light.

12 March 2011 at 17:18  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"Only in so much as a white zulu is a zulu, which would mean we can wipe out the black zulus and it would not matter."

You know that many Zulus now live in cities like Durban, wear jeans and teeshirts, and speak English? Similarly, with Xhosas in Cape Town and places. If a Xhosa moved to Durban, wore jeans and a teeshirt, and learned to speak Bantu then is that a problem? Should Xhosas stay around the Cape and Zulus in KwaZulu-Natal to protect tribal purity?

12 March 2011 at 18:26  
Anonymous Oswin said...

DanJo @ 15:12 :

Only if he has ginger hair and can prove an irrational hatred of the English. :o)

12 March 2011 at 19:17  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"Only if he has ginger hair and can prove an irrational hatred of the English. :o)"

:)

12 March 2011 at 19:18  
Blogger Bred in the bone said...

Tribal purity?

I take it you do not accept a white man can be a zulu?

But the zulu who wears a kilt and lives in Glagow can be a Scotsman.

If a McGregor marries a McClellan does that affect tribal purity?

12 March 2011 at 20:22  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ DanJ0 (15:12)—Is a black Scotsman a Scotsman?

According to the study Race differences in average IQ are largely genetic, the average White IQ is 100, while the average Black IQ is 85 in the United States and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa. Better simply to accept that the races are distinct than spend your time trying to prove that we’re all the same.

12 March 2011 at 21:03  
Anonymous non mouse said...

It's all very nice and generous of everyone to play along with DanJo's distractive and patronising -isms. However, his ever-masterful posture, especially @ 10:39 is further evidence that he inhabits 'never-never' land.

On the question of culture. He identifies himself as someone who never knew or belonged to ours; and who never really knew our country before it was invaded. And we have, patently, been invaded both by foreigners and by fabian/marxist ideologues. The latter have set out their 'methodology' in various formats, including Freire's: it has taken place here, and continues apace. DJ is a product of it, if not part of it. So, indeed, is the egregious Deputy PM.

On the question of inherited characteristics. DJ speaks as someone who never enjoyed the continuity of generations, either personally of socially. Many of us, doubtless including the Deputy PM, would reject the suggestion that we are all naturally dissociated from our forefathers. I know and love the continuity from mine, and am proud that they have nothing to do with euro-aristocracy.

Furthermore, when I meet cousins who have grown up in dj's generation, and in different places from me: they astonish me -- it's like listening to myself at that age. Something is at work other than present-day brainwashing: it is both familial and genetic.

Methinks love of family, race, and culture provides a good basis for accepting Your Grace's advice on the issue at hand. For that issue is indeed about the imposition of a foreign culture by foreign people.

12 March 2011 at 22:18  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

What Non Mouse said.

12 March 2011 at 22:40  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

Incidentally, my big toes are longer than my second toes, lol.

12 March 2011 at 22:52  
Anonymous non mouse said...

Sorry to post twice - but...
To preserve our families, race, and culture - let alone their freedom - it becomes clearer that we must ditch more than AV. Nickers and Cammy must go too. D. Singh indicates the great impediment to progess: "We have no leader and yet there are millions of us."
He also asks "Why?"

MrJ has added "Will it be friutless for any member of that multitude to look for an answer here? A truthful answer may excite fear and trembling."

What is that answer then, MrJ? Is it close to suggest that, as soon as we have one, the enemy will deploy all their ammo - from character assassination to outright murder? I recently re-viewed JFK's Inaugural Address - and suddenly I knew exactly why they killed him. Perhaps the same is also true of MLK. They were both very much in the way of the path we have followed, and they could sway multitudes from it. A few very young men have since agreed with me; so there is awareness also among them.

Funny/tragic though - that the present spineless, mindless shower of politicos should consider themselves in the same danger: because they know their system best. Yet they can never figure as martyrs --- that tradition attaches to the ideals they seek to destroy.

So what can we do to produce and keep a leader?

12 March 2011 at 23:07  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ non mouse (23:07)—So what can we do to produce and keep a leader?

If we want a leader who's with the people, not against them, the political class will have to be overhauled. Dump career politicians and require that prospective parliamentary candidates have a record of public and/or charitable service, and be aged over 45 or so. To make doubly sure that the people’s voice is heard, institute direct democracy: binding referendums on subjects proposed by the electorate.

13 March 2011 at 00:22  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"Tribal purity? I take it you do not accept a white man can be a zulu? But the zulu who wears a kilt and lives in Glagow can be a Scotsman."

I think a white man can be a Zulu, though it would be hard as it stands now given the very strong tribal identities prevalent in South Africa. More importantly, I think the offspring of a English man and a Zulu woman, or a Zulu man and an English woman, can be a Zulu. In a couple of generations, whether or not inter-marriage occurs, I think being a Zulu will mean something rather different. So, back to the Xhosa and the Zulu, what do you think?

13 March 2011 at 08:25  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

"According to the study Race differences in average IQ are largely genetic, the average White IQ is 100, while the average Black IQ is 85 in the United States and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa. Better simply to accept that the races are distinct than spend your time trying to prove that we’re all the same."

I'm not willing to go into the issue of inter-racial IQ, having been there before and seeing the trouble it usually causes, but I have two comments to make just taking the link at face value for the purpose of discussion.

The first is, it says that average IQ in 'East Asians centers' is 106 compared to 100 for 'Whites'. Should we not be trying to boost our country's IQ by encouraging East Asian immigration if that is an important attribute in itself? The second point is related. Is IQ a very important attribute in itself when discussing immigration? Could that be offset by something else, for instance, so that we benefit from a broader package?

13 March 2011 at 08:36  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

non-mouse: "It's all very nice and generous of everyone to play along with DanJo's distractive and patronising -isms."

^ Clearly self-awareness = zero. Marvellous. :)

13 March 2011 at 08:42  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Hold on Johnny, I have just realised that my quote of you:

"the average White IQ is 100, while the average Black IQ is 85 in the United States and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa."

very closely echoes the one in the link:

"Around the world, the average IQ for East Asians centers around 106; for Whites, about 100; and for Blacks about 85 in the U.S. and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa."

except you have stripped out the example of the higher IQ of East Asian centres!

:O :O :O

Is that because you said earlier: "There’s the practical argument: the Third World has been markedly less successful than the First World; why should we import failure?" I'd forgotten that though it was clearly in my mind when I wrote my previous comment.

13 March 2011 at 12:01  
Blogger Johnny Rottenborough said...

@ DanJ0 (08:36 and 12:01)—…except you have stripped out the example of the higher IQ of East Asian centres!

Your comment asked whether a Black could be a Scotsman, so I quoted the IQs of Blacks and Whites. If you had asked whether an Oriental could be a Scotsman, my answer would have been the same: the races are distinct.

Is that because you said earlier: ‘There’s the practical argument: the Third World has been markedly less successful than the First World; why should we import failure?’

I wouldn’t count Japan, Singapore and South Korea as part of the Third World, and even China is bounding towards First World status now that it has abandoned Socialism in all but name.

Should we not be trying to boost our country’s IQ by encouraging East Asian immigration…

Force British women to breed with Chinese men? I think I’d prefer to see a return to the high standard of education provided by grammar schools.

13 March 2011 at 14:02  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

;)

13 March 2011 at 15:25  
Anonymous Oswin said...

DanJo @ 08:25 :

On a purely prosaic note, a colleague of mine, of twenty years back, was indeed a white Zulu. He had worked with the Zulus for many years and was a great friend of the Zulu King, Cyprian. During the early 1960's he was honoured by the King, with 'Official' Zulu status.

13 March 2011 at 17:58  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Blimey.

KwaZulu-Natal is an interesting place. Even on the outskirts of Durban long-tailed monkeys often run across the road as you drive along. As you drive North there are commercial forests all over and little hamlets scattered around. Almost every house seems to have a thatched roof rondavel attached. It's like proper African tribal mixed with modern living. Lovely people, but a little scary sometimes to my Western eyes. Some of the men even now have three stripes cut into each cheek.

13 March 2011 at 20:09  
Blogger LobotomySpoon82 said...

I see DanJ0's been reading Wikipedia again.

13 March 2011 at 21:40  
Anonymous DanJ0 said...

Hey look, the angry man is back trying to find his lost dignity and recover from his sense of humiliation. A man who Jesus almost certainly doesn't know, if he exists, judging by the behaviour to date.

14 March 2011 at 13:01  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older