Blog

The entire WEF house of cards that has been built on long term hoaxes, "the narrative", and psyops is coming apart. Sir Keir Starmer and his team are now so far out of their depth that the look of desperation is palpable. Rictus grins become ever more fixed to the faces of the rabbits in the headlights.&nbsp; Please send this notice to your Labour MP so they know what to expect and that we will hold them personally responsible for the ongoing negligence that they are failing to stop - although they are the one way (other than the King) we have to call a halt to a rogue government...<figure id="figure-53r4e2e5bvm4sttmz2" class=""><img id="53r4e2e5bvm4sttmz2" src="https://cdn.durable.co/covers/19AdzIeWKbD12Gx0sEMmbwcdckhThCfQVvK5eODbCZUuwGGpRCaLGWODeaZuwatb.jpg" alt="" title="" class="object-cover bg-gray-100 " style="aspect-ratio: 1/1; object-position: undefined% 70%;" data-corners="default" data-aspect="1:1" data-caption="" data-positionx="undefined%" data-positiony="70%" data-fullwidth="false" data-mce-src="https://cdn.durable.co/covers/19AdzIeWKbD12Gx0sEMmbwcdckhThCfQVvK5eODbCZUuwGGpRCaLGWODeaZuwatb.jpg" data-mce-style="aspect-ratio: 1/1; object-position: undefined% 70%;"></figure>"Regarding Your Negligence in Not Pursuing Vote of No Confidence...Dear [MP's Name], I am writing to you as a concerned constituent from [Your Constituency] regarding the current governmental policies under the Labour administration, which I and many others believe are causing significant harm to our country and its citizens. Recent decisions, including [mention specific policies if possible, e.g., "the cessation of the winter fuel allowance"], have been acknowledged by your own party's research to potentially lead to the tragic loss of life among our pensioner population and squander vast sums of public funds through what many perceive as speculative and reckless climate change legislation. Given these dire consequences, I am compelled to express my deep concern over your apparent inaction in utilizing one of Parliament's most potent mechanisms for accountability: a vote of no confidence in the government. Your failure to initiate or support such a motion, despite the clear evidence of harm and public outcry, including a petition with over three million signatures demanding accountability, appears to me, and undoubtedly many others, as a form of negligence. Your role as an MP is not only to represent us but also to act in the best interest of the nation. By not challenging these harmful policies through all available parliamentary means, you are, in my view, neglecting your duty to safeguard the welfare and interests of your constituents and the broader UK populace. I urge you to consider your stance and actively pursue a vote of no confidence to halt these detrimental policies before they cause further irreversible damage. The lives and well-being of our fellow citizens, especially our vulnerable pensioners, hang in the balance. Please understand that this letter is not just my personal plea but reflects a broader sentiment among many who feel let down by the current political leadership and the lack of opposition to it. Your actions or lack thereof will be noted and considered in future electoral decisions and legal actions concerning criminal negligence. I look forward to your response on how you plan to address this matter. Sincerely, [Your Name][Your Address] [Your Contact Information] The first reaction by any politician used to the nonsense of UK elections to this proposition is "hoho - you''re 'avin a giraffe, mate - you can't do that..." Just watch... Now negligence is an interesting legal proposition that straddles civil and criminal law.&nbsp; This is being explored in another blog post with that assistance of Grok.

Do no evil, but do SOMETHING!

02JAN25 Verision 2.2 -&nbsp; (started 10DEC24&nbsp; Version 1.0 ) There is a lot of glum acceptance that we are lumbered with Labour until 2029 - but dumping this catastrophic administration long before 2029 is gaining credibility all the ime, and ELon Musk is weighing in on the Rochdale and Rotheram gooming scandal. So we are not inevitably stuck with this fiasco unless we acquiesce, the government can go at short notice in a number of ways - so let's go into the situation room and wargame scenarios that can bring down governments or force them to compromise and seek coalition partnerships in times of national emergency. The idea the electorate can hustle this catastrophically illegitimate government out of office for lying, cheating and incompetence is not an impossible dream. It just requires some effort.Sending missiles to poke the Russian bear in the eye could get us into a war overnight. Putin can look at the petition result and be forgiven for wondering if he could drive through Dover in a tank and be welcomed as a liberator. He certainly has no fear of being overwhelmed by a well armed and trained civil defence force.We have taken our eye off the possibility of an attack from other unfriendlies - like Iran; N Korea and even China in the event of an invasion of Taiwan - when we have not got adequate means of defence. And who know what other terrorists might acquire a stray nuke?&nbsp; In the case of China it might not be a shooting war, but crippling trade warfare over the withdrawal of access to strategic goods such as semiconductors and solar panels. Granted the UK likes to think it is constrained by civilisation and the rule of law, but the numbers for the July 4th election are outrageous (and some labour MPs will secretly and sheepishly admit it) that there is a real moral hazard if we do not address the democratic deficit with an electoral system that does not disenfranchise 80% of voters. The government has been progressively disarming the population - firearms became almost unobtainable after Dunblane and Hungerford, and are now only rarely available after deep and detailed investigations into all applications and renewals - recently swords and knives have been taken off the population. So are we going to be told to prepare food and eat with plastic and wooden bladed "cutlery" ...? And then there is the very real possibility that senior Labour politicians (including Lords) will be found to be involved in illegal activities and conspiracies to conceal awkward facts from their activist pasts and associates. The Labour government is already at the tipping point, and will not require much more of a nudge to csacade into the gutter.More awkward revelations involving compromised senior civil servants; love children, super injunctions... there are many ways for an apparently immovable government to become so utterly bogged down in sleaze and corruption that the stench of hypocrisy and decay is so pervasive - that it becomes a pariah that cannot survive.&nbsp; Starmer already used up his allocation of complimentary "honeymoon period" hypocrisy by insisting "HIS GOVERNMENT" would contrast with the previous government and be paragon of probity and virtue - but he immediately ran into the Lord Alli freebies, the <a data-mce-href="https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-the-angela-rayner-house-row-explained" href="https://www.channel4.com/news/factcheck/factcheck-the-angela-rayner-house-row-explained" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Rayner housing awks</a>; the <a data-mce-href="https://metro.co.uk/2024/11/29/transport-secretary-louise-haigh-resigns-admitting-phone-offence-22087315/" href="https://metro.co.uk/2024/11/29/transport-secretary-louise-haigh-resigns-admitting-phone-offence-22087315/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Louise Haigh resignation</a>, the <a data-mce-href="https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x9gxxb" href="https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x9gxxb" target="_blank" rel="noopener">disgraced </a><a data-mce-href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c51y4vz6900o" href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c51y4vz6900o" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Jacqui Smith Lords appointment,</a> and the Rachel from Accounts' <a data-mce-href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy12820kwwo" href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/cwy12820kwwo" target="_blank" rel="noopener">CV fiasco.</a><img id="ozq5ggx998m5flow74" src="https://cdn.durable.co/blocks/13OjugARVfMHeFKyIoSpcThsNLQNvr2J2NLG0GaiZWU2fABdglz2gxKjzXELNC3C.jpg" alt="" title="" class="object-cover bg-gray-100 " style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; object-position: 50% 0%;" data-corners="default" data-aspect="16:9" data-caption="" data-positionx="50%" data-positiony="0%" data-fullwidth="false" data-mce-src="https://cdn.durable.co/blocks/13OjugARVfMHeFKyIoSpcThsNLQNvr2J2NLG0GaiZWU2fABdglz2gxKjzXELNC3C.jpg" data-mce-style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; object-position: 50% 0%;">So I asked Grok...How can the British labour MPs &nbsp;be made financially responsible &nbsp;for allowing mad Ed Milliband to wreck the country through his insane net zero policies And GROK says... "The question of holding British Labour MPs financially responsible for the outcomes of policies they support, particularly those related to net zero emissions under Ed Miliband's [leadership], involves complex legal, political, and ethical considerations. Here's an analysis based on the available information and context:Legal Accountability: Personal Liability: Generally, MPs are not held personally financially liable for the policy decisions they support or enact unless there's evidence of gross negligence, corruption, or illegal actions. The democratic process allows for policy implementation by elected representatives, with the assumption that these policies serve the public interest, even if they are controversial.&nbsp;Fiscal Responsibility: While the government can be held accountable by the electorate through elections for policy outcomes, the financial implications of those policies are managed through budgetary controls and are not typically directed at individual MPs. Policy failures might lead to political consequences, like losing an election or facing voter backlash, but not direct financial responsibility unless specific legal breaches occur.Political Accountability: Electoral Consequences: MPs are held accountable by voters in elections. If the public perceives Labour's net zero policies, championed by Ed Miliband, as detrimental, they can vote against Labour MPs in subsequent elections. This is the primary mechanism for political accountability in a democratic system.Public and Media Scrutiny: Media, public campaigns, and think tanks can increase scrutiny on MPs and their policies. For instance, articles from sources like The Times and The Telegraph have discussed the potential negative impacts of net zero policies on energy security and costs, which can influence public opinion and political pressure.Policy Critique and Debate: Policy Review: There's ongoing debate about the feasibility and economic impact of net zero policies. Critics argue that these policies could lead to higher energy costs or job losses in traditional industries, while proponents highlight long-term benefits like energy independence and environmental health. The discourse around these policies includes voices from both sides, with some expressing concerns over the rapid transition's economic implications, while others see it as necessary for future sustainability.Economic Impact: It's argued that the transition to net zero could strain the UK's economy if not managed carefully, with critics like Howard Cox from Reform UK suggesting that these policies might not align with the UK's global emission impact and could economically disadvantage the country.Conclusion: While there's no straightforward mechanism to make Labour MPs financially responsible for policy outcomes in the manner implied by the question, they are subject to:Political accountability through elections - Public scrutiny which can influence policy direction or lead to changes in government.]Legal accountability only if there are breaches of law, not merely based on policy outcomes.The debate around net zero policies is significant, involving economic, environmental, and social considerations, with no immediate legal avenue for direct financial accountability for MPs except in extreme circumstances. [Bankrupting the entire country in pursuite of an unproven hypothesis is extreme enought for me!] The effectiveness and impact of these policies will continue to be debated and judged by the electorate in future elections..."&nbsp;It's clearly not an open and shut case - the Palace of Westminster would have become the Prison of Westminster a while ago, to save the trouble of transporting the inmates to another location. So we have to work on the points raised, and I think there is an arguable&nbsp; and straightforward case for negligence in face of endless warnings, and also around the bribery act when votes with conned out of the electorate on promises of cheaper energy. Yes there will a lot of wailing OF "you cannot possibly do that" but aren't we ready to change the rules and expectations after the failure of 30 years of Blair and his heirs? Many good people have looked at politics and concluded that they could not bring themselves down to the level of mendacity and deceit required to be a player in the Westnminster game. Ben Habib and&nbsp; Tim Montogomery have both recently been prodded by conscience to re-evaluate&nbsp; their positions in the Tory party. Labour defectors seeking to dissociate themselves from the distastrous consequences of govenment profligacy will take off when the first test case of an MP's potential for their 1/411th share of the many £billions being flagrantly wasted by Miliband, gets to court.... &nbsp;🤔Meantime, reported on January 2, 2025 - Broxtowe Borough Council: A significant number of Labour councillors, including the council leader Milan Radulovic, have left the Labour Party to become independents. This was due to dissatisfaction with Keir Starmer's leadership and policies.&nbsp;It was Keir Starmer that set the "nasty" intimidatory tone of this government with a vicious burst of lawfare to scare the people into submission to his police state and "bang-em-up" judges - now shall we concentrate minds and investigate and catalogue the assets of every Labour MP who will be liable for their share of the costs of the accumulating fraud in which they are prima facie complicit? Those who decide to do the decent thing and participate in a vote of no confidence in the government in order to respect the will of the people's petition may be granted leniency.&nbsp;A defenestration of the Starmer "illegitimocracy" is all the more likely if there is an obvious replacement government in waiting with a leader and credible policies. But there is not one at present, and Rupert Lowe needs to find some more Reform performers with the balls to look the government in the eye to tell it that it needs to prepare to be out of office by next summer. But the announcement that <a data-mce-href="https://news.sky.com/story/reform-uks-new-treasurer-nick-candy-reveals-he-spoke-to-elon-musk-this-morning-13270916" href="https://news.sky.com/story/reform-uks-new-treasurer-nick-candy-reveals-he-spoke-to-elon-musk-this-morning-13270916" target="_blank" rel="noopener">billionaire Nick Candy id on the Reform team</a> will further alarm Labour.<figure id="figure-ad4ftrvm1fm5fp8ssu" class=""><img id="ad4ftrvm1fm5fp8ssu" src="https://cdn.durable.co/blocks/aI9Wu7bbmOozeNYdt4uvULGNebaT5HN87CGMdiVbfcBVzfykt5ayuOdugoPqbUuw.jpg" alt="" title="" class="object-cover bg-gray-100 " style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; object-position: 50% 15%;" data-corners="default" data-aspect="16:9" data-caption="" data-positionx="50%" data-positiony="15%" data-fullwidth="false" data-mce-src="https://cdn.durable.co/blocks/aI9Wu7bbmOozeNYdt4uvULGNebaT5HN87CGMdiVbfcBVzfykt5ayuOdugoPqbUuw.jpg" data-mce-style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; object-position: 50% 15%;"></figure>Also remember that <a data-mce-href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyv2g2pe5ro" href="https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/clyv2g2pe5ro" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Dominic Cummings is still on the loose</a> with scores to settle and he always seems ready to implicate our rogue civil servants in all government failure and&nbsp; malfeasance; speaking of which I have not once alluded to what Trump and Musk might have up the MAGA sleeve... there is much to hope for if you want a fairly and democratically elected government within months, not years.But keep in mind when we do get close to disposing of Starmer and his #illegitimocracy, the Tory party may well pretend it can't be done - since it is just as disturbed by the almost inevitable prospect of any sort of PR electoral system - as will Labour and Lib dems - who will be huge losers in a fairer voting solution. The <a data-mce-href="https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/" href="https://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Electoral Commission</a> is supposed to be a neutral and objective guardian of democracy in charge of the rules - such as they are, when the system has allowed the despotic Keir Starmer to claim a mandate for fundamental change with just 30% of the vote.&nbsp; There are numerous models for PR - ask GROK to explain and illustrate them - and filter the obviously vexatious and implausible propositions. A workable balance needs to be struck - with an electorate of 48m there will not be 48m political parties - although technology advances could easily cope with the logistics of managing thousands of national political parties, the vast majority of the electorate just wants a simple life with one competent government keeping the lights on, maintaining law and order, maintaining national security and borders to keep undesireables of all types out of the country, providing a competent health and welfare service (ideally for the UK citizens that have paid into the National Insurance scheme), keeping food on the table, educating the kids, and fixing the potholes. Plus maintaining an environment in which UK businesses can employ the people, innovate and trade. Once we have established the terminology and parameters of this issues, then monitoring panels tracking satisfaction on these topics by sampling ongoing opinion can be produced...<figure id="figure-6b46lp5o6om5fqg3ug"><img id="6b46lp5o6om5fqg3ug" src="https://cdn.durable.co/blocks/1cYDGCetinFGq91uk7mJ7Io98o1VOYjPQ7TCECM2BXKCrYS8ercunlEifrUAzvO8.jpg" alt="" title="" class="object-cover bg-gray-100 " style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; object-position: center center;" data-corners="default" data-aspect="16:9" data-caption="" data-positionx="undefined" data-positiony="undefined" data-fullwidth="false" data-mce-src="https://cdn.durable.co/blocks/1cYDGCetinFGq91uk7mJ7Io98o1VOYjPQ7TCECM2BXKCrYS8ercunlEifrUAzvO8.jpg" data-mce-style="aspect-ratio: 16/9; object-position: center center;"></figure> It's basic stuff; and only when that it is sorted to everyone's satisfaction would we have the luxury of the scope to pander to crank ideologies.&nbsp;The electorate doesn't want to have work too hard at keeping a recalcitrant government on the rails. And it doesn't like unpleasant surprises; business especially does not like surprises. But it seems fair to propose that everyone would prefer a voting system that represented the will of the electors, so that decisions were taken with the posiitve engagemenet of&nbsp; &gt;50% of the electorate - a simple majority is going to be fair.&nbsp;&nbsp;But with a handful of exceptions, that national governerment has been made up from members of a single partyfor most of the last 100 years; the UK does not easily accommodate coalition solutions. It's a different story in local government where local factors can make big differences - but without major national significance . The "big politics" will continue to determine the elements of&nbsp; "the national budget"&nbsp; &nbsp;Are we put off by the prospect of seeveral "leading" parties being required to do deals to form governments? Well, we are happily at a point in time where there is general consensus that the government could hardly be any worse across almost every one of its responsibilities - which reduces the risk for innovation - since nothing likely to be as bad as the Starmer Goverment's omniclustershamblesfuck with its student common room politics. So let's try and be grown up and take into account all the new tech and innovations that can change the relationship of electorates and elected.&nbsp; Our present systems were devised in the dark ages of carrier pigeons and <a data-mce-href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotten_and_pocket_boroughs" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rotten_and_pocket_boroughs" target="_blank" rel="noopener">rotten boroughs</a>, and if we stick to the wote pledge principles, then what can possibly go wrong if electors are encouraged to be involved, consulted and empowered - and MPS are sanctioned for breaking their promises.

Putting Labour out of the UK's misery

15DEC24&nbsp; (Version 1.0 )Fantasy housing targets - we asked AI to second guess the next level of Angela Rayner's housing fantasy promises, and it came up with this rather fetching palace.&nbsp; In fact, it leads down <a data-mce-href="https://x.com/i/grok/share/n5BCzSrHpcULv0sXGMScsTArE" href="https://x.com/i/grok/share/n5BCzSrHpcULv0sXGMScsTArE">a fascinating rabbit hole </a>that I will develop on another page when I have the time ...Just as Ed Miliband is lying about energy costs and net zero, so Angela Rayner has been lying her socks off about housing targets.&nbsp;Whilst the housing undershoot will not have the same immediately obvious disastrous consequences as energy shortages, it is nevertheless another example of the systemic criminal negligence of Labour MP's to allow the completely inexperienced Rayner to carry on lying to the people with impossible numbers and expectations.&nbsp; Correction, Rayner does indeed have experience in the housing market, let's recap - <a data-mce-href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/12/15/angela-rayner-given-flat-admirality-house-john-prescott/" href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/12/15/angela-rayner-given-flat-admirality-house-john-prescott/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">she is now here</a> in a grace and favour residence we are paying for...&nbsp; and has <a data-mce-href="https://www.itv.com/news/2024-04-13/rayners-former-aide-contradicts-her-housing-claims-in-police-statement" href="https://www.itv.com/news/2024-04-13/rayners-former-aide-contradicts-her-housing-claims-in-police-statement" target="_blank" rel="noopener">this backstory on file.</a> A problem is that as she gets increasingly cornered by her folly, she may try and change planning and development rules to permit incongruous, unfortunate and spiteful developments to rub the noses of the aspirational classes living in their hard-won rural and urban idylls in "housing diversity", with developments like a traveller sites or sewerage works, close by.So in keeping with Starmer's blunt use of lawfare to force the "far right" to submit to his police state, the silenced majority needs the clarity of an examination of this situation under oath in court to establish the truth, and not pretend it's just another case of "politicians being politicians". &nbsp;Starmer's regime gave up that option for politicians to be judged using a half jokingly weary "what are they like?" when it locked up <a data-mce-href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/12/11/allison-pearson-essex-police-investigation-harrington-chief/" href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/12/11/allison-pearson-essex-police-investigation-harrington-chief/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">grandfather Peter Lynch</a> for what had hitherto been dealt with by social media "house rules".&nbsp;The threats by police who advise they have teams of researchers investigating the online history of anyone they choose to target, have also changed the mood.The examples of citizens being doorstepped at 8am by zealous police (eg <a data-mce-href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/12/11/allison-pearson-essex-police-investigation-harrington-chief/" href="https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2024/12/11/allison-pearson-essex-police-investigation-harrington-chief/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">Allison Pearson</a>) seem calculated to encourage unquestioning compliance through intimidation examples "to encourage the others".&nbsp;So let's make all members of Starmer's Orwellesque regime jointly and severally personally responsible, and required to share the costs of their unchecked liars and their failures. It's only financial sanctions and penalties that can force a change on the irresponsible culture of feckless politicians.Alternatively, maybe we could try to work hard to &nbsp;revert to the high trust and broadly tolerant "fair play" society that had been the hallmark of Britain's silent majority that existed before the politically autistic Starmer and his henchwoman, Mrs Balls, introduced two-tier justice to seal Britain's fate as an invaded - rather than an integrated - society.&nbsp;Who would prefer to invest in the effort to at least acknowledge the situation - and then revert to policing by consent and banter - rather than threat and riot gear?But that only starts with a complete regime change and rethink of spurious hate legislation.... and a move towards a simpler modern secular constitution that is not at the mercy of the bigotry of medieval mullahs, paedophilic priests, raving rabbis, barmy bishops and spurious sky fairies.Watch the blog at http://wote.uk as we try and evolve this proposition into a "party neutral" pledge tenet.

Angela Rayner prosecution..?

<h3>Why do most climate activists oppose nuclear power?&nbsp;</h3>I’ll tell you why. 🫵💰 It has nothing to do with the cost to deploy; it is actually pretty cheap without burdensome compliance regulations.☢️ It has nothing to do with radioactive waste; that is easily compactible into steel and concrete casks, and much of it is in fact reusable.Instead, their vitriol towards nuclear is an artifact of their Malthusian religion.&nbsp;They maintain that industrial processes are harming the planet and the only way to avert catastrophe is to decarbonize our economy rapidly and stop economic growth by abolishing capitalism. Many in fact admit that is their intention.&nbsp;Solar and wind are their preferred energy technologies. ☀️Why? 🤔Because they are intermittent electricity generation sources. The activists know that neither solar nor wind can serve as the baseload to power modern civilization. It’s simply not feasible with current technologies [which is why they require fossil fuel backup when there is no sunlight reaching the panels or wind blowing to turn the turbine blades]. This means that supply must be rationed.Nuclear, on the contrary, can. ✅France runs 70% of their grid on it. 🇫🇷Fission is symbolic of an economically prosperous future. 📈Solar and wind are symbolic of what the degrowthers want. 📉&nbsp; Some activist academics have gone so far as to say that the planet has too many people. But, they never take the liberty to decarbonize themselves and net zero their own existence. Oh, no.&nbsp;There is just the right amount of them, but too little of us. They don’t care about the planet; as George Carlin once said, they only care about having their own space to live. Their own little habitat. It’s narcissism guised as environmentalism.You and I are the carbon that they want to reduce.It’s that simple.https://x.com/ChrisMartzWX/status/1864800709218013642

Nuclear makes sense

<h3>What the hell is going on with Reform?</h3>Only a month ago, Britain was gripped by the excitement around Trump winning the election. Even better, Farage has a seemingly great relationship with him, so we all started hoping and daydreaming that Reform could be our Republicans. They are doing well, no doubt about it. They announced they’ve got 100k new members and bookies are giving Farage good odds on being PM. But the fact is, unless the slease carries on piling up, Labour is never going to volunteer to hold an election before they’re forced to, and four years is a long time. If Reform aren’t going to offer us anything more than the Tories or Labour, why would we vote for them? Having been on the left all my life until about 7 years ago, one of the biggest things that stood out to me is that people on the right have the ability to forgive, re-evaluate, challenge things and admit they’re wrong. The left doesn’t do that. More importantly they don’t forgive. And the working class “right” are happy to forgive if someone holds their hands up. They’ll welcome everyone into the fold. We saw it during the US elections. Lifelong Democrat voters saying they’re voting Trump, and everyone just being pleased. No gloating or anything, just “welcome aboard”.Where they differ in mentality, also, is being able to criticise their own. Unlike Labour who have been excusing in their party the same policies and horrific language and bad behaviour from their own MP’s like Dawn Butler, the “right” don’t tolerate it. If you’re a twat, own it and apologise, or piss off. It’s that simple.It’s always something that comes up from the left whenever Muslim grooming gangs are mentioned. The retort is always “white men rape kids too” – yeah, we know! But we don’t, as a “community” harbour them. We would be the first to hand a nonce over to the authorities. We want them all – ALL – to be in prison. For life. We, the working class, do not excuse anyone, for anything.The last few months since the election, has been just that. The British working class, who are the majority of the Reform voter base, are calling out things we think are out of order or not in line with what we wanted, hoped, or expected from Reform.They’ve actually got away with a lot and been forgiven a lot. But the more time that goes on, the more complacent and arrogant and demanding they become, people are getting more and more pissed off with them.<h3>What they don't seem to get is that we don't actually want to be pissed off with them. We WANT them to do well and win and save the country. Most of the anger towards them is coming from those that voted for them - including me.</h3>The thing with the working classes is that they’re often pattern spotters. Most of them have jobs where they have to make decisions based on experience, because things change a lot. If they’re an electrician or plumber, for example, every day, they’ll have a job different to the last, and have to think on their feet, and improvise or problem solve, and they do that because they’re genetically wired to do so. If you’re in the care industry, you could come across a whole host of different scenarios every day and have to use your initiative to solve them. There’s a reason that the army is predominantly working-class people and not academics. The realities and practicalities of real life don’t require reference books, they require smarts. They’ also very knowledgeable and proud of British and world history, and, open to learning new things. They’re not arrogant like many degree holders these days, that a degree somehow magically makes you an expert on literally everything on the planet ever, they recognise there’s a lot to know and learn, and go off and find out. They seem to love it. They’re also mailable and adaptable and pretty brave. Bloody loyal too. Until they're treated like shit or lied to. Then you've lost them.&nbsp; I’ve said before, when Covid hit, it was the care staff, the road builders, factory workers, farmers, delivery drivers and shop workers and tradesmen that kept this country going – not all the posh academic wankers that sat on their arses on furlough whinging about Brexit on Twitter all day.These people matter. We matter. They matter.The working classes also the people MOST effected in society by really, really, shit governmental policies. It’s their poor towns and villages where tens of thousands of foreign men are dumped. It’s them that get evicted by their landlords who got a better deal off Serco to house migrants, it their little girls who have to run the gauntlet of “Turkish” barbers every day after school, being air-dropped dick picks and having their arses felt, it’s their mums and grans and grandads that face freezing to death this winter, it’s them that can’t get a doctors appointment or have to wait 10 hours at A&amp;E, it’s their kids parks that are full of smack heads taking a shit, it’s their businesses that get hit the hardest by rises in fuel duty, VAT, national insurance and min wage… the list is endless.As a collective, as a "community", they have the least unemployment, commit the least crime, and pay the most taxes per capita. Yet, they have absolutely no voice. The chances of a proper working-class person ever having their say on TV or in Parliament, is almost zero.Even posting on social media now, about their frustrations, get’s them thrown in prison. Up until @elonmusk took over X, they had no voice, except the ballot box.Every election, two parties would stand up and offer A or B and they had to choose the least shit option. That was it. And even then, they were abused for it. The Leave/Remain fallout is what finally turned me against Labour. I voted Labour and I voted Remain, but I knew loads of people, being in Cornwall, that voted Leave – and not one was a racist, or a moron, or a gammon or a nazi or any of the other vile accusations thrown at them. Leave voters didn’t speak like that to Remainers. It was shocking. And I was appalled.So, along that journey, over the last 7 years, I’ve watched the growth of what has now become Reform, and I’ve watched the excitement that has surrounded it. It was like someone finally had their backs. Someone finally was sticking up for the working classes. Farage had done it for Brexit, and now they had him again for Reform.So what the hell has happened?Rupert Lowe is an absolute warrior. He’s smart, he’s tenacious, he absolutely understands us, he is like a dog with a bone on getting down to the facts and every minute gory detail on immigration and crime, he absolutely refuses to back down or walk away, and he’s also a generous and kind gentleman – every month giving his salary to a local charity. When he’s not in parliament, he’s having streets signs cleaned and burned out cars removed, so that his constituency looks nice. He’s the absolute pinnacle of the sort of man we like. And Ben Habib was another. Ben was articulate and smart and another gentleman. He was always courteous, knew what he was talking about and was a fierce champion of the working class. Like Rupert, brave, bold and prepared to say what needed to be said, no matter who was offended. The people like Lee Anderson, too. Less frilly around the edges, but a good British bloke that has balls. Smarter than he's given credit for, he's been impressive in various enquiries. Because the people like Reform, everyone has been prepared to ignore some things that they haven’t liked, because they can see the bigger picture, and have hope, but those things are becoming harder to ignore.For starters, even before the election in July, a lot of people were pissed off with Mr Tice and Dr Bull, because during covid, they wanted mandatory vaccinations, and supported sacking care staff that didn’t comply. Given that Tice’s long-term girlfriend, Isobel Oakeshott was sitting on damming text messages from Matt Hancock that the entire covid charade was bollocks, and that Bull is a doctor, made the vaccine push even more shocking. Tice could have dealt with this and said, “I recognise now, that I was wrong to push vaccine mandates, and going forward, people’s personal medical choices should not be for the state” and everyone would have said, “good bloke he’s apologised, let’s move on”. They would have even moved past his loitering about needlessly in Ukraine trying to jump on that bandwagon. But when he started calling people on a “unity March”, a peaceful event, that passed without any kerfuffle, that had brits of all ethnicities and backgrounds, “them lot”, he started to all out of favour, and his attitude doesn’t look set to improve'And, it didn’t escape our notice that we’ve been titillated by Tice with suggestions of Christian values and church and protecting these things, and then goes and voted for government sanctioned state murder of the elderly and vulnerable. Dress “assisted dying” up however you want, but that what it is. You can’t claim to have Christian values, the main caveat being “thou shalt not kill” and then vote for it. The argument he should have made is that end of life care needs to be better, and early intervention for cancer diagnosis. Not start calling End of life doctors “deluded”.Same with Farage. When asked about Robinson, all he had to say was, “I’m not here to discuss Mr Robinson”. That’s it. Done. He did not need to castigate him publicly, or those that support him. And Farage hasn’t said a peep about Peter Lynch, the elderly grandad who tragically took his own life, after being unfairly imprisoned, for attending a protest that got out of hand. And, whilst complaining about immigration, seems to be apathetic about deporting people, and resigned to the fact we’re stuck with these millions of men. Prior to the election, people were notably aggrieved that grooming gangs weren’t mentioned either. And when their financiers were announced, it seemed, rightly or wrongly, that that was the reason. Farage might be sick of hearing about it but we're sick of it happening. And if he can’t see why it matters, he aint the guy for the job. We wanted and hoped for a Trumpesque movement. A proper no-shits-given, love-your-country, bollocks-to-the-perpetually-offended-left kinda guy. We wanted someone not beholden to the media and what they might say, we want someone who isn’t controlled by who funds them, and we want someone who speaks about things that matter to us. Screaming about the standard of milk in a 5* hotel in Westminster, does little to get our hopes up. We want to hear what they’re going to do about all the problems they can see. I haven’t heard one tangible solution put forward. Some of these things are simple: Ban all non stun slaughter and overhaul the farming industry so it’s much more humane, in general, ban blood marriages, all child circumcision, 10 year min custodial sentences for anyone who abuses children, online or in person, no benefits for anyone non British born, unless they’ve worked and paid in to the system for 10 years, mass deportations, proper help for veterans, including a move to employ them in the British police force, de-politicise the judiciary, streamline the NHS and the universities, I mean… there are a thousand things that could be put forward – but we’re not hearing any of this. There are a few other things, but that’s the gist.So, now people have X, after decades of being silenced, they’re talking. It started off by trying to politely point things out and ask perfectly valid questions, but now, it seems Reform have taken to shouting down their supporters. They need to take a step back and have a think. Four years is a long time away. Relying on Labour and Tories to be so shit, you win be default, isn’t really a great plan for getting more seats in parliament.That Tice put a lot of money in, isn’t our problem. None of us are obligated to him because he did that. He’s not our boss, or our dad, or our boyfriend. He doesn’t pay our bills, or our wages, and WE are not answerable to him. If he, and Aaron Banks and all the inner Reform circle want to carry on calling everyone names, and generally telling them off for wrong think, they’re not going to be as celebrated in four years’ time, as they have been.Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe the British working class are happy to continue to be spoken like shit to by rich people. Maybe. Maybe they’ll win the next GE, and Farage is PM and I’m totally wrong. But, to me, it just looks like more rich people, with privileged lives, telling poor people to shut the feck up and feck off.I can’t imagine running a business, where customers unhappy with the product that is advertised, would be told that they’re the arseholes for not liking it. That feels like what happening with Reform at the moment. To me anyway. We owe nobody nothing. If you want our vote, they need to tell us why, and what they’ll do with it. @Kingbobiiv https://x.com/KingBobIIV/status/1863920374364139671

What the hell is going on with Reform?

Corporative. Group of people colleagues fun and smile.

When I joke about the sitcom Friends being responsible for the collapse of the West, I'm only half joking. It's a programme that normalised casual use of pornography, coerced women into finding it socially acceptable, normalised divorce, and promoted casual hook-up culture. In their universe it had no moral consequences. In the real world, this liberalism left a generation psychologically damaged and emotionally scarred. There's been a broad realisation on the right that socially permissive liberalism has been a catastrophic mistake. The pendulum is swinging back to socially conservative views and a rejection of liberalism. This also extends to feminism. I have no problem with social conservatism. It basically upholds the natural order of things, seeing the traditional family unit as the fundamental basis of community and society. Things went awry when we sought to replace the family with a welfare state which underwrites poor life choices, where nobody is held accountable. This is why we've seen a rise in single-motherhood. Yet somehow, the right is still losing. It rejects liberalism, but has failed to persuade women that they're better off for it. We see this in America where the right threatens women's bodily autonomy - to the extent where women could be forced to carry a fetus to term even if it's life threatening, or have to endure the trauma of carrying a non-viable fetus to term.&nbsp;&nbsp; &nbsp; Conservative men are the worst advocates for conservative values being that they have immature ideas of a woman's role is supposed to be. They're demanding women give up their hard-won liberties to become little more than house servants and breeding cows. There are some women who've bought into this warped notion of conservatism. We see it in the TikTok "tradwife" movement in which women advertise their willingness to be servile, in the belief that being the dutiful housewife and staying at home is more rewarding and spiritually fulfilling. This is as much a luxury belief as wokery. For working class women, motherhood is often lonely, unrewarding, thankless, and isolating. Not forgetting the opportunity cost and not realising their potential. The fact is that we have progressed socially and feminism is part of that - and there is no going back. Emancipation of women is a good thing and it's one of the values by which we view our own culture as superior. Ours is a culture in which women have the right to vote, the right to have a bank account in their name, the right to own property, the right to say no to their husbands, the right to inherit, the right to drive, and the right to an education. The right to be free individuals as opposed to the property of men. When men blame feminism for all of society's ills, you're usually talking to someone who couldn't even define the word. Women want to be more than sex objects in the way they are portrayed. Women want to be respected in all the same ways men want to be respected. That's the equality they demand. The basic right to go out in public without being groped or harassed. The right to public safety. The right to autonomy and equal opportunity in the workplace. Having achieved much of this, there is nothing more of a turn off than conservative men who believe that conservatism means winding the clock back to 1950, with the notion that women, when they're not being babysitters, exist to please men (in what they do, how they behave, and how they look). It's true that we have to find our way back to a society that values family, marriage and stability, but if the champions of conservative values are sexist frat boys and incels, conservatism will continue to lose. This is borne out in the statistics where we see the new wave of conservatism being largely the domain of young men, while women maintain their allegiance to progressive parties. Whatever conservatism might offer in the greater good, if it's a raw deal for women, they won't stand with us. Conservatism has to accept that not all social progress is bad. Telling women they've got to give up their basic liberties is never going to win.

The WOTE.uk Federation 2025

Blog: the Revolution starts here...

Do no evil, but do SOMETHING!

Putting Labour out of the UK's misery

Angela Rayner prosecution..?

Nuclear makes sense

What the hell is going on with Reform?

one for the ladies