Just what is the point of voting (or leader’s ‘debates’)?

The questions are asked in all seriousness; although it is doubted that which I am about to raise has occurred to more than 10% of the electorate – and it certainly won’t have occurred to our politicians who are so obviously not of this planet.

The entire ‘panel’ – and I would also include ‘She’ who has deigned to make herself absent – know nothing about what should be the burning issue of the day, namely Brexit. They exhibit a total lack of knowledge on the subject; and ‘matters EU’ in general and consequently appear to go out of their way to ignore it.

Brexit will have a cost to this nation, whether some may not like that fact. That cost will not – and cannot – be known until the Art 50 negotiations are concluded. On this point it appears to me that our politicians must carry round with them a bucket of sand so that they can then imitate the behaviour of an ostrich when Brexit and ‘matters EU’ are broached with them.

In June last year it was estimated that the UK”s national debt was £1.6trillion; and by now must be fast approaching £1.9trilliion.  When we then consider one political party is promising free child care, no cap on the winter fuel allowance or the provision of bus passes, wiping out all student loan debt, etc, that debt can only increase. Page 14 of their manifesto informs us that each strategic sector of our economy will have created  ‘a council’ to oversee its future security and growth. Really – nationalisation by another name? Staffed by who – surely not more sinecure placements comprising, like other political appointments, jobs for the boys and girls?

Not knowing the final cost of Brexit, if we then add the ‘freebies’ political parties in general are offering us as bribes for our votes, by the end of the year our national debt may be well over £2trillion. If we know not the final cost of Brexit, just where is the source for the cost of all these ‘freebies’ we, as a nation, are being promised?

The electorate will no doubt vote for one political party or another, based upon that which most affects their lives. What they seem to forget is that all political manifesto promises contain a ‘caveat’; one about which they do not advise us. For those who consider ‘free school meals’ to be important to them; how are they going to feel when they discover their vote mattered not because a cap has been imposed, meaning they will not qualify? As an example of what I mean by ‘caveat, the Coalition Government, in their faux manifesto (page 27), published after that election, promised us the power to recall our Member of Parliament; only for us to find that the final decision would  rest with a panel of MPs. As an aside, that ‘manifesto’ also promised us 200 all-postal primaries over the life of that Parliament, targeted at seats which have not changed hands for many years. What happened to that promise? What price political manifesto promises? Why should we bother voting?

To turn now to the first question,  the second which I trust has been shown to be pointless, let us see why the first question is also pointless. There are many people who have written to their Member of Parliament with a grievance or a question, only to be ‘fobbed off’ with a response based on their ‘party line’. I believe I can claim to have suffered more than they in that I have been informed by the member of parliament for my previous constituency that he would entertain no further correspondence on the subject in question – this after ignoring all the documentation and subsequent points I made to him (see here – and do please follow all the links therein). A member of parliament, elected to represent the view of his constituents and beholden to deal with any matters said constituent may have, then informs said constituent he will entertain no further correspondence on said matter? That is democracy? No, that is democratised dictatorship!

There are a number of facts that both politicians and the electorate need to consider:

  • Governments appear to consider it is “greed” for people to want to keep the money they have earned but not greed for them to take our money in taxation without asking us..
  • It is amazing that some of the electorate (and politicians) believe we are not spending sufficient money on the NHS in order to pay for the required doctors, hospitals, and medication, yet  somehow they believe that we can afford to pay for doctors, hospitals, medication and a government bureaucracy to administer it.
  • This has become an era when many, many, people are concerned about ‘fairness’ and ‘social justice,’ but seem unable to answer the question of what is their ‘fair share’ of that for which someone else has worked? One of the consequences of such notions as ‘entitlements’ is that people who have contributed nothing to society feel that society owes them something, apparently just because they have a vote. One of the sad signs of our times is that politicians have demonised those who produce, subsidised those who refuse to produce, and canonized those who complain.
  • Politicians and fake charities never tire of banging on about the benefits of “diversity”.  Evidence of its harm can be witnessed — invariably written in blood — from Iraq to India, from Serbia to Sudan, from Fiji to the Philippines. Oh, how easily are so many people brainwashed by the sheer repetition of a word.
  • The most basic question, where the future of our country – and that of the people – is not what is best but, more importantly, who shall decide what is best; and that surely must be the people themselves.
  • Those of the electorate that been voting for politicians who promise to give them ‘goodies’ at someone else’s expense should realise that they have no right to complain when politicians take their money and give it to someone else, including themselves.
  • The fact that so many successful politicians appear to be – correction:  are such shameless liars is not only a reflection on them, but at the same time is also a reflection on us. When the people want the impossible and believe the impossible, only liars can satisfy.
  • We seem to be getting closer and closer to a situation where nobody is responsible for what they did but we are all responsible for what somebody else did. To believe in personal responsibility would be to destroy the special self-created role of our politicians, whose vision casts them as the rescuers of those treated unfairly by “society”.

I could continue, but where democracy is concerned, finally –  :

It is hard to imagine a more stupid or more dangerous way of making decisions than by putting those decisions in the hands of people who pay no price for being wrong; fostered by a system of democracy that induces people to forget the wrongs they have suffered, aided and abetted by an education system which stifles the power of thought and reason.

So people, just what are we going to do about it – those of us with a brain, that is? Currently one political party or another assumes power on the votes of less than 40% of the electorate.

One of the ways to get change is either by armed revolution, or civil disobedience. How about a more peaceful method? How about more of the electorate follow a growing minority and spoil their ballot paper. Would any political party attempt to form a government on a majority of just 15% or 20% of the electorate?

Louis d’Amour is reputed to have said: To make democracy work we must become a nation of participants, not simply observers. For far too long we, as a nation, have been observers. If we are to achieve as a nation, or an area of that nation, or as a community of that nation. or as individuals; then we must become participants in democracy. To remain observers, which we currently are, can only hasten reaching the bottom of the nadir into which we are sinking.

For those who have had enough of politicians taking some of our hard earned money through taxation, the process in which we have no say; for those who believe that having worked hard they should have a say in the receipts of those that have not; for those who feel politicians have squandered the blood and treasure of our nation; for those who have had enough of politicians meddling in that about which they obviously know nothing;  for those who believe we are individually responsible for our actions;  and for those who have had enough of politicians who pay no price for their actions – it is decision time: Stop being an observer; become a participant. Take an interest in democracy; and thus in direct democracy.

Remember: your life is your life; and your life is not for politicians to mould and control purely for a political ideology.

5 thoughts on “Just what is the point of voting (or leader’s ‘debates’)?

  1. It does begin at the bottom – at local level; as this guy suggests:


    We noted with the referendum and the Electoral Commission, that the people who got to nominate hold the cards and can influence the outcome.

    And for local selection, the low-level local nominations are in-house affairs confined to each one political religion, and everybody outside those circles are left with a best case choice.

    And then comes the thorny subject of funding whatever political set-up we arrive at.

  2. personally I’m voting for Corbyn, or rather for labour…why? simple because its the biggest protest you can do..vote Brexit, vote Trump,vote Corbyn…all are massive votes against the the establishment. ..and they absolutely hate it…its gone way to far now to worry about the consequences,we passed that point long ago…so flick, the globalist,liberal progressive,smug metro centric elites, the middle finger and do exactly the opposite to what they think you should do….welcome to anarchy!

    1. “all are massive votes against the the establishment” –

      And which ‘establishment’ would that be, there’s more than one, there is no singular establishment, never was?

      1. it maybe true that more than one establishment exists,but there can only ever be one dominant group who truly control things and currently they are represented by a coalition of banking and financial and corpoate interest along with the various think tanks, NGO’s and MSM, who help facilitate their global programme.

        these people have no real loyalty to any nation state, the nation state and sovereignty must be got rid of, hense the endless work of people like George Soros, he’s part of the globalist elite billionaire establishment, and yes they may fight and squabble between themselves, but the underlying ethos is to control society,create their version of democracy,which neither Trump, Brexit or Corbyn fit into,and finally they must crush and discredit any notion of sovereignty, because that is the biggest threat to them, hence the extreme hysteria regarding Russia. They hate Russia for one simple reason, because its a sovereign state,and it has the temerity to say “no” if you disagree fine, but look what happened to Greece when they said no,look at what happened to Ireland when they said no….no isn’t a word the establishment understand,at least not as we, normal people do….no to the establishment is tantamount to an act of war!

        therefore, they endlessly propagate the notion of free trade,trade liberalisation, freedom of movement,human rights,LGBT rights, humanitarian war etc,etc. because this is the tool kit they use on each and every one of us to convince us to dismantle our country,our home and our society,in fact you rarely hear the word society these days, we only live in ‘communities’ now!

        so this is what i mean by the establishment, let me put it a different way to clarify my position, lets call them progressive liberals, its a term i prefer.
        I hope that makes my position more clear.

Comments are closed.