Democracy or mob rule?

Democracy is an overused word these days. That, in itself, would not be a bad thing if it were being used correctly, but the trouble is that it rarely is.

There is a growing assumption - perpetuated by the mass media - that democracy is simply the will of a large group of people expressed in some collective form or another. This is a simplistic and inaccurate view and one which I most definitely disagree with.

Worst of all these assumptions is the belief that if that will is expressed through some sort of election mechanism that is democracy.

IT IS NOT!

If it were then no one could deny the democratic credentials of the Soviet Union which had universal suffrage and held frequent elections - but every one knows the Soviet Union was far from democratic.

This is because the pre-conditions that need to exist for democracy to exist simply were not there - and with out those pre-conditions there can be no democracy. Those pre-conditions are numerous and complicated (and difficult to explain), but the most obvious are the existence of a demos (a body of people with shared a shared history, culture, traditions and language), the existence of the institutions of democracy (rule of law, respect for authority and a transparent, fair justice system) and political pluralism (genuine choice of political ideology).

For what it's worth, it is my belief that these conditions no longer exist in our country.

Our demos has been undermined by mass immigration and the fact that non-British people can vote in our elections is an affront to the concept of democracy (they are not part of the British demos and therefore there participation in elections is anti-democratic).

The institutions of democracy have been corrupted beyond recognition. The rule of law barely exists anymore, there is no respect for authority (hardly surprising as this is actively discouraged) and our justice system is neither transparent or fair.

And there is no political pluralism. The main parties all subscribe to the progressive ideology with only minor detail differences and they combine to use the law and media to "lock out" any potential challenge to that hegemony to such an extent that other parties are unable to make any sort of headway in elections without spending an awful lot of money (which they do not have) or having the ear of some favourable media outlet (which very few get).

Such has been the corruption of the concept of democracy that the recent "Arab Spring" was often set in terms of a democratic movement even though there is no evidence that this was the case. What happened in Egypt, Libya and other North African and Middle Eastern countries was not democracy in action but pure and simple mass disobedience - or, as we used to call it, mob rule.

And the trouble with mob rule is that once people get a taste for it they tend to like it. People - regardless of their political persuasion or motivation - enjoy having power of some sort and the power provided by mob rule can be quite intoxicating.

So the recent tragic events in Egypt come as no surprise to me. Whether it is a football match, a political march or religious persecution - once the mob realises it has the power it will tend to use it.

But let us be clear about one other thing. Britain is no stranger to mob rule. Far from it - it was a commonplace event throughout the 20th century and continues today. Mob rule is used with and without governmental approval - the only real difference between us and what happened in Egypt is that we still retain the facade of the rule of law (but that is all it is) which does not exist in Egypt (or Libya or any of the other "Arab Spring" nations).

I hope - probably against all reason - that we might one day realise that democracy might flourish once more in this country because, if it does, it will mean that we have restored the pre-conditions necessary for democracy to exist.

Unfortunately, I do not expect it to happen in my lifetime.

The pygmy mind of Nick Clegg

A few weeks ago I revealed that since officially retiring I've started working as a business coach. I'll be honest, I'm no business genius and most of what I tell people is common sense, but one of the most common obstacles I come up against is mindset.

People get very set in their ways - particularly if they've been doing the same thing for some time - but the worst mindset of all comes from those who won't do what I suggest because they don't believe they can.

As I'm always telling my clients - if you think you can't then you probably won't.

It's such a simple thing and, for the majority of my clients it sinks in pretty quickly. They understand that if their business is going to survive they have to start thinking their business can survive and doing the things that will achieve that.

Which brings me to Nick Clegg.

He claimed at the weekend that this country - without the EU - would become a "pygmy nation". I've no doubt that he believes that because Nick Clegg has a "pygmy mindset". He's not stupid - I'm sure he has a very high IQ - he just lacks the ability to think beyond his self-imposed boundaries.

He honestly believes this country can not achieve great things. He sincerely believes that we are incapable of forging our own place in this world as an independent nation. He believes this because he has a small minded attitude.

You don't need to be a great person to achieve great things - you just need the ability to have a great vision and the will and determination to see it through. Nick Clegg has none of these assets.

Indeed, anyone who believes - like Nick Clegg - that Britain is unable to make its way in the world as an independent nation also has a pygmy mind. They are the true "little Englander" - because they have little minds with little imagination.

They are the people who are always making excuses and finding reasons NOT to do something. I come across them all the time in my work.

Britain can survive in the big bad world as an independent nation. Not just survive - but thrive and achieve greatness once again. I'm not saying it is easy - it will take work, effort and time - but I have no doubt it can be achieved.

I am equally certain that as long as we have people governing this country who THINK we can not do this then we never will.

If the government thinks we can't - we probably won't.

What can we do?

We need to get rid of the Nick Clegg "pygmy" attitude.

Change the mindset - change the government.

Le grand stitch-up

With the kind of breath-taking arrogance that only the French and Germans are capable of, those arch-conspirators Sarkozy and Merkel announce they've agreed a new EU treaty.

It's not an agenda for the upcoming summit meeting; it's not up for negotiation; it's not even open to discussion - France and Germany have decided and everyone else has to accept it whether they like it or not.

'Scuse me? I thought the EU was made up of 27 nations, not two.

What on earth makes Sarkozy and Merkel think they can dictate terms to everyone else?

Well - this for a start.

Of course, those of us who actually bothered to look into the thing have known for years that the EU was not intended to be democratic - just to merely assume a veneer of democracy - and that it was a tool to enable France and Germany to dominate Europe.

Whenever there has been an enlargement, we've been told this will help to dilute French and German influence. Of course, it did nothing of the sort - and was never likely to. The French and the Germans get together, they decide and then they work out how to implement their decisions using the EU framework.

This is how the EU works and has always worked. The difference now is that they're not even pretending it is anything else.

Thatcher realised this too late. Cameron is about to find out.

Even while Britain was fighting a war and our people suffering and dying to free his country from the tyranny of the Nazi jackboot, Charles De Gaulle sat in London and contemplated with relish the day when France and Germany would combine to take down the "Anglo-Saxons".

The EU is no longer pretending to be democratic and the French and Germans are no longer hiding the fact that they make the decisions and everyone else has to accept them.

How much more evidence do you need?

No time for blogging

I've just noticed that yesterday's post was my first since the end of August.

I suspect that many people may have assumed I'd given up blogging again, but this really wasn't the case. There are two main reasons why I've not posted since August.

First of all, I've pretty much said all I need to say about the current economic and political crisis gripping Britain and the west. I think it's fair to say that it has, thus far, unfolded pretty much as I predicted, but that doesn't make me feel any better about it.

Because the other reason I haven't posted is that I have been so busy.

As you know - if you read this blog - I don't like to divulge too much detail about what I do now. I officially retired in March, but opted to start my own business soon after following several requests from friends.

Well, this business has snowballed. What started off as a hobby helping out a couple of mates has turned into a full time, 12 hours a day occupation. I do "business coaching" - helping start ups and struggling businesses to survive and grow.

It's very hard work, but very rewarding - in more than one sense - but I really wish it wasn't necessary.

The trouble is - so many people are losing their jobs and deciding to start their own business I have more work than I can handle. I don't advertise or market my services at all - all my clients have come through recommendations, but because I have so much work, I have very little time for blogging.

But don't get the idea that I've given up. I haven't. When I have something to say I'll still say it - as long as I can find the time to write and post it.

I don't plan to do business coaching for ever. As long as I'm being asked to help and as long as I have the time and enthusiasm to help I'll do what I can - but I don't see it being a long term thing.

Ranting Stan is alive and well - just too bloody busy!

The day democracy died

The 3rd November 2011.

Remember that date - because it is the date when the principle of democracy died in Europe.

Anyone who has read this blog in the past will know what I think of the EU - and that I have been warning about its anti-democratic nature for some years - but even I didn't expect the EU to behave in the way it just has.

That the leaders of some EU nations were so prepared to so completely ride roughshod over the democratic will of another nation is not new. To do it so brazenly and so openly is flabbergasting.

And yet - even as this happens, our media ignore what this means.

They see with their own eyes how the knife in the shape of a "bail out" is wielded by the killers - Sarkozy and Merkel - and thrust into the victim. They watch as the knife is plunged into the beating heart of the democracy and their only concern is that the knife is unharmed.

Incredible. This is truly a day of infamy. A day which, in years to come and in the history books of the future, will be remembered as the day the EU finally did away with any pretence of democracy.

And the biggest irony of all is that the democracy was killed off in the nation which gave birth to the idea over 2000 years ago.

For God's sake, buy a briefcase!

I don't know when, exactly, using briefcases fell out of fashion, but I suspect it was sometime around the arrival of the cheap laptop computer. However, if you're not carting a laptop around with you then a briefcase is still a very useful way to transport documents, notes and even sandwiches.

And if you're in the sort of job where the documents you carry may be rather sensitive and important then there is even more reason for keeping them secure and out of sight. Especially, if you're in government.

What is up with these people? Are they so worried about looking "out of touch" that they prefer to wander around clutching confidential papers in their hand in front of TV cameras and reporters rather than risk being seen with a briefcase?

It's not as if they don't have lackeys they could hand the briefcase to if they can't handle the indignity of being seen with anything so practical - and it's not as if the government don't make these things available to them.

Or is it because they are simply careless?

The only reason they get caught like this - even after others have been caught making exactly the same mistake - is because they are careless. And if they are careless with something as simple as putting confidential papers out of sight, then you can bet they are every bit as careless with the way they draft legislation, form policy and spend our money.

It's a sound bet that anyone who can not take care with the simplest of things can not be trusted to take care of complex things and things that are important. That is, I am afraid to say, the plain and simple truth about our political class today.

Not only are they obsessed with style and appearance over substance and ability, they are incompetent and incapable.

The real cause of the riots must never be revealed

I've not written anything about the riots since they began for various reasons. First of all, I've been very very busy with my work for a couple of weeks - a little too busy if the truth be told. When I started doing this it was only supposed to be a part time "hobby" sort of business, but for the last couple of weeks I've been working 18 hours a day every day. Some hobby!

The other reason I've not written anything about it is that I've pretty much said all I have to say about it on previous posts - I can't be bothered to post links - the riots are something I've been expecting and predicting for some time and came as no surprise to me.

What is clear to me, though and is something of a revelation is that the media, for a brief time, seemed to come to the same conclusions as me in that the riots were not caused by "deprivation" or any of the other poster children of the left, but simply by the absence of morality and decency.

That realisation was brief, though. In the last few days I've read more and more comment articles in sources as diverse as the Telegraph and Guardian making the usual claims about poverty, lack of opportunity and other social grievances.

It's all codswallop - but predictable codswallop. It's predictable because to admit that the underlying cause of the riots was anything but the usual suspects is to admit that everything the liberal progressives believe in is completely wrong.

That applies to David Cameron, the bulk of the Tory party and the majority of the journalists who work in the mainstream media as much as it does to the Toynbees and Milibands of this world.

So the liberals will do some hand wringing, have a couple of inquiries and will manage to draw the wrong conclusions once again.

They have to - otherwise their very reason for existing will cease.