Poms fouled their own nest

The nearest to illuminating comment on the British “riots” (risible notion, also here) is from EU Referendum (longer post here). It helps reveal some of the cant and humbug flowing freely the greatly disturbed. Simon Jenkins in the Guardian conveniently overlooks one of the very real powers of local government authorities to wreck families in legal and public silence, something Christopher Booker has endeavoured to report over many years (see here, here, and here for just the most recent examples).

There was also somewhere, possibly from Ambrose, the proper complaint that the excitements found in various parts (then of London, latterly beyond the capital) were very small beer compared with the (probably irredeemable) irresponsibility of EU  and EMU authorities playing God with the lives of many, many millions of folk in the name of a totalitarian ideology.

Perhaps it’s the raw though hardly naive combination of open hostility and cavernous candor, hiding nothing, deceiving no-one, that draws us towards the heart of this darkness. It makes for stark contrast with the perpetual lying propaganda of political and governmental authorities and media. Stock markets in recent days, for example, have fallen rapidly for good reason. A ‘rumour’ —

Fund managers say the dramatic mid-afternoon rally was sparked by a rumour that the US Federal Reserve will announce another round of quantitative easing when it meets tonight in a bid to stop the financial market slide turning into an economic slump —

in the Oz instance reverses that. Absurd.

And that absurdity deepens with the bulk of news reporting, not least from the ABC. “Conservative” practice and “conservatives” as persons warrant only condemnation. I heard Malcolm Turnbull the other day effectively  spitting the term in regard to consumer caution. (Comparable with Hugh MacKay’s condemnation of irrational consumers on Radio National the previous week.) And, only “conservatives” have caused the US a problem of fiscal deficit. Better, like British social workers and family destruction, to have silence on the matter.

Hooligans won’t rule. Yet the all too typically unhelpful definition (per COD), “a young ruffian, esp. a member of a gang” points in the right direction. Thus “ruffian”: “violent, lawless person”. That’s better and brings us closer to the modern, softly (and often not so softly) despotic and parasitic state, democratic in name only.

 

 

Advertisements

There are no comments on this post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: