Rambling thoughts on the changing DNA of British politics - Re-post (inadvertently deleted)
Those who voted in the UK general election on 4 July 2024 took the important step of removing those who injected them with experimental concoctions and made them poorer with ludicrous “net zero” policies, whilst allowing an invasion of people deserting their own countries to suck o the teat of the British welfare state (do they still shoot deserters from an army?).
Whilst the two major parties’ pussy footed around the methods for dealing with criminal migrants, the major issues of the waste of hundreds of billions of pounds on the C19 response and “renewable energy” were not at the forefront of debate. The assumption of all parties remains that the deadly and harmful experimental C19 injections were “safe and effective” and that the transit to “renewable energy” is inevitable. Both of which are patently false, as well as being costly and deadly.
Here is a snapshot of the latest UK election results with just one out of 650 results pending.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2024_United_Kingdom_general_election
After taking account of all the independent candidates votes, we have these umbers for the turnout on election day.
28,753,772 votes cast amongst an electorate of 48,214,128 - 60% turnout, meaning 80% of the electorate did NOT vote for the new Labour government, which won just 20% of the eligible voting; electorate, yet achieved 63% (almost 2/3) of all available parliamentary seats. Hence the UK is now in the grip of “the battle of the minorities”.
One large portion of the country not represented at all are criminal migrants. There could be as many as 5 million, which would make them the third largest party in the UK – all housed, “healthed”, clothed, educated, policed, administered and fed by taxpayers and debt. If the cost is 50 pounds a day, that is an annual cost of around 100 billion pounds. Additionally, the UK is at war and needs to increase its military budget to support Ukraine and replenish its arsenal, it is spending well over a hundred billion pounds just on the interest on its national debt, plus tens of billions on its ludicrous “net zero” policies.
The Labour government will start with a deficit in excess of 100 billion pounds – it will accelerate “net zero” policies” and earmark several hundreds of billions of pounds to build houses over the next five years – in addition to those already slated to be built.
Starting with this disastrous fiscal position, the UK is about to be hit with the policies of “national socialism” by politicians with roots deeply immersed (wittingly or unwittingly) in Marxist dogma – especially around the control of the means of production and distribution under a surveillance state.
Labour’s “focus groups” of newly elected MP’s will no doubt be looking for new sources of money in the form of debt or taxes – there will be no spending cuts. Labour had previously proposed a “wealth fund” – that is a tax on capital redirected to its pet projects. I see a grab for book entries – such as the UK’s trillion-pound defined benefit pension scheme assets. It is more than 40 years since Arthur Scargill lost his case for the pension fund of the National Mineworkers Union to be invested solely in the UK. Confiscating the assets of defined benefit pension schemes (a lot of which are in a position of “deficit funding”) would enable the sell-down of overseas investment and investment in “net zero” policies and provide funds for renewing the UK’s aging infrastructure plus all that funding required for new homes – at least in the short term.
The unfunded liabilities (deficits) of the newly nationalized defined benefit schemes could be tacked onto the national debt – a book entry today that will add to the interest burden in the future.
What else could be “nationalized”?
All transport systems used by the public – airlines, railways, buses, taxis, and of course, private cars.
Maybe either the building of new hospitals with a few hundred thousand hospital beds OR the export of hospital waiting lists to other countries – 6 million exports of patients costing 5,000 pounds per operation would cost 30 billion pounds – put that in the context of the 200 billion pounds a year spent on health in the UK and waiting lists of years in some cases!
All of which is going to be “on the table” for radical socialist MP’s.
What else? Hydrocarbons!!! What better way to control emissions than to take over the means of production of fuel?
I suggest that the UK will (over)pay for skilled European house and apartment block builders and outfitters – I also suggest that the UK will quickly run into a crisis on its trade account (mitigated by the repatriation of overseas investments). This always happens when politicians try and deliver more than the country can provide. I would not be surprised if there was a return to regulated interest ad exchange rates and an inflation crisis. The Governor of the Bank of England would likely need t be replaced with a socialist.
There’s lots more – nationalisation of the internet and telecommunications so that censorship and content control can be regulated by the Labour elites.
There are few if any barriers to the legislation that will be introduced to lock in the political landscape that exists today., including making past “safe seats” for political parties unsafe!
What is glaringly apparent is that the democratic will of the electorate is badly represented using the “First Past the Post” electoral system.
How might a proportional representation system have worked out with the 2024 pattern of voting (voting patterns will change in a different system). Suffragette women and slaves had similar cases!
One such system allocates half the votes to political parties (that must gain at least 5% of the “popular” vote, with remaining seats retaining first past the post characteristics. There are other methods; they generally result in a large increase I the number of parties represented. Even more minority parties!
Under the party plus first past the post system, the Labour Party would have received a third of the 324 sears that are half the 650 parliamentary seats – so e third of 325 or 108 seats that the Labour Party could allocate to its party apparatchiks. Assuming it won the same proportion under the existing first past the post system, Labour would have won half the seats it did win with the full blown and existing first past the post system - half of 411 = 206 for a total of 314 seats instead of 411 sears.
The Tories would have won around ¼ of 650 plus a half of 121 = 172 seats instead of 121
Reform UK wild have won a seventh of 650 plus a couple of seats = around 94 instead of 5 sats.
The Liberal Democrats would have won around an eighth of 650 plus half of 71 = 116 seats and the Greens would have won a seventeenth of 650 plus 2 seats = 40 seats. The SNP would have won zero “party list” seats and just 5 first past the post seats.
All that results in 40-50 too many seats, so some juggling would be required!
A quick note on the ever-increasing female share of the House of Commons. There are a few more women than men in the general population, but from here:
A Breakdown Of The Number Of Female MPs Now In Parliament And The Key Women To Remember (msn.com)
“In addition to welcoming in a record number of LGBTQ+ and state school-educated MPs, the polls saw the highest number of female lawmakers being elected to the House of Commons.”
“… at least 242 female MPs in the new government (220 female MPs were elected in 2019.”
242 out of 650 = 37% - another 65 needed for parity!
Amongst the ethnic community (emerging and important segment), from here:
UK elects most diverse parliament in history | Reuters
“Black, Asian and ethnic minority lawmakers will represent around 13%, opens new tab of the House of Commons, up from 10% in 2019, when Britain last held a parliamentary election.”
13% of MP’s equals 84 MP’s.
Of note, from here:
“//according to the 2021 Census, the total population of England and Wales was 59.6 million, and 81.7% of the population was white.”.
A large lap, but that would imply that 18.3% of the population would be categorised as “ethnic, no-white”, meaning that another 30 or so would be needed to represent the general (not the sub-categories) population of those classified as ethnic, non-white.
Out of interest, from here
Islam in the UK - Statistics & Facts | Statista
“Like most major European countries, the United Kingdom has a significant Muslim population living within its borders. With the number of Muslims in Europe predicted to increase significantly in the near future, the UK's share of Muslims in the population could rise from 6.3 percent in 2016 to 17.2 percent by 2050.
This can be partly attributed to the fact that the UK Muslim population is quite a young demographic, which is also true of the wider Muslim population of Europe.
Onwards!!!
Please take a paid subscription or forward this article to those you think might be interested. You can also donate via Ko-fi – any amount from three dollars upwards. Ko-fi donations here: https://ko-fi.com/peterhalligan
There appears a bewildering constellation of death by a thousand cuts. The populace of the UK seem unknowing poised, beyond loitering on the edge of an abyss. Some get it, most don't, or probably don't want to. A vast number of people appear too compliant or punch drunk from the numerous assaults perpetrated and instigated by the supra-national globalist tyranny. In the end, the maniacal despots preside intentionally over dependence, destitution, de-population, de-industrialisation, and death ... which are exactly the outcomes what they want leading to economic, social, biological, ethical and moral dead ends. There may still be more than a few who wish differently.