Category Archives: Better Government

This article, KiS: government for the silent majority,  assesses numerous faults with the Australian government, but notes similar issues afflict most other democratic governments.  An entirely different approach to governance is proposed based on fundamental principles and applying many lessons learnt from restructuring both government departments and major corporations.

‘PC’, ‘Woke’ Orwellian censorship – 1984, official lies, media lies, ‘socialism’ and modern ‘democracy’.

Many from the ‘Left’, progressives, Cultural Marxists and activists keep trying to stymie democracy with their shrill, often illogical, Orwellian and ideological views and variations of mind control. The following articles provide evidence.

It’s not Trump but America the left hates

It’s not Trump but America the left hates  By Greg Sheridan, The Australian, 12 July 2020

Donald Trump’s speech at Mount Rushmore on the eve of the Fourth of July was the most important and riveting of his presidency. It was mostly a soaring celebration of America, though with a presidential election just five months away, there were a few partisan jabs at his opponents.

By the standards of contemporary debate it was civil throughout. By Trump’s own normal standards it was positively decorous.

Reaction to it was all but deranged and demonstrates the profound cultural crisis through which the West is passing.

A piece in Foreign Policy, a semi-official journal of liberal internationalism, in all seriousness described the speech as fascist. Fascist!

This bizarre reaction was sadly pretty widespread.

Time magazine said “Trump pushes racial division”. Annie Karni in The New York Times was typical, indeed relatively mild, of much of NYT reaction saying that Trump had delivered a “dark and divisive speech”. Esquire magazine called it “terrifyingly bonkers”. An Associated Press headline said the speech was all about advancing racial division.

Perhaps the most magnificent bit of nonsense of all came in the increasingly deranged Washington Post. It ran a piece saying the speech demonstrated Trump’s “unyielding push to preserve Confederate symbols and the legacy of white dominion”.

That piece deserves a special Leon Trotsky award for ideological madness because Trump didn’t mention, extol or support any Confederate figure at all. Instead he sang paeans of praise to Abraham Lincoln for abolishing the evil of slavery and constantly affirmed America’s civic universalism.

It goes without saying Trump brings some of the misinterpretation on himself. He has said so many intemperate, foolish, offensive and just plain wrong things that it’s what people have come to expect. At the personal level, Trump is an appalling figure to embody the defence of Western civilisation.

The Room Where It Happened, by Trump’s former National Security Adviser, John Bolton, is a brilliant read, but sobering and even disturbing in its depiction of Trump. Bolton is a lifelong hardline right-wing Republican, a natural America First type but from inside the system. You can discount part of his tone as self serving, though Bolton seems pretty self aware. But you cannot really argue he makes up the incidents where Trump is abusive and foul, or where he simply has no idea what he’s talking about (constantly confusing the president of Afghanistan with his predecessor, thinking Finland is a part of Russia, not knowing Britain is a nuclear power). Most presidencies look ragged from the inside, but this is pretty weird.

However, as well as many foolish things, Trump has said and done brave and even wise things. It is also the case that there is no serious evidence that Trump is a racist. Nonetheless, even if you believe the very worst of Trump, a sensible reaction to the Mount Rushmore speech might have been to argue that while Trump expressed noble and traditional American sentiments in this speech, he frequently doesn’t live up to those sentiments, that he was a hypocrite.

But I suspect we are dealing with something much more troubling than merely the normal Trump Derangement Syndrome. Many of the speech’s critics hate it partly because it expresses traditional American liberalism on issues of race and history. It is the turn away from that liberalism, towards a wholly destructive hatred of the Western project and of all Western history, combined with a profoundly illiberal desire to re-racialise society, that is disturbing in the reaction to Trump’s speech.

The Economist magazine addresses this a bit in this week’s issue. It is important for a moment to situate the Economist culturally and ideologically. The Economist was once an intelligently conservative magazine. It would be wrong to characterise it that way now. It is a strong proponent of markets, and mixed-economy capitalism, and of free trade, but on all social issues it has moved to the progressive side. Nothing wrong with that. Magazines, like people, are entitled to change their minds, change their outlooks. They go through different stages, adopt different identities.

But now on social issues The Economist is a journalistic expression of corporate wokeness. Partly one suspects to emphasise the devoutness of its adherence to the new religions, The Economist is seldom outdone in its detestation of Trump and all his works.

Yet this week, remarkably, The Economist finally finds in itself the wit to denounce the left-wing extremism of aspects of the Black Lives Matter movement and its recent efflorescence in protests. After running through its normal liturgical denunciation of Trump, The Economist actually made an interesting point. The cancel culture and extremists in the racial justice and social justice movements are actually attacking liberalism. It said: “… a dangerous rival approach has emerged from America’s universities. It rejects the liberal notion of progress. It defines everyone by their race, and every action as racist or anti-racist… it is spreading out of the academy and into everyday life. If it supplants liberal values, then intimidation will chill open debate and sow division to the disadvantage of all, black and white.”

That looks like The Economist has been mugged by reality. It’s the first recognition for a long time in that august journal that the threat to liberalism comes from the activist left, the race-centred, history-hating, which nonsensically sees West as the enemy of humanity.

It is just this illiberal spirit that The Economist derides which I suspect animates so much of the denunciation of the Mount Rushmore speech. That is, the Trump haters have not assumed that Trump said something worse than he did and reacted against this. They actually heard what Trump said but have moved to a position where they now denounce the great liberal ideal of abolishing race as a constraint in civic identity, and building on the strengths of our liberal and conservative heritage, while of course always recognising the many times Western societies have failed to live up to their ideals.

I recommend people read Trump’s speech. Mount Rushmore is the site of carved likenesses of four great presidents: George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, Abraham Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt. Each of these men had their faults of course, they were, after all, human beings. And each was a creature of their time, no-one can really escape that either. But on any rational assessment each was a friend and enlarger of liberty and each contributed magnificently to the American dream and the American achievement.

Trump partly uses the four men as the frame for his speech, which was certainly crafted by expert speech writers. Consider some of its key passages. Repeatedly, in this speech Trump denounces the evil of slavery and its contradiction of American ideals. He says of Lincoln: “He rose to high office from obscurity, based on a force and clarity of his anti-slavery convictions… Lincoln won the Civil War; he issued the Emancipation Proclamation, he led the passage of the 13th Amendment, abolishing slavery for all time, and ultimately, his determination to preserve our nation and our union cost him his life…giving every ounce of strength that he had to ensure that government of the people, by the people, and for the people, did not perish from the Earth.” Trump cites and praises many African-American heroes.

Frequently, repeatedly, joyfully, Trump cites and celebrates the universalism of the American promise, that the American dream is open to every citizen of every background. He says: “We believe in equal opportunity, equal justice and equal treatment for citizens of every race, background, religion and creed. Every child of every colour – born and unborn – is made in the holy image of God.”

That is not fascism, but traditional liberalism, in this case, if you like, Christian liberalism.

Trump cites Martin Luther King, whose vision he supports.

King did not denounce the American dream. He did not denounce America’s core documents. Rather, in his famous I Have a Dream speech, he asked America to live up to those documents fully. Indeed he began that speech with a heartfelt tribute to Lincoln: “… a great American in whose symbolic shadow we stand, (who) signed the Emancipation Declaration. This momentous decree is a great beacon of hope…”

In a powerful formulation, King said he and his followers had come to Washington “to cash a check. When the architects of our Republic wrote the magnificent words of the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence, they were signing a promissory note to which every American was to fall heir.”

It’s pretty clear isn’t it that if King were saying things like that today he would be denounced as a racist, a stooge for colonialism, as someone who refused to acknowledge the structural racism of America and its institutions, as someone who did not understand that, as The New York Times ridiculous 1619 Project has it, the central purpose of America was slavery. King would surely be denounced as threatening the safety of students who might have to listen to such shocking sentiments and he would be subject to the cancel culture.

King was also, like Trump, strongly, vigorously, stridently opposed to violence in demonstrations.

In his famous speech, King instructed: “In the process of gaining our rightful place we must not be guilty of wrongful deeds. Let us not seek to satisfy our thirst for justice by drinking from the cup of bitterness and hatred. We must not allow our creative protests to degenerate into physical violence.”

None of this, of course, is remotely to equate the heroic moral leadership of Martin Luther King, which has inspired millions of people across the generations, including me, with the often odious personality of Trump. However, those who style themselves as King’s heirs have become too often progenitors of ideological extremism he would hate.

In attacking Trump for his Mount Rushmore speech they are not just displaying an irrational hatred of a particular political leader, they are actually attacking Trump for espousing the same positions as King himself espoused.

Of course there were some contemporary, partisan, sharp edges to the Trump speech, but nothing remotely racist, or even race specific, nothing remotely offensive.

In his speech, Trump promises that the nation’s monuments to its founders will be protected. He promises that the police will “arrest the rioters”. He does not say protesters should be arrested. This is a vital distinction and one which Trump’s enemies never acknowledge. Barack Obama himself called violent protesters “thugs” and said they discredited the movements they claimed to support.

Republican senator Tom Cotton caused a firestorm by writing an oped in The New York Times in which he argued that violent protesters whom city police forces could not control justified the deployment of active service US military. That was probably a mistaken call at the time, though by no means extreme. But the real moral of the story is that when the newspaper staff revolted and the paper’s leadership went into craven surrender, and then full jihad denunciation of Cotton, they routinely claimed he had called for troops to be used against demonstrators.

These constant elidings and misrepresentations cannot really be seen any longer as accidental. The crime the ultra woke militants of illiberal liberal conformity want to punish is actually failing to support the new civic religion which involves hatred of Western civilisation and hatred of the societies this civilisation has created.

Trump at Mount Rushmore also had some shorter passages condemning the contemporary cancel culture and the left-wing indoctrination of students with hostility to America. In the attacks which claimed Trump was a fascist they claimed Trump was making this up, that no such thing really existed.

Are they kidding?

The West is under profound challenge internally and externally today. The irrational hatred of the West, within the West, is one symptom of a deep malaise. Trump was right to call it out.



Greg Sheridan, The Australian’s foreign editor, is one of the nation’s most influential national security commentators, who is active across television and radio and also writes extensively on culture. He has w… Read more


As Long As Mass Media Propaganda Exists, Democracy Is A Sham

As Long As Mass Media Propaganda Exists, Democracy Is A Sham  By Caitlin Johnstone, 9 July 2020

A new Reuters/Ipsos poll has reportedly found that a majority of Americans believe the completely discredited narrative that the Russian government paid Taliban-linked fighters to kill the occupying forces of the US and its allies in Afghanistan.

“A majority of Americans believe that Russia paid the Taliban to kill U.S. soldiers in Afghanistan last year amid negotiations to end the war, and more than half want to respond with new economic sanctions against Moscow, according to a Reuters/Ipsos poll released on Wednesday,” Reuters reports.

“Overall, 60% of Americans said they found reports of Russian bounties on American soldiers to be ‘very’ or ‘somewhat’ believable, while 21% said they were not credible and the rest were unsure,” says Reuters.

Most Americans believe Russia targeted U.S. soldiers, want sanctions in response, Reuters/Ipsos poll shows

— Reuters (@Reuters) July 8, 2020

Those 21 percent are objectively correct: the story is not credible, and it’s not even close. Gareth Porter shows in The Grayzone how the “Bountygate” narrative is so utterly baseless that even US intelligence agencies have dismissed it, Joe Lauria of Consortium News explains how it doesn’t make any sense on its face, and FAIR’s Alan MacLeod breaks down the appalling journalistic malpractice that went into circulating this incredibly thinly sourced story to the mainstream public.

The story advances no solid facts or verified information. What it does advance is pre-existing imperialist agendas like remaining in Afghanistan, killing the last of the remaining nuclear deals with Moscow, and manufacturing public support for new Russia sanctions.

And yet a majority of people believed it, and still believe it. The narrative that Russia paid Taliban fighters to kill occupying forces is now regarded as an established fact in many key circles, despite being backed by literally zero facts.

If people were as objective and adept at critical thinking as we tend to believe we are, the mass media’s unconscionable facilitation of a brazen cold war psyop would by itself have killed off all public trust in the institution of mass news reporting. But people are not as objective and adept at critical thinking as we tend to believe we are. People have many cognitive biases which distort our ability to objectively process information and understand events, including one which causes us to believe something is true just because they’ve heard it said multiple times. This makes us easily susceptible to mass media propaganda, where our encounters with daily news headlines can shape our perception of what’s going on in the world regardless of whether or not those headlines are backed by actual facts.

“Bounty-Gate” is the Pentagon’s main chance to keep the U.S. war in #Afghanistan going for a while longer. Push-back against those in Congress exploiting this fraud is needed to deprive the Pentagon and its allies from succeeding in this scheme.

— Gareth Porter (@GarethPorter) July 8, 2020

This latest poll is a perfect example of how the plutocrat-owned media manipulate public opinion in the interest of establishment agendas with brazen propaganda campaigns, but it is just the most recent example. Over and over and over again we see public perception of what’s going on distorted by lies inserted into their minds by the corporate news media, like when half a year after the invasion of Iraq seven in ten Americans believed Saddam Hussein was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. All it took to trick them into believing this and supporting the invasion was repeatedly mentioning 9/11 and Saddam in the same breath, despite there never being any evidence whatsoever for any such thing.

This kind of manipulation is not rare, it is ubiquitous and ongoing. Every single day the plutocratic media are putting ideas in people’s minds which favor the establishment upon which said plutocrats have built their kingdoms, normalizing the insane status quo and manufacturing support for agendas which bolster it. This is not some delusional conspiracy theory, it’s a well-documented fact to which many mainstream journalists have testified.

As long as this remains the case in our society, democracy cannot exist in any meaningful way. As long as a loose alliance of plutocrats and government operatives are able to consistently manipulate the way a critical mass of people think and vote, then you cannot rightly say that the people are in charge of the fate of their nation. If the majority is consistently in alignment with the plutocrats whose outsized media influence enables them to dominate the public narrative, then voting necessarily reflects the will of those plutocrats, not the people.

Even if you changed everything else that is wrong with the current system, nothing would change if the plutocratic class retained its ability to manipulate the way people think and vote. You can fix America’s garbage election integrity, end gerrymandering, even get money out of politics, but as long as the plutocratic class is still using its wealth to manipulate public thought in support of its interests, people would keep voting the way they’re manipulated to vote.

Manipulation is a key ingredient in any long-term abusive relationship, because people don’t tend to stay in abusive situations unless they are manipulated into doing so. This is true whether you’re talking about romantic partnerships, governments, or globe-spanning power structures. We don’t use the power of our numbers to end this abusive relationship where we are at the whim of crushing austerity, exploitative neoliberalism, endless war and rapacious ecocide, because we’re being manipulated into staying.

And, just like with any other abusive relationship, there comes a time to leave before it’s too late. That time is now. We can begin by expanding awareness of what’s really going on, both inwardly in ourselves and outwardly by sharing truthful information with others. In so doing, we stand a chance at making ourselves impossible to propagandize effectively and using our strength in numbers to force real change.


London Spins Out Of Control As Met Police Abandon Streets

London Spins Out Of Control As Met Police Abandon Streets  By M A Richardson, via, 7 July 2020

The US and Britain are at their most perilous point in one hundred years. Once stable democratic nation states made great through struggle and suffering to gain comparative freedom at huge sacrifice to their own population are throwing it all away.  The speed and ferocity of the attack is frightening, but this has been building for years, spreading from the 60s onwards through the university teaching  systems, unquestioned. It emerged into the public arena as political correctness as each generation of students became more radical. Then came the final push to silence opposition with wokism, virtue-signalling, identity politics, and now racial division, an aberration of democracy and freedom of speech.

The Trump presidency has been under a continual coup, even before taking office.  Involvement from the top down of Obama and his administration and security services is an inconvenience for the Democrats, and many Republicans feel the same. What it does show, is that at this moment in the history of the United States, the deep state are above the law. We are waiting for Attorney General Barr to prove otherwise, but since he has already stated it is unlikely that Obama or Biden will be called to testify, he has issued a free pass, move along, nothing to see. All is swept aside on a media tide of attacks on democracy and the rule of law by the radical left, as BLM take control and politicians scamper down rabbit holes trying to avoid the buckshot.  Those who control the media control the narrative, never more true than it is today, as truth becomes fiction and fiction fact.

History is no longer the ‘right’ history, facts are no longer facts but interpretations. Our language is corrupted by thought-speak and ‘wrong-thinking’. Intersectionality seeps through to the subconscious of the people as they are dissected, examined and re-assembled from parts into a whole, as independent thought lies discarded on the slab. The monster of BLM has screamed into the world, its children intent on destroying everything that will not acknowledge them, blind, unreasoning, malicious, merciless, they search for the meaning of their own existence and find nothing but their own image staring back from an iPhone.

We are at the turning point. All opposition is being de-platformed, demonetised and silenced by the tyranny of the social media monopolies of Google, Facebook, Twitter, in the great lurch left to totalitarianism.

Our language has been acquired, repossessed and annexed, a grand and despicable M&A, dismembered, rendered useless and sold off to the corporates and big tech.  They are laying off the workforce whom they consider obsolete and no longer useful for their purposes. The world has turned on its dark side, an unrecognisable corruption of reality.  Boris Johnson is presiding over a shift into anarchy. The Labour party cannot win through the ballot box, the BLM are useful to them. The radical left have co-opted and subjugated the old left, they are one and the same, because disorder and destruction are their only route to power, and they are taking it.

As temperatures rise and unrest spreads, London is braced for another week of anarchy.  A combination of  Covid-19 restrictions, a hands-off police policy, and subsequent breakdown of law and order follows years of devolution of police enforcement powers to local authorities, and pushes London towards breakdown.  Sadiq Khan, Mayor of London, has announced funding cuts to an already undermanned and demoralised front line police force of £110 million over the next 2 years, #BLM defund the police. The country is undergoing a communist insurrection, a cultural marxist revolution indulged and endorsed by the elites. Far left racial divisionists and mainstream media incite violence, pushing the marxist agenda, whilst the rest of the population is so punch- drunk with the speed of the takeover, it does not even recognise that it is about to hit the canvas.


BLM is a marketing exercise by the three founders, all trained radical Marxists.  Alicia Garza, Opal Tometi, and Patrisse Cullors. The public have been played.  No sympathy there. If you put your name or your money to a cause, the least you can do is look it up and see what you are supporting and find out what is behind the hype. Follow the money.

There is bet-hedging from ‘left-light’ political commentators who are afraid to declare the emperor has no clothes. They advocate that it is not BLM and the rise of cultural marxism that we should be worried about, but the rise of the far-right in reaction to it.  The far-right, or simply put, anyone who sees BLM for what they are, a cultural marxist totalitarian power-grab, are not the ones that require people to kneel before them, pull down and deface statues, injure police, the public and public property. BLM are the ones inciting riots through racial division, bullying small children,  calling to abolish the police, and end capitalism and the family. It is time to get off the bench and stop trying to play both sides of the field. It is cowardly and will end in your own demise as all is swept aside by the mob. Come the revolution, and it is coming, you want to know who will hold the line with you and who will run, so best to find out now.


At a party in Harrow Road London this week, police were pelted with objects and prevented from entering the area by youths shouting “you’re not coming in”  The police released a statement:

“Following engagement within the local community we are hopeful that crowds are dispersing.”

A quick look on Google translate will tell you this means – ‘they threw stuff at us, so we left’

The message is, don’t bother to call the council or the police, your neighbourhood is now run by youth mobs. The hardest hit by this lawlessness are in the poorest communities, in the council blocks, the housing association accommodation.  The gentrified can sell up and ship out with their kids, the same kids advocating and encouraging the cultural revolution and racial division that is destroying London. The same kids that will be the politicians of tomorrow.

Local authorities have the power to issue ASBOs (Anti-Social Behaviour Orders) noise abatement orders, and to seize equipment, but in most instances do not have the manpower or the resources to do so. They are the front line community police for out of control raves and parties, and they are the ones that engage with the local community and youth offenders and understand what is happening on the ground.  Most no longer operate ‘out of hour services’ which is a nonsense, since that is exactly the time they are needed. All that can be done is for a complaint to be lodged after the fact. The police rarely engage with locals, instead they have a faceless, distant, centralised Met police call centre.

Parliament have made mass gatherings and peaceful protests unlawful for the moment, but there is an exception.   Northumbria police issued this statement yesterday:

“We’ll be in attendance to facilitate a planned Black Lives Matter vigil at Keel Square in #Sunderland tonight.  A Section 14 order is in place forbidding any other public assembly, including counter-protests, to ensure the public’s safety.” – Northumbria Police

This was echoed yesterday in London as more subsets of BLM demonstrators were allowed into central London in a  Black Trans Lives Matter rally. Thousands of activists marched through central London in place of Pride celebrations that had been cancelled due to Covid-19 health fears. Banners of “White silence is violence” were held above the crowd, and a sign outside Parliament defaced, crossing out ‘Parliament’ and replacing it with “racists”. The law is no longer applied equally. Radical left marxists running BLM take over the centre of London each weekend and grow emboldened, realising the law does not apply to them.

London 16 Jun 2020:

“MPs have unanimously approved the Health Protection (Coronavirus, Restrictions) (England) (Amendment) (No.3) Regulations 2020. This new law bans mass gatherings in London in a fight to stop the spread of the deadly virus”

In Westminster, the government in their elite London bubble, seem unwilling to admit to the sense of unease amongst the public as law-abiding citizens are beginning to wonder if they even cares, They know that Sadiq Khan is intent on causing as much pain as he can to the population of London.  It is likely the police will abandon the streets if a serious riot breaks out.  Londoners see this as a real possibility, it has happened before.

The last sustained rioting across London was sparked by the death of Mark Duggan in 2011. This saw disaffected youths vandalising property, looting, and assaulting people. Police were unable to respond to the speed of the rioting or to the numbers on the streets. The disorder spread to other parts of the UK and showed the power of social media to ignite and inflame tensions.  An astonishing 3,000 people were arrested and 1,000 criminal charges brought for various crimes related to the riots. It was anarchy.  There were 5 deaths and 16 injured as a direct result.

These riots are still fresh in the mind due to their speed and ferocity and the opportunistic and senseless nature of the crimes committed.  The same atmosphere is building, this time based on the BLM righteous rage and racial division agenda. If the police cannot shut down a party, they cannot contain a riot.

The BLM construct lights a fire under race relations, deliberately so. The law-abiding citizen is unprotected and demonised.  It is woke politics on steroids.

“Developing and delivering training, police monitoring and strategies for the abolition of police.”    –  gofundmeUK BLM 

BLM has seeped into all aspects of our lives, online, onto the streets and into the language. It is a very aggressive form of indoctrination and advertising, it is impossible to get away from on any media platform, television, radio, advertising and is being relentlessly pushed by corporates.  The premise is, if you are white you are a racist. BLM is controlling the news narrative.  The British and American public are under attack by a cult largely endorsed by their governments who, instead of defending the people that voted them into power, take the side of the mob.

We are living through a transition to totalitarianism. The attacks are coming in waves, each wave growing in intensity, consuming and feeding off the last. They carry with them the worst disruptors of society of which there are many. They are active at demonstrations,  as trained jihadists infiltrate and disrupt alongside Antifa and BLM activists.

In America, heavily armed populist militia groups are growing and forming a coalition with the police, preparing for the fight-back.  In the UK, there is no second amendment right to bear arms, so citizens are at the mercy of government policy.  The police and government are working against their own people, the only way to fight back is to move out and find relative safety, this is what is happening in London.

Left wing councils all over the UK are forcing agreement to marxist agenda. This is a battle between the people vs the elite political class. There is deep suspicion of all that they represent, government, corporate, education, media, church, all seem designed to silence those they claim to represent and to further their own, centralised globalist ideology. BLM are just another branch of this elite. This is Groundhog Day, the same argument that was played out after the Brexit referendum, that democracy does not matter, this is just the next battle in a far more extreme, pervasive and corrupt form.

This is a race war incited by woke identity politics, facilitated by middle class white malcontents and snowflakes, overindulged by their parents and allowed to continue tantrums far beyond their teens, encouraged and enabled by neoliberal university educators and group-think on social media. It is an assault on the soul of nations, aided by domestic terrorists with the blessing of big government. It is the opposite of the spirit of Brexit, the opposite of independent thought. It is against the rule of law, the constitution, it is the destruction of the West by a decadent and controlling elite completely out of touch with its own people.

On television, white primary school kids are humiliated and confused as they are asked to explain their white privilege.  This is the ultimate endorsement of bullying by a political elite.  BLM have ignited a race war, it is being played out in schools, on the streets and in the political arena, we are being told we must ‘see colour’, to actively encourage division by colour. There is no room for discussion or debate with this hypersensitive Facebook generation who are incapable of having an opinion unless it is ‘liked’ by consensus. Racial profiling is being endorsed across all mainstream media platforms.

Both Britain and America have governments that are weak and vulnerable, both countries are ripe for the taking. Shaun King could not have staged this uprising more skilfully, no doubt he has a strong hand in this and directs from his throne at Harvard Law School. Sadiq Khan and Cressida Dick do his bidding.

Norman Brennan, Director of the Law and Order Foundation, on Talk Radio London said of the anarchy in Britain:

“We are barely able to police everyday issues. We have lost 22,000 officers, 4,000 of them in the Met. Just look how that has depleted backing up their own colleagues dealing with any public disorders that we are beginning to see on our streets, almost daily now. It’s embarrassing, I feel for my colleagues. In thirty-one years of policing I can’ t recall a single time that I ran away from an incident. A). I knew I would be getting back-up and B). we had this sort of fearlessness amongst us that the criminal element were not allowed to run riot, they were not allowed to rule the streets. That’s our job, and we rule the streets on behalf of society. What the Commissioner does {Cressida Dick}, and she does it all the time, is to close it down, you can see her political stance.

What public order incident that breaks out on the streets, most probably in London,  is going to ignite wide scale public disorder throughout Britain? It takes one. At this moment in time, it’s like a litmus paper. Which incident is going to light it?”

BLM can only feel encouraged, just like a spoilt child testing how far they can go until the adult in the room says, no more.  The problem is, there are no adults in the room.

Boris Johnson and Priti Patel are full of platitudes, but they do nothing. This is no longer a Conservative party that are strong on public order, this is a Conservative Party far left of Tony Blair.  A party out of touch with its core voters, so much so that all it can do is steal the ideas from another party to win an election, as it did from Nigel Farage and the Brexit Party in 2019.  It seems to think that to deliver on Brexit is enough, but this terrible unease that has come over the country is at boiling point, as the law-abiding citizen is chastised and knocked back into silence again and again.

In London, you can feel the tension on the ground, simmering, mostly unsaid, but it is there. The elites in the London bubble don’t see this, and so it festers. They have no sense of place, only a sense of self.  For them it is an experiment in socialism, for the public it is a crisis. When a country has to take up arms to protect itself, will such a diversity of communities, such disparity in wealth, of ideas, of religions, be able to come together to defeat the enemy?  Will it even be able to identify who that enemy is when the government and their agencies, so contemptuous of the public, and yet so naive themselves, cannot.  That question will be answered soon.  The public will get no help, the elites have chosen to go to war against their own people. They have taken to a serpent to their bosom, an insidious viper that is sowing the seeds of racial unrest.  It is a construct by forces wishing to subvert and cause pain and to take power over those already weak and demoralised from Covid-19.  A woke, cultural revolution of media and government institutions against all that the British public hold dear.

“I believe that the mainstream media in Britain are stoking and inciting people to be disorderly on the streets of Britain. It’s almost as though they would love it if there were wide-scale public disorder.” – Norman Brennan

More than this, it is the aim of BLM, Antifa and the increasingly marxist socialist left, many of whom preside in Westminster, to cause exactly that.  The public are at this very moment being beaten into submission.

Anyone who lives in London becomes streetwise very fast, and stories of citizens being marched to an ATM at knife point are common. These are not petty crimes.  In one of the largest local authorities in London run by a Labour council for many years, their crime enforcement team has been reduced to 4 for a population of approx 324,000. The need by government to reduce perceived crime has led to such madness. This hollows out the middle class who are moving away from London as they feel it is no longer a safe place to live or raise children. Judging from the battles in some of the most gentrified and highly-priced boroughs in London, they are right.

Whilst most citizens are still under restrictions in ‘bubbles’ of social contact, others are totally immune to either enforcement or prosecution. Priti Patel talks tough but if she were serious, she would fire Cressida Dick. Alongside Sadiq Kahn, the marxist agitator who despises his own country, they are killing London, without law and order on the streets, and law and order applied equally, there is nothing. They are poisonous.

This overtly racist tribalist drive to divide the cities is yet another realignment of the elites. Those outside the London bubble indoctrination zone are not buying into any of this and grow more sceptical by the day.  This is a choice. You chose civilisation, free speech, the constitution and the rule of law, you defend it vociferously, or you let it all crumble to dust and be taken over by the radical left, who will have power over you until death.


Previous articles

    • pauling-hansons-first-speech-in-the-senate-14-september-2016
    • cairns-post-editorial-201016  Laws of diminishing returns as the ‘nanny state’ takes over control of our freedom, By Julian Tomlinson, Cairns Post, 20 October 2016

Government for the Silent Majority

The KiS report – “Keep it Simple” – Government for the silent majority.

The full report can be downloaded as a PDF file: KiS full report 100316  The report summary and table of contents are provided below.

The KiS  report describes an Australian government the ‘silent majority’ of voters would likely have elected – if they had the choice.

Why?  Because because it would benefit them far, far more than any recent governments which have evolved since federation over a century ago.  Many would say most if not all aspects of government have gone downhill ever since.  Like a corporation that is failing badly, the Australian Government needs a fundamental restructure – a ‘root and branch’ rebuild based on the needs of 2016 and the future.

The report includes assessments of, and proposed solutions to, key factors voters expect their governments to lead and manage appropriately on their behalf such as: finance, debt, defence, environment, law and order, energy availability, pollution regulations, immigration, taxation, healthcare, recreational drugs, education, infrastructure and related planning approaches.

Please note this report was written nearly 5 years ago and is in dire need of updating in some areas.  However, the substantive points remain valid, and the overall proposed solution will not change significantly in the update.  A few areas such as the system for taxation will be modified, as will aspects of foreign relationships.

Whilst the report is focused on the Australian government, much of the report could be applied to most governments in democratic countries.

About the author: Peter Senior CV March 2016 – email:

The report Table of Contents, then the Summary, are below:

KiS Report – Table of Contents


2.  Introduction
2.01  There are glimmers of hope
2.02  Check the roadmap first

3.  Issues Influencing KiS Government
3.01  Democracy evolution
3.02  The modern nation-state
3.03  Cargo Cult mentality
3.04  Immigration
3.05  Freedom of speech
3.06  Trade unions, labour laws and productivity
3.07  Standards, regulations and intrusion
3.08  ‘Carbon pollution’ v. weather
3.09  The ‘green mafia’
3.10  Water management
3.11  Energy management
3.12  Global governance
3.13  NGO influence
3.14  Bureaucracy and convoluted government management
3.15  Levels of government

3.16  Justice
3.17  Economics and financial management
3.18  The modern politician
3.19  Human imperfections and differences

4.  KiS Issue Summary

5.  KiS Philosophy

6.  KiS Vision for Australia

7.  KiS Management
7.01  Management 101 delivers optimum results
7.02  A starting point to improve on

8.  KiS Government Organisation
8.01  KiS national government objective
8.02  KiS national government law process
8.03  National Government structure
8.04  Two levels of government
8.05  Democracy

9.  KiS Government management
9.01  Criminal Justice
9.02  National and local service fees
9.03  Excise tax and royalties
9.04  Financial management
9.05  Commercial and financial oversight
9.06  Citizenship and Visas
9.07  Infrastructure and the environment
9.08  Labour laws and productivity
9.09  Welfare
9.10  Retirement
9.11  Health
9.12  Education

10.  Implementing KiS Government
10.01  Transition plan
10.02  KiS government activities and resources
10.03  Planning and plans
10.04  International agreements and foreign aid
10.05  Asset ownership
10.06  Process and regulation simplification
10.07  Culture and values tests
10.08  Guardian group and freedom of speech
10.09  Communicating KiS changes

11.  Would the Silent Majority Vote for KiS?
11.01  Are the silent majority of Australian voters sufficiently fed up?
11.02  Boiling frog syndrome
11.03  An about-turn by politicians as well as the silent majority?

A.  Australian immigration history
B.  The Greens’ agenda
C.   ‘Carbon Pollution’ in the UK
D.  The Silent Majority (1):  Australian divorce
E.  The Silent Majority (2):  ‘I’m tired’ (US)
F.  The Silent Majority (3):  What good people do
G. ‘The Australian Government beat me to it’

KiS Report Summary

Surveys, ‘pub-talk’ and media comment indicate that most Australians are very dissatisfied with their Government.  Few voters believe that current political parties can fix the plethora of problems which arise from the government itself – and politicians tend to exacerbate problems rather than fixing them.

Voter frustrations include: excessive governmental intrusion and bureaucracy; financial regulator failures; abysmal government management of risk, building, health, water, energy and immigration; ineffective criminal justice; ‘carbon pollution’ taxes and waste; the ‘green mafia’; variability of freedom of speech; covert influence from some NGOs; inadequate employment laws; and the regularity of politicians’ breaking of promises.

No democratic government in the world is widely viewed as very successful, so there is no ideal model to copy.  The complexity of government and the depth of related problems are too entrenched for incremental improvements to be effective.  A keep-it-simple policy could provide the best solution.  KiS is a completely different way of democratic government, starting with a ‘clean slate’ and applying the best management practices.  Key components of a KiS government would include:

  • Recognition that competent and diligent governmental staff are often thwarted by excessive complexity and by covert agendas of power brokers and ideologues.
  • Government structure comprises two levels: national and local.  States have figurehead roles only.  Local governments have wider roles including health and education boards.
  • House of Representatives and Senate member numbers are reduced to a total of 100.  Members demonstrate excellent competencies and comply with fiduciary duties of care.
  • All taxes are replaced by ‘flat rate service fees’ introduced over 3 years: 20% on individual incomes and 10% on business expenditure.  Compliance is simple.
  • Businesses such as mining companies using natural resources pay economic rents which enable fair profits and encourage investment and growth, including overseas investment.
  • Recreational drugs are not illegal.  Excise duties are charged on alcohol, tobacco and recreational drugs at rates that cover all related costs with rigorous auditing and penalties.
  • Government processes, systems and regulations are reviewed using ‘clean slate’ methods that optimise efficiency and effectiveness, and, if necessary, are modified or replaced.
  • All government departments have audited plans that conform to guidelines reflecting best practices, and which include preparation for such contingencies as catastrophic weather.
  • The criminal justice system focuses first on full compensation of all victims’ losses and all related judicial costs, then on the rehabilitation of criminals.  When appropriate and possible, custodial sentences consist of home detention – prison is a last resort.
  • Government asset ownership is retained only if no better alternative be available.
  • Commercial and financial oversight is strengthened to ensure that GFC-type greed and excesses are not repeated.  Net government debt is eliminated as soon as practical.
  • All government funding relating to ‘carbon pollution’ ceases.  Related actions are reviewed after rigorous assessments and recommendations from a Royal Commission.
  • Immigrant assessments are completed and decisions made within three months.  Immigrants sign contracts agreeing to abide by Australian law and to support Australian culture and values.  Major transgressors are evicted from Australia.
  • A Guardian group investigates concerns about covert influence and behaviour.
  • Implementation is gradual over several years; each step builds on the last success.

KiS solutions focus on the concerns and wishes of the ‘silent majority’ of voters — the antithesis of political power-brokers, ideologues and rent-seekers.  KiS proposals are not intended to be definitive; rather they provide a basis for improvements and further reforms.

Are the ‘silent majority’ of voters so fed up with existing governments that they would vote for radical change such as KiS?  Would sufficient candidates with the requisite competence and credibility stand for KiS and promote it, or would an existing political party adopt KiS policies if it became clear a growing movement of voters demand change?  Failure to implement radical change soon will result in Australian politics and government descending even further into complexity, intrusion and waste with little hope of real reform.