Value the Power of your Consent

VALUE THE POWER OF

YOUR CONSENT

And the power of your withheld consent

According to an article in the business section of The Telegraph on Sunday, 23 April 2017, overall, combining the previous costs of running elections and the likely spend in this year's campaigns, the 2017 General Election is estimated to cost around £170m.

I put it to you that this estimate isn’t even close to the real cost and it is, anyway, a mere monetary cost. The TRUE cost is higher, much higher. I believe we are being called in all manner of slippery ways to what I can only describe as mass delusion or even insanity.

Attributed variously to Albert Einstein, Benjamin Franklin, Rita Mae Brown, Beth Moore, Mark Silber, Henry Ford, the grammatically incorrect Tony Robbins, and others, the essential statement is: 

and

 

ANY ARGUMENTS?

It’s OK. I didn’t expect (m)any.

Everyone who hasn’t been in a coma for the last few weeks knows that a General Election has been called in UK while the Fixed-Term Parliaments Act 2011 is still in force. The Act provides for a General election to be held every five years on the first Thursday in May. But, as is so often the case, there is a get-out clause. An early election may be called “If a motion for an early general election is agreed either by at least two-thirds of the House or without division. Political party members in the House of Commons agreed by 522 to 13 to allow an early General Election. Politicians ALWAYS have the next election on their minds. YOU weren’t asked. Only those with vested interest were asked, which is ‘normal’.

OK, that’s the background. Unspoken and unwritten is the implicit idea that, for whatever reason, 522 party representatives (give or take a few who will anyway choose to stand down) believed they have a reasonable chance of re-election. Or they expected some form of political isolation or retribution if they failed to agree to the call. Perhaps ex-communication from the party? Perish the thought. 

Nevertheless, they decided amongst themselves that the public could be deluded once more into believing that their votes will bring about change. They have perpetrated a staged illusion. As I said earlier. . .

AND

Here’s a good suggestion: Print those two signs and stick them on your refrigerator door. Read them daily and think about their message. Then admit in your heart of hearts:

AND 

THAT IS THE TRUE COST OF OUR

IMMINENT GENERAL ELECTION

˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜

So what can we do?

1.  Make it your purpose to be part of the movement that seeks electoral change! Change from the ‘no longer fit for purpose’ voting system that party leaders love so much.

2.  Never use a postal ballot. The opportunity and temptation to manipulate postal ballots is huge – and proven. Why make it easy?

3.  Ignore political party leaders. You can’t vote for them unless you live in the constituency in which they stand for election. You know that you may only vote for a candidate in your own constituency, don’t you?

4.  Recognise that something in each party manifesto will more or less reflect some of your views. But recognise, too, that the party exists only to continue the existence of the party – and nothing more than that. So ignore the party and its siren calls.

5.  Seek out the Independent candidates in your own constituency. If they reflect your own view of the world, get behind them and encourage your neighbours to do the same.

6.  Lastly, if you cannot be comfortable getting behind your local Independent candidate, spoil your ballot paper, and ask your neighbours to do the same. Spoil them in the same way so it is clear that there is a movement for change. WHY? Because even spoiled ballot papers are counted and the numbers are published. Not voting isn’t a genuine option. A non-voter’s hopes and aspirations are not counted and don’t count – literally.

7.  Be assured that those candidates who represent a political party will review the spoiled papers. If hundreds of papers have been marked “None of the above” the discontent will be noticed provided sufficient people join the action, not just on 8^th June but every time we are called to vote.

8.  Above all

Cause no harm

Be honest

Be peaceful

Recognise that we are sovereign beings and NO ONE has the right to rule over you without your consent. NO ONE.

MAKE YOUR CONSENT VALUEABLE

(See also www.bloodlessrevolution.co.uk) 

Meanwhile, ah've bin thinking

While the newspapers, TV and radio news broadcasters have reported the world on its way to hell in a hand-basket, I’ve been travelling. I’m told that travel broadens the mind and for some people, sometimes, I believe that it does. 

For some others it means nothing more than confirmation to self about how very important we travellers are. At least, many seem to think so. After all, we can afford to be transported. Much of the world can’t afford to eat properly, despite all manner of international aid. Others scrimp and save to pay someone to transport them illegally but we aren’t concerned about all that from 39,000ft., are we?

The epitome of this falsehood about our importance is demonstrated to me by the Welsh clown in the TV advert for luxury holiday cruises. “Ah, this is the life!” he summarizes, smugly. Of course it is; he was paid very well by the cruise company to say that.

˜ ˜ ˜ ˜

Realise with real eyes the real lies

Things that I felt absolutely sure of but a few years ago, I do not believe now.

This thought makes me see more clearly how foolish it would be to expect

all men to agree with me. (Jim Rohn 1930-2009)

I’m sure every generation has its own ‘Fings Ain’t Wot They Used To Be’ experience. Some call it ‘progress’ but I think ‘change’ is a better description. The word ‘change’ allows the individual to determine whether or not there is progress but ‘progress’ implies that any change, whether it be social, political, or religious is for the good. It ain’t necessarily so – with apologies to Porgy and Bess.

I’ve mulled recently on the idea of ‘-ism’. Dictionary.com defines ism as:-

A noun - a distinctive doctrine, theory, system, or practice: as in This is the age of isms. (??)

The word that immediately springs to mind from that is ‘schism’. The same Dictionary.com tells me that this, too, is a noun, meaning:

1. division or disunion, especially into mutually opposed parties.
2. the parties so formed.
3. Ecclesiastical.

1. a formal division within, or separation from, a church or religious body over some doctrinal difference.
2. the state of a sect or body formed by such division.
3. the offense of causing or seeking to cause such a division.

I believe that tells me all I want to know about Conservatism, Liberalism, Communism, Socialism, Catholicism, Anglicanism, Calvinism, Islamism, terrorism, opportunism and so on. All these words are divisive except when applied to their respective adherents. For them, an ‘ism’ unites. Isn’t that interesting?

That led me to ‘-ist’: a suffix of nouns, often corresponding to verbs ending in -ize or nouns ending in -ism, that denote a person who practices or is concerned with something, or holds certain principles, doctrines, etc.: as in apologist; dramatist; machinist; novelist; realist; socialist; Thomist. And specialist? (My question mark)

In short, -isms and –ists seem to be labels that we apply conveniently to determine social separation and division of some kind. (Dictionary.com again). I find it remarkable that we are able express our divisions with a single word and not even think about it.

˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜

While the world holds its breath

Presidents Trump, Putin and Kim Jong-un stand nose to nose on the world stage and strut the most alarming ‘I’m-right-you-are-wrong’ pantomimes while the rest of us look on helplessly. 

The media focuses on the leaders but thoughtful people also focus on those behind the thrones. I’m referring to the advisers, counsellors, (Queen’s Counsellors in Britain) and other vested interest sycophants, the -ists and -isms that have the ear of current, here-today-gone-tomorrow leaders.

When these, too, pass away, where do we stand, dear thoughtful reader? What are our values? What is our –ism?

How about PRAGMATISM?

noun

1. character or conduct that emphasizes practicality.

2. a philosophical movement or system having various forms, but generally stressing practical consequences as constituting the essential criterion in determining meaning, truth, or value. (Also dictionary.com)

How about ‘to thine own self be true’? (Act 1, scene 3, Hamlet by William Shakespeare).

So, it seems that everything boils down to whether or not each thoughtful individual is willing to pay the price for holding true to their own version of meaning, truth or value. Individual-ism has its (often high) price and so does conformity and compliance. There is no get out clause.

I leave you with my own philosophy:

Cause no harm

Be honest

Be peaceful

(They can’t touch you for it).