A generation of entitled, vacuous, wasted materialists

First things first, I will begin this rant with 2 disclaimers;


1) Before anyone complains that this article is ‘ageist’, I would like to state that I wrote it as a *reaction* to the hundreds of articles circulating the net which attack, insult and patronise Millenials.  It is hardly fair to say that the under 35s are fair game for derision, slander, and spite from the commentariat, then complain that the reverse is ‘ageist’.  What is truly ‘ageist’ is denying working, taxpaying 16 and 17 years olds the vote, charging a 25 year old who has been driving six years higher car insurance than a 45 year old new driver, setting the minimum wage lower for younger (i.e. more energetic) workers, denying them housing benefit, while granting it to older people, or any of the other myriad ways the young are expressly singled out for unfair treatment in modern Britain.

2) This is an attack on the baby boomers specifically – not ‘old people’ in general.  The attitudes, injustices and hypocrisies highlighted here are perpetrated almost exclusively by the under 85s.  I talk here about the post-war generation – those from 40-80.  Those older than this – nonagenarians and centenarians in particular – were responsible for both defending the country from fascism and rebuilding once it was vanquished.  I have infinite respect for those who got us through the war, and built us up afterwards.  This attack is focused exclusively on those who benefited from, and ultimately destroyed, the society which the over 85s built.  Indeed, tory baby-boomers have voted not only to destroy their children’s futures, but also to make the final years of their parent’s generation infinitely more miserable with the cuts to health and social care their votes implicitly support.

If we are to believe the mainstream press and the better-funded social commentators of the world, Millennials are shallow, entitled wasters, while baby-boomers are sober, sensible, hard-working, salt-of-the-earth types.

Problem is, once you actually look at the facts, rather than the baseless opinions of the privileged, self-entitled, molly-coddled ‘journalists’, we see the opposite is true.

Baby boomers are more likely to drink and drive than Millenials [1]

Baby-boomers drink more alcohol than Millenials [2]

Baby-boomers smoke more than Millenials [3]

Baby boomers were, in their youth, (& often still are), more violent than Millenials [4]

Baby boomers are more likely to cheat on their partner, whilst Millenials are actually very faithful [5]

Baby-boomers take/took more drugs than Millenials [6]

Baby-boomers commit more crime than Millenials [7]


So we see how, even by the conservative baby-boomer’s own standards of good behaviour and decency, Millenials actually perform better!  So that’s the charge of hedonistic, vacuous inebriation out of the window. . . so what about the accusation that Millenials are ‘more entitled’?  What does ‘entitled’ mean?  Surely it means you believe you should get something denied to somebody else, simply by virtue of ‘being you’. . . but again, we see how this accusation applies to baby-boomers far more than Millenials.

Baby-boomers retired somewhere between 60 and 65 (68 if they were unlucky)  Millenials are on course to retire at 70 – if they’re lucky!

Baby-boomers were entitled to free university education, while Millenials are shouldered with £50-75,000 student debt

If a baby-boomer decided not to go to uni, their job would probably give them decent training and a promotion scheme, whereas the Millenials usually get neither

For a baby-boomer at age 25, the average house price was around twice the average wage, for a Millenial, it is ten times the average wage.

Boomers got secure working contracts, Millenials get zero hours and the gig economy

Boomers get/got sick pay, Millenials don’t

Boomers got holiday pay, Millenials don’t

Boomers got a student grant, Millenials don’t

Boomer’s houses have quadrupled in value, whereas Millenials are subjected to barely affordable rents (usually paid to already wealthy boomer landlords!)


So we see how, a generation which gets persistently called ‘entitled’, is actually in receipt of far, far less opportunity than the people leveling this accusation!  We constantly hear the tory-boomer  yammering on that “there’s no magic money tree”, even though there apparently was one for them!  What did they do, chop it down for firewood?


So, once we observe the facts, we see that Millenials are far less vacuous and entitled than baby-boomers – but what about another accusation leveled at Millenials – that they are ‘soft’, ‘easily offended’, ‘quick to complain’ and ‘slow to action’.  Again, we see how the opposite is true.

Despite all their privilege,  the baby-boomers still ended up as ‘grumpy old (wo)men’, constantly moaning about everything, whether it be in local newspapers, complaints to the council, the comments section of facebook pages which invariably incorporate the Union Flag somewhere.  The litany of things the boomers will gripe and whinge about has no end – lefties, migrants, the EU, “the council don’t mow the village green often enough”, “The council mowers are too loud”, kids today, Muslims, migrants, the council, speed bumps, refugees, litter, queues at borders, lack of border control, bin collections, poles, no bin collections, wind turbines, solar farms, power plants, expensive energy bills, the neighbor’s overgrown hedges, bleeding heart liberals, traffic, traffic calming measures, speeding cars, speed traps, and on and on and on.

You rarely see a Millenial looking grumpy on page 8 of the local gazette because he saw a dustbin turned over and, rather than just picking it up, decided to go to the effort of moaning to the local paper and council – it is always some bored, middle-class dullard with nothing better to do with their Sunday.

Whereas on the other side, we see that, despite all the disadvantage they face, Millenials ended up positive, chirpy, kind and tolerant – attributes for which they are continually derided by the mainstream press.  Millenials don’t have either the time or the disposition to complain about every last thing – they just get on with it, overburdened though they are.

The funny thing is that the boomers often claim proudly to be ‘conservative’. . . yet by their own standards and measures, millennials actually fulfil the positive values of conservatism – sobriety, faithfulness, hard work etc. – far better than their parents not only did, but in many cases, still do!

So we end up in a world where permanently sozzled, borderline alcoholic baby-boomers who lounged their way through free university education, insult comparatively sober millennials who did three jobs just to survive their degrees, accusing them of being “spoiled, lazy vacuous wasters”!

Those who are working three jobs to get through uni are being insulted as lazy by those who did none!

Millenials work ten times harder for half as much – they meet conservative standards of ‘decent living’ far better than the actual self-proclaimed conservatives of the world – they work harder, behave better and receive far, far less in return. . . and then have to tolerate the insults and derision of the most spoiled generation in history, and their conservative media (mainstream and ‘alt’) deriding them as slovenly and entitled!

Its like the boomers are psychologically addicted to believing the opposite of truth – we have a demographic who have become wealthy beyond all reasonable means off the back of a property bubble (which took zero skill, enterprise, hard work or intelligence to exploit) – telling an utterly broke, destitute, disenfranchised generation which can barely afford their rent, that THEY are the ones who are privileged!

The boomers are the only generation in history to put their short-term materialism and greed over the needs of their children.  We owe them NOTHING – not our place in the queue, nor our seat on the bus, and least of all our respect – they have systematically exploited, disenfranchised and stolen from us – all the while insulting us as spoiled and over-privileged!


So we see, once we look at facts, not opinions, we see that Millenials;

Get attacked as privileged, even though they receive less.

Get called lazy – even though they work harder

Get accused of being vacuous wasters – even though they live more sober & faithful lives than their parents!

Don’t believe the propaganda – there is a generation of spoiled, wasted, vacuous, shallow materialists, but it ain’t the Millenials.



2] http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/millennials-drinking-less-alcohol-when-they-socialise-compared-to-older-generation/news-story/b0d2ab0dc085316f5ec6714d3da1f5cf

3] http://news.gallup.com/poll/187592/young-adults-cigarette-down-sharply.aspx

4] https://medium.com/@ries10berg/crime-and-millennials-37320eb84431

5] http://nypost.com/2017/07/29/why-millennials-cheat-less-than-their-parents/

7] https://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2017/05/daily-chart-21

8] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/09/07/young-people-are-committing-much-less-crime-older-people-are-still-behaving-as-badly-as-before/?utm_term=.67659e25fe33


C is for Conservative, C is for Chaos

Dear reader

A message from a concerned fellow citizen.

An election has been called.  The conservatives, and the newspapers which support them, will set out their stall claiming they stand for stability, security, and strong leadership through challenging times.   However, the record of this government, under both Cameron and May, has seen nothing but chaos, insecurity, instability and weak leadership from day one.  Under their watch, we have seen;

An ever-growing number of workers forced onto insecure, low-pay, zero-hours contracts, or phoney ‘self-employment’ schemes, unsure of how much work, if any, awaits them the next week or even the next day – what ‘stability’ have the conservatives provided for these hard-working citizens?

Fewer and fewer striving, professional, working and middle-class young couples are able to afford to get onto the housing ladder at all, let alone within their desired regions and communities.  What ‘security’ have the conservatives provided for these young families, many millions of whom have completely given up on the dream of home ownership?

The NHS is on its knees.  What ‘security’ is there for pensioners reliant on a chronically underfunded care system, staffed by overworked and undertrained staff?  What stability and certainty for these pensioners, and other vulnerable people, is there in an NHS which has been denied the resources it needs, leading to rising inefficiency and standards, and promptness of care and treatment in freefall?  Since the conservatives gained power, every single NHS trust in England has gone from a funding surplus to a funding deficit.

Whether you voted leave or remain, the conservative party’s unwillingness to set out any real parameters for what Brexit will eventually look like (single market or not, tariff-free access or not, etc.) has led to nothing but insecurity for business, workers and the markets and has devalued the pound to a previously unforeseen level.

Unlike her predecessor, Margret Thatcher, Theresa May has made repeated U-turns in her short time in office, most notably over Grammar Schools but also this election itself – an election she repeatedly promised not to call.  She has demonstrated her leadership to be weak and indecisive.

Under Cameron’s watch, this country has seen homelessness quadruple, the debt triple, food bank use by working families increase tenfold, wages stagnate by more than any European country apart from Greece, and child poverty double.  Theresa May’s reign has seen all these trends continue, as well as the pound reach its lowest ever level, Britain lose its AAA credit rating, and drop from 5th to 7th in world economic league tables.  This is not stability, security, a ‘safe pair of hands’ or a ‘steady hand on the tiller’ – this is evidence of a nation in terminal socio-economic chaos and decline.

Be it concerning the NHS, secure jobs, home ownership, care for our elderly, hope for our young, security for our workers, Brexit or fiscal competence, this government’s record shows it has let down the people of this country time and time again.  Every other party has a coherent plan to invest in and help our country recover and grow.

This is a plea from a fellow British not in favour of any particular opposition party, be they Lib-dem, Labour or Green, but rather against the chaos, insecurity and decline perpetrated by this conservative government.  This country cannot survive another five years of deterioration and disorder under this party.  Please, for the good of the nation, do not vote conservative this June.


The corruption of conservatism

The three conservatisms – the true conservative

One of the main factors damaging our country in modern times are the strange changes taking over conservatism.  I admit, I do not personally identify as a conservative, there are many aspects of even true conservatism with which I do not agree – the hierarchical ideas, the notions of conformity and authority and an overarching focus on ‘tradition’.  However, I do respect true conservatism as an honest, decent, consistent and rational parallel to my worldview.  True conservatives consistently believe in traditional family values, hard work, British institutions, sobriety, charity, community, stability, order, sound business practice, an entrepreneurial spirit and fiscal prudence. . . these are noble qualities, and I truly respect those who support them consistently and without hypocrisy.

However, these days, this true meaning of ‘conservative’ is being corrupted and distorted by an increasing number of hypocrites who seem to be very flexible in their application of the principles of conservatism.  Many people who often don’t even truly practice the real tenets of conservatism are increasingly coming to loudly self-identify as such, and demand others follow suit.

Modern conservatism is splitting into three main branches – the Consistent Conservative, the Short-Sighted Scrooge (personified by Tory Austerity) and the Nationalist Fraud (personified by ukip).  The second two come under the banner ‘Nominal Conservatives’ – people who loudly proclaim their conservatism but who demonstrate little consistency in its practice of true understanding of its ideals.  As we will see, the second two are also actively harmful to the true values of conservatism.


True conservatives value family – the stability, both on an individual and a community level, which comes from having a strong, secure and loving home life.  True conservatives recognise the value in committing to a partner, settling down, forging a home, working hard for your children and conducting ones affairs in a sensible, sober and rational manner.   However, this notion of family is being destroyed by the economic short-termism of Tory Austerity, and the Nationalism of Ukip.  More and more hard-working young British couples are waiting longer and longer before buying their first home (stability) and having their first child (family), due to the housing bubble and economic insecurity brought on by the policies of the current ‘conservative’ government. 

Austerity causes a fear amongst many young people that their government has no faith in them, refuses to invest in them, does not believe in a future for them.  Many cannot afford to buy a home and, even if they could, are tied to such low-quality, zero-hours, temporary employment no-one will lend to them.  This is gradually killing off an entire generation’s desire to commit to the stability of a family unit, when the narrative of austerity forever promoted by Cameron and May’s Tories gives them no hope, no security, in their own or their children’s futures.

Ironically, the more liberal and left wing parties such as the SNP, Greens, Labour, and the Lib-dems, are actually putting forwards proposals (more social house-building, scrapping zero hours contracts etc.) which would do more to forge the kind of strong family units which conservatives claim to support.  We are now in the strange situation where the fallout from Tory policies (increased student debt, insecure homes, insecure work etc.) is actually doing much more to corrode the idea of ‘family’ in the UK than anything the liberals or socialists have suggested!

The family unit is also under a more direct and vehement attack from the Nationalist strain, coming both directly from ukip, and from the Tory right itself.  There are many stable, contributing, established and hard-working families in this country who are under threat from being either deported or split up by Theresa May’s weak stance on securing rights for EU migrants.

British husbands and wives are seeing their spouses threatened with deportation under Brexit negotiations – spouses which may have lived in the UK for decades, but who now have no guarantee of their right to remain in the country they have helped build, under the current conservative government’s refusal to protect the rights of EU citizens in Britain.  This conservative government, since Brexit and under Theresa May, is threatening to tear long-established and decent families apart simply because one of the parents was not born in Britain.

This lack of support for the family by professed conservatives was also made brutally clear was when our ‘conservative’ media (Sun, Daily Mail, Daily Express) argued that refugee children in the camps in Dunkirk and Calais should be prevented from re-joining their families, unless they submit to degrading dental checks to determine their ages, even when this was already well-documented.   This new rhetoric coming from people who claim to be conservatives threatens to see children languishing alone on the streets of Calais when there is a loving home waiting for them in England.  These are children who already have families and homes waiting for them in Britain.  They will not be ‘stealing’ a job or a house from any native Brits.

When it is proposed that refugee children seeking to link up with their families be subjected to humiliating Nazi-style dental checks to determine their ages, a true conservative must realise that taking harsh measures to keep families separated is a million miles away from what conservatism should be. 

When the Kindertransports headed for England in the run-up to world war two, Churchill recognised that conservatism was naturally opposed to nationalism, and protected these vulnerable children, helped them find new families.  Now, we see a conservative minister, David Davies, arguing that refugee children should be separated from their families by a dental check on their age?!  The Tory party can no longer legitimately claim to hold the centre ground whilst courting such vile Ukip-style policies.

Hard work and self-sufficiency

Another core value of true conservatism is the idea of hard work and self-sufficiency, and yet again we see how the stinginess of austerity and the nastiness of nationalism threaten these conservative values.

Most immigrants to the UK are – as well as being devoted to their families – hardworking and self-sufficient.  Many also come from more actively Christian Eastern European cultures, and would, by anyone’s reckoning, be considered more conservative than many Brits in their daily affairs.  They work hard, they forge strong families, they have a strong Christian faith and they pay their taxes.  But again, our ‘conservative’ press decides to focus on their nationality, rather than on their willingness to contribute, and other positive, conservative attributes. 

It is an unavoidable fact that, on average, EU migrants claim fewer benefits, work longer hours, and pay more taxes than their British equivalents.  Unlike the Nationalist Fraud, a True Conservative would never say “We support strong, hard-working, self-sufficient families. . . unless they are of foreign stock!”.  Yet in one of her speeches, Theresa May has even called for legal immigrants to be ‘on a list’. . .  what sort of message does this send?  What kind of attitude to the idea of striving to support your family does this project?

We see hard working European fruit pickers, cleaners, and a whole host of other professions being threatened with deportation by our Prime minister simply because her government is clueless on Brexit and has no other cards to play than to use EU citizens as bargaining chips.  These people are diligent workers contributing to the economy, paying taxes, spending money in our shops, and earning a wage doing jobs many Brits would be unwilling to – What sort of ‘conservative’ would threaten to punish hard work in such a way?

This shallow nationalism coming from the Tory right via ukip has nothing – nothing – to do with real conservatism.  Real conservatives – consistent, principled ones – value those who are prepared to build stable families and contribute to society – wherever they come from.  Nationalism argues that the lazy should have advantage over the strivers, if the lazy are ‘native’ and the strivers ‘foreign’.  This is anathema to conservatism.  Those who work hard should receive their rewards, regardless of their ethnicity or place of birth. 

This attitude is also bad for business.  Under the proposals of the Nationalist Fraud, a business cannot pick the strongest workers from the biggest pool in order to compete with their rivals – they must simply take someone local, regardless as to whether or not that person is the best man for the job.  All this talk from Ukip of ‘points-based systems of immigration’ is also anathema to conservative ideals of free trade, dynamic business and small government.  Which entrepreneurial, free-market conservative, would support the idea of the nanny state instigating ‘points based quotas’ of entry to micro-manage the labour market?  Surely any true conservative would be appalled at the idea of ‘big government’ standing in the way of a free contract between employer and employee, and of the free movement of trade, workers and capital across border being stymied by red tape?

Churchill was a conservative, and fought with blood, sweat and tears against the sort of divisive, ‘us and them’ ideology now being promoted by the Tory right and Ukip.  The current direction and rhetoric coming from Theresa May’s Tories is not what Churchill or even Thatcher believed in – government interference in trade and business, families being split up, communities being divided, hard workers being punished, threatened and demoralised.  No compassionate, moderate, progressive, liberal or centre-right conservative could ever support such far-right narratives – no person who believes they are ‘socially liberal but fiscally conservative’ could possibly support hard working families being subjected to such threats and demonisation as come from Ukip and the Tory right.

The recent rhetoric from the tory party has not been one of rewarding those with family values, or those who are self-sufficient, but rather dismissing hard working families if they are foreign, and proposing to give extra benefits to lazy people simply because they are British.  This smacks of national socialism, and it baffles me to see it taken up by a party calling itself conservative.  Professed conservatives who would consider supporting these policies need to decide if they consider themselves a Nationalist, or whether they believe in true meritocracy.


Back to the false-economy of Austerity as practiced by Cameron and May’s Tories.  The current direction of the conservative party is also not conservative in the literal sense. . . what are the modern conservative party in England actually conserving?

Have they conserved a manageable debt OR deficit?  No. They promised it would be a surplus by 2015, now they say we won’t even be rid of it by 2021!

Have they conserved affordable university education?  No, the modern student is indebted for life!

Have they conserved affordable housing?  Emphatically no!

Have they conserved low levels of homelessness? No, this has quadrupled since they came to power

Have they conserved low levels of child poverty? No, 30% of all children now live in poverty

Have they conserved stable growth in new home ownership? No, this is in terminal decline

Have they conserved low food bank use? No, this has quadrupled since they came to power.

Have they conserved quality, long-term employment contracts? No, its zero-hours all the way now

Have they conserved a functioning NHS? No, it has fallen to its knees in the last five years

Have they conserved British infrastructure in British hands? No, they have sold it to the Chinese!


Every single one of these factors has worsened since 2010.   This is not stability, this is not fiscal prudence, this is terminal chaos and decline!  This ‘conservative’ government have actually bought radical change in the form of tripled tuition costs, a massive decline in affordable housebuilding, a quadrupling of homelessness, skyrocketing child poverty, increasing food bank dependency, a massive increase in zero-hours contracts, an NHS bought to its knees, and British infrastructure, especially energy production and rail operation, sold off to the Dutch, French, Chinese and German.  Selling off great British institutions to foreign states and companies, or letting them go to rot due to under-investment, is not ‘conservative’ or ‘patriotic’.

‘Living within our means’ is indeed a conservative principle, and there is nothing wrong wth this principle provided it is genuine.  However, austerity, as practiced by our current government, is not fiscal prudence.  In their willingness to save pennies in the short term by selling off public sector services to private chancers, the conservatives are doing nothing to invest in our future, or bring in a true, effective, long-term recovery. 

How the Tories are currently operating is the equivalent of saving £50 by employing a cowboy builder to get your roof fixed, then having to spend £1000 extra to get your entire home redecorated when it leaks.  This is, essentially, what the current Tory party are doing when they employ G4S and all the other poor quality, profit-driven private contractors to enact ‘efficiency savings’ (i.e. cutting corners and not doing the job properly).  Again and again these companies mess (charging to tag deceased prisoners up but again and again the short sighted phoney conservatives go to them to replace ever more of our public infrastructure, with ever more disastrous results.  

We hear how conservatives are supposed to support the idea of ‘fiscal prudence’. . . yet, since the Tory party started their drive to ‘live within our means’ and ‘balance the books’, the UK has lost it AAA credit rating, dropped from 5th to 7th place in world economic tables, seen the pound drop to a 30 year low against the dollar, seen the debt triple, and seen real wages stagnate more than any other country except Greece.  Austerity is failing.  It has gone on too long, cut too deep, and failed in its own remits, whilst at the same time impoverishing and disenfranchising some of the most vulnerable. 

Austerity ≠ fiscal prudence.  Any pro-business, entrepreneurial spirit should know that you have to speculate to accumulate, you have to invest to see returns.  This country will never be able to cut its way to growth, as has been proven over the past 7 years.

But there is one fundamental similarity between the two phoney conservatives, the Nationalist Fraud and the Short-sighted Scrooge – a lack of belief.  Both these corruptions of true conservatism contain a resigned acceptance of the idea that Britain is simply too broken, too weak, too poor, too small and too scared to help others, have faith in itself, or it be worth investing in its future.

Both ideologies have no vision of Britain’s strength whatsoever, no belief in her potential.   The Short-sighted Scrooge says Britain is not worth investing in, could never yield net gains, the Nationalist Fraud never ceases talking about how small and weak and poor Britain is, how unable to help it is, how miserly and distrusting and inward looking it must become so that it can ‘protect its own’ – a promise nationalist governments never fulfil anyway!

The post-referendum debate, reduced to an argument over whether or not to buy shoes!


Remainer: “I think we should not buy shoes”

Brexiteer: “I think we should buy shoes”

[There follows an argument, and eventually, the ‘pro new shoes’/Brexit side wins]


R: “Damn.  Oh well, I guess we’re buying shoes then”

B: “Hah ha!  We won!  You lost!  Get over it!  How does that feel?!  Losers!”

R: “Dude, you won, no need to be childish and spiteful”

B: “Too right we won!  Now you have to shut up forever!  Your opinions of shoes will never, EVER be permitted again.  Nobody will ever again be allowed to change their mind on the subject of shoes!  Our children, and our children’s children, must forever accept and enjoy the shoes we are about to buy!”

R: *sigh* “So, I guess we now need to talk about what type of shoes we should get?”

B: “What?!  How dare you say we’re not getting any shoes?!”

R: “I didn’t!  I asked what type of shoes we. . . “

B: “Silence!  Enemy of the people!”

R: “What’s that supposed to mean?”

B: “What part of ‘shoes’ don’t you understand?”

R: “Dude, we’re getting shoes, I just wondered what type of. . . “

B: “You smug, elitist dictator!  Shoes means shoes!”

R: “But there are hundreds of types of shoes!  We need to think about. . . “


R: “What shoes do you want?”

B: “Stop moaning, just because you lost!”

R: “Tell me what shoes you want!”

B: “How dare you try to stop us buying shoes!”

R: “I’m not, I’m asking WHICH shoes you want!”


R: “Trainers, daps, stilettoes, sneakers, winkle pickers, steel toe-capped work boots, clogs, tap shoes, fucking giant clown shoes.  We’re in the shoe shop, point to the shoes you want!”

B: “Erm, well, red white and blue ones, obviously”

R: “But any of the aforementioned types of shoes could be red, white and blue!”

B: “Stop trying to confuse me!”

R: “Point to the shoes you want!”

B: “Oh, well, hmph. . . I can’t decide.  This is too much detail.  Too much like hard work.  You sort it out?  It should be easy, shoes means shoes, after all…”

R: “But I didn’t want shoes. . . surely, as the shoe advocate, you should be interested in a debate about the specifics?”

B: “Stop trying to not buy shoes!  Oppressor of the people!  Tyrant!  Elitist!  Establishment enemy of the will of the daily mail. . . err, I mean, the people!”

R: “You pick the shoes then!”

B: “Can’ be bothered”

R: “Fine.  Whatever.  I’ll do all the hard work for something I never actually wanted.  Ok then, what have we here?  Hmm, this nice soft pair of shoes seems. . .”

B: “NO!  Definitely not them!  Hard shoes means hard shoes!”

R: “But we never discussed what type of shoes.  We were given the choice ‘shoes or no shoes’.  Now that we are definitely getting shoes, we need to discuss what sort”

B: “Stop saying we’re not getting shoes!”

R: “Arrrgh!”

B: “And stop moaning!  Get shoes now!”

R: “Can I ask the shopkeeper for advice?”

B: “NO!  No experts!  Shoes means shoes!  What part of shoes don’t you understand?  Enemy of shoe-ocracy!”

R: “Fine.  Whatever.  I’ll just get some shoes.  How much, roughly, should I be prepared to spend?”

B: “Don’t care.  Bored now.  I’m going outside to sit around in the sun.  Bring me shoes – exactly the shoes I demand, even though I refuse to specify or discuss this – or you are a traitor who must be silenced forever”

R: “I’ve got an idea!  How about you get shoes, and I don’t!?”

B: “No!  I wanted shoes so that means we have to wear them!  Now hurry up!”

Brexit, a movement of the Elite, by the Elite, for the Elite. The Establishment’s dreams come true!

The whole Brexit debate was framed around the idea of an ‘elite’ vs ‘real people’.  Funnily enough, I actually agree with this idea, however, the truth is opposite to what the Brexiteers would have us believe.

Brexit was the movement of the Elite – funded, backed, and propagated by the rich and aristocratic.  Remain was the voice of the oppressed and marginalised younger generation.

Lets look at the bare facts.  As a demographic average;

Brexiters came from rural areas.

Remainers came from cities

Brexiters were older

Remainers younger.

Which means that Brexiters were more likely to live above the poverty line, more likely to own property, more likely to own land, more likely to have received free education, more likely to have found affordable housing, more likely to have had secure employment, more likely to have a higher disposable income, more likely to own their own car. . . in pretty much every way, the typical Brexiteer is wealthier and more represented than the typical Remainer.

The Brexiteers are the elitists!

When you look at the ‘class’ of people most keenly shouting for and funding Brexit, you begin to see just how much of a phony revolution this whole movement was from day one.  From the start – even before ukip, when we had “The Referendum Party”, Brexit’s loudest voices have come almost exclusively from the aristocracy and the Fleet Street Elite.

An incomplete list of the aristocrats, old Etonians, and members of the landed gentry who fund ukip or back Brexit follows (deep breath!);

Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson (bojo!), the Earl of Dartmouth, Lord Neidpath, Baron Pearson of Rannoch, Lady Yvonne Colin, 21st Baron Willoughby deBroke, Baron Stephens of Ludgate, Sir John Craven, the Earl of Leicester, the 8th Baron of Grantley, Viscount Michael Cowdray, Viscount Rothermere, Lady Goldsmith, Lady and Baron Vinson  – all keen Eurosceptics and members or patrons of ukip.  We then need to add to this parade of privilege the billionaire press lords, such as Richard Desmond, Paul Dacre and Rupert Murdoch.

This is the aristocracy – the landed gentry and Fleet Street Establishment!  How on earth did Brexit become the voice of the ‘working man’ with this bunch of elitists at the helm?!

You will have often heard the Brexit brigade complaining about how the ‘liberal media establishment’ was ‘ignoring the concerns of the average man’.  ‘The mainstream media is corrupt’ they’d wail “political correctness is preventing us from speaking” they’d say, repeatedly and loudly.  However, this narrative of media oppression vanishes when concerning their giant blind spot for the pro Brexit Sun, Star, Mail, Express, Telegraph and Spectator. . . oh, on *these particular occasions* the ‘mainstream media suddenly ceased to be the Mouthpiece of the Oppressor and instantly became the Voice of the People!

If you want to know what a ‘sneering London establishment’ sounds like, just read some of the attacks the pro-brexit Fleet Street Elite (especially the Sun) make on our great cities such as Liverpool, Bristol and, more recently, Hull.

Another interesting thing is the one piece of surprise ‘good’ economic news since the vote to leave. . . The FTSE 100 is up!  Hooray!  Workers and small business may be fucked, but the big multi-nationals that make up the FTSE 100 have been able to exploit the weak pound whilst costs rise for the rest of us!

Brexit – a movement of the elite, by the elite, for the elite, pushed by the aristocracy, via the rural bourgeois, on to the gullible half of the working class.   A scapegoat to allow the British government and their aristocratic, establishment friends to continue screwing us over because they can always blame the EU for their own failings.

But make no mistake, once we have left the EU, the right-wing press will continue to blame it for all the ensuing economic chaos.  When the economy begins to tank again – just like it was before we joined Europe, and we plummet down the world rankings (as has already started to happen) we will begin to see the narratives “they are ganging up on us” our “Bullying neighbors”.  As hypocritical as it is predictable!

Brexiteers – “Rebelling against the establishment” and “Taking back Control” . . . by doing exactly what the aristocracy and the foreign-owned Fleet Street Elite tell us!

Of course this country’s undemocratic aristocracy want to ‘take back control’ from the democratically elected European Parliament!  This country’s elite cannot wait for the protections the EU gives us to be gone, so we can go back to the days of economic stagnation, wage slavery, and forelock-tugging of the past!  We have 800 unelected Lords in this country, far less democracy than the EU, yet taking power away from the proportionally represented European Parliament, and handing it back to Lords and the Monarchy at the behest of their press-baron friends hardly seems like the ‘common man taking back control’.

Brexit – Taking Back Control by Shirking Responsibility

All through the referendum campaign, the Leave camp consistently came up with the simplistic platitude ‘Take Back Control’.  This is ironic as the entire movement has been defined by an inability to take ownership of the issue, an unwillingness to accept responsibility for the consequences, blame dodging, finger pointing and a general childish  “I Brexit, you fix it” attitude.   The Brexiters were offered their beloved ‘Control’, and ran away from it once they realised it would involve hard work, leadership, intelligence and responsibility.

The entire movement was, of course, wrapped up in an unwillingness to take responsibility from the word go – practically every charge leveled at the EU by the Leavers could more accurately be attributed to Westminster, rather than Brussels.  But accepting that would mean having Britain accept responsibility for its own failures, take ownership of its own issues, and this is something a nationalist cannot do.  This stems from an insistence by nationalists that nothing Britain does could be at fault for anything – dodging responsibility, refusing to accept blame and never learning from their mistakes.  Many of the problems Britain currently faces do not exist in other EU countries – if that is so, how can it be Brussels that is to blame?  Real terms wages have increased in France, Germany and Spain since the economic crash – all EU countries, but in Britain, they have stagnated – that is the Tory’s doing, not Brussels!  But of course, a nationalist will never take responsibility for anything if there is something ‘foreign’ available to scapegoat.

This childish and irresponsible attitude really came to the fore, however, once they won the vote.  They won, their beloved Brexit beckoned, and what did the leavers do?  Did thy jump at the chance to put their myopic obsession into practice?  No!  They ran away, ‘leave’ing the mess to a Remainer (Theresa May) to clear up!  Farage, Gove, Johnson, Fox, Leadsome and IDS all immediately ran scarpering away once there was hard work to be done.

But it is only now we are truly beginning to see what a bunch of pathetic, irresponsible shirkers and chancers the Brexit lot truly are;

Now, we have dropped to 7th in the World economic tables, (down 2 places since July, now behind France and India), we have lost our AAA ratings, the pound has dropped to its lowest level since records began and who is to blame, according to the Brexiteers?

Why, the Remainers of course!  Yes, all this economic woe is our fault for ‘talking down’ Britain – because that is exactly how an economy works – some people look a bit sad and suddenly – bang!  – £1 = 1.

And of coursse don’t forget that the older a voter got, the more likely they were to vote Brexit. . . which means that, as a generalisation, the people most committed to leaving were the people whom it would affect the least!

Brexiters started off shirking responsibility by blaming Brussels for Westminster’s failings
Brexiters then shirked responsibility by leaving leadership on the issue up to Remainers
Brexiters then blame problems directly attributed to Brexit on Remainers pointing them out!

It would be funny if it weren’t so tragic.  Truly, we have let the country be taken over by a bunch of irresponsible shirkers, people who are quite happy to cause chaos, division and disruption, but completely unwilling to do anything about it!

The fundamental paradox at the heart of the modern right wing.

The self-contradictory message of the modern right wing – from conservative (centre right), through to fascist (far right);

Right whinger:  “We believe in free market, dog-eat-dog capitalism, social Darwinism, survival and prosperity of the fittest.  The state is inefficient and authoritarian, a huge swollen bureaucracy that should be abolished and/or severely cut back.  Only through the dynamism of unrestricted private enterprise, hard work, deregulation, free markets and competition can we thrive and…

What’s that?  Someone foreign is out-competing a British worker or company?

Call the government!  We need to defend ourselves from being out-competed!  Get the State, quick – we need to impose tariffs, points-based systems of entry, and micro-management of everything and everyone which goes in or out of the country!  We must use the ‘cold dead hand of the state’ to create immigration and economic tick-lists to artificially stymie the natural flow of people and goods.  This must be enforced with an army of state-funded border guards, cops and pen-pushing, meddling bureaucrats, because otherwise, our free-market will be unable to compete!

When we said we wanted  ‘competition’, we only meant if we could be given unfair advantages to guarantee we end up on the winning side!  Now we have been out-competed, we want state-enforced micromanagement of every aspect of the economy and labour market.  When we said we wanted ‘small government’, what we meant was we want a massive amount of (state-funded) cops, soldiers, border guards and pen-pushers, the prison industrial complex, religious purity and class-based checks at the borders, and the state having the right to trawl everyone’s private correspondence!

Ours is an ideology which extols the virtues of riches for the winners and poverty for the losers. . . err. . . unless we are the losers, in which case we demand big government, state-sanctioned protectionism to keep us safe!  I don’t get why people see this as a paradox?!”