Y Repwblic
Conversations with Wales' Republicans : Poblachiaethwyr - Repwbligwyr - Gweriniaethwyr

Declining Democracy by Refusing Registration ?
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Y Repwblic Forum Index -> Ymgyrchoedd - Campaigns
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Mon May 26, 2014 11:45 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I would like to record my thanks for being invited to talk to the South Wales Anarchists on the evening of 27-05-14 in Newport to explain the above and I want to wish them well in their proposed ' Week of Action Against NATO Summit ' and I also further express the hope that what I proposed to the Welsh Government last year when it was announced will come to pass : that when the protesters that any sensible person ought to expect arrive from abroad they will find themselves provided for and acknowledged as a legitimate part of the political system in Wales if not elsewhere ... well I can stubbornly continue to hope for such things can I not ... perhaps the international Anarchist fraternity can make a demonstration to Y Senedd of what real political discussion and debate looks like ? They always prove to be charming to me, albeit that I am committed to a more over-seen view of the political sphere we all share.

I now have other pressing personal matters to see to but those who want to keep track of what will hopefully develop into a peace camp should look to -

https://network23.org/stopnatocymru/ - and - https://www.anarchistaction.net/

I gave a typically rambling off-the-cuff talk and presented the following extract from Colin Ward's article quoted above after I chopped the text of my letter about a bit to fit it onto the other side of an A4 ( using 10 pt Ariel ) thus -

Colin Ward

The Case Against Voting

No politician of any colour likes a non-voter. Last week Labour MP Tony Banks introduced a bill in an almost empty House of Commons seeking to make voting compulsory .His fellow members had voted with their feet out of the chamber, but he wanted to fine those of us who fail to vote, unless, like absentees from school, we could produce ‘a legitimate reason’.

Yet the non-voters are among the largest of the political groups. Tony Banks reckons that they form 24 per cent of the electorate and he claims that ‘those ten million or so who failed to vote in 1983 have a great deal to answer for to those who did’. His assumption is that all those non-voters would have made their cross for candidates of whom he approves.

But the abstainers, like the other parties, are a broad church, embracing the sick, the indifferent and the idle, those who have something more pressing to do on a Thursday, as well as the hilarious prohibited categories like peers, the insane and Anglican clergymen. Among them, too, is the unknown quantity of conscientious non-voters. To join this hidden party, as the South African elections reminded us, you have to be eligible to vote.

Our own history has examples of the manipulations with which governments ensure that citizens can’t win. Having abolished an Irish Parliament the government made sure that the majority of the Irish were ineligible to elect MPs to Westminster, and after the passing of the Roman Catholic Relief Act, ensured that this majority still couldn’t vote by raising the property qualification from ownership of land worth 40 shillings a year to a figure of ten pounds a year . When the franchise was eventually extended, was the best strategy for Home Rulers to boycott the polling booth, or to vote for Nationalist candidates pledged not to take their seats, since in any case they could not swear the oath of allegiance to the British sovereign, or should they forget into Westminster and there create I havoc?

The same tactical dilemmas divide Nationalist politicians in Northern Ireland to this day, and in many other countries have beset every movement for national autonomy. The issue for such movements in considering whether to take part in or to boycott elections is not the effectiveness of parliamentary government, but the usefulness of either course in strategies for obtaining a parliament of one’s own.

One advocate of seeking the voters’ mandate for not taking one’s seat was the late Guy Aldred who stood many times over 40 years as an anti-parliamentary socialist candidate in Glasgow, believing that this was useful propaganda. He convinced few of the conscientious non-voters that this was true, and came bottom of the poll every time, except on the occasion when he stood as a World Government candidate and came second to bottom. Other believers in a protest vote argue that the right tactic is to attend the poll and put slogans instead of crosses on the ballot paper, so that it is registered as a spoilt rather than an uncast vote.

But it is the anarchists who, for well over a century, have been the most consistent advocates of conscientiously staying away from the poll. Since anarchism implies an aspiration for a decentralised non-governmental society, it makes no sense from an anarchist point of view to elect representatives to form a central government. If you want no government, what is the point of listening to the promises of a better government? As Thoreau put it: ‘Cast your whole vote, not a strip of paper merely, but your whole influence. A minority is powerless while it conforms to the majority; it is not even a minority then; but it is irresistible when it clogs by its whole weight.’

The various streams of 19th century anarchist thought were united together in their opposition to participation in elections. Most of them shared with the early Marxists the view that the State was simply the executive committee of the ruling classes.

Political democracy, they declared, was just a facade concealing the real effective power of the owners of capital and land. If the workers withdrew their labour power the capitalist class would be impotent and its State would fall to pieces. For the anarcho-syndicalists, every industrial dispute was to be fought through to the bitter end with no compromise. The culminating general strike would make the ruling class powerless and the people would take over through their own forms of industrial organisation, providing goods and services. under workers’ control. Parliamentary elections were not merely irrelevant, they were a ruling-class conspiracy to divert workers’ attention from the real struggle.

Anarchist-communists of the school of Kropotkin linked industrial autonomy and local autonomy. The means of sustenance and livelihood would be in the hands of the local commune on the principle ‘to each according to his needs, from each according to his ability’. This conception of the way society should organise itself through federations of autonomous self-organising groups drew upon innumerable antecedents older than the nation state: the medieval city with its guilds and confraternities, the Russian mir and artel, the American town meeting of the 18th century. It exemplifies Kropotkin ‘s concept of mutual aid as the mainspring of human society, and like Swiss federalism it implies no parish pump isolation. From the anarchist., communist standpoint, general elections to a central parliament are a form of social suicide since they imply the surrender of local autonomy and local revenue- gathering to central government which throughout history has shown itself to be the destroyer, not the upholder, of communal decision-making.

Finally, there is individualist anarchism. proclaiming that it is absurd for individual people to surrender their right to run their own lives to an outside body. Objectors see 1his as absurd selfishness and maintain that government is necessary to restrain our anti-social natures. Anarchists of all varieties respond with William Morris’s warning that no man is good enough to be another man ‘s master . [ AND THEN COLIN WARD GOES ON TO DISCUSS THE 1930's UGT v CNT ]

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

" Declining Democracy by Refusing Registration ? " topic : http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=2355#2355

REPWBLIC.org - Conversations with Republicans in Wales

Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 : REMOVING A NAME FROM THE ELECTORAL REGISTER

XxxX Xxxx , Cardiff City Council Electoral Services, County Hall, Atlantic Wharf, CARDIFF CF10 4UW

Dear Xxxx Xxxx, 21-05-14

I write to you from the email address of Repwblic because although I undertake this privately this of interest to the public.

I hope that you remember me but please try to forget the unprepossessing sight which I presented to you on 10-03-14 when I promptly called in person after your phone call to explain to you that I had deliberately fulfilled my legal obligation to register as an elector with the explicit intention of thereafter removing my name from the Electoral Register. As I explained to you this because I strongly object to the change in the law introduced by the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 which I perceive to be introducing a form of conscription to compel me to support a political system which I now most strongly object to. I do not think that the mounting number of reasons for my strongly objecting to being registered as an elector are strictly relevant to the following, but I would certainly refuse conscription into a war for reasons of conscience so it seems equally reasonable to me to refuse to endorse any political system that wages war.

Previously there was a legal duty imposed upon the householder, named or otherwise, to report to the local electoral registration officers the names of others resident at that address who were eligible to vote. But now the law appears to require that each of the individuals registers themselves - only it doesn't : it applies multiple standards of responsibility for registration such that on the one hand an individual may be automatically registered without their even knowing about it whereas on the other hand a person who might have registered or whose act of registration somehow goes wrong can be faced with a fine and if they protest about the circumstances involved and refuse to pay that fine may face a court action and even imprisonment. On the further hand the electoral registration officers apparently face no penalties for failing to discharge their duties and yet there are widespread reports of electoral registers that are substantially incomplete and demographically slanted against certain communities. Besides that the introduction of the practice of simply hoovering up names from various data bases is believed to be resulting in the registering of people who have not only moved but died.

Now in recent years, after decades of arguing about the other misdemeanours of Cardiff City County Council, I have not only become a very public advocate of Republicanism but I have also become so utterly fed up with the political system of the United Kingdom that when I noticed the introduction of the provisions in the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 it finally convinced me to disentangle Republicanism from Democracy altogether in order to make the difference between them clear. It is simply the difference between good and evil as far as I am concerned and I think that a lot of other people in the United Kingdom feel the same way without having any clear idea as to what to do about it. Apparently the number of deliberately spoiled ballot papers is now rocketing because, having all stated various plans to the electorate to deal with the crimes of their colleagues in Westminster, all of the Democratic Parties have notably avoided doing so. My use of the word ' Democrat ' has in the past year come to mean all those who continue to actively support the discredited political system of the United Kingdom, whereas it seems clear to me that all those who now actively oppose that political system because it is harming our society are arguably ' Republican ' whether they like the term or not. Speaking as an advocate of Republicanism, I think that the blind prejudice of my compatriots against this important political analysis is depriving our nation of the very conventional constitutional arrangements which would remedy the evils protested about.

As an electoral registration officer you know full well that the fact is that in the European Parliamentary Elections tomorrow 22-05-14 far less than half of the registered electors are going to vote and it is little better in any other election - and in some places at times it is much worse. It is perverse to for you to threaten me with prosecution and possibly a fine of up to £1000 and / or imprisonment for wanting to remove my name and address from the electoral register when I have always conscientiously registered to vote and have always conscientiously exercised the right to vote and now find myself with no other conscientious way of exercising the right to vote against the political system of the United Kingdom other than by refusing to endorse it by conscientiously removing my name from the electoral register where it silently lends the appearance to the Democratic Parties that myself and tens of millions of others are tacitly resigning ourselves to this evil. Removing my name and address from the electoral register has for myself and for many others become a matter of moral and ethical necessity - but somebody has to find a way of establishing the legal right to do so, which means in a court of law unless Cardiff City County Council's lawyers want to be gracious and figure out some reasonable course of action.

It probably will cost less than £1 to remove my name and address from the electoral register - but I do not think that anybody in any Democratic Party is going to recompense Cardiff City County Council even if this action should end up in a European court : this bill will I presume be settled by the taxpayers. Unfortunately I am unable to forecast the sum for you.

In view of the fact that I would like to see a substantial response from your lawyers, I do not need a reply before 30-06-14.

If your lawyers do not offer me a suitable response i.e. that they do not find a way to comply - I will consider legal action.

Yours Faithfully

David B. Lawrence [ writing as ' dai ' - repwblic.informe.com ]


Last edited by dai on Tue Apr 19, 2016 9:56 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Thu Oct 23, 2014 1:51 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I haven't forgotten about this - it's just that like anybody else my life consists of a series of situations - some very difficult situations created by the English Law.

To understand why I refuse to be coerced by the threat of being fined and / or imprisoned to support this political system called the ' United Kingdom ' read -

http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=2475#2475
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Tue Nov 11, 2014 12:29 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know I know I'm not getting on with it but I do have a private life too ... but as to not believing in this political system because it is unbelievable ... well neither do those same Members of Parliament who want to coerce me to support the political system that they do not believe in themselves by making me put my name on the Electoral Register or face fines or imprisonment - " ha ! " - watch the video and understand what happened this evening in the House of Commons : I caught some of it and there was as usual just posturing and no proper debate, and as for these laws being held up for scrutiny the troops were marched in at the end to ensure the prescribed victory of 464 v 38 ... leaving MPs talking of a farce.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-29983651

EU justice measures backed by MPs despite anger over procedure : Speaker John Bercow oversaw angry scenes in the Commons, reports Ben Wright


" ... The government has won its bid to sign up again to 35 EU justice measures - including the European Arrest Warrant - following a dramatic Commons vote. ... But ministers were accused of breaking a promise to hold a vote on the warrant itself. ... Earlier, Commons Speaker John Bercow said people would be "contemptuous" of the government's tactics. ... BBC political correspondent Carole Walker said there were "scenes of chaos" in the Commons chamber. ... The government opted out of all 133 EU police and criminal justice measures measures in 2013, a decision that will take effect on 1 December. ... Ministers plan to rejoin 35 of the measures, including the European Arrest Warrant, before that deadline. ... "

[ see - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23239493 ]

" ... "There is not today to be a vote on the specific matter of membership of the European Arrest Warrant," Mr Bercow told MPs. ... The Speaker said he himself had expected a vote on the warrant, saying it was a "sorry saga" and that "the House should not be put in that position".
... "A commitment is a commitment to be honoured," he said, "rather than trying to slip things through some sort of artifice". ... He said the public expected "straightforward dealing and they are frankly contemptuous, and I use the word advisedly, of what is not straightforward dealing" .... Sir Richard Shepherd said the government's behaviour had been "sly" while Jacob Rees-Mogg called it "underhand" .... Bill Cash, who chairs the Commons European Scrutiny Committee, said: "This is a disgraceful way of going about a very, very important matter. It is tainted with chicanery, it is not the way this Parliament should be treated." ... "

... AND WHO IS AT THE CENTRE OF THIS ROW OVER DENYING US THE MEANS TO THE MEANINGFUL RULE OF LAW AGAIN ... THERESA MAY ... AGAIN, MAKING IT VERY OBVIOUS THAT SHE DOESN'T UNDERSTAND OR RATHER SUBSCRIBE TO THE IDEA OF ' THE RULE OF LAW ' - AT ALL ...

How can any honest person continue to register their name in support of this farce ?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Fri Mar 13, 2015 5:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I am sorry, but when I decided to rip apart Republicanism and Democracy in 2013 in order to make Republicanism clear once more ( and because I know from bitter personal experiences not merely philosophical objections the faults in both the political system and in Democracy itself ) I adopted the strategy of deliberately placing myself on the Electoral Register in 2013 in order to remove it in order to ensure for myself and others that it can be done and that the Electoral Administration etc Act 2013 is a bum law but ... I did not reckon upon being drawn into another tiresome and rather more stressful legal argument that I simply have to conduct as a duty rather than an option ... so I seem at the moment to have take the low-road and you'll be in Scot-free land before me : I have to wait for them to take me to court instead of the other way round ... I haven't even opened the envelope ... hell - I've lost the envelope ... I have just been adding this to ' The Open Hand ' thread - please take a look at the others which I have just done tonight - http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=2589#2589



( from that thread - ) " I am really pleased with this which did not look so useful until after I had added the lettering to emphasise the point that 99.99% of the politics in Wales is not taking place either within political parties or between their elected representatives : the real political debate is not being conducted by " Democrats " in their " Democratic " political system called the " United Kingdom " - Democracy is merely a device by which they contrive to convince The People that they have no political authority themselves having given it away by putting a cross on a piece of paper ... but if you accept that idea that the source of political authority is information, then the only way to obtain that political authority in Wales is by obtaining the informaton from The People in Wales - and what Democrats do not do is ever listen or even turn up to inquire : if they ever turn up at all it is only ever at election time to talk at you incessantly, offering you all sorts of bribes and threats which are all equally irrelevant because they are not based upon any understanding of yourself or your concerns - all that is relevant to them is whether you will vote for them, and if you pass critical comment upon their political system they become terrified and accuse you of terrorism ... and you can not opt out of this political system which they assert is " Democratic " even though constitutionally it is " Aristocratic," for if you try to vote in the only meaningful way by removing your name from the Electoral Register you will be prosecuted and fined £1000 and if you refuse to pay that they will send you to jail and seize your property aswell - this is Demockery in the United Kingdom : there are estimated to be over 7,000,000+ political dissidents who are not on the Electoral Register and whilst you can not positively vote for The Republic in this way you can ' vote ' in this way against the political system called the United Kingdom, which is all that is left to us to be able to do now to promote " The Public Interest in Wales " i.e. " The Republic in Wales." "
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
marianneh



Joined: 30 May 2013
Posts: 1933

PostPosted: Sat Mar 21, 2015 9:40 pm    Post subject: comment Reply with quote

I have to say I agree with Dafydd. If you individually don't vote, you're just making yourself helpless. You still have to live in the state you disapprove of, and its laws will apply to you anyway.It might be different if no one at all voted.

I recognised Dafydd straight away from his idiolect. Why is he calling himself Morittz? Has he made any other contributions?

What I want to know, Dai is are there any circumstances in which you would vote?

I don't know if this is the right place to ask this question but I notice that earlier in this forum you describe yourself as an atheist, but you clearly have a soft spot for religion and have often attended Quaker meetings.

So what I want to ask is this, how long does your apparent flirtation with Islam go back and is it serious? Surely, you're not actually going over to Mecca? Does this have any bearing, direct or indirect, on your attitude to democracy?

Don't answer these questions if you find them intrusive or impertinent, but I don't want to sail under false colours. Although I have become somewhat disillusioned with Richard Dawkins and may do so with Sam Harris, it's difficult to fault them on religion in my view.

I have a love hate relationship with religion but it's mainly hate. Much as I admire and like some individual Muslims, I feel about them as I do about Mormons. Mormons would be great if it wasn't for Mormonism.

I'm very depressed and frightened about the growth of Jihadism, and I'm terrified about the world my sons -and their children if they have any - will have to live in.

I admire everyone who advanced democracy, Chartists, Suffragettes et al. I think we should be thankful for them. As we are apparently drifting away from each other ideologically - at least temporarily - I was wondering if it would be exhibiting a lack of transparency or integrity if I continued to post contributions on this site.


I will continue to do so if you don't object, but let me ask you one further question. If I made remarks about Islam as harsh and blunt as I do about Catholicism under 'Savita died for Ireland' on 'Women's Forum', would you be fine with that, or would it cause problems of any sort for you?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Mon Apr 06, 2015 9:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

From:
To: today@bbc.co.uk
Subject: " TODAY " - COPY OF A COMPLAINT ABOUT YOU AND YOUR IGNORANT COLLEAGUES
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 2015 09:28:46 +0000

Dear Today,

I am getting fed up hearing you interviewing whining apologists for a failed political system who favour Fascist solutions.

By definition Democracy has to be conducted on the basis of consent : these proposals for coercing people to vote are vile.

Fining people £1000 because they are indifferent to or antagonised into not wanting to register to vote deserves contempt.

I am campaigning to be off the Electoral Register, but circumstances in my private life led to my putting off the court case.

Surely the Electoral Registration and Administration Act reintroduced and combined both Heresy and Tendering the Oath ?

HOW I AM FEELING ABOUT THIS - http://repwblic.informe.com/declining-democracy-by-refusing-registration-dt689.html

Perhaps your reporters' inability to identify this problem declares your programme as being Middle Aged and Restoration ?

Possibly why I listen to you each morning myself - but 12 million registered without consent and 7 million not registered ?

Is the United Kingdom going to fine us as a form of taxation ? Are they seriously proposing to imprison millions of people ?

What kind of " democratic " politicians make laws to punish those who just happen to not agree with them ?

DEMOCKERATS !

David B. Lawrence

Your Complaint

Type of complaint:
BBC News (TV Radio and website)

What is your complaint about:
General News

Complaint category:
Bias

Contacted us before:
No

Complaint title:
NOT REPORTING ARGUMENT AGAINST FINING NON-VOTERS !

Complaint description: BBC Complaints - Case number CAS-3250322-XXXXX

FOR TWO YEARS BBC NEWS OUTLETS HAVE NOT BEEN REPORTING THE ARGUMENTS AGAINST THE ELECTORAL REGISTRATION AND ADMINISTRATION ACT 2013 - this statute introduced not only the systematic theft of millions of people's names to place on the electoral register to prop up the claims of the United Kingdom's politicians to possess a ' democratic mandate ' when there is not merely mass indifference but definite antagonism towards them - but also replaced the householder's duty to register electors with their own right to coerce others to agree with them. There is now the threat of prosecution, fines, distraints and imprisonment for those who are peaceable opponents of and conscientious objectors to the corruption of this political system which proclaims itself to be the ' United Kingdom ' yet is setting the people of these islands at each others throats. The only viable way of expressing our political disagreement to being conscripted into supporting the United Kingdom's " demockery " is by refusing to register to vote and this is a legal course of action under all versions of the various human rights conventions and laws which these politicians claiming to be ' democrats ' supposedly support. The BBC continues to support this illegal law by broadcasting these proposals to coerce people to vote and thus undermines the consensual basis of political discourse : your reporting excuses these " demockerats " in the United Kingdom from any accountability to the norms of Democracy and is biased.

( ... there ... I'll bet dat lern'd 'm ... er ... ugh ... )
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Fri Apr 10, 2015 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Of course there are people with other reasons for Damning Democracy : those who are not interested in the good decision making processes advocated by Republicanism or - even worse - claiming to have better decision making processes - or worst of all - all claiming to have improved Republicanism by the use of various Ultraist methods ... and what their aim is in every case is to substitute their own interests for The Public Interest and to represent themselves to those they oppress as the guardians of the ' Res Publica ' ... and who guards the guards ?

Monarchist Republicans have such crack-brained claims as ' The Divine Right of Kings ' as used by Charles I and Oliver Cromwell - not mere characters in an historical tableau but examples of what Republicans would now call a terrorist and a freedom fighter ... and what happens when freedom fighters win their war and get control of the state ? They become terrorists : unpleasant though the behaviour of lone gunners and bombers are they are not ' terrorists ' because ' terror ' requires large numbers of people on every street corner and the resources of the state in order to organise the control and repression of a whole society e.g. like the Khymer Rouge ... so not even the South Wales Police can qualify as terrorists ... it is best to simply label those who think that they can achieve their political objectives through the use of violence as criminals : nobody with a gun in their hand needs a political argument, and if and when they seize power through violence they will not put down their gun and suddenly become interested in listening to other people's political arguments - attaining power through violence means that you can not put your gun down afterwards or you will be dead : it is not a political method.

Aristocratic Republicans argue that having won what they have by trial by battle or as captains of industry and major shareholders etc they should rule ... you know, our heads are just so full of this stuff due to living in the United Kingdom - which is constitutionally, socially and economically an Aristocracy - that it sounds almost reasonable : of course we should be relieved and delighted to know that in order to rescue the United Kingdom from bankruptcy the Democrats should add billions of digits to their Aristocratic sponsors' bank accounts and then force down our wages for them but raise the taxes on our incomes to pay off the interest that we have agreeably agreed to pay for the next thousand years on the loans which we gave to the very wealthiest of our citizens who just cant find the money to pay their own taxes and - hey ! - THAT'S A GREAT IDEA - the Democrats are going to let us cash in our worthless pension funds ( whose value was whittled away by the charges made to us by the wealthiest people ) so that we can feed and clothe ourselves - if there is anything left after we have paid this new tax that they have agreeably agreed to levy on people who are too poor to have saved up a pension fund and ... no - we are never going to be able to save up enough pennies and ha'pennies to buy The Republic in Wales ... it is like Max Boyce saving up enough trading stamps to buy himself a lawnmower - then saving like mad to see if he can save up enough to buy himself a lawn : ye-es economics is involved, but Republicanism requires more than a mere economic redistribution - if trickle-down schemes of economics really worked then usury in its various forms would not work. The lawn only looks this good because of several thousand years of being tended, but whilst it is our collective possession but we can licence the use of private lawnmowers and other socially beneficial uses of it - but not sell it : nobody can own the lawn, we can only mutually agree how we can use it without annoying each other - leaving it in a usable state for the next generation of occupiers ( and there is to be no chucking of the clippings over the neighbours' fences ! )

Democratic Republicans of course claim that having won the support of a majority of us through bribes and threats and thus they have a ' Democratic mandate ' - only that argument has now failed with voter turnouts falling below 50% or indeed below 25% in parts of Wales - so now they must threaten us with fines and imprisonment in order to get us onto the electoral register in order to claim that for their authority to rule us : are we now peasants upon the estates of a neo-Aristocracy ? ... er no, not quite : by definition a peasant is a ' freeman ' and is not held in debt bondage as most of are now, with nothing to leave to our children after death and taxes but our debts to be added to theirs ... still in theory we are born free - free as the wind blows, wherever the wind blows us ... free to stand with the other paupers in front of the pie-shop window and to live on the promised possibilities of our lives which will never be fulfilled - we can not even possibly purchase putative pieces of the proper political pie popularly plied as Democracy because the constitution of the United Kingdom is ' The Crown in Parliament ' which means that this is definitely not even a pie shop although due to the appallingly low level of political eduction in Wales many of our paupers have indeed been persuaded by our Democrats in Wales into believing that it is, and have agreeably agreed to the idea that the ' IOUs ' being handed out to them in exchange for their lifetime's commitment to misery will be worth something some day - and that they can bequeathed to their children ... only our paupers are so poor they can not even afford to get married ...

Hierarchic Republicans ... of which Islamic Republicans citing Shia Law are an example, and if the Christian Party get their way we will all end up living in their ' Christian Republic.' Just think with pity about all of those poor sods in ' Israel ' who are going to end up living in a ' Jewish Republic.' These aberrations first arose because the polytheistic Roman and Greek versions of Republicanism assumed religious pluralism and tolerance of diverse conceptions of the world and how to behave in it - but when late Medieval and Renaissance scholars revived Republicanism they had to mix it with these versions of Monotheism which are intolerant.

Now I live in Butetown in Cardiff and outside of the mosques here there has been somebody putting up posters denouncing Democracy as being un-Islamic : the classic Hierarchic argument that " GOD RULES OK ! " and that your local imam, rabbi, priest or scientologist is always on hand to tell you what GOD thinks of you ... and gosh - GOD thinks that we owe these guys a living for dispensing GOD's opinions to us ! ... These of course are the muppet-gods which disguise the hands manipulating us - although the voices being projected into them are perhaps less easy to spot when they seem reasonable enough, which they do once the ventriloquists of the various divine revalations have polished their acts and can deliver their lines with confidence : as with all forms of ideological activity, once you can fake sincerity you have got it made ... which is why I so often fake insincerity - because I do not want to make sincerity into the criteria by which people assess what I wish to advocate : that nothing should be accepted as given and then blindly repeated, but everything should be examined ...

... all ideologies should be treated merely as a way of packaging their contents - and it is their contents which count : it is easy to fake the packaging. When someone is making a bid for authority then almost inevitably the first thing that anything that they try on for size is the clothing of the ultimate and untestable authority of ' GOD ' and thus demand that nobody should challenge their authority as the appointed spokesman for the almighty sovereign of the universe ... now I always was the kind of kid who was uninterested in the packaging and hated ' pass the parcel ' - and here I now am, years on and just a meddle aged scrabbler, and despite it always being on my wish-list I am only still hopefully ripping open my parcel and still only finding pants ... as for religion - it can be honest thing when conducted by people who want to really try to understand each others' understanding, and if other people want to use the idea of god to order their sense of themselves and the world that they imagine that they live in then I regard that as a legitimate individual choice - but when they shout " GOD ! " at me and demand that I agree to their ideology and that I must submit to being ordered to suit their sense of themselves and the world that they imagine that they live in ... then I point out that it is just an idea, albeit a useful one - but not one that I use myself, despite the fact that I am religious - or rather because I actually am religious and therefore I am not deceived by the claims of Hierarchs who are commonplace corruptors of religion, which is the universal and necessary collective human activity of making sense of ourselves and the world we live in and therefore necessarily progressive.

Any person who asserts that their authority rests upon a text written by a person now dead is going to be a Hierarch, devoid of any understanding of themselves of others - excepting that they hope to imitate somebody else and in doing so acquire the authority and respect accorded to them in order to manipulate others by invoking some obscure ancient bearded prophet who had founded a religion that they must either accept or be denounced as heretics and enemies of all true believers in e.g. Karl Marx and Marxism. Hierarchs are often exceptionally persuasive and very presentable, and so when they fail at religion they tend to go on to sell double glazing or second hand cars, and open brothels or peddle drugs, and failing that they become Democrats - which requires even less ability. Democracy shares with Hierarchy the need for some fundamental untruth that is obviously patently screamingly untrue - but used to divide one community from another and typically to establish some claim to the resources of the world e.g. all true believers in Flymo are entitled to chuck the clippings over their neighbours' fences - and woe betide anyone who mentions " Qualcast " which is not a mower at all but the evil idol worshipped by the nearly worst of all non-believers, the worst being those who do not cut their lawns ... or ... oh ... yeeargh ... have patios !!!

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I have already written a bit about Islamic Republicanism and Democracy, but since Dis' United Kingdom's 2015 General Election is now on and being protested about ... it is worth noting in the following that the original and correct meaning of the term " sovereignty " is being used : it belongs solely to god therefore and belongs in the heavenly realm along with flying pigs and numberless angels dancing on the heads of pins - so it ought to be considered to be meaningless in terms of earthly politics ... as to the earthliness of Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad - well, assuming that this is not from over a hundred years ago - his grasp of the British political system is adequate but then in order to maintain his authority by citing an existing literature he has to repeat statements made in previous centuries because he has to use the same language, statements which may have been true once but are now just weird eg. the idea that Christianity is led by monks possibly belonged to some Sunni encounter with Orthodox Christianity ? ...

... Above all you can see the problem of being constrained to reason from incidents reported second or third hand in the life of Mohammed and by the time that Bedouins and camels are being dragged in to provide some flimsy pretext to base a judgement upon then you can almost hear Mohammed wailing in frustration ... not to mention sheer embarrassment ... now what do I think Mohammed would have said ? ... I think that Mohammed would have immediately pointed out that Allah has endowed men with both reason and sociability, with the desire to do justice and the will to hold conversations as to their understandings of what is desirable even if those understandings are not perfected : one example of this is this fatwah ! ... A fatwah is but a scholar's understanding of how to apply the tradition of Islamic thought - but it is abnormal to present a single scholar's opinion as authoratative : it is normally taken in consideration with other scholars' opinions ... and the reason for this is to prevent any individual from pronouncing himself a sole authority upon what Mohammed's opinion might have been upon a subject i.e. the collective deliberation of the scholars is one of Islam's checks upon Hierarchy ...

... I am no great scholar of Islamic thought, but my preferred understanding of Mohammed's intention was to bring an end to the abuses of religion being practiced upon vulnerable people who were being bamboozled by various Hierarchs - pagan, Jewish Mandean and Christian - by turning people away from being dependent upon their rites or their expertise in interpreting complicated texts : hence Mohammed constantly emphasised that he was showing them how to worship Allah and that they were to do so directly as constantly exhorted to in his great poetic work - The Koran ... that is what it should be regarded as and nothing more - the source of wisdom in Islam is Allah not Mohammed, he counted himself as a messenger - like a guide giving an account of his journey : each person has to make that journey not just sit and lovingly study the map, but unhappily Islam like every other religion is riddled with Hierarchs who know every detail of the map but who never intend to make the journey - they make and sell ' maps ' like these, complete with marginal inscriptions like " Here Be Bedouins." Unlike Zoroaster, Moses and Jesus, for modern people Mohammed can be directly encountered because he is not only the author of real literature but of some funny stories also !


( actually I think that this may be an aquaintance of mine - ripping off another - so to do them justice I will borrow the lot : it is not too bad actually - as far as these things go : a fatwah by Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad ) ...

https://dontvote4manmadelaw.wordpress.com/ [ THE WEB ADDRESS GIVEN ON POSTERS IN BUTETOWN DURING THE 2015 GENERAL ELECTION ]

Fatwah on Participating in Democratic Elections

Question: What is The Islamic Verdict on those Participating in the British General elections and On Voting ?

Praise be to the almighty Allah and may the peace of Allah and his Mercy be upon the Messenger Muhammad, his family and his companions and those who ally with them.

In order to be able to answer the urgent question of participating in the British Parliament and voting for candidates who want to participate in Parliament, we must understand the reality, for the Juristic principle states part of Judging a matter is comprehending it or understanding its reality.

Therefore we must understand the reality of two things:

1- The British Parliament who some candidates want to participate in and
2- The election which the people want to be involved in i.e. voting.

We must remember that part of our Imaan and belief in Allah (SWT) is At-Tawoheed which means obeying, following, worshipping and elevating Almighty Allah (SWT) exclusively, without associating with him or his attributes anyone else, and that conversely associating with God or with any of his attributes is an act of Shirk which makes a person go outside the fold of Islam and that this is why At-Tawheed is the fundamental pillar of Islam. One of Allah (SWT)’s attributes is that he is the legislator and the commander and he has the absolute right and power to command and legislate, and no-one shares this absolute power with him. For Allah (SWT) says:

“Verily the absolute right of legislating is for none but Allah (SWT)” [EMQ 12:40]

And Allah (SWT) says:

“It is unlawful for Believers male or female if Allah and His Messenger decree a command to have any choice but to abide with it and whosoever disobeys Allah or his Messenger went astray in plain misguidance” [EMQ 33:36]

After having established this absolute fact let us investigate the reality of Parliament or as it has been described ‘the Legislative House’ for the People; this is its description according to lawyers who call it the legislative body formulated for passing laws, Those who are associated with this body are called MP’s, i.e. The Representatives or Deputies of the people, who have been elected by them. There is no disagreement among anyone in the Eastern or Western Countries that the main function of Parliament is to legislate law and that the role of the MP’s is to choose from among themselves Ministers. We can summarise the main duties of this legislative body or parliament as:

1- Legislating or passing bills or law,
2- Giving a vote of confidence for the Prime Minister and his/her cabinet as the government.

As for the Sources of legislation for Parliament, it includes:

1- The mind and desires of the MP’s or Ministers as representatives on behalf of the people
2- International institutions or so-called international law.

The Deen of most people in the World today is Secularism which states that ; God has Sovereignty ONLY in Heaven or Inside the Church and in the places of worship, whereas Man i.e. People, have Sovereignty On Earth in all other Spheres of Life Except Religion (which according to the Deen of Secularism States that Religion is a Personal experience between an Individual and a supernatural power or God such as the Sun, a Cow, Statues or people etc…) this is the reality of Parliament and the basis upon which it is built.

As for the reality of Voting; Voters have a common sovereignty as people who legislate for their own affairs in society therefore as a sovereign body they establish a mechanism to have representatives from among themselves, who they choose and vote for, who become MP’s and legislate law and order on their behalf for their own interests. This is manifested in the political man-made principle, which states that ‘the Rule is by the people, for the people over the people’, hence we can say that people are the source of legislation.

The reality of the voter is that he/she is the one who chooses his representative, which results in fact in his/her joint liability for whatever the representative has been chosen and allocated for. The task here being to legislate laws in order to manage peoples interests.

In Summary, Parliament is a body which legislates, people are sovereign and the source of legislation, and MP’s are chosen by the people to legislate on their behalf.

The Islamic verdict on the above:

1- Anybody who believes that almighty Allah (SWT) is not the only, exclusive Legislator and Commander is a disbeliever i.e. Kaafir.


2- Anybody who believes in Almighty Allah (SWT) and associates anyone else with Him, contravening his being the sole legislator and commander is a Mushrik i.e. associates another as partner unto Allah (SWT).

3- Any Muslim who votes for a person knowing that the Parliament is a body of legislating law is an apostate.


4- Any Muslim who participates in elections to become an MP knowing the reality of Parliament as a legislative House is an apostate.

5- Any Muslim who does not know the reality of Parliament and he votes is sinful because he did seek the divine ruling for his action before committing it, since the Juristic Principle is that every action, verbal or physical, must be based on an Islamic ruling which is derived solely from the Qur’an and Sunnah.

6-Any Muslim who participates in voting for a candidate whether the candidate is Muslim or non-Muslim basing his action on a misled so-called ‘opinion’ from a rationalist or secular clergyman has been misled and the issue must be explained to him/her. Though believing that Allah (SWT) is the only legislator is a matter known from the Deen of Islam by necessity, therefore ignorance about it is not an excuse and he/she is therefore sinful.

7- The only excuse is for a person who is new Muslim or fully Jaahil or someone ignorant about what is known by necessity from the Deen of Islam due to the fact that he has grown up under kufr law and between non-Muslims. Those Muslims need the matter explained to them but if they continue to vote claiming that they have a different opinion from another person they are sinful.

As for the divine evidences for the above verdicts, they are derived from the fact that Allah (SWT) says:

‘They imitate the sayings of the disbelievers, Allah(SWT)’s curse be on them, how they are deluded away from the truth; They took their Rabbis and their Monks to be their Lords and Legislators besides Allah(SWT) and took the Messiah, the son of Mary, while they were commanded to worship, obey and follow none but one God/Allah; none has the right to be worshipped or followed and to legislate but he, praise and glory be to him from having the partners they associate with him ’[EMQ 30:31]

The circumstances in which this ayah was revealed are as follows:

It has been reported by Huzaifah in Ahmad, Tirmizi and Ibn Jarir that the Messenger Muhammad (saw) was reciting this verse and Udayy (ra) said to Him (saw): ‘Oh Rasoul Allah, they do not worship the Rabbis and the Monks’ To which He (saw) replied: ‘The Rabbis and Monks make that which is lawful unlawful and that which is unlawful lawful and they i.e. the people, follow them, and by doing so they worship them’

In addition, Allah (SWT) says in another clear-cut and explicit evidence that obeying any man-made system knowingly with consent for its source, different to Allah (SWT) is apostasy. For Allah (SWT) says;

‘Eat not, Oh believers, of that meat on which Allah (SWT)’s name has not been pronounced at the time of slaughtering the animal, for surely it is Fisq (a sin and disobedience of Allah) and certainly the evil do inspire their friends to dispute with you and if you were to obey them by making a dead (un-slaughtered) animal lawful and eating it, then you would indeed be Mushrikoun (polytheists)’ [EMQ 6:121]


Note here that Allah (SWT) is describing obedience in a matter of legislation in the example of making the unlawful un-slaughtered meat lawful, as an act of shirk although people did not worship idols or pray to them. Even so God calls them Mushriks! As for the circumstances of this verse, it has been reported in Al-Haakim upon the authority of Ibn Abbas (RA) that this verse was addressing Muslims when a group of Mushriks were debating with them on the issue of legislating. The Mushriks said: ‘You call the sheep upon which the name of Allah has not been mentioned; dead, who is the one who killed her?’ The Muslims said: ‘Allah’ So they replied: ‘So what Allah has killed or slaughtered by a gold knife is haram and what you have slaughtered with a metal knife is halal?’ To which Allah (SWT) revealed the above ayah.

In this ayah Allah (SWT) has declared as Mushrik the one obeys anyone other than Allah(SWT), even if one does not make sujood to him/her. So what can we say about the one who obeys or votes for another to legislate law and order for them? Allah (SWT) says:

‘Or have they partners with Allah, who have legislated for them what Allah (SWT) has not decreed and had it not been for a decisive word the matter would have been judged between them and verily for the Polytheists and wrongdoers there is a painful torment’ [EMQ 42:21]

Moreover we know very well that Allah (SWT) says: ‘And He made none share in his decision or rule’ [EMQ 18:26]

It is well known in Islam that any law different to the law of Allah (SWT) is Taghout and Allah (SWT) rejects us to refer to Taghout:

‘Have you seen those who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you and that which has been sent down before you and they wish to go for judgment in their dispute to the Taghout i.e. false Judges etc… while they have been ordered to reject them but Shaytaan wishes to lead them far astray’ [EMQ 4:60]


It has been reported concerning the circumstances of the above ayah that some hypocrites claimed to be Muslims and yet in their own disputes they tried to refer to the man-made decision of some contemporary MP’s as legislators such as Amru Bim Luhay, Al-Khuzaa’ie and Ka’ab Bin Al-Ashraf with other Monks, Priests and MP’s who used to legislate for them, instead of going to the Messenger of Allah and seeking the legislation of the almighty Allah.

As for those people who have been misled and have fallen down in this clear-cut apostasy and crime, the Messenger Muhammad (saw) said: ‘One of the things I fear strongly for my Ummah is mis-guided Imaams who will lead part of my Ummah to worship Idols and they will lead others of my Ummah to follow the Mushrikeen’

Therefore whoever votes or follows any of those misguided legislators and gives them the vote enabling them to legislate has in fact chosen a lord to legislate for him and this is associating with almighty Allah another legislator and commander. Allah (SWT) says:

‘Are many different Lords better or Allah, the one the irresistible, you do not follow, obey, worship beside him but only figures which you have named, you and your fathers for which Allah has sent down no authority, Verily the Command and the Judgment and the power of legislation is for none but Allah, he has commanded that you worship and follow none but him, that is the true path but most people know not’ [EMQ 12:39 & 40]


This is the reality of the new Deen and Lordship, which declares sovereignty for man which most of the people have embraced. This is why whatever man does as a good Deed and whatever a Muslim does as prayer or fasting and other good deeds and afterwards commits this apostasy and does not repent from it, thereafter all his deeds will be abolished, for Allah (SWT) says:

‘This is the guidance of Allah with which He guides whomsoever he wills of his servants but if they have joined or associated in worship others with Allah all that they used to do as good will have been of no benefit to them’ [EMQ 6:88]

And for those who claim that we are not calling them Creators but we are merely calling them ‘Commanders’, we will remind them that Allah (SWT) says: ‘Surely he is the only Creator and the only Commander, blessed be Allah, the Lord of all that exists’ [EMQ 7:54]


Hence as no one is allowed to be associated with him in his absolute power of creation similarly no one has the right to associate with him in his absolute power of commandment and legislation.


As for those people who have been misled by others and have committed this crime before as an error from them we advise them to fear Allah and not to indulge in this crime again because Allah (SWT) will excuse them for what they commit out of error but he will never excuse them for what they commit intentionally until they give it up and ask for forgiveness, for Allah (SWT) says: ‘And there is no sin on you if you commit an error or mistake in your deeds except for those you committed deliberately or intentionally’ [EMQ 33:5]

The mistaken are therefore excused the way the Messenger Muhammad (saw) explained about the Bedouin who lost his camel in the desert with all his clothes and his water and then found it after having lost all hope of surviving and was ready to face death. Allah (SWT) sent his camel back to him and he supplicated and said: ‘Oh Allah you are my Servant and I am Your Lord’ The Messenger Muhammad (saw) said regarding this: ‘Verily he committed his mistake because h was lost in his happiness’

There is a world of difference between someone who votes out of error and mistake thinking he/she is doing a good deed and those who do such evil actions intentionally and they call people to participate in elections and voting day and night, collecting money for it, setting up stalls, writing and distributing leaflets for it, inviting MP’s to the houses of Allah, offering gifts to them, slaughtering meat and even sacrificing their Tawoheed in order to be elected or to vote so that they may get some benefit. Is there any comparison between such people and the Bedouin mentioned in the narration above?

Finally I would like to stress that the above seven verdicts passed do not include the one who voted under duress or absolute ignorance or the one who has been misled without any clarification for him/her. This is one of the calamities, which has affected many Muslims both in Muslim countries and non-Muslim countries today.

I pray to Allah (SWT) to forgive all those who commit sins out of mistake and to guide all of us to work to implement his command and to establish his Deen so that Sovereignty is for none but Allah and the Supremacy of Islam is dominant over the Whole World. All Glory and Thanks is for Him alone (SWT).

Sheikh Omar Bakri Muhammad

Fatwa No: L-221 – 20 Safar 1422 Hijri – 15th May 2001
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Thu May 07, 2015 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote



I guess that I ought to double-post this onto this thread - where I posted the email which I wrote when distributing it -

UK General Election 2015 Etholiad Cyffredinol DU - http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=2655#2655

From:
Subject: FW: PROTEST LETTER 2015 GENERAL ELECTION
Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 21:59:37 +0000

Dear Friends - and a few others who know nothing of my being abused for over thirty years by those citing ' Democracy,'

I come from a family whose politics mostly consists of " SOMETHING MUST BE DONE AND DAMN THE CONSEQUENCES ! "

I prefer to think that there will be no consequences : for the Democrats this is merely a gesture - but for me this is a duty.

We must oppose those shoring up The United Kingdom with corpses and refuse to be conscripted into endorsing this Act.

You must now make a choice : should our political system be based upon Ultraism or Altruism - Democratic or Republican ?

Whichever Democrats win the United Kingdom 2015 General Election we know that we will be ruled by sectarian interests.

Whose sectarian interests the Democrats in Westminster are taking care of we can never know - except they are not ours.

What we have witnessed in this election are bribes and threats - but no politics : Democracy is not a political system at all.

There is only one system of government which is actually political i.e. based solely upon facts and arguments - Republican.

The political system called The United Kingdom is based solely upon Lies, Hatred, Enslavement and War - a total Ultraism.

I think the Democrats in Westminster have run out of all economic options save one - to start a war to justify printing cash.

In which case continuing to support the political system called The United Kingdom is surely suicidal if this is World War 3.

We need to at least strive to achieve the modest aim of re-establishing Republicanism in the political discourses of Wales.

David B. Lawrence

From:
To:
Subject: PROTEST LETTER 2015 GENERAL ELECTION
Date: Thu, 7 May 2015 19:06:20 +0000

RepWblic.org – repwblic.informe.com

The Returning Officers, Cardiff South & Penarth Constituency – Re : UK 2015 General Election,

Dear Sirs / Madams,

I will enter this letter into the ballot box and retain the ballot paper issued to me on the grounds that I have asked for my name to be removed from the Electoral Register and therefore the creation of it should not be possible. The ballot paper of course remains your property – but my name belongs to me : until my name has been removed from the Electoral Register I will continue to do this in all forthcoming elections – and once it has been removed ( and I am no longer being conscripted into supporting the political system called The United Kingdom with threats of harassment, intimidation, prosecution, fines and imprisonments ) I will not vote again until that most fundamental principle of all modern political systems has been restored to us : that of government by consent - not coercion.

I appreciate that you feel bound by duty to adhere to the Electoral Administration & Administration Act 2013 – but equally I feel bound by my duty to The Public Interest to not only argue against but to defy this law and declare the United Kingdom 2015 General Election to be null and void on the grounds that it has been conducted in a corrupt manner ie not merely the coercion being applied to individuals such as myself to subscribe our names as if we were endorsing a political system which in fact we strongly object to, but also the multiple issues which have erupted out of the introduction of what to me is obviously the theft of people's names in this desperate Act by those who claim to be “ Democrats “ yet who have discarded that most basic principle of government by consent. Why have they done this ? Because the normal basis for political authority in a Democracy is a mandate secured by the votes cast – yet in many places even if all of the candidates standing for election had pooled all the votes cast for them all together they still would not be able to secure the endorsement of the majority of those entitled to cast a vote. In other words, the credibility of The United Kingdom as a political system has collapsed – but instead of examining its faults and introducing political reforms such as Proportional Representation, which might result in their parties never ever again enjoying the elected dictatorships they enjoy now, those vaunting themselves as “ Democrats “ have instead discarded the very principles which Democracy is founded upon – and thus in their need to secure the Electoral Register as the basis of their claim to political authority they have now re-instituted a secularised version of that law which just keeps being revived in different disguises – heresy ; tendering the oath ; seditious libel … those laws which Democrats historically opposed …

Some months before the Electoral Administration & Administration Act 2013 was passed, due to a raft of events in my own life in 2012, I had become so disaffected towards the claims being made by those in all elected parties ignorantly proclaiming themselves to be “ Democrats “ and erecting the word as a shibboleth to coerce and frighten the electorate whilst libellously denouncing critics such as myself, that I chose to abandon my long held position as a “ Republican Democrat.“ I have seen so much corrupt behaviour over the thirty five years or so that I have been quietly trying to put things right that I finally found the original Republican arguments about Democracy too utterly compelling and I re-assigned Democracy to where I now believe it belongs in my opinion – in the bin … As I emerged into what for me is a new political landscape I most certainly had my doubts about the idea that Democracy is not merely a corrupt but corrupting and therefore inevitably an irredeemable political system … but once the Democrats in all political parties had endorsed and passed the Electoral Administration & Administration Act 2013 – then I felt that my decision was indeed well-founded : I no longer see Democracy as even being a political system – it is a crime.

David B Lawrence, XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX ( “dai” )
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Tue Jun 02, 2015 4:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

A lot of crap has happened since the United Kingdom 2015 General Election which lends further weight to the hypothesis that Democracy is a criminal conspiracy which is pretending to be a political system - and other things are happening elsewhere - especially France and the United States of America - which underline the point for me that the 18c Republican Democrats and Democratic Republicans were very over-optimistic in believing that they could re-balance the power within society by creating their paper-thin " Republican " constitutions in the hope that they could incorporate a measure of Democracy without the real power in their societies - the Aristocracies which were still in the saddle having got rid of their kings - being able to find ways to subvert Democracy in order to make these " Democratic " political systems serve their private interests instead of " The Public Interest." The game of course was up for many as long as a hundred years or more ago - as soon as the advent of one-person-one-vote finally revealed that voting is solely for the purposes of electing those previously selected as candidates.

But surely there is no alternative to voting as the way for The People To Do Politics, even if the political system is like the United Kingdom, not a Democracy ?

Let me help you think this through properly : even if we continued to vote upon every available occasion for the next hundred years we would be spending less of our time in participating in elections than most of us will be spending on politics in the next minute e.g. in the time in which it has taken you to read this paragraph you could have voted twenty times. Each and every time that you enter a ballot sheet, even if you have spoiled it as your protest, the only party that you will ever elect is The Democratic Party in Wales and The World - and the only party that you will never be able elect is The People's Party in Wales and The World : by definition, you can not elect a minority to represent the interests of the whole of society - they will only ever represent the interests of those who provide the means for them to get elected ... the claim that " Democracy " means " The Rule of The People " is demonstrably a false claim, even when " Democracy " is interpreted to mean direct voting on issues without electing any representatives to deliberate them i.e. " Pure Democracy."

" Pure Democracy " - or any other version of Democracy mixed with something else - is simply not a political system in the sense that " Pure Republicanism " is as a public decision making process founded upon facts and arguments : Democrats concern themselves with conniving at the pursuit of power and therefore whether American Democratic Republicanism or French Republican Democracy are being practised with a paper constitution or this rather more muddled British version of a rather more poisonously Purer Democracy is being practised without, the consequences are demonstrably all the same. Elections are being carried out for the purposes of obtaining the acquiescence of those who are being told that by voting they are actually participating in a political system and must therefore submit to those who control it - even when they actually know that those that they are electing have been presented to them as if in some shoddy card trick in which they know beforehand that the card which they are electing has been pre-selected before hand.

" Easy lessons for forcing a card ... The art of forcing a card is to ask the spectator to choose any card and make them pick the card you want him to pick " -


http://www.howtodotricks.com/forcing-card.html ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?t=11&v=6QHDw2hDN0A

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation_%28magic%29#Card_force

" ... Equivocation is used to force a card using wording and not sleight of hand. The use of this kind of verbal force in close-up magic apparently offers a subject a free or random choice of card. It is not as common as sleight of hand or other methods. ... "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equivocation ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallacy ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Informal_fallacy

" ... Equivocation ( " to call by the same name " ) is classified as an informal logical fallacy. It is the misleading use of a term with more than one meaning or sense (by glossing over which meaning is intended at a particular time). It generally occurs with polysemic words (words with multiple meanings). ... Albeit in common parlance it is used in a variety of contexts, when discussed as a fallacy, equivocation only occurs when the arguer makes a word or phrase employed in two (or more) different senses in an argument appear to have the same meaning throughout. ... It is therefore distinct from (semantic) ambiguity, which means that the context doesn't make the meaning of the word or phrase clear, and amphiboly (or syntactical ambiguity), which refers to ambiguous sentence structure due to punctuation or syntax. ... "

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman

Person A : " No Scotswoman ever triumphs over her opponents."
Person B : " But Nicola Spurgeon has triumphed over her opponents."
Person A : " Ah - yes ... but no TRUE Scotswoman ever triumphs over her opponents."


" ... The essayist Spengler compared distinguishing between "mature" democracies, which never start wars, and "emerging democracies", which may start them, with the "No true Scotsman" fallacy. Spengler alleges that "political scientists" have attempted to save the "US academic dogma" that democracies never start wars from counterexamples by maintaining that no true democracy starts a war. ... "


Why mention " equivocation " in the context of " Declining Democracy by Refusing Registration " ? Well, apart from the fact that it is an established feature of Democratic behaviour, it appears to have been especially significant in the United Kingdom 2015 General Election ... indeed it might well explain why Nicola Spurgeon has had such devastating success having lost the referendum on Scotland's independence i.e. the end of The United Kingdom ... normally a major loss like that would set back such a party as the SNP - but it didn't ... why ? ... because the Labour & Cooperative Party along with the Conservative & Unionist Party and the Liberal Democrat Party all rushed up to Scotland at the last minute and made a heap of equivocating statements to avert what they felt united together in fearing as a disaster - the removal of simply any part of their basis for power - not even losing a tenth of it would they tolerate ... and yet once they had secured the territorial unity of what they imagine to be a country - The United Kingdom merely being a political system - they very cavalierly started explaining that no true Scotswomen or indeed men would have could have should have believed all of that old flannel ... so now for the next five years we have the juicy prospect of the House of Commons being literally a physical manifestation of a political conflict such as we have never seen before and ... oh ... yes - of course : there was that business with the Irish Nationalists holding the balance of power - holding nearly all of the seats for Ireland ... not to mention - if you look back far enough - The Welsh Party ...

" EQUIVOCATION " is more or less how politicians are forced to act by the way that Democracy works : they need to make their pitch equally to all available voters, appearing to promise them everything but delivering nothing - and hoping that everything which they said five years ago has been forgotten by the next election ... and what is more, equivocation works very well in so-called political systems where representatives are elected - because provided that the electorate are excluded from any participation in politics the voters swiftly forget their pasts as they become pre-occupied with their prospective futures as presented to them by The Democrats in Wales and The World ... you know, the " fact " that your local corner-shop proprietors might be grooming jihadis under their counters etc ... one counter-measure for this was the sixth point of ' The Charter' - a scheme for annual parliaments : NOT a scheme for annually running election campaigns such as we witness, but with the idea that the electorate would simply decide how their representative was behaving and as to whether they wanted to keep them. When ' The Charter ' was first published in the 1830s there were no such things as modern political parties and their manifestos, so ' The Chartists ' did not understand how much more corrupt elections might become - even though they had heard about President Jackson's behavior in the United States of America.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jacksonian_democracy

In contrast to the Jeffersonian era, Jacksonian democracy promoted the strength of the presidency and executive branch at the expense of Congress, while also seeking to broaden the public's participation in government. The Jacksonians demanded elected (not appointed) judges and rewrote many state constitutions to reflect the new values. In national terms they favored geographical expansion, justifying it in terms of Manifest Destiny. There was usually a consensus among both Jacksonians and Whigs that battles over slavery should be avoided. ... Jackson's expansion of democracy was largely limited to Americans of European descent, and voting rights were extended to adult white males only. There was little or no progress for African-Americans and Native Americans ( in some cases regress.) ... Jackson's biographer Robert V. Remini argues that Jacksonian Democracy : " ... stretches the concept of democracy about as far as it can go and still remain workable. ... As such it has inspired much of the dynamic and dramatic events of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries in American history—Populism, Progressivism, the New and Fair Deals, and the programs of the New Frontier and Great Society. ... "

... aaaahhhh ... but ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spoils_system ... NOT a Republican idea ...

" ... In the politics of the United States, a spoils system ( also known as a patronage system ) is a practice in which a political party, after winning an election, gives government jobs to its supporters, friends and relatives as a reward for working toward victory, and as an incentive to keep working for the party—as opposed to a merit system, where offices are awarded on the basis of some measure of merit, independent of political activity. ... The term was derived from the phrase "to the victor belong the spoils" by New York Senator William L. Marcy,referring to the victory of the Jackson Democrats in the election of 1828, with the term spoils meaning goods or benefits taken from the loser in a competition, election or military victory. ... Similar spoils systems are common in other nations that traditionally have been based on tribal organization or other kinship groups and localism in general. ... Less obvious than the incompetence and/or indolence of many of its political appointees was the spoil system's propensity for also corrupting or installing already corrupt public officials. ... "

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_nzR-GPLEo

... Do you think the we might - together - all get an exit visa ... if only we can persuade the English declare independence too ? ... Oh ... hell : you know what will happen - do you not ? ... The Irish will leave ... The Scottish will leave ... The English will leave ... The Manx will leave ... The Poles, Pakistanis and possibly probably all of the others will leave ... and The ******* Welsh will vote to remain in The United Kingdom and thus to patriotically pay off all of the debts ... well ... at least The Democrats in Wales will then finally leave us alone : we will end up being so poor we will unable to afford to corrupt them even to the modest standards which they have come to feel entitled to ... and surely that is the whole trouble with The Democrats in Wales - a lack of vision, a lack of ambition, a lack of the wish to reach out in order to touch anything which they can not take hold of let alone mentally grasp ... perhaps all of those with any ambition were bribed into emigrating ?


[ There were complaints about patronage abuses by the Labour & Cooperative Party governments but I can not yet even find one about Cameron II - yet ...]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Tue Jul 14, 2015 2:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

From:
To:
Subject: FW: I need to find a new solicitor - but I have two very different kinds of problem
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 02:02:12 +0000

Dear X

I thought that I might share with you the way in which I am beginning Bastille Day - " Y Dydd Rhydd " - looking for lawyers !

Thank you very much for the Bastille Day Card : I also received a hand-made one from a sympathetic friend - Conservative !

David B. Lawrence

From:
To:
Subject: FW: I need to find a new solicitor - but I have two very different kinds of problem
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 01:55:53 +0000

Dear X

I have mentioned your name in this ... perhaps you can just pass me off as a law-abiding chap but slightly mad if asked ...

Perhaps I should have asked beforehand ... I trust however that this is OK and you do not want a call from me at 03.00 am.

David B. Lawrence

From:
To:
Subject: I need to find a new solicitor - but I have two very different kinds of problem
Date: Tue, 14 Jul 2015 01:50:15 +0000

To XXXX YYYY ZZZZ

Dear X and Y

[ It is approaching 03.00 am and I have been enjoying myself and have treated you to some " wreckreational writing " but you need not read beyond THIS, other than in a leisurely moment if you wish, because my immediate problem is THIS. ]

I am hoping to be advised by yourselves as the most knowledgeable as to whom I might approach to be my new solicitor.

I have a problem in picking a new solicitor after amicably parting ways with ZZZZ who is now too busy as a judge. ZZZZ suggested another firm of solicitors but having taken a look at them, whilst I feel that they might do for the pressing immediate problem, I feel that whom I would really benefit from is somebody who might perhaps be retired and able to be interested in and sympathetic towards a person whose life in terms of legalities has become very complicated - even more complicated that ZZZZ suspects, because although he has heard a fair bit about all of the shenanigens about the situation he is, as far as I know, entirely unaware of how I have developed my political conceptions in response to these abuses ...

My pressing personal problem at the moment is one concerning [ MY APOLOGIES TO MY READERS : THAT BIT IS ABOUT A PERSONAL PROBLEM ]

You may certainly ask ZZZZ of his opinion of me, I have been with [ ZZZZ'S ] for over thirty years and they were kind ...

... but to the best of my knowledge ZZZZ and his colleagues are not aware of how the situation has shaped my politics ...

I ALSO WANT TO FIND A LAWYER TO ARGUE AGAINST THE ELECTORAL REGISTRATION & ADMINISTRATION ACT 2013

In brief, the vast bulk of my diverse legal problems have resulted from inadvertently becoming caught up in a situation which was deliberately engineered by Cardiff City County Council and South Glamorgan County Council, or rather by certain Labour and Cooperative Party politicians directing them for their own ends without any regard for those who lived and worked in the communities of XXXXXXXXX which resulted in hundreds of people losing their homes and scores of people their businesses. I have had the misfortune of being the last owner-occupier left standing or rather being ground down beneath their policies, the reputation of my business and home address destroyed, my property not only damaged but effectively made worthless, thrown into long term unemployment, poverty, social isolation with my physical and mental health being destroyed by a constant series of very stressful events. Whilst I have not even been offered an apology let alone any compensation - even for my property, let alone for my loss of income or the destruction of all aspects of my life - Labour & Cooperative politicians have been freely offering my property to others whilst apparently agreeing with Cardiff City County Council's lawyers to bankrupt me if I try to go to court : this is the ongoing saga of " The XXXX XXXX XXXXXX "

That is the overall situation which I struggle with and which led me to The XXXXX XXXXX XXXXX and Legal Aid committees, where there there were further contentions with Cardiff City County Council and the Labour & Cooperative Party and where you can request a further opinion of me from XXXX and XXXX and XXXX. Around this time the Cardiff Bay Barrage Groundwater Compensation Act was passed some ten years after I had started the public argument about it in 1991, and in September 2001 the groundwater rose to a level just below my basement floor and Cardiff City County Council lawyers contrived to delay its investigation resulting in my having to inform my insurance company and therefore I became uninsurable long before they declared that I would receive no compensation because they were deciding this from water in their boreholes not my home. By 2003 I had decided to become a public advocate of Nomocracy, i.e. The Rule of Law, or in more familiar terms ' Republican Democracy ' which was the subject of the pamphlet ' Repwblic ' which I wrote in 2003 in irritation at a meeting in which Republicanism was equated with " not wanting the Queen " or " disliking the English " etc.

By 2007 this had become repwblic.informe.com which has unfortunately now become little more than my blog but which recently supposedly had 1067 members and last year was apparently viewed by some 73,908 people, mostly in countries overseas. ' Repwblic ' is apparently receiving some interference, but I wish to assure you that it is a perfectly legitimate and legal operation whatever the opinions of those whom I have taken to referring to as " The Demockerats in Wales." This was not however the opinion of The Silk Commission who refused to publish my " submission to the commission " which argued that it is wrong for The Welsh Government to be passing laws without the jurisdiction being created having a court i.e. I made the same argument which The Law Society did, albeit I went the whole way into Nomocracy and argued that The Court in Wales should be independent and advise The Welsh Assembly, both government and opposition, on both the draughting and amendment of Bills and Acts - and it should refuse to affix its seal and make them into Laws if they are not consistent with existing Laws and Legislation etc. It seems to be clear, given that The Silk Commission published not merely several incoherent scrawls but also a blank sheet of paper, that the main fault that they found with my paper was that it was written by a " Republican in Wales " - that it is axiomatic for " The Democrats in Wales " that we do not exist.

I have in recent years started to draw a sharp distinction between " The Democrats in Wales " who are forever claiming this political system to be " Democratic " and yet refusing to accept the normal institutions of modern political systems, such as The Court ( which is central for Republican Democrats, because we want " The government of laws, not men," ) and " The Republicans in Wales " who are drawn from all colours of the political spectrum and are insisting upon them : what I have in mind is a rainbow coalition of all those who understand that Wales is now the constitutional basket-case of Europe in making laws without having " The Court in Wales." Then in 2012 several bad - indeed sinister - things happened to me and this led to my ripping up my own sense of how politics works and - partly with an eye towards making a strongly polemical argument in order to illustrate what is wrong with The United Kingdom's lack of a constitution - I did something which surprised even me : I declared for " Pure Republicanism " and rejected both of those historical compromises of French " Republican Democracy " and American " Democratic Republicanism " in favour of arguing against Democracy itself, since in The United Kingdom the historic marriage between the two has never been consummated and there are no effective checks and balances. I reclassified Democracy as an Ultraism, as the calculated use of emotional coercion in political decision making - and therefore as illegitimate as the use of violence, which I ascribe to Monarchism ( which is the concentration of political power into the hands of a single community of interest : Monarchism is NOT therefore to be equated with The Royal Family, there have been plenty of ' Crowned Republics ' and those are an entirely different issue.)

In opting to argue for " Pure Republicanism " I was a little wobbly afterwards : apart from those tedious people who do not know what Democracy is but blindly believe that in repeating the word that will make them into good people because they have been told so by those in authority who tell them that they are Democrats but who reserve the right to re-define and to re-define that word to mean what they wish, whenever they wish ... and starting in 2013 there has been increasing talk of legislation to criminalise those who did not believe in " British " Democracy, " British " Human Rights and - presumably - " British " Britishness ... this to me, even given my limited knowledge of history, was like a red rag to a bull - we have seen such laws before and it took centuries in each instance for Republicans to remove them from the statute book ... but the one law which confirmed to me that my rejecting Democracy was the correct thing to do has paradoxically led me into both defending Republicanism and shoring up Democracy simultaneously : my voting record is impeccable and now I wish to have an equally impeccable non-voting record i.e. for me, remaining on The Electoral Register is voting for " Demockery."

At that very moment The House of Commons was voting to shore up its claim to legitimacy by the only means that it now had, given that in many constituencies even if all candidates pooled their votes then even all together they still could not claim a Democratic mandate. In terms of Real Democracy, The Demockerats of The United Kingdom effectively conceded that they were politically bankrupt in 2013 - so instead of persisting in claiming a political mandate on the basis of the votes cast in approval of themselves and thus consenting to their political system, in 2013 " The Demockerats " decided to shore up Their Dis-United Kingdom by laying claim to a political mandate based upon an imaginary number of votes which might have been cast according to The Electoral Register. Instead of addressing the widespread political antipathy towards themselves ( - after all, that would involve them admitting to their mistakes - and Democrats will never admit to any faults because when they do they will not get elected again, so it is axiomatic in every party that Democrats are never at fault - it is always The Electorate Who Are At Fault - ) " The Demockerats " reached for The Electoral Register as the basis for their claim for a political mandate - only once they opened it they found it half empty and so they concluded that The Electorate Are At Fault for this ... indeed in several constituencies there were ludicrously few of these imaginary votes to be found in The Electoral Register with which to provide any basis for their claim to a political mandate, so in order to ensure that everybody would imagine that there were enough imaginary people voting for the political system which they call The United Kingdom they decided that surely The Electorate Are At Fault for not filling in the forms they provided and so " The Demockerats " would fill in those forms for themselves and give those imaginary people's votes to - themselves !

So " The Demockerats " set about making it lawful for themselves which it is otherwise absolutely illegal for others to do - or atleast, as far as I know, it has always been illegal to sign somebody else's name to a contract from which you will profit, albeit I just have to guess at the number of crimes involved in doing so - and of course for Democratic Republicans it is The Social Contract which is the very basis of Democratic Republicanism everywhere but - of course - this is that newly old strange new chestnut " British " Democracy which is no longer based upon consent - and soon we shall have " British " Human Rights too ... Why ? ... Because " British " now means " Arbitrary " - " Willful " - " Whatever We Want It To Mean ! " ... What " The Demockerats " need for shoring up Their Dis-United Kingdom is a political mandate so what they want is The Electoral Register to be full of names - so they have obtained tens of millions of names - obtained ? ... sorry - even I am not sufficiently educated to twist the meanings of words to that degree ... they have stolen tens of millions of names and The Electoral Register is now once more fat and ... absolutely worthless ... because besides the names of those who could not consent ( e.g. because the persons involved are either dead or absent or never existed in the first place ) there are the names of those who either have not volunteered their names or having done so before now wish to withdraw their consent.

I therefore placed my name on The Electoral Register in 2013 for the explicit purpose of establishing the right to remove it.

To have no way even to withdraw your consent from a social relationship, even if you can not physically escape from it, is by definition in Republicanism a violation of the basic principle which justifies The Rule of Law, and whether or not any political system is involved in the making of a law or a state is involved in applying that law, the object of all laws is to define those relationships which are not consented to and either to bring them to an end or to restore them to consent. A law that imposes a non-consenting relationship must demonstrate that overall this imposition is in The Public Interest e.g. governments impose compulsory taxation for expenditure which broadly benefits those who are not in the communities of interest of the government's communities of interest which legislated for it. But the compulsory Electoral Registration of a severely disaffected electorate is solely for the benefit of those they are disaffected towards, the community of interest of " The Demockerats " of The United Kingdom. As a Pure Republican I do not agree with the Liberal Democratic idea that Human Rights are the personal property of isolated individuals ; nor with the Conservative Democratic idea that Human Rights are dispensations within their gift which they can withdraw from those groups and individuals whom they imagine that they can obtain political gains from doing so ; nor do I agree with the Socialist Democratic idea that majorities can simply proclaim as many Human Rights as they can imagine for themselves. I believe that Human Rights only arise in the context of human relationships e.g. when I have told most people that I disagree with them and that I will not endorse their political viewpoint, my Republican friends of all colours - Communists, Socialists, Anarchists, Liberals, Fascists, - and yes - even Conservatives, may well bring the matter up again in order to argue it differently ... but absolutely no Republican of any colour that I ever met would dream of passing laws to intimidate, harass, prosecute, fine, distrain or goal any others.

Laws the Conservative & Unionist, Labour & Cooperative, Liberal Democrats, Plaid Cymru Democrats have now all agreed.

I do not know whether it is better to argue against the Electoral Registration & Administration Act 2013 upon the grounds of the various Human Rights treaties which The United Kingdom has signed, or upon a more generally applicable principle which will hopefully survive their revocation of the Human Rights Act 1998. From my own point of view, I wrote to all of the Democratic Party leaders in Westminster several years ago asking them to replace the Treason Felony Act 1848 which in The Guardian's case before the House of Lords in 2003 was demonstrated to be defunct because of the Human Rights Act 1998. None of The Party Leaders of the Demockerats in Westminster has ever replied - excepting that the Conservative & Unionist Party may have responded by choosing to discard the universalising principles of the Human Rights Act 1998 and so fully restore the bloody-minded arbitrariness of The English Law in Wales. It is now clear to me that instead of doing as I advised and replacing the Treason Felony Act 1848 with something better and sensibly draughted, they will be seeking to make exemptions for such legislations in their new " British " Human Rights Bill ... and in all likelyhood in order to justify themselves doing that they are already gently provoking some gun-toting wanna-bee terrorist who thinks that he must be a Republican and will graft him onto somebody like me - and then ... well, then I will definitely be in need of a solicitor.

You will find that many respectable people will be willing to come forward to vouch for my upright character as a Quaker.

I have committed no crimes - yet I was condemned as a young man to a life sentence of poverty - for the crime of poverty.

As a Republican I believe that civil society depends upon universal access to legal redress, free at the point of necessity.

So you will understand that Nomocracy is the politics which uses laws to advise how to conduct consenting relationships.

Pure Republicanism is conducted solely upon the basis of facts and arguments directed towards creating The General Will, and I believe that only the voluntary and charitable sectors are practicing this : " We The People " - Are Doing The Politics.

Pure Democracy is conducted solely upon the basis of denying facts and not listening to arguments which contradict yours, by coercing the electors and elected with bribes and threats to claim " Vox Populi, Vox Dei " - Democrats Don't Do Politics.

There are supposed to be faults within both " Pure " political systems which were supposedly remedied by the checks and balances created in the various " Democratic-Republican " and " Republican-Democratic " political systems which were created as the philosophical consequences of " The 18c Shotgun Marriage between ( Mr ) Democracy and ( Ms ) Respublica " but in over two hundred years this has never happened within the political system which we refer to as " The United Kingdom " which has continually dis-united The People in Britain and Ireland and has been setting them at each other's throats for over four hundred years. Apart from the obvious need to finally bring this non-political system to an end - and it is after all just a mechanism, not a country or a nation or our society which I propose that we should discard and ... [ ... OK OK OK : I WOULD LIKE TO BULL-DOZE THE PALACE OF WESTMINSTER INTO THE THAMES - OK ? ... ] ... in my own observations, I have come to the conclusion that Pure Republicanism is not faulted as traditionally claimed by - oh, yeah - by Pure Democrats ... and I have now come to fully agree with the early Pure Republicans : Democracy is not only a corrupt but corrupting and for me the idea of remedying the faults of Democracy with even more Democracy is ... just imbecilic.

You will I hope detect the fact that I have just treated you to a taste of the sort of ill-informed, working-class, shoot-from-the-mouth wreckreational-writing in which I pass my evenings with in My Little Repwblic, as Machiavelli once did in his.

Well, if nothing else I hope that I have entertained you : but I must ask whether you know of anybody with a taste for this ?

Yours Faithfully,

David B. Lawrence,


Last edited by dai on Sun Oct 25, 2015 8:14 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Sun Jul 26, 2015 7:31 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I have been commenting upon this matter whilst writing about other things -

http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=2791#2791

The Social Contract : Rousseau, Hobbes, Locke & Others

[ MY COMMENT : " THE GENERAL WILL " IS THE PURE REPUBLICAN WAY OF DISCOVERING THE RES PUBLICA THROUGH POLITICAL DISCOURSES IN WHICH WE DEVELOP A MUTUAL UNDERSTANDING AND THUS FOUND THE SOCIAL CONTRACT BY VOLUNTARILY ENTERING INTO AGREEMENT - WHEREAS " VOX POPULI, VOX DEI " IS THE AGGREGATION OF ALL OF THE PARTICULAR WILLS OF THE PEOPLE AS IF THEY WERE SELFISH IGNORANT INDIVIDUALS : THIS IS THE PURE DEMOCRATIC WAY OF DELIBERATELY NOT DISCOVERING THE RES PUBLICA BUT INSTEAD EQUATING IT WITH THE OPINION OF THE MAJORITY THROUGH THE MECHANISM OF VOTING. MAJORITY VOTING IS AN ULTRAISTIC METHOD WHICH IS USED TO COERCE MINORITIES TO ACCEPT THE ARBITRARY WILL OF THE MAJORITY : THERE IS NO MUTUALITY IN DEMOCRACY, THEREFORE NO UNDERSTANDING AND NO AGREEMENT, AND SO MINORITIES WILL NOT WANT TO UPHOLD WHAT THE MAJORITY DECLARE TO BE THE RES PUBLICA BECAUSE IT IS BOTH RATIONAL AND REASONABLE TO SUBVERT THE WILL OF THE MAJORITY WHEN IT IS UNJUST. THE SOCIAL DISORDER WHICH RESULTS IS JUST ONE OF THE REASONS WHY PURE REPUBLICANS OBJECT TO BOTH VOTING AND POLITICAL PARTIES AND ESPECIALLY TO PURE DEMOCRACY I.E. TO A GOVERNMENT WHICH IS DELIBERATELY MIS-CONDUCTED BY USING A POLITICAL SYSTEM WHICH IS CONSTRUCTED IN AN ARBITRARY WAY, I.E. WITHOUT A CONSTITUTION E.G. THE UNITED KINGDOM. THERE ARE HOWEVER ARGUMENTS FOR " REPUBLICAN DEMOCRACY " AND " DEMOCRATIC REPUBLICANISM " WHICH PRESENT THESE AS USEFUL COMPROMISES BETWEEN THESE TWO POLITICAL SYSTEMS, ATTEMPTING TO STRIKE DIFFERENT BALANCES BETWEEN WHAT ARE DEEMED TO BE TOO OVER- OR TOO UNDER- PRINCIPLED POLITICAL SYSTEMS, THAT REPUBLICANISM IS TOO RIGID OR DEMOCRACY TOO PLASTIC, THAT REPUBLICANISM LICENCES US TO BE SUPER-HUMAN AND DEMOCRACY LICENCES US TO BE SUB-HUMAN, AND THUS NEITHER ARE REALISTIC : THAT POLITICAL SYSTEMS SHOULD BE DESIGNED TO BE NEITHER RIGID NOR PLASTIC - BUT FLEXIBLE ... but ... whilst in Wales that is one of the conventional Republican Democratic / Democratic Republican arguments - I came to disagree with them in 2013 and I now advocate " Pure " because most of us are involved with or supporters of charities and campaigns outside of the activities which The Democrats in Wales are involved with : we have no use for voting or for their parties, and we should be careful to promote our causes without promoting theirs - voting for any party actively endorses their political system called The United Kingdom and even not voting but remaining on the Electoral Register passively endorses it. I advocate getting off the Electoral Register in order to stop The Democrats in Wales abusing it by stuffing it with stolen names as the basis of a false claim to a mandate from The People. ]

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?t=1214 -

REPWBLIC : Funding Arrangements - COCK AID ?

... After more than eight years Repwblic is clearly no longer merely an experiment but a fixture of some sort, a nail in the coffin of the political system called The United Kingdom upon which to hang some other matters upon. " Y Repwblic " was meant initially to be solely " A Republic of Letters " intended to promote an improved understanding of what Republicanism really is, in order to protect the word " Republican " from being abused by teenage wanna-bee terrorists posing before their webcams in their their bedrooms in their camouflage pyjamas with their balaclavas and plastic pistols, whose corrupt ideas of " Republicanism " are derived from the propaganda against Republicanism rather than from Republicanism itself. Here in Wales we have the almost hopeless task before us of overcoming over two hundred years of propaganda against their critics by the supporters of The United Kingdom. Just in order to motivate us to make this wearysome task more interesting, in this long drawn out verbal struggle with this corrupt and corrupting political system called The United Kingdom, we have to contend with laws which prohibit the kinds of Free Speech which are necessary to criticise it. These are designed to suppress any of those sorts of Free Thought which might lead to anybody questioning the continued existence of The Democrats in Wales' political system, which they refer to as The United Kingdom even in the face of the obvious evidence of its consequences - that it has been dis-uniting The People of Wales and The World and setting them at each other's throats for centuries.

Amongst other things Repwblic was intended to be a sort of bulletin board upon which to pin up notices of campaigns but not a vehicle to conduct campaigns ... but ... It became obvious that in order to assure the continued existence of Repwblic, it is necessary to remove the remains of The Treason Felony Act 1848 from the statute book, which should not be so controversial because in 2003 it was effectively declared dead by The House of Lords on the basis that it contradicts The Human Rights Act 1998 ... but ... in 1998 The Labour & Cooperative Party deprived The Human Rights Act of having any real teeth because they stripped off the first three clauses in accordance with the principle of The Sovereignty of The Crown in Parliament in order to make sure that neither any of the European Courts nor The Supreme Court of The United Kingdom could over-rule them i.e. the principle established by Magna Carta that The Rule of Law is not compatible with The English Law ... And ... Now the Conservative & Unionist Party is conniving at undermining even that defective situation by opting out of the European Courts altogether so their behaviour can not even be subjected to any examination and criticism by others even though the political system called The United Kingdom is already not bound to comply with any of their their legal opinions : they can not even tolerate embarrassment let alone being subjected to The Rule of Law ...


SEE - http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?t=438

Yr Ardystiad - Campaign Against The Treason Felony Act 1848


... And ... from several weeks ago, after The United Kingdom 2015 General Election returned a government of The Conservative & Unionist Party which is blue is tooth and claw and The Labour & Cooperative Party is now determined to oppose them by not merely mimicking them but being even more reactionary in the hope of winning back a few floating voters. Hence the situation now is not merely about our speaking freely about what we are freely thinking about that, but simply everything that civilised people care about is at stake e.g. the Labour & Cooperative Party are apparently willing to destroy the very trade union rights which their own party was created to defend, created ultimately by the efforts of 19c Republicans such as Dilke, Bradlaugh, de Morgan and Odger, to defend rights which had first been exercised over a hundred years before hand - in the 18c ! ... And ... So another campaign has arisen which is closely allied to any workers' right not to work and any voters' right not to vote : the right of anyone to refuse to subscribe their name to The Electoral Register. ... So ... again, we find that The Labour & Cooperative Party are the foremost advocates of destroying consent as the basis of Democracy : an opinion apparently founded upon evident contempt for their constituents in expecting them to vote for them out of loyalty or just poverty which is amply illustrated by their proposal to fine and jail those who have given up on voting for them as a futile exercise ...

[ RE ABOVE : A TOPICAL INSERTION - AS I WRITE TONIGHT, THERE IS PANIC IN THE LABOUR & COOPERATIVE PARTY THIS WEEKEND BECAUSE IN ORDER TO MAKE A PRETENCE TO DEMOCRACY THE PARTY'S MANAGERS INCLUDED JEREMY CORBIN AS A TOKEN SOCIALIST AS A SOP TO THE OLD GUARD - BUT THEY HAD NOT COUNTENANCED THAT THE NEW GUARD WOULD SUPPORT HIM TOO. THESE ARE THE YOUNGER GENERATION WHOSE PARENTS WERE HIT BY THATCHERITES AND THEY WERE HIT BY THE BLAIRITES AND THEY ARE BLOODY FURIOUS BUT ALSO BLOODY LUCKIER THAN US : THE PARTY MANAGERS AS A SOP TO THIS NEW GUARD HAVE CHANGED THE PARTY'S RULES TO ONE PERSON ONE VOTE EXPECTING THE PARTY MEMBERSHIP TO BELIEVE AS THEY HAVE BEEN LECTURED TO, BUT THEY DO NOT ... BECAUSE THE RANK AND FILE OF THE LABOUR AND COOPERATIVE PARTY ARE NOT UPPER CLASS POLITICAL CAREERISTS ... THESE PARTY MANAGERS WERE USED TO THOSE PRETENDED ELECTIONS SUCH AS THE ONE THAT BROUGHT BLAIR TO POWER AND RUMOURS ARE ABOUNDING THIS WEEKEND THAT THEY ARE NOW PANICKING BECAUSE THE DEMOCKERATS IN WESTMINSTER HAVE LOST CONTROL THE LEADERSHIP SELECTION : THEIR SOLUTION ? TO CLAIM THAT SOMEBODY HAS RIGGED THEIR ELECTION - YOU KNOW : THE ELECTION WHICH THEY THEMSELVES ARE RUNNING ACCORDING TO THE RULES THEY NOT ONLY AGREED TO BUT DEVISED THEMSELVES IN THE FIRST PLACE - !!! - SEE WHAT I MEAN ABOUT HOW THE REPUBLICAN MODEL OF SOCIETY DESCRIBES A PROGRESSION THROUGH HIERARCHY, DEMOCRACY, ARISTOCRACY AND MONARCHY INTO AN UTTER POLITICAL INCOMPETENCE WHICH RESULTS IN THE DESTRUCTION OF SOCIETY ? -

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Labour_Party_(UK)_leadership_election,_2015#Controversy

- OF COURSE MEMBERSHIP OF THE HOUSE OF LORDS IS ALWAYS DECIDED IN SECRET BY SELECTION NOT ELECTION - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33667676 ]


... So ... They allege that The People In Wales are merely apathetic and refuse to admit that The Democrats in Wales are widely held in contempt because they they are not political : they now construe politics as telling the electorate what to believe instead of listening to what they say, hence they are no longer behave as representatives elected by The People but as commissars selected by The Party. Apparently this is now the practice of all of The Democrats in Wales and The World : Republicanism predicts this in stating that Democracy unrestrained, as a political system based upon bribing and threatening the electorate, conducted in secrecy and without The Rule Of Law to protect The People from The Government, will corrupt any society. The People in Wales apparently continue to believe in what The Democrats in Wales keep telling them, that even to consider some other political system is insane, and yet they have clearly also ceased to believe in this political system called The United Kingdom. The vast majority however still believe that Democracy can be used to repair the political system : about 20% of adults in Wales think that the " Democratic " solution is to get rid of " The Monarchy " and have a " Republic " because the level of political education in Wales is abysmal and they do not understand the meaning of these words. Pure Republicans however view Democrats as " Ultraists " i.e. " beyond the bounds " and classify them along with Hierarchs, Aristocrats and Monarchs - but the latter are not to be confused with " The Royal Family." There is such a thing as " Crowned Republic " and those who want to keep " The Queen " are welcome to her - but The Treason Felony Act 1848 and other such laws which cite the mythical concept of " Sovereignty " must go because " The Rule of Law " only addresses those things which can be evidenced in a court of law : nobody can legislate to make pigs fly - even if the absence of The Court in Wales leads The Democrats in Wales to fondly imagine that they can get around such things somehow ..."

... I THEN WENT FOR A LITTLE WANDER IN THAT THREAD WHICH I HAD TO PUT IN BLUE TO LET MY READERS AVOID " THE SHORT CUT " - SOME BITS OF IT :

" ... Those who swallow up The United Kingdom's propaganda against Republicans think that it is this civil war scenario above that we advocate as the means to transform society - but all that such a catastrophe results in is a return to the very first stasis when The People are in a state of desperation because they are without any economic resources and so are willing to turn to some false religion and thus submit to the rule of any Hierarchy which turns up distributing bread and bandages. Basically, when The People are desperate they will agree to say that they will believe in anything - and if those Hierarchs licence them, they are willing to kill those who say that they believe in something slightly different because then they can eat their share as well. But once The People become more prosperous and tolerant again then society will evolve into Democracy - again ! - This cycle will happen again and again at varying speeds and in varying ways according to the varying circumstances unless it can be ended by finally excluding all of The Ultraists from access to power over the political system and founding it upon The Rule of Law.

The Rule of Law requires that the political system created laws that are universally and uniformly applied to everybody and that they are under constant review to test their rationality and reasonableness. The ultimate determiner of these laws is The Supreme Court which is the mountainous peak, the most passive but most powerful part of the state apparatus to which all of the other institutions of government are subject - but to prevent its power over the state apparatus being abused The Supreme Court is forbidden to make the laws, albeit that it can interpret them and thus passively make precedents ; the most active but least powerful parts of a Republican political system, where the political authority to originate laws is located in The People who Possess The Facts and Make Arguments, are the mounds and foothills of the individual campaigners and the smaller organisations advocating for particular policies and legislations - and their activities are publicly funded by a Republican state because they are the providers of the facts and arguments upon which a Republican political system is dependent.

The Rule of Law being the embodiment of The Public Interest, it is the public handbook of advice upon how to conduct consenting relationships and the basis of the curriculum in all schools in a Republican state and the aim is not to teach children to blindly obey The Rule of Law but how to be citizens eager to question it and willing to participate in the political system in order to improve it. It is important that the teaching of Republicanism does not become an opportunity for anybody to establish a Hierarchy. In Republican political systems it is important to strive to exclude all of those Ultraisms used by those who strive to represent their own private interests as being identical to The Public Interest : claims to political authority based upon Hierarchy, Democracy, Aristocracy, Monarchy and indeed any other such corrupt and corrupting strategies must be rejected. Political authority for a decision belongs only to those possessed of the facts and arguments in Republicanism - but they must explain these to others and persuade them of the merit of their political proposal : winning a vote is not winning an argument.

It is not in The Public Interest to decide matters with votes because they can be traded or bought and so - as we have so often witnessed in Wales - the practices of Democracy will inevitably corrupt any political system. Republicanism seeks to create not a political consensus but an actual change of consciousness in society so that once a better way of understanding a matter has been grasped only the perverse will continue to reject " The General Will " whereas most will be eager to understand and uphold the new law because it is advising them how to conduct their consenting relationships more successfully. Only the most perverse flout such advice and so the Republican state does not punish those it deems to be criminals but restrains them until they have understood the matter and thus come to agree with the law. Those who are convinced that they are not perverse in their objections to a law which others have consented to but they perceive to be unjust are eager to peaceably convey their understanding of its faults to those others and thus to restrain themselves until they are forced by the intransigence of others to resolve upon a course of action which they deem to be suitable for purposefully demonstrating those injustices which a badly conceieved law is causing and thus to re-present their arguments in courtrooms. ... "


... OH DEAR ... I REALLY SHOULD HAVE BEEN WRITING ON THIS THREAD ... BUT I AM CONSCIOUS THAT THIS CAMPAIGN PROBABLY REQUIRES BOTH COUNSEL AND CASH ...

Democrats argue that they acquire political authority by virtue of the votes cast for them in their ballots, but now that less than half of The People in Wales bother to cast a vote, because they instinctively know that The Democrats are deceiving them, The Democrats have seized upon the idea of claiming the Electoral Register as their substitute for " an electoral mandate " and licensing themselves to pass laws to place The People's names upon it without their consent. If there ever was anybody who thought that the political system called The United Kingdom was honestly conducted and was a Democracy, this violation not merely of the norms of Democracy but of the very basis of it as a form of government conducted by consent when those who in trying to defend this fundamental principle of Democracy refuse to subscribe their names to the Electoral Register are subjected to legal sanctions. This absolutely demonstrates either The Democratic Republicans' claim that The United Kingdom is Democratic but merely lacking a clearly written constitution, - or The Republican Democrats' claim that The United Kingdom is a Pure Democracy which is deliberately preventing any scrutiny by refusing to have a clearly written constitution, - or The Pure Republicans' claim that The United Kingdom is in fact an Aristocracy which is employing Democrats to run its affairs : that Democracy is a non-political system which is based upon denoting and selections not upon voting and elections.

I have over the course of my political lifetime, beginning with my reaction to the sinister adulation for The Investiture of The Prince of Wales when aged seven in 1969, moved from Democratic Republicanism through Republican Democracy until in 2013 - to my own surprise - I felt finally compelled to agree with the arguments of Pure Republicanism : that Democracy is both corrupt and corrupting, merely a mechanism and not a political system. In the past two years or so I have looked and felt quite wobbly as I publicly shredded my previous political beliefs on " Y Repwblic " without entirely knowing where I was going except that finally everything seems coherent - well, it seems so to me if not to my readers ... things are now happening in this non-political system called The United Kingdom which have confirmed to me that this was a good decision, an appropriate if not a correct one.

In re-framing my view of The United Kingdom the implications of Pure Republicanism do not lead me to change my political activities in collecting facts and making arguments but it did lead me to the conclusion that not only was voting futile but also harmful. I regard merely not voting as not an active positive act, because for me that would be a passive negative act of despondency and even more shameful than spoiling ballot papers, which I regard as merely childish vandalism which does not treat those who still believe in them with enough respect. I have had an impeccable voting record and I want to now be possessed of an impeccable non-voting record - or rather I want to positively register my vote against the political system called The United Kingdom. In the first instance I thought of trying to establish the legal right for everybody, for whatever their reasons, to refuse to have their name entered without their consent into The Electoral Register ... and then the-god-that-I-do-not-believe-in-but-have-faith-in apparently intervened in my favour ...

Whilst I was still wondering as to whether I really was mad the Coalition Government of Liberal Democrats and Conservative & Unionists and Labour & Cooperative and other Parties in the one-party political system called The United Kingdom began to worry that they had been so badly behaved over the previous seventy years that by the time of the forthcoming 2015 election they might finally be seen to be utterly discredited and nobody would vote for them at all or - even worse - Russel Brand might be elected on a no vote ... This situation was particularly bad in Wales where The Labour & Cooperative Party had plainly demonstrated the lack of credibility of the political system called The United Kingdom in Wales by taking half of the seats in the Welsh Assembly on merely 16.7% of the available votes. In order to remedy the patent lack of a Democratic mandate, they devised the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 which contained two significant innovations -

( A ) instead of there being a civil penalty of £1000 for refusing to perform the duty of naming the other criminals in the household who were not obediently turning up to vote for their betters, they introduced individual registration - but kept the £1000 civil penalty for not volunteering our own names, yet now there was no agency involved i.e. the duty of acting on behalf of the state had ceased, and so it became a straightforward threat of the same crude sort which was on the statute books centuries ago. For example, when those who objected to what was then a Monarchy called The United Kingdom in the 17c were used as a ready source of cash in the form of a steady stream of fines extracted by " Tendering The Oath " in which case if in good conscience as a Republican you refused they imprisoned you for the first offence, hanged you for the second - and for the third they then dug you up and hanged you again and again and again ... until your widow finally ran out of money ... Before that they fined The People for going to the wrong church on Sundays, for going to the right church on Sundays, for not going to church at all and for going to church every Sunday but having opinions about it ...

( B ) is the provision in the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 which ought to offend not only Republicans but those who truly care about Democracy too : because of the falling numbers of The People Who Register To Vote, The Democrats in Wales and Westminster have decided that the Electoral Registration Officers are to scour all records that they can lay their hands upon and enter the names which they can find into The Electoral Register. This is portrayed as The Democrats helping The People to vote, but the names registered not only include those who have moved away and those who are dead but also those who positively did not want to have their names placed on The Electoral Register ( for various reasons.) This is also suggestive of a return to certain infamous historical precedents in the exceedingly corrupt political practices of 17c and 18c Wales when The Electoral Registers were manipulated in various ways to ensure the correct results. In particular I have in mind the 1660 election, when all of The Republicans in Cardiff were arrested and imprisoned the night before to ensure that they could not cast a vote against the local Aristocracy. The following morning the Aristocrats produced a number of electors who had never been registered before and announced as their candidate one Mr Ffloyd who was no where to be seen but in due course was obediently elected. The Aristocrats then sent the election return to London where an officer was sent by The House of Commons to Mr Ffloyd who was most confused : he had never before visited Cardiff and in 1660 he had already been elected as a Member of Parliament for somewhere else.


[ I DECIDED TO CHECK THAT DATE BECAUSE THE APOLOGISTS FOR THE UNITED KINGDOM OFTEN RE-WRITE WELSH HISTORY - http://www.historyofparliamentonline.org/volume/1660-1690/member/lloyd-(floyd)-sir-richard-i-1606-76 ]

Now I am a meticulous ticker of boxes and ex-directory forever because there are a lot of The People who have been told that " Republicans Are Terrorists " and therefore some of them fondly imagine that beating the crap out of a frail lame ill white-haired lil' ol' man like me is in The Public Interest and therefore they will be acclaimed as 'Eros ... One of my complaints about The Electoral Registration Officers is that they are yet another bunch of The People who are excused The Rule Of Law : there are a number of reports of complaints about the names and addresses of The People Who Tick Boxes being sold and there being nothing to be done. Besides this they also fail to enter names on The Electoral Register and so many companies use it to establish the identity of customers etc even those who want to be on it suffer inconveniences. If you still think that dispensing with " Government by Consent " as the fundamental underlying principle of Democracy is not a dangerous idea, think of what will happen to you when the definition of " Democracy " in The United Kingdom begins to subtly shift away from what you thought it was right to criminalise anyone for disagreeing with : what will you be able to do about it if Compulsory Registration becomes Compulsory Voting and then that in turn leads to Compulsory Happiness ? Should we not challenge this evil as soon as possible and before it becomes an established practice, rather than leave many future generations to just grin and bear it ?

I feel deeply antagonised that the response of The Democrats in Wales and Westminster in not receiving The Consent of The People by obtaining sufficient votes in their elections to secure a mandate has been to dismiss the disaffection of the electorate as either ignorance or laziness and then to disregard the necessity of obtaining a positive endorsement from them as the fundamental basis for Democracy. I find it offensive that The Democrats not only reached for The Electoral Register as a substitute for The Consent of The People - but then in finding The Electoral Register to be nearly as empty as The Ballot Box they then not only disregarded that fundamental principle of Democracy but then added insult to the injury by excusing themselves once again from The Rule of Several Laws - which otherwise they insist upon applying to us - and taking without positive consent tens of millions of names from various public records in order to fix The Electoral Register so that they can use it to fake the appearance of having a Democratic mandate whilst loudly shouting and screaming about how everybody must believe in Democracy and how anyone must be a criminal who questions as to whether their political system called The United Kingdom is in any sense legitimate let alone functional and effective or just : this is the sort of behaviour which I have dubbed " Demockery."

Which puts me in a bizarre sort of fix : having decided to campaign for the right not merely to not vote but to not register to vote on the grounds of conscience - and presumeably that only makes sense as a political protest if there is another register created to record the names of those who do not want their names to be entered upon The Register of Electors i.e. " The Register of Voters Who Refuse To be Registered To Vote " would be the political objective to aim at : to enable the 12 - 15 millions of The People in Britain and Northern Ireland who are not merely passively feeling disaffected towards the political system called The United Kingdom but who want to positively object to it would be able to do so ... and at this point Dafydd will immediately allege that all of the Muslims will band together and make the rest of us live in some Islamic Republic ... Personally I can not see why he objects to that ISIS lot really, given his love affair with the idea of dispatching his various political and chess opponents with a guillotine : after all a scimitar is a much more portable and like the cutlass its outwardly curved blade is designed for fighting at close quarters in confined spaces. I can imagine that a scimitar could be the very weapon of choice for him down at the pub quiz ... in fact he might even be able to argue that it is merely a fashion statement of sorts if he sticks it with rosettes and slings it across that apron wherein he keeps his cockade ...

... So perhaps I should finish writing tonight with this thought in mind : if funds are to be appealed for to challenge the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 it may be best that they should be kept separately from any funds being used for Repwblic ... so I should create a sort of general fund for assisting The Republicans in Wales ... Cock Aid ?


... NOW THE NEXT POST ON THAT THREAD IS QUITE INTERESTING TOO BUT ... WELL, THERE IS PROBABLY MORE COMMENTS UPON THIS CAMPAIGN ...

... incidentally, the previous posting on this subject was prompted by my receiving " The Yellow Card " - so before I go to bed I will slap it into Paint and edit it for your overseas perusual ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Sun Jul 26, 2015 11:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well Daf got one as well and - having recognised it for what it was, laying there amongst the heap of bills and summonses behind his front door - I took the opportunity to recruit him to the glorious cause of martyrdom for the sake of witnessing to The Republic in Wales, explaining the necessary things to do and discussing who would feed whom's cats and ... and he was already reaching for his phone and had registered himself to vote before I could even utter " NOOoooOOOooo...OOOooo !!! " ... Bloody Reds ... " The Tree of Liberty is watered by The Blood of The Martyrs " - ? - So much for " The Red Flag " then ... and " The White Flag " is supposed to be a bandage - not a shroud !!! ... And Daf will mutter that is more probably some kind of posh toilet tissue with a posh name* like " Shite White " ... well, I am certainly aspiring to have a go at cleaning up the mess that these cats have made ... I really like " E " below - a sort of typo which I made because I was tired, perhaps I was tired enough to allow my unconscious get a word in edgeways : I rarely ever let her get started - she's a real anima when she is in the mood for a conjugational relationship with me ... I guess I am just passed it now that I am middle aged ... but then surely that must mostly depend upon the length of my remaining lifespan, and this third bout of Pure Tory Sheer Mayhem may well finish me off - or is this now their sixth bite at my political cherry ... ? ... I am still fondly imagining it to be a Maraschino - you know : that sweet sort which comes in many flavours, being hard-boiled and dai'd in many colours, which is served up to you in Cock Tales.



[ * That " posh name " really ought to be " White with a hint of Shite " should it not ... ]
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Sun Oct 25, 2015 12:55 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quite a bit has been going on and I have not been commenting on it because it is irrelevant to me but something notable is coming on Tuesday 27th October 2015 : the Conservative government wants to bring forward the date of supposed completion of the Electoral Register a whole year and the Labour Party in particular are throwing a wobbly because they might lose a few votes ... neither of these parties nor any other as far as I can see care for the basis of their claim to power being founded upon the consent of the electorate ... anyhow I was in the mood to write a rather sub-standard email -

From:
To:
Subject: Dear YYYY - two fun poems in this - FW: ( Tuesday 27th ) questions about the ELECTORAL REGISTRATION & ADMINISTRATION ACT 2013 - FW: One Party Within The Other - ( Momentum )
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 06:01:26 +0000

Dear YYYY,

I hope that you are well - did you see that picture of a weird cat which looked like that Harry Potter elf in Metro ?

Regards,

David

Dear PM,

I didn't think that this would fit onto the form so I sent an email first to mnmnmnm - I hope that you enjoy it - ! - I also sent it to Today because I really do want somebody to question this trend of laws which treat us as the property for those in control of the state to dispose of as they wish : how come I can be a conscientious objector to military conscription but not political conscription - huh ?

David B. Lawrence

From:
To:
Subject: ( Tuesday 27th ) questions about the ELECTORAL REGISTRATION & ADMINISTRATION ACT 2013 - FW: One Party Within The Other - ( Momentum )
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 05:40:48 +0000

Dear Today & PM, BBC Radio 4,

I HAVE BEEN HAVING TOO MUCH FUN : JUST READ THE HIGHLIGHTED BITS IN ORDER TO HAVE SOME FUN YOURSELVES

I was about to just throw in another of my " proems " or " textericks " to amuse you which I composed for this thread -

http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=2955#2955

Both of Big Ben's Houses have been lately taking fright_
Because The Pendulum of Politics is swinging further - Left and Right -_
But whilst the Electoral Registers have now been proved corrupt_
The voters are feeling restless because their country is bankrupt :_
Yet against proposals for reform - Westminster will unite !

dai repwblic - Dai Saw - David B Lawrence - the author asserts his moral right - not to sue for copyright !


- but in contemplating what I was about to write about - the debate about bringing forward the date of the closure of the Electoral Register - I wondered whether either of your programmes might be interviewing anybody about this on Tuesday.

In 2013 the compelling logic of my own take upon the Republican tradition - increasingly oriented towards the earlier forms of the Republican argument - and some thirty five years of various sorts of political activisms led me to reject Democracy. I will not expound the arguments for you here save to point out that politics for me is a matter of facts and arguments and I object to voting as a decision making process and that includes voting to elect people to present facts and arguments on behalf of others : that is a brief description of a " Pure Republican " position and it makes sense to me for a variety of good reasons. My change of position from " Republican Democrat " to " Pure Republican " effected no particular change in my political methods save that I resolved to never vote again until there are substantial reforms of the non-political system called The United Kingdom to bring it into line with conventional constitutional practices, which I doubt will ever happen.

I was a little bemused by my own decision until the Electoral Registration & Administration Act 2013 was passed a couple of months afterwards which for me absolutely confirmed the correctness of my decision to reject Democracy as merely a means of selection and a very bad one at that unless its potential for corruption is not severely constrained by proper constitutional arrangements i.e. I used to subscribe to the conventional ideas which I usually label " Republican Democracy " ( where Republicanism predominates ) and " Democratic Republicanism " ( where Democracy predominates.) I strongly objected to the addition of a third abuse to the existing two because in placing names upon the Electoral Register without obtaining a prior and positive affirmation the ERA Act 2013 actually destroys the basis of Democracy itself - consent.

My political response was to consider how to establish in a court room the legal right to refuse to consent to be registered ( i.e. how to demonstrate legal arguments against all three abuses ) so in late 2013 I registered as usual ( I have an impeccable voting record : I have never failed to cast a vote before in any sort of election or referendum ) and then in 2014 on the day that the Electoral Register was published I immediately went to confirm that my name was on it and then to the dismay of the Electoral Registration Officer I requested in writing that it was removed.

My letter was forwarded to Cardiff City Council's lawyers and eighteen months later I still have not received a reply - and nor have I received any other letters, phone calls or visits excepting the occasional further standard form to not fill in. To be honest I am getting a little bored : I am supposed to be in jail by now and a famous martyr for the Republican cause ... On the other hand I have had the leisure to consider the rather copious number of legal arguments to destroy this law in a court room and thus to expose the practices of Democrats for what they are. I am particularly angry with those in the Welsh Assembly for passing laws and thus creating a jurisdiction without a judiciary which is absolutely unheard of : this makes Wales worse than a Banana Republic - yes, we have no bananas and no republics either ... even Sark has a court !

If you have the opportunity, could you please put these questions to someone advocating the ERA Act 2013 on Tuesday -

( A ) Why do those who support the non-political system called The United Kingdom consider it to be legitimate to dip their fingers into the Electoral Register and sell its contents ? Its purpose is supposed to be political - not commercial.

[ i.e. I do not think that the sale of names and addresses is legal even if consented to : I spent years chasing mine with phone calls, letters and emails and I always was careful to opt out - there are no penalties for the Electoral Registration Officers and there are no mechanisms to retrieve data whether it was released deliberately or by mistake : but there are penalties a plenty for those who ticked the wrong box when labeled with gibberish or who refuse to fill in the form at all.]

( B ) Why do those who support the non-political system called The United Kingdom consider it to be legitimate to dig their bankers into the Electoral Register and tell its contents ? Its purpose is supposed to be political - not financial.

[ i.e. I do not think that coercing people to be on the register by threatening their credit status is legal : in contractual law such inducements are illegal and some forms of this behaviour are defined as criminal offences ... the problem is that the supporters of the non-political system called The United Kingdom claim it to be " sovereign " i.e. that " The Rule of Law " applies to everybody else and not to themselves ... Actually " The Rule of Law " is what defines a Republican political system and it means that nobody is either above or below the law - by definition therefore The United Kingdom does not have " The Rule of Law " because it is a bandit state and for centuries its apologists have stolen from Republicanism.]

( C ) Why do those who support the non-political system called The United Kingdom consider it to be legitimate to dye their voters into the Electoral Register - and hell and its contents ? Its purpose is supposed to be political - not pantechniconical.

[ i.e. I do not think that taking people's names without consent is legal - even if it has been legislated for - because if this is admitted as a legal principle then centuries of established legal precedents and other statutory laws which are based upon the need for consent will collapse ... More importantly if this is being admitted as a political principle then it means that the Conservative & Unionist Party are deliberately dismantling the present constitutional arrangements of the United Kingdom : if the constitutional arrangements were clearly set out this would be obvious, but the combination of politically miseducated populace and the present shambolic pile of half-baked statutes and the scribbles on the backs of envelopes extolled by romanticising victorian reactionaries means that very few - like me - can recognise how dangerous this is ... it may appear to be convenient, useful and even desirable - but this treats the populace as belonging to the government. The last time that a government tried to introduce this political principle was in 1915 and even though they tried to do it first by stealth - as they are doing right now, in several laws recently introduced - and then by mass prosecutions - and then by jailing the " ring-leaders " - they did finally give up on enforcing conscription : after they provoked the 1916 Easter Rising.]

( D ) Why do those who support the non-political system called The United Kingdom consider it to be legitimate to dib their critics into the Electoral Register and shell its discontents ? Its purpose is supposed to be political - not criminal.

[ i.e. I do not think that criminalising those who refuse to endorse the political opinions of those who have obtained control over the state is legal in conventional modern political systems i.e. those which have constitutions which typically contain a body of laws to restrain the state's powers over the populace i.e. a law on Human Rights such as was not introduced into the non-political system called The United Kingdom because its lawyers stripped the first three clauses from the Human Rights Act 1998 in order to maintain and assert the " sovereignty " of The United Kingdom i.e. the " right " of its politicians to be unaccountable to any court including the " Supreme " Court of The United Kingdom which is not " supreme " at all. ... I think that - just in terms of economics and practicality of implementation - spending on occasions more than £1,000,000 of tax-payers' money in order to coerce a dissident, such as I have now chosen to be, to agree ( but not consent ) to my name being placed on a list for an activity that I am refusing to participate in is plainly questionable in terms of Common Sense.]

( E ) I will not bother to be clever with this one because it does not yet exist in the non-political system called The United Kingdom : apparently the Cooperative Labour Party draughted a bill ready for their winning the election in 2015 ... they want to introduce a fine for those who are on the Electoral Register but refuse to vote for them, which is of course just an extension of the same principle as ( D ) ... here in Cardiff they were short of money and so suddenly the centre of the city was adorned with permited parking spaces - i.e. all of their councillors are muddle class and protested most vociferously against these in their roads, for after all their parking problem is where we poor people are ... so they then polltaxed us for easy money and the councillors and their friends still come here to cause their parking problem - using disabled badges. I am very torn here between complaining at their abuse of the scheme or ... well ... from my point of view they are disabled.

Of course my friends were not particularly shocked when I declared against " Demockery " but they are having difficulty in getting their heads around " Pure Republicanism " as indeed am I : some think that my stance is desperately polemical, but actually it finally makes sense of things and produces some useful observations and arguments e.g. I observe that Theresa May is presently draughting legislation upon the basis of what I have been writing in recent years to ensure that I will be defined as a criminal and David Cameron must have actually read that letter I sent him the other year ( or two ? ) because obviously in having no criminal convictions ( other than that the non-political system called The United Kingdom is a steaming pile of nonsense with which unfortunately I still have to get my hands dirty with in order to get anything done ) the only thing that they could find wrong with me is my proven pacifist or rather pacificator record ... ah - it is 1915 again !

Yours Sincerely,

An Enemy of The United Kingdom & All of its Evil Works ( including the BBC - excepting Radio 4 & World Service of course )

David B. Lawrence

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Today & PM,

this is a text to my friends which you might enjoy too : this is my recreational equivalent of crosswords - one text poems ... only this one was slightly more : they are usually limerickish-ish ... As it happens I am a dissident of sorts from those dark days of Kinnock : I asked one timid question & I was branded a Trotskyist and infiltrator ! ... As far as I am concerned the whole political system is now rotten & useless - I would not have said this 30 years ago but I sure of it now : I have asked for my name to be removed from the Electoral Register & I am hoping to fight the Electoral Registration & Administration Act 2013 in a court room soon. I strongly object to these " Demockerats " not conducting Democracy on the basis of consent and to their refusing to provide the conscientious objector with a means to refuse to endorse their non-political system which is paradoxically called " The United Kingdom " when it has forever been destroying any unity that has existed between the peoples of these and indeed other countries.

Now Old Labour has got some Momentum_
New Labour now wants to prevent 'em_
For to have one party inside another_
Risks the smaller controlling the other_
Parliamentary parties ? Repwblicans reject 'em !

dai repwblic - Dai Saw - David B Lawrence - the author asserts his moral right - not to sue for copyright !

I messed with the above at the last moment removing " to try " and " within " and I am now dissatisfied with it : does this now scan better ?

Now Old Labour has got some Momentum_
New Labour now wants to try to prevent 'em_
For having one party inside another_
Is risking the smaller controlling the other :_
Parliamentary parties ? Repwblicans reject 'em !


Want a party ?

http://democraticrepublicanparty.co.uk

https://www.facebook.com/PeoplesMomentum

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I seem to be in a poetic mood & versifications ought to come in threes in Wales so I will add this last one to the end of this posting -

They poisoned him - there's no disputin' -_
They shot and drowned that mad Rasputin ... _
Yet he crawled away ... _
And he's around today -_
But is he Cameron, May - or Mr Putin ?

dai repwblic - Dai Saw - David B Lawrence - the author asserts his moral right - not to sue for copyright !
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Sat Oct 31, 2015 9:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I missed this episode of The Moral Maze before the election - relevant ?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b052jkx0

The Moral Maze - Is it a Moral Duty to Vote ?

Is it immoral to be apathetic about politics? The Bishops of the Church of England clearly think so. This week they sent a letter to parishes advising 'Christian men and women how to vote". So we all have a duty to join in the arguments and it's wrong to be a 'don't know' !

As the election gets closer, however, the prevailing view seems to be that politicians are a sleazy and self-serving bunch of hypocrites. Whatever the bishops say, at least a third of us won't be voting; half of young people aren't even registered to vote. But when politicians focus their efforts on ingratiating themselves with pensioners (the people who vote the most) we say that's cynical.

Party membership has fallen off a cliff. More of us belong to the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds than to all our political parties combined. It was revealed last week that Russell Brand ( ' Don't vote it only encourages them ' ) has three times as many Twitter followers as all our MPs put together.

Polls show that we hate the idea of state funding for political parties, but we also hate the idea of 'dodgy donors' buying political influence. We laugh at last week's Tory fund-raising dinner featuring an auction in which lots included 'a shoe-shopping trip with Theresa May'; we recoil from the idea of a Labour government in hock to its trade union sponsors. Some say that political donations from wealthy individuals are to be applauded - it's philanthropy, just like giving to charity. But do we really believe it's a coincidence that so many millionaire donors happen to have ended up in the House of Lords ?

Should 16-year-olds have the vote ?

Should voting be made compulsory ? [ THUS ENDING DEMOCRACY WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO BE " GOVERNMENT BY CONSENT." ]

Is it a moral duty to vote ? [ SURELY MORE IMPORTANT IS THE MORAL DUTY TO REFUSE TO VOTE & ENDORSE CORRUPT POLITICAL SYSTEM.]

Or are there other ways, just as morally cogent, to get involved in the political process ?


I note that it is observed that giving sixteen year olds the vote just to try to drag in a few more votes is damned here as cynical ... Dr Eamon Butler director of The Adam Smith Institute re-iterates the point that majorities exploit minorities and that civic participation can be conducted by other means - and that voting is not a rational activity because individual votes do not settle elections [ THUS MISSING THE POINT THAT ENOUGH VOTES HAVE TO BE CAST IN ORDER TO CLAIM THAT THE PEOPLE HAVE POSITIVELY ENDORSED THEIR GOVERNMENT - AND THAT THIS HAS CEASED TO HAPPEN, WHICH IS WHY THE DEMOCKERATS IN WALES AND WESTMINSTER HAVE BEEN REACHING FOR THE ELECTORAL REGISTERS WHICH IN TURN HAVE BEEN FAILING TO PASSIVELY PROVE THEIR CLAIMS - WHICH IS WHY THEY ARE NOW CONTRIVING TO REMOVE THE VOTERS ENTIRELY FROM THE ELECTORAL REGISTRATION SYSTEM : THAT OLD JOKE COMES TO MIND THAT IN A FULLY FUNCTIONING DEMOCRACY WHEN THE ELECTORATE NO LONGER ACCEPT THE BEHAVIOUR OF THOSE THAT GOVERN THEM THE DEMOCRATS CALL AN ELECTION AND CHANGE THE ELECTORATE ... PERHAPS THAT ACCOUNTS FOR THE HIGH LEVELS OF IMMIGRATION INTO BRITAIN ? ... IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA THEY USED TO REDREW THE BOUNDARIES OF THEIR CONSTUTUENCIES IN ORDER TO CHANGE THE ELECTORATE - AND THEY MANIPULATED THEIR ELECTORAL REGISTERS IN THE SOUTHERN STATES BY THREATENING, BEATING AND LYNCHING ANYBODY BLACK WHO DARED TO TRY TO REGISTER TO VOTE - AND THREATENING, BRIBING AND CINCHING ANYBODY WHITE WHO DARED TO TRY TO NOT REGISTER TO VOTE - AND TO TO NOT VOTE FOR THEIR LOCAL LANDLORDS, EMPLOYERS OR NEIGHBOURHOOD WATCH SCHEMES ... OH WELL, THIS PROGRAMME DOES GET BETTER ... TRY LISTENING TO THE LAST FEW MINUTES AS THEY SUM UP WHAT THEY HAVE THOUGHT ... and try thinking up a better acronym for those watching over the Republicans in Wales in our parochial Welsh Demockeratic Hegemony than " KLWB KWLTWR KYMRU."]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JPe48jxLmz8 ... entertainment ? ... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwqhoVIh65k



http://patriotpost.us/commentary/16837

The Republican Fight Against the KKK / Democrat Tyranny - by Louis De Broux

" February being Black History month, we continue a review of the long relationship between the Republican Party and black Americans. In the previous two articles, we discussed the establishment of the Republican Party for the specific purpose of ending slavery, and the backlash from pro-slavery Democrats ( including a slavery critic being beaten almost to death by a pro-slavery senator ) which ultimate led to the commencement of the War Between the States. We noted the 13th ( ending slavery,) 14th ( extending rights to former slaves ) and 15th ( securing voting rights for blacks ) Amendments, as well as the first Civil Rights Act ( passed in 1866 ) all have a common thread – they were passed by Republicans and viciously opposed by Democrats. Democrat President Andrew Johnson would refuse to enforce the law, and a Democrat-appointed Supreme Court would later rule them unconstitutional. ... The most well-known opposition to black equality ( well, other than the Democrat Party itself,) was and is the Ku Klux Klan. The Klan originally formed in 1865 in Pulaski, Tennessee, and used violent tactics to terrorize blacks and Republicans into abandoning the pursuit of racial equality. While technically separate organizations, the KKK and the Democrat Party had a symbiotic relationship; virtually every member of the Klan was an active member of, or sympathetic to, the Democrats. ...

... Ultimately, the Ku Klux Klan and Democrats would murder, oppress, and torment untold thousands of black Americans. Cross-burning and lynching would become synonymous with the groups. One of the most notorious murders was the assassination of civil rights activist Medgar Evers, shot and killed by Democrat and Klan member Byron De La Beckwith, who in turn escaped justice for more than thirty years after two all-white juries failed to convict him. He was finally re-tried in 1994 following the exhumation and autopsy of Evers, and was convicted at last, serving only six years in prison before his death in 2001. ... Despite its history of racist and violent oppression of blacks, including outright murder, the Democrat Party today is seen as the protector of blacks in America. Such a claim could only be the result of stunning ignorance and brilliant propagandizing. In next’s week’s final article in the series, we’ll take a look at what many white Democrat leaders really feel about the blacks who vote for them, and why Democrat policies have led to institutionalized poverty and the destruction of the black family. ... "


... but please note that whilst this was copied for the purposes of making you think about what " Democrat " can mean in the United States of America, the way in which I use it here in Wales is because we have no constitution and " The Democrats in Wales " do not want us to have one : they had the opportunity to progress towards a conventional Democratic Republican or - my preference - a Republican Democratic constitution but they have deliberately chosen not to, they have refused to even have a Welsh Court whilst taking to themselves the power to make laws ... and now they are going to discard the closest thing that we have to a Bill of Rights which is the Human Rights Act 1998 ...

... When I refer to " The Demockerats in Wales " I mean all those in every political party that we have and their choirs of supporters who shout and scream about " Democracy " yet they do not even know what the word means ... and when I refer to " Republicans " I mean all those in every political party that we have and their choirs of supporters who shout and scream about " Demockery " but they do not even want to know that the remedy that they are trying to describe is Republicanism - because they do not even know what the word means ... amongst those of us who do know what Republicanism means, very few know that not only does Republicanism in Wales goes back to circa 1550 but that before they were maliciously branded as traitors and criminal conspirators, Republicans from Wales were widely admired and quoted - and still are by Republicans in America, Canada, France, Italy etc ...

As to my opting to become an advocate " Pure Republicanism " this is not pure polemecising on my part - I have always deemed Democracy to be a corrupt and corrupting way to select people to make political decisions on our behalf, and whilst previously I believed that a Republican Democratic political system could resist this corruption through a properly organised system of checks and balances I have ceased do so. My absolute rejection of Democracy in 2013 was a consequence of over thirty years of political engagement in what I now deem to be the non-political system called The United Kingdom i.e. in a real political system the participants want to make it work and to improve it in order to secure the Res Publica, but in The United Kingdom there is merely sham talk of " The Public Interest " whilst it is clear that every apparent increment of progress is but the mimicry of the institutions which make real political systems function. What remains the corrupt and corrupting heart of The United Kingdom, which secures it for those who gain control of it as a non-political system, is Magna Carta which provides the basis for pretending to but disregarding The Rule of Law in favour of The Rule of The Lawless i.e. The United Kingdom is a bandit state which I suspect is now finally beginning to exhaust its ill-gotten gains, and so I am expecting this non-political system to finally fall ... probably very heavily ... onto The People Like Me.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Thu Nov 12, 2015 5:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well for those who think that Republicanism in Wales and The World must feature barricades and guillotines and choruses of bayonets singing hymns and arias ... the dull reality of politics is that it is mostly like watching paint dry ... is it two years since I started this thread ?

About 3.30pm 12 / 11 / 15 and almost two years to the day since the end of government by consent in the non-political system called " The United Kingdom " which has already been setting The People of Britain and Ireland at each others' throats for over two hundred years - or indeed rather more - there came a knock at the door ... " Oh bugger - I told them that I would save them the time and stick the uncollected rubbish in some nearby public litter bin to save them the trouble ... or have they come about the rats now running about all over the place because Cardiff City County Council are cutting back on every conceivable expenditure besides their opera tickets ? "

Well I have not been well for months and the knocking was very persistent so eventually I wrenched myself away from the task of devising a new Eutopia and shaking as I stumbled I made my way to the front door ... only to be confronted with a bald-headed little geezer sporting an IWW t-shirt who started to announce that he was from Cardiff City County Council's Electoral Registration Office and was I David B Lawrence ... well I did not throw The Wobbly but had the presence of mind to simply mutely shut the door in his face ... at least he had the presence of mind to laugh !

So I guess this is it : all of these legal arguments that have been floating around in my head now need to be researched before I end up in court ...

... Hang on a sec ... What is A Wobbly doing upholding what they oppose ? ...

... You know what ? ... All of these years I have been upholding the cause of Republicanism in Wales - and I have not even got a t-shirt to show for it ... >sigh< ...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Mon Dec 14, 2015 1:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Replying to a piece by Marianne I sort of sketched towards the subject of The Electoral Registration & Administration Act 2013 ... I have mentioned my anger about this in a number of posts : I has a wide relevance because once consent to the political system is not positively obtained then it ceases to be legitimate, whatever the advocates of The United Kingdom claim to be the case ... and to have no mechanism by which those who wish to dissent to what amounts to Britain's Social Contract can register their protest - to be trapped, caged, shackled as we now are - is to create the circumstances in which somebody will argue the merit of Clause 35. ... Anyhow -

http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=3029#3029

I liked your point above about the difference between extremism and intolerance ... but would you agree to extend it a bit more ? ... Surely it is The Democrats in Wales and Westminster who extol themselves to The People in Wales and The World as models of " moderation " who promote intolerance - despite all of their speeches against it, or rather because of their speeches against it : they make a point of promoting divisions in society - by class on The Left and by nation on The Right - because they need to deepen and harden these divisions to in order to get themselves elected ... Surely the very reason why Republicans in Wales and The World are vigorously denounced as " extremists " is because the natural political impulse of Republicanism is always towards reconciliation and unity, which Democrats can not subscribe to because they always have to set The People at each other's throats in order to get themselves the votes ...

... Hence The Democrats in Wales are always a clear and present danger to The People in Wales when The People in England are being taught by The Democrats in England to act as they are told, consume what they are told, emote as they are told - and think what they are told, which is nothing more than to be told to act as they are told : thus what The Democrats in Wales and The World really mean by " moderation " is " an unquestioning obedience which is agreeable to those in our party ( - but those who are unquestioningly obedient to another party are extremists - ) " and it is the resulting tribalism which then destroys the political discourse because The Democrats both refuse to engage in it themselves and actively discourage those they claim as their members and supporters from engaging in it lest they begin to obtain a better understanding and sympathy for others, and then - realising that others are not potential opponents but potential collaborators - reject The Ultraism of Democracy for The Altruism of Republicanism ... start to clearly identify the non-political nature of The United Kingdom : that those shouting and screaming that its Republican critics should be jailed are the very ones whose interests it most serves - " The Demockerats in Wales and Westminster." ...

... Whether or not the person that I am talking to is a Republican in Wales or something else in The World, I do not believe that Republicans and Democrats are merely to be mutually regarded as relatively extremist in each others eyes : Republicans are always moderates but appear to be extremists in the eyes of Democrats because Democracy is a non-political system and therefore an amoral, unethical system in which any decision not made upon the grounds of private interest but debated in terms of The Public Interest is automatically denounced as extremist because it those making it are resistant to bribes and threats ... In a truly political system i.e. a Republican political system it would immediately become obvious that The Democrats in Wales and Westminster are subverting the Res Publica and are therefore The Enemies of The People : there has been no clearer example of The Democrats in Wales practising this kind of subversion than in the way in which the have contrived to acquire law-making powers without the hindrance of having a national court in which to be held account to by The People in Wales and The World ... call it childish if you want, that The Welsh Nation's grasp of political education is so infantile that this happened, but do not mistake that it was The Democrats in Wales who did it - and therefore as Republicans and adults we should hold them to be both fully accountable - and responsible - and culpable ...

... Do you realise that I have wandered off-message here ... What I was thinking of saying was that ... um ... When I talk to extremists - and here I mean real extremists, not merely those who have not voted for The Democrats denouncing them - REAL EXTREMISTS ... real extremists have usually arrived at their beliefs after a lot of listening, reading, thinking and arguments - and so, having a lot of knowledge about how others think, extremists are usually very tolerant and sociable people who enjoy talking about both their own beliefs and listening to other people talk about their beliefs ... and when you get onto the subject of politics you find that most extremists are Republicans of some sort because this tolerant behaviour naturally leads towards Republican sentiments ... contrast Democrats : they announce that they are " moderates " yet it turns out that what this means is that they have never considered why they believe in anything, mostly because they are very anxious about thinking at all lest those who rule them punish them for expressing any difference : best to keep quiet, and not socialise with anybody either because those who rule them are very jealous ...

... because if you mention the subject of politics you will find that all " moderate " people like these believe that those who differ from the opinions which they have been given and have not had to test because these opinions entitle those who hold them to enter a ballot paper in the free ( they are told ) National Lottery ( they never win anything - but they have been promised that they might ) and ... entitles them to hate and despise all of those stupid people who keep on insisting that The National Lottery is rigged and that The National Assembly is not to be treated as a casino and ... well all of The People in Wales who are " moderate " and therefore loudly declare themselves to be The Silent Majority surely think that those who do not want to endorse their non-political system The United Kingdom should be harassed and made to sign their name to it - or, if they refuse - fined, jailed, hanged, burnt at the stake ... and then the supporters of the non-political system called The United Kingdom can just sweep the ashes of anybody who threatens to be rational and reasonable into the gutter - and then forge their signatures ... after all, they need all of the corpses that they can get - to prop up their non-political system.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Mon Feb 01, 2016 8:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Well I was going to add a note to an email to some friends which was about this - http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=3086#3086 - but it turned into this ... which is not very good, but sort of relevant ... and then there was this letter from Electoral Services which I wearily expected to be everything kicking off at exactly the wrong moment but - hey, after more than two years - about time ... So - let me just slit ... oh hell ... they have simply registered me to vote - " If the details are ALL correct you do not need to do anything." ... Well ...tonight I am relieved by that because I am knackered - but I really do need to do something, anything ... like sort of on the lines of these thoughts -

Dear Enemies of Democracy & Aspartame

The Republicans may not be as stimulating, but I can assure you that The Democrats are more poisonous than Aspartame.

[ mmm : but - Republicanism is more stimulating than either Democracy or Aspartame - and unlike both of them, it does not result in madness ... ]

I am scattering this abroad with the eye towards Canada, USA & Mexico - but I ought to point out that here in Wales the supporters of the status quo keep insisting that those who object to The United Kingdom are " against Democracy " and so in my terminology we will let them keep the word which they have stolen and brandish without even understanding what it means. For those who understand what " Democracy " means then we know that the collapse in numbers casting any votes means that in most wards and constituencies in Wales even if all of the votes cast for all of the candidates of all of the parties involved were pooled together then they would be less than half of the potential vote on The Electoral Register i.e. The United Kingdom as a political system no longer has a mandate and The Labour & Cooperative Party in Wales took half the seats in The Welsh Assembly and control of The Welsh Government on the basis of 16.7% of the potential vote ... The idea that The United Kingdom is a " Democracy " is neither constitutionally true nor a socio-economically valid assertion - and instinctively The People in Wales know this to be so and have stopped voting and therefore stopped supporting " it " even if they do not know yet that " it " is in fact " Democracy."

The remedy of those loudly asserting in the face of these facts that Wales is a " Democracy " is to ignore the very basis of Democracy which is founded upon securing the positive consent of the majority to the existing political system i.e. that whoever it is who wins an election the election itself must be endorsed by the active participation of the majority of the registered electorate, otherwise the passive participation of a majority of the electorate in agreeing to being registered to vote but in not voting is de facto the existing political system not being endorsed ... In 2003 The Democrats in Wales and Westminster became so frantic to deny the progressive collapse of the credibility of their fake " Democracy " they came up with a new definition of " Democracy " which was designed to have nothing to do with the electorate actually voting ! To get around the growing antipathy towards themselves, The Democrats - i.e. all those in those political parties which always promise to address the reform of the political system until after they get elected - decided to invert the argument that the basis of a Democratic political system is to secure a positive political mandate and instead proposed the idea of a negative political mandate. That provided that they could get enough of the non-voters to sign themselves onto The Electoral Register by either coaxing them with postal voting privileges or harassing them with threats of fines and imprisonment, then they could argue that The United Kingdom is a " Democracy " albeit one in which they (a) have no positive active political mandate from voters and ( b ) their negative passive political mandate from those non-voters agreeing to register to be voters has been secured by discarding the Democratic principle of government by consent - i.e. all of major political parties proclaiming loudly about Democracy have in fact agreed to redefine it as this " Demockery " ...

... And then it got worse : in Wales we have elections for The Welsh Assembly this year - so let us look back to ... oh dear : of course - what is increasingly happening is that sources of information as to how many potential votes there are i.e. the actual numbers on The Electoral Register - are becoming very hard to come by ... you can find out about " Turnout " and " Swing " etc from most sources - but what the BBC will not tell you is how many votes there actually are available to count. Now that is surely very interesting given that The Democrats in Wales and Westminster have come to rely upon the foolish pretence that they can lay claim to a " Democratic " mandate by citing the number of names on The Electoral Register - but that became an embarrassment because the registered electorate had given up voting because for various reasons it had become or always was utterly pointless e.g. the two-party system with First Past The Post electoral rules means that in about 80% of constituencies there is no possibility of casting a vote meaningfully - in contrast to multi-party systems with Proportional Representation, Single Transferable Vote etc. Panicking about how even their redefinition of Democracy was evaporating before their eyes because they could not even find enough people willing to submit to harassment and threats of prosecution to make them submit to electoral registration, The Democrats in Wales and Westminster came up with yet a new innovation in the definition of " Democracy " - besides (a) no votes being required, and (b) their governing without consent, - in 2013 they rather unsubtly refined their definition of Democracy to mean (c) " Power without The People " and then made some large grants to supposedly independent organisations to advocate their new idea as truly " Democratic." Their new idea is to ensure that their " Democratic " mandate can be secured upon the basis of The Electoral Register by filling it up with all of the names which they steal - and then they demand the signatures of those whose names they have stolen and threaten them with harassment, prosecution, fines, imprisonment : this is not " consent to be governed " and that is demonstrated by The Electoral Registration And Administration Act 2013 which not only recorded corpses as voters on The Electoral Register but also enabled The Electoral Registration Officers to assist them to apply for their postal votes.

How does " Demockery " work ? In the first instance they assert that it is firmly planted in " British Values " i.e. bullshit. The People in Wales ceased to vote because The Democrats in Wales ceased to listen to them so they ceased to have not only a mandate for any of their political parties but for their political system itself - or rather their non-political system because refusing to listen to what The People in Wales are trying to say and ignoring what they are talking about is simply not politics at all : the fact that Democracy is obviously not a political system but a selection procedure confuses many ... Look at it this way - Democrats are very skilled at getting themselves elected but otherwise incompetent so they can not govern successfully and therefore things will go wrong - but they want to be re-elected, so they insist upon the principle that as the most important and powerful people in our society whose casual mistakes can do a lot of harm they must be allowed to operate in in secret - and that if any of the harms they do are publicly exposed then they have the right to deny everything and lie their heads off and demand a peerage and ... you see : The United Kingdom is de facto an Aristocracy - it has merely learnt to imitate other countries which became de facto Democracies in the 19c, but it did not even concede to pretend the idea of " one person one vote " until after World War Two - and it is now preparing to discard the pretence : politics in The United Kingdom as an Aristocracy will henceforth be decided by wealth not by votes, by The Democrats being in possession of The Electoral Registers not by The Electorate being in possession of The Vote : it is now irrelevant.

I know, I am grumbling-mumbling and not getting the disquisition of the matter clear : most would just automatically talk of arguing this from a human rights point of view but even if successful that merely provides an opt out clause and it might be limited by the judge to only those who believe in The Big Bunny etc but anyway The Conservative and Unionist Party are about to destroy even the feeble amount of fake human rights legislation which The Labour and Cooperative Party facked up. I personally think that The Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 abrogates hundreds of other laws because it violates basic legal principles which have underpinned The English Law for centuries ... or at least I hope so ! Sad

David B. Lawrence

http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=3086#3086
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Tue Apr 19, 2016 9:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

FROM " Wales' National Assembly & Other Elections 5th May 2016 " - http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=3293#3293

This is probably on the face of it going to seem like hypocrisy : the guy - dai - who has renounced Democracy as an Ultraism and declared for " Pure Republicanism " - now tells you to make sure that you vote in the 2016 Welsh Assembly Election ... why ?

The Welsh Assembly during the last five years has been trying to deal with some savage cuts imposed by The United Kingdom's government i.e. by the English cohorts of The Conservative and Unionist Party. Not even their Welsh cohorts are so irresponsible - so I reckon that even if The ( Welsh ) Conservative and Unionist Party win the 2016 election it could be as bad as what is being done in the name of Conservativism in England where the rank and file are none too happy about what David Cameron & Co are doing either.

But whoever wins the 2016 Welsh Assembly election they will be relatively powerless if they do not have a strong mandate from The People in Wales. It really does not matter who you vote for provided that you get into that polling station and leave a mark on a piece of paper - you can even spoil your ballot paper for this purpose, although I strongly disapprove of doing that normally because it is an act of bad faith towards others. What is needed is a high turnout which breaks the 50% mark - hopefully far higher - so that The Welsh Assembly has a credible Democratic mandate to use in bargaining with Westminster i.e. with David Cameron & Co. In a sense The ( Welsh ) Conservative and Unionist Party could save the day here not merely for The People in Wales if they win but also for The People in England if they stand up to the clique that have seized control of the power in No 10 & No 11 Downing Street.

You will have to excuse me no longer having any faith in The United Kingdom because I view it as a non-political system, a chameleon which has clothed itself in the outward appearances of Democracy without ever instituting the basic institutions of it and being forever hostile to being held to account by an independent judiciary by a division of the powers of the state so that the abuses within its shadows can never be brought into The Light ... Politics however it is conducted must be founded upon The Consent of The People and that is meaningless if there is no longer any possibility of refusing consent : I simply have to fight the Electoral Registration and Administration Act 2013 or lose my self-respect as a human being - I refuse to be treated as The Property of The State.

So you must run to any polling station in order to " vote " to support your own conception of Democracy - just as I must run from any polling station in order to " vote " for my own conception of Republicanism.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Thu May 05, 2016 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote



I ought to add some explanation onto this - I suppose ... I have already described it in The Welsh Assembly 2016 Election thread - here is a little bit ...

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

... mmm ... I ought to strive to come to the point : I am campaigning for the right not to vote ... that may seem a little eccentric given that in the 1840s my ancestors in Monmouthshire were visiting their neighbours in the middle of the night in the company of a couple of hundred of their friends and family in order to explain the potential benefits of their not signing The Charter ... but the point is this : politics should be conducted on the basis of consent and in Republicanism nothing else is considered to the basis of any political system, however good or bad, Democratic or otherwise. True, the feeling of consent can be manufactured by the manipulation of people's consciousness - but there is no such thing as consent if it is not possible to say " NO ! " When Ultraists obtain control of a political system the thing which they always strive towards is criminalising any refusal of consent to do what they are doing : it is utterly necessary to maintain the argument that they have obtained the consent of the society which they are raping ... after all if she is moaning, sobbing and screaming " NO ! " that is her way of expressing her pleasure, satisfaction and contentment - is it not ? ... If you can understand that rapists will excuse themselves in this way, that they will give your name and lie under oath - even upon the precious relics left to us by The Republicans in Wales and The World such as the word " Democracy " - then you can understand what The Ultraists are now doing to The People in Wales and The World : The Rapists are The People Who Refuse To Take " NO ! " For An Answer.

Remember that email above - now below - ?

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

From:
To: readers~walesonline.co.uk
Subject: PLEASE WESTERN MAIL : A FULL ACCOUNT OF THE COUNT ON FRIDAY
Date: Tue, 3 May 2016 02:24:10 +0000

Dear Western Mail,

I have been relaxing with my usual political wreckreation this evening by writing on repwblic and I am despondent at the lack of interest in The Welsh Assembly Election 2016 by the bookmakers. It appears that only two of the twenty six are offering any bets at all and then only on UKIP, Plaid Cymru and The Labour & Cooperative Party. What underlines this lack of interest even more is that what coverage of the election exists is mostly in the London newspapers - even S4C seems to be uninterested ! If this level of disinterest is expressed in a further collapse in the numbers who can be bothered to vote the credibility of the political system resulting from "Devolution" will end.

[ +120 = 120 ]

I want to make a special request of The Western Mail : when you publish the results of this 2016 election please publish the number of votes that are available in each constituency as well as the number of votes that are actually cast : if the number of votes cast does not break 50% ( again ) then The Welsh Assembly's claim to " a democratic mandate " needs to be questioned.

[ +67 = 187 ]

As somebody who waited twenty years for the second opportunity for Wales to have a form of government which addresses our needs I have become intensely dissatisfied not only with the unnecessary constitutional mess that we are living in but the fact that this second opportunity was squandered. I sense that others instinctively share this dissatisfaction both without knowing that Republicanism is the remedy for it and without knowing that Republicanism in Wales was once a commonplace part of Wales' political discourse - and viewed simply as Common Sense.

[ +88 = 275 ]

Yours Sincerely,

David B Lawrence - Dai Saw - dai repwblic

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Labour and Cooperative Party obtained half of the seats in The Welsh Assembly in the last Welsh Assembly Election which took place in 2011 - and they did this on just 16.7% of the available votes : if all of the votes cast for all of the candidates in that election are added up they do not pass the 50% mark i.e. less than half of the electorate in Wales positively endorsed the political system being presented to them as a " Democracy." In a real political system this should be a cause for alarm and those of us who want to devise a political system which will be endorsed by The People in Wales ( and The World ) are seriously concerned about our politicians having failed to obtain The Consent of The People. It does not even matter what kind of a political system results - it does matter that we continue with this situation. In the fake political system called The United Kingdom this is also a cause for alarm but the main concern of The Democrats in Wales and Westminster is how to conceal from view the fact of The Lack of Consent of The People. In the first instance they opted to argue that provided that they had enough names to endorse their non-political system then the number of The People Who Vote does not matter.

The Democrats in Wales and Westminster immediately ran into their first problem : they did not have enough names ... The Electoral Registers in Wales and The World are seriously depleted because The People in Wales and The World know that they are being lied to - that Democracy is yet another non-political system, slightly worse than Hierocracy perhaps and slightly better than Aristocracy, better than Monocracy ... Very few of The People in Wales and The World possess enough knowledge of politics to understand that these are but different faces of the same thing - Ultraism. ... Very few of The People in Wales and The World are willing to do other than accept the idea of politics presented to them by Ultraists : that politics is the pursuit of self-interest and that all that The People in Wales and The World need to think about in making their choices within their non-political systems is their own interests. Republicans however reject this argument : the pursuit of our own interests belongs solely to our private lives - you can not build a political system upon the pursuit of individual private interests because by definition politics is the collective pursuit of The Public Interest - " De Re Publica."

In terms of a metaphor which anybody normally adjusted can understand : you can no more build a society upon the basis of Ultraism than than you can build a family upon the basis of lies, intimidation, greed and violence. But The Democrats in Wales and The World being Ultraists do not agree with that - and sneer at the Altruists that most of The People in Wales and The World are, who are not driven by the neuroses and psychoses of The Ultraists who in being out of control of themselves attempt control others through seizing control of The State. The values of Altruism - Truth, Love, Freedom and Peace - have been rediscovered in every generation and these are the same values which are found in every religion and which also underpin " Pure Republicanism " because unlike The Democratic Ideologies which are only partial explanations of society, being formulated to be used to argue for sectarian private interests and therefore the contests conducted in their name will always harm societies by constantly tending towards political extremism and lead ultimately to armed contests. The emphasis in Republicanism is always towards mutuality, reconciliation and solidarity through the development of The Common Sense, or rather in Republican terminology " The General Will," in order to replace voting as the means to determine political matters ... in other words, in order to be accounted a " Republicanism " a political analysis must explain both its own ideology and other ideologies : " Republicanisms are Meta-ideologies " - these are Altruistic political theories and they advise against coercion.

02:50 am ( 06-05-16 ) - THE FIRST RESULTS ARE COMING IN AND ONLY 46% OF THE PEOPLE IN WALES HAVE ENDORSED THE POLITICAL SYSTEM : THIS IS BETTER - BUT THE DEMOCRATS IN WALES STILL HAVE NO MANDATE.

Republicans are supposed to not coerce The People in Wales to agree with us let alone use coercive methods to make them do as we want : but the implications of all Republicanisms are that we should resist coercion when used against us - and this can be interpreted to mean that Republicanism licences us to fight fire with fire, Lies with Lies, Hatred with Hatred, Slavery with Slavery, Violence with Violence, Death with Death ... but Republicans do not agree with that : you fight fire with water, Lies with Truth, Hatred with Love, Slavery with Freedom, War with Peace - and Death with Life ... and I know that can sound a bit hippy-dippy and I will leave that argument to another day ... But what follows shortly is an account of the messy business of trying to be a Republican in Wales. ... The Democrats in Wales and Westminster have been discussing a remedy for The People in Wales not giving them The Democratic Mandate which they need to assert their legitimacy : they are planning to make it illegal not to vote ... yes - I am not joking here : they want to make it a crime not to love and admire and vote for The Democrats in Wales and The World. ... This is because their first plan is not working : they argued that just because The People in Wales are not voting for them it does not matter - they will base their claim for the legitimacy of their non-political system ( not called by its supporters The Dis-United Kingdom ) upon The Electoral Register. The trouble was how many of The People in Wales were not registered to vote despite the existing threats of harrassment, fines and imprisonment for the individual householders who were supposed to fill in the paper forms.

So they introduced voter registration on-line and postal voting ... and then found that The Democrats in Wales and The World - i.e. they found themselves - registering voters who did not exist and using them to return postal votes for themselves ... and then they got impatient with The People in Wales and The World and passed the Electoral Registration and Administration Act in 2013 to put an end to being on the wrong side of the law when they were registering voters - by simply invoking the principle of " Sovereignty " in order to make it legal for themselves to use the names of The People in Wales and The World ... of course it is still a crime for The People of Wales and The World to do this because the true definition of " Democracy " is that of a non-political system founded upon coercing The People in Wales and The World using Lies and Hatred i.e. The Democrats reserve to themselves the right to change the definition of any word in order to use it to spite others - Democracy means " Screwing The People." So they started stealing names to stuff their Electoral Registers with - and that meant not only registering those who had emigrated and died but also those who might otherwise be making a political argument about refusing to register ... which was a decision which I was making independently of this fiasco because it is the logical consequence of rejecting Democracy ...

... So - bizarrely - I now found myself simultaneously protesting for the right not to vote ( having opted to be an advocate of Pure Republicanism ) and also defending the fundamental principle of Democracy - the necessity of obtaining a positive mandate by being endorsed through the ballot box. ... Hence, around 08.30 pm I set out to do my duty as a Republican in Wales clutching a haggis in my hand and one of those letters which I belt out at the last minute " because something must be done - and it is far better to do something badly than not at all " ... the haggis was not actually necessary - it was a gift that I was going to take over to Dafydd afterwards - and I was a trifle worried lest I might later be indicted for it as carrying an offensive weapon ... I was rehearsing in my mind how I was going to pull this stunt off this time, because last time I knew that my name was on the electoral register because they had refused to take it off ... this time I had not returned the form and when they sent somebody to harrass me I remained tight-lipped once they had announced their purpose and I shut the door in the face of the electoral registration officer - who was wearing a Wobblies T-shirt of all things : so much for Socialism !

Thankfully the Polling Station was empty : the whole point of a protest action such as this is not to allow it to become complicated but to focus it upon the political argument i.e. to be swift and decisive - and not be a prick ... well I managed two out of those three ... in these multiple ballot elections the table is set out with a polling station officer appointed to each task : recording the voter's attendance, issuing the constituency ballot, issuing the regional ( usually the Euro-constituency ) list ballot - and the guarding the ballot box with a large plastic ruler from The Republicans in Wales ... I took in the scene swiftly as I approached the table and quickly swapped the haggis with the letter - folded up small - which I concealed in my right hand ... The first officer asked for my address and then asked me for my name ... I asked him what name he had printed next to that address and it turned out that he had the wrong address ( after all, this is Cardiff City County Council I was dealing with here - you know, The People Who Are Never Wrong ... )

... The right address located in a flurry of paperwork, the other polling officers were already paying attention when I asked again what names were recorded for that address ... When he read out my name I swiftly pointed to the document and announced " That's illegal ! " and I decisively moved the two metres or so to The Ballot Box and - fortunately - beat the fourth polling officer to that narrow slot ... No - I have not a clue what would have happened if I had failed to get that letter into that narrow slot, which was worrying me because it was folded small and therefore it was thick ... An argument was immanent so I told them that I had a copy for them to examine if they wished to and then as I left I once more pointed at the document and repeated " - and THAT is illegal." ... I wish that I had walked out gracefully but I simply marched off : my feelings on the matter are that my protesting in a polling station should not amount to a disturbance of the peace and quiet which others have a right to expect when casting their ballots - I have the right not to believe in Democracy and to protest against being coerced into endorsing it but others equally have the right to believe in Democracy and to choose to endorse it : The People in Wales who have not been elected are not being paid to listen to my political opinions.

FROM - http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=3367#3367

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
dai



Joined: 09 Feb 2007
Posts: 2637

PostPosted: Thu Jun 23, 2016 8:11 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

http://repwblic.informe.com/viewtopic.php?p=3545#3545

Hi - oh ... it's off to unwanted work I go ... actually I am feeling sick at the prospect : in a functioning political system nobody would need to do this -



- and I wanted to not end the day by arguing with anyone so I skipped those formalities of denouncing the crimes of The Democrats in Wales and quoted my address and collected the ballot paper and quietly substituted the letter for the ballot and walked away from it all wondering whether this depiction of the map of The Dis-United Kingdom has not been constructed for some kind of psycho-political purpose to influence the outcome of this European Union Referendum ... or perhaps it was already on the drawing board ready for The Referendum on Wales leaving Britain ... er ... Wexit ?

Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    Y Repwblic Forum Index -> Ymgyrchoedd - Campaigns All times are GMT
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next
Page 2 of 5

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


© 2007-2008 Informe.com. Get Free Forum Hosting
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
 :: 
PurplePearl_C 1.02 Theme was programmed by DEVPPL JavaScript Forum
Images were made by DEVPPL Flash Games