Showing posts with label Tories. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tories. Show all posts

Monday, 14 July 2014

Tories, they just can't get it right.

God it has been a week. First we found out that the is a possible cover up of child abuse claims by the Conservative party as over 100 files go missing from the home secretary. Then we find that Thatcher possibly knew of the cover up and actually helped to keep the claims out of the public eye. Last week was not a good week for the Tories. Less than a year before the next general election, the curtain is being pulled on the corrupt actions of the party during the 80s and 90s. This was starting to die down as we entered a new week of current affairs but has heated up again after Cameron has announced a huge cabinet shuffle this evening which has seen William Hague moved out of his job as foreign secretary. The government claim that the shuffle is to give the election campaign an extra boost in order to give the Tories the best shot at making us sit through another four year of facepalming. Many believe that Cameron knows the party will be faced with some tough questions in the next few months and wants to rid himself of any old Tories as possible to give once again the lean look which contributed to his win in 2010.

To do this, Cameron is rumoured to be adding a lot more women to the cabinet. Not because he wants to but because he "needs" to in order to attract voters. Young female Tories have always excited to British public. Although not necessarily young, Thatcher both thrilled and scared voters when she first rose to power and arguably did so throughout her reign. In Scotland, where to vote Conservative (to some) is like an act of treason, Ruth Davidson (leader of the Scottish Conservatives) is becoming more and more popular down to her "dynamic" political style in promoting the advantages of a union (so the New Statesman says). You could say, the public crave a strong female political figure. In Tory logic it also shuts the feminists up. This then, from a Conservative's point of view is a good thing - put women in power, stop the feminists from moaning and get votes from the public. NOPE.

I actually find it offensive that women are being shoved in the cabinet in favour of men just because they are women. We shouldn't live in a world where you get jobs on what sex you are, we should get jobs depending on whether we are the right candidate and that decision should be made in an unbiased and just way. Personally, if David Cameron was offering me a job in his cabinet at this time because I have boobs I would tell him to shove it. Female MPs shouldn't be used as pawns in order to win an election and then be discarded.

When I heard of the cabinet shift, I prayed that Gove had been sacked yet, alas, no joy. Despite making education a misery both for students and teacher and failing to improve grades significantly in the process, Mikey is still in a job and I must go on with my suffering as he sucks individuality and self-expression out of education (thank goodness I am coming out of the other end of it!). Everyday Gove stays in his job, the more the Tories prove they are out of tough with the public. It isn't teacher's fault strikes happen, it is his. My Mother cared deeply for her students and was sad to leave them but he drove her out of the profession and will do the same for thousands more.

On the bright side, women can now be bishops. Hooray for women!

Leave me a comment!

Follow me on Twitter!

Thursday, 3 July 2014

Bannockburn is not relevant?

1314 is a date that has rung through the Scottish media with great volume over the past few years. Being the year of Bannockburn, the date has a huge amount of significance to Scotland as we beat the English against the odds sending them homeward to think again. 700 years on, Scotland faces a new battle with England, the battle for independence.

Many see what Salmond is doing. It is clear that he deliberately chose 2014 as the year of the referendum because of Bannockburn in order to obtain as many "yes" votes as possible. He hopes to rouse up the Scots with ancient jingoism and delusional patriotism. The idea of 'fighting for freedom' will appeal to many Scottish citizens who have a chip on their shoulder about how the "English" have oppressed and exploited them throughout history although the idea that the English hate the Scottish is yet another misconception. In fact, living in England and being being Scottish by birth and by ancestry, I see a lot more hatred being subjected from Scotland's court than England's.

"Nationalist" Scots confuse the English for the Tories, which is of course is a ridiculous and xenophobic statement to make. Yes, Thatcher fucked Scotland right over and the reason Scotland faces so many of the problems it does is down to her and her elitist government but she also fucked over Wales and everywhere north of Leicester. A lot of Scotland's hatred is based on the assumption that all English people voted for Thatcher and compliment her policies. This is not true in the slightest. It is probably an accurate statement that without Scotland in the Union, Labour will face real difficulty gaining power in U.K Government but that's not to say that austerity hating, worker loving people don't exist in England. It's very far from the truth. The SNP are not turning on their enemy, rather the opposite, they are turning on a true ally.

Back to Bannockburn. People were outraged that Armed Forces Day was on the same day as the Bannockburn celebrations and claimed the clash had an underlying agenda. Not the case. There has been no mention of Bannockburn in England (in fact if ashamed to say that it would have gone straight over my head if I hadn't been told by my Gran), as far as I know it isn't on David Cameron's radar at all. This is a sting but extinguished the idea of agenda on the Conservatives' part. This is because a battle 700 years ago is irrelevant to today's society.

Yes, it is Scotland's heritage but honestly, how many of us actually can safely say that 700 years ago their ancestor actually fought against Edward? I know that I can't. Just over 100 years ago, the majority of my family were living in Ireland. I also have descendants from Northern Europe. I know that really, my ancestors probably didn't fight at Bannockburn and would say that most Scots are the same. Also this is ancient Scotland we are talking about. The Scotland fought over in 1314 is in no way the Scotland we see now. We cannot take political and cultural inspiration from something that happened close to a millennium ago. Take the American constitution, although Republicans frequently tell us that 'the constitution states I have a right to _____ because of the _____ amendment' (written in 1787), it is a document that is becoming increasingly irrelevant to many of its citizens as the America of the founding fathers is no longer the America we have today. This is a document that until 1918 didn't allow women to vote in America - it is obviously obsolete and out of touch with the modern world.This is a way of thinking that is almost 500 years younger than Bannockburn yet we are told to believe that it is our destiny to take it further. 

The Scots that fought at Bannockburn are not the Scots that will vote this September in terms of politics and culture. This was in the days of feudal society and clans. Today, Scotland is a place of materialism and class. Your surname is of no more importance in terms of status than the kind of toilet roll you buy. We are not Ancient Scotland, we are Modern Scotland. The Scotland that Robert the Bruce fought for no longer exists so why take influence from it when September comes? 




Please leave a comment.

Follow me on Twitter!

Sunday, 25 May 2014

So, the EU elections... let's talk UKIP!

Well after a few days of reflection, I can say that I am pretty happy with the result. (Ignoring UKIP for now) Labour gained 338 seats and the Greens 16 where as the coalition lost a total of 538 seats between them. Labour managed to take over what is usually easy Tory stomping ground and managed to claim 6 more councils than they did in the previous election. To me, that is a huge step forward for the left and something lefties should be proud of all over the country.

So onto "the UKIPs". UKIP did very very well for a protest party, obtaining 161 more EU seats. But let us not forget that before UKIP had 2 little seats and so although they did make HUGE gains in the election (second highest overall) they still only have 2/5 of the power the Lib Dems have and still came 4th overall. I can't help but wonder if the Green Party would get this kind of publicity if they did the same.

Since then, there has been all sorts of talking about what this means for next year's general election. We have been told that the result of Thursday's voting means that UKIP are now a strong contender next year and will probably do well; we have been told that the Lib Dems should 'prepare for the 2020 elections' and we have been told that the Tories are quaking in their boots. I read somewhere that many want Cameron out and Theresa May in (please no) and that Yvette Cooper could take Miliband's role if he fails to bring victory to the Labour Party. A lot have said Labour should have done a lot better and that they got cocky meaning UKIP were able to nab more than they should have and that Labour needs to up its game. The Daily Mail called Labour's victory a "savaging" for Labour (despite them having over 100 more seats than the Tories) because UKIP managed to get some bored Tories to vote for them.

UKIP are only successful because of the media. They have been given their platform and they have used it to their advantage. I was talking to a friend over Easter and he brought to my attention that actually, UKIP have no right to be where they are. If you look at the Green Party, they had 2 seats in EU parliament before Thursday compared to UKIP's 13 yet UKIP has been on our screens weekly whether it is the news, Question Time or The Sunday Politics yet the Greens haven't. Although there were 11 more seats in UKIP's favour they had nowhere near the same amount as 'the big three'. The public need to realise we are fuelling UKIP's success by retaliating to them. They are only as powerful as they are because the media make them so and because they know it will boost sales and ratings by having them there.

UKIP's success was not that much of an achievement. They have taken the place of the Green Party (who, from experience, UKIP see as a bit of a joke) in 4th place. That is good but U.K politics is mainly a two horse race with the occasional pawn shoved in to help gain power (cough, cough... Lib Dems) and those two horses will always be Labour and the Tories.

What did you think of the elections? Leave a comment!

Follow me on Twitter!

Friday, 23 May 2014

What percentage of MPs like a bit of tit?

The No More Page 3 campaign released information last night about the number of MPs in certain parties supported their campaign. The results are interesting.

Green Party
Labour Party

Lib Dems
Tories
Hmmmm... most of them were lower than I thought. Isn't it funny how UKIP aren't there? Here is the NMP3 campaign's website: http://nomorepage3.org/

What do you think? Leave a comment!