All that is wrong with politicians…

This asshole makes me want to spit……


Green Party co-leader Jonathan Bartley has revealed that he killed a man when he was driving at the age of 17.

Mr Bartley, 45, said he was returning home from a concert when a student walked in front of his vehicle in London.

Speaking on talkRADIO, he added that he had apologised to the victim’s family after attending the inquest and that his Christian faith, family and friends had helped him to deal with the incident.

He told the broadcaster: "I was coming back from a gig and a guy came out in front of me and I killed him, and I’ve had to live with that for the rest of my life.

“I grew up with a strong moral code and it felt as though I had been responsible by mistake… I felt so low. I woke up the next morning feeling I didn’t deserve to go on living."

He added: "Cars are lethal weapons, it isn’t just about air pollution they emit."

A Green Party spokesperson said: “This tragic incident is something Jonathan has always been open about.

"An inquest was held at the time and he was found to have done nothing wrong.

"This incident had a profound impact on Jonathan and is one of the reasons he is a passionate campaigner for road safety measures to protect pedestrians and cyclists.”

So, let’s summarise shall we.


a) the man was involved in an unavoidable accident in which a reckless pedestrian placed themselves in the path of his car, such that no-one could have avoided hitting him, and was the pedestrian was killed.


b) the man was a shitty driver when he was 17, was tired while driving at night after a gig, and his probable (but unprovable) ineptitude and unarguable inexperience means he was involved in a fatal accident that a competent and alert driver could well have avoided.

Either way he states that he felt guilty.

However, in order to assuage his guilt, he didn’t enter a monastery and dedicate his life to quiet contemplation and devotion to his God. No, he entered politics in order to project his failings onto the rest of society, and use his position to advocate for draconian restrictions on people’s freedom of choice and movement.

There are millions of motorists who drive hundreds of thousands of miles each in their lifetimes, without ever killing or injuring anyone. But because this fuck-knuckle can’t get behind the wheel without someone dying, cars are weapons, and we shouldn’t be at liberty to own or use such lethal contraptions.

I bet that this greenie idiot isn’t campaigning for the two things that would really make drivers safer: make the driving test significantly more challenging and make everyone re-take it every 5 years.

And yet… this man is an advocate for cyclists. Like this 19 year old cyclist who collided with a pedestrian that consequently died last year, and this cyclist whose collision with a pedestrian left a person in a critical condition last year. This report suggests that “Cyclists ‘almost as likely’ to injure pedestrians as cars”.

Bicycles are weapons and their use must be severely curtailed and regulated.

Not really… cars and bicycles are just tools. So are politicians, and I know which I’d prefer to see severely curtailed.


They’re catching on… somewhat…

This on the NHS from Spiked


Sadly the author’s prescription seems to want to retain the fundamental underpinnings of socialised healthcare, which always implies public health – one of the most perverse incentives of our times, and an open door for socialists, ninnies and self-important nannies to stick their beaks into your life.

Oh well… inch by inch…


Personal Tax Summary (a.k.a. the “Fuck You Very Much letter”)

Like me, you’ll probably have recently received your Annual Tax Summary 2015-16

The front of this document is depressing and infuriating enough, as it shows in black and white (okay, green and blue) how much of your hard earned was stolen under threat of violence by the government, to be spent in ways that are invariably against your personal interests and against the national interest.

Clearly I’m not going to state here precisely how much income tax and national insurance I paid last year, but it was enough to buy a luxury car, or a deposit on a detached house in the south east of England. For which I can expect not to be thanked, but to be spat at by a spiteful, entitled and envious society as a “greedy rich cunt”.

It’s the reverse of the document, though, that really ought to raise the hackles and resolve any right-thinking individual to investigate how to reduce the amount of tax they pay, by whatever means possible.

This is a breakdown of how my income tax and NICs were spent – I expect we will all get a breakdown indicating exactly the same proportional allocations:


Firstly, this is clearly only income tax and NICs which nets out at more than 35% of my annual income… I don’t know if there’s a full breakdown across the whole piece including all the other taxes we pay directly or indirectly: VAT, fuel duty, vehicle excide duty, alcohol duty, tobacco tax, insurance premium tax, council tax, stamp duty, capital gains tax, inheritance tax, green taxes, air passenger duty, TV licence etc… If you add those in, I expect the ratio of your income that goes back to the government as tax rises from 35% to more like what… 60%? 70%?

Now, let’s look at some of the categories above.

Welfare – 25% of the tax stolen from your earnings is used to pay for other people who cannot or will not work, or who consider themselves entitled to breed without having to own the financial and social consequences of their decisions. Notice that this explicitly excludes NHS & state pensions. It’s sometimes asserted that state pensions are the main reason why welfare is such an expensive habit. Clearly this is not the case as they are a separate category.

While there are always some cases where people genuinely cannot work, there are quite clearly a significant number who could work but won’t . There are also those who should be able to work but cannot because of barriers created by the state – people who are failed by the NHS and cannot work while they’re waiting 2 years for e.g. a hip or knee operation. Young people who have been failed by the education system, and by generationally welfare dependant families, who may wish to win their independence but, being low skilled, are locked out of the labour market by the minimum & living wages, finding the black economy to be the only place they can prosper.

This, in one paragraph. illustrates my conviction that what we spend on education, the NHS and welfare actually contribute to the inflation of the welfare budget. All because of how the money is used; how the machinery that allocates and spends the money, and delivers the “services”  is riddled with intellectually bankrupt self-serving leftist philosophies of the state, education, society and economics.

There are all manner of “civilised” ways to tackle these problems. People like Iain Duncan Smith have been trying to do so since 2010. But they get no thanks even when their plans are as moderate and ineffectual as can be imagined. They win vitriolic opprobrium by the entitled classes and the leftist elitists who virtuously enlist the underclass as their free-range pets.

So what’s the point? If we grudgingly accept that a welfare state should exist at all, we need to seriously curtail it. The overarching principle has to be that you cannot get out more than you have put in. Beyond that, your safety net is the workhouse, and your children’s organs on eBay.

Health – the NHS is an international disgrace. It needs to be burned to the ground. Socialised medicine is a cancer and should be replaced with a much more individual system. It provides a moral hazard regarding personal responsibility. It is inefficient, dehumanising, callous and deadly all while expecting thanks and veneration. Sorry, but no. On top of the thousands I contributed to the NHS, for the sake of my own health and dignity spent IRO £5k on insurances for healthcare, dental, and against serious injury and illness that may prevent me working.

State pensions – here I’ve less of a problem, but I do still have a problem. While I get that the state pension system is a Ponzi scheme, those who have paid in all their lives are perfectly entitled to get the pensions they were promised. However, I know from my own elderly relatives that those who have paid in all their lives, and saved from their modest incomes have ended up less well off than those who spent years on benefits and retired without a penny to their names. Again here, I allocated a significant proportion of my earned income to a private pension, which thanks to more than a decade of short-sighted economic incompetence by government and reserve banks, will not grow into anything like the retirement fund it ought to.

Education – we have seen the state education system drowning in a toxic cocktail of leftist ideology, grade inflation, feminisation, multiculturalism, lack of discipline and disastrously low expectations. I don’t have children, but if I did, it’s almost inevitable that I’d be making the necessary sacrifices to have them privately educated.

National debt interest – the cost of feeding and watering the magic money tree. The national debt will never shrink. It can only be inflated away in a manner that will decimate your savings, assets and earnings.

Defence – more than 5% of my income taxes spent on what? Ill advised military adventures that force millions of people in the middle east and north Africa to abandon their homelands and seek sanctuary in gullible, beneficent Europe. And amongst those incomers hide swivel-eyed jihadists that jeopardise our security at home. Great. Perhaps if we just controlled and defended our borders properly instead?

Once we get past public order and safety (corrupt police, intrusive surveillance and nannying), we really just have a mixed bag of shit that the government should not be involved with at all. Taken along with getting the state out of the big areas that it’s clearly catastrophically bad at – health and education – the public sector and government budget could be cut in half overnight, and while it may come as a shock to people, in the medium to long term, the benefits would be phenomenal.

One final note… as you will see when you receive your own personal “FUCK YOU” from HMRC, they don’t actually give percentages, they give actual numbers of pounds spent in each area from your taxed income. I’ve converted them into percentages. But I noticed that, while they state that the numbers are rounded to the nearest pound, and there are 15 categories listed, the total of the £ spent in the 15 categories comes up £47 short of the total they put at the bottom of the breakdown.

You have to wonder, really, don’t you?


Tory Bigotry…

A spokesman for London Zoo has confirmed that its ape community will be lodging a police complaint, after a Tory councillor apparently took to Twitter today to compare them to Diane Abbott.

“This sort of bigotry is completely unacceptable,” said London Zoo’s head of anthropology, “Apes are magnificent beings. They are sociable, sensitive and intelligent. They are a testament to the miracle of evolution. Quite clearly, none of these things can be said about Diane Abbott, and we completely condemn such an appallingly ignorant juxtaposition.”

Diane Abbott’s keeper was unavailable for comment due to an EGM of the Stop the War Coalition being convened this evening in Stoke Newington.


Children must be taught what they used to be taught..

I’ve seen a couple of articles like this in the Times, Tellygiraffe etc over the last few days..


This does baffle me a little bit.

I don’t have kids, so I’m not in touch with what they teach these days but, when I went to school in the 80s, I distinctly remember being taught about how to evaluate sources of evidence. It was a foundational lesson in both English lessons and history lessons. I learned this stuff in primary school and it was regularly reinforced during secondary (grammar) school. It was institutional, in all the textbooks.

Are teachers, texts and curricula that useless now that kids do not receive these vital lessons? Are they too busy teaching kids that it’s okay to be a transsexual pangalactic polarbear to equip them with basic analytical faculties?

If so, it’s probably evidence of something. Perhaps the educational establishment has, in the fog of politically correct horseshit,  lost sight of its basic responsibility.

I left 6th form in 1990. I could see which way the wind was blowing and, on the day we wandered up the road to the pub with our A-Level results in our hands, I reflected to my friends that we may have just got the last decent education that the British state would offer.

The more I see, the more I think I might have been right.



Quote of the Year: Candidate 1

As pointed out by Rod Liddle in the Spectator.

I’m sure this won’t be the last of the year from the ever reliable Guardian…

The left let this happen, being too hesitant to call out prejudice, misogyny and total falsehood where they saw them.



The Shed Society…

Jesus fucking Christ.

The jury has returned from its deliberations and the verdict is in. If Cameron was the “Heir to Blair” then Theresa May is the “Hand-me-down of Brown”.

Emphases are mine…


Theresa May will ditch Margaret Thatcher’s and David Cameron’s approach to social policy as she pledges to create a “shared society” where the state helps to strengthen communities.

The prime minister will use a speech tomorrow to outline plans to abandon Cameron’s vision for a “big society”, where charities and local groups were asked to take on functions from a shrinking state. Instead, in a radical departure for a Conservative politician, she will make clear that central government has a responsibility to do more to strengthen “the bonds” holding communities together.

May will outline a programme of social reform and a “significant shift” where the government steps in to play an active role in tackling “everyday injustices” that have left many in society feeling forgotten. The prime minister will repeat that she wants to help the middle classes who are “just managing” and set out her belief that previous governments have focused too narrowly on the poorest.

She will say: “The central challenge of our times is to overcome division and bring our country together. And that starts by building something that I call the shared society. This means a government rooted not in the laissez-faire liberalism that leaves people to get by on their own but rather in a new philosophy that means government stepping up — not just in the traditional way of providing a welfare state to support the most vulnerable.

People who are just managing, just getting by, don’t need a government that will get out of the way, they need a government that will make the system work for them.”

Just where does one start with this utter shit-show?

Well, my answer comes in two parts.

1) Government can do no good and much harm.

It’s probably no co-incidence that my response here will be a continuation of the theme of my last post, and of a recent post about Louise Casey’s review into the integration of minorities.

This theme is that it is much easier – intentionally or otherwise – for the government’s interventions and initiatives to have a negative effect on individuals and society than for them to have a positive one, and that the best outcome is where the government has no effect, in the course of burning no taxpayers’ money.

But no, in spite of mountains of evidence that whether by design or default, governments cause misery, hardship and injustice, May seems bent on inserting the state even more firmly into our lives, at great cost, and doubtless benefiting only those who got a ticket for the gravy-train.

2) There really is no such thing as society, even if there once was.

So the state wants to “strengthen communities” does it? And how would they do that exactly? By reversing the state-sponsored mass immigration that has lead to a far less homogeneous society? Cultural, ethnic, ethical and religious homogeneity are, for better or for worse, what makes society strong – the feeling that we are cheek by jowl with “people like us”, with whom we have a shared experience of life and shared values.

Although, perhaps that plural usage of the word “communities” speaks to the heart of the problem. Perhaps May’s view is that we need a strong Muslim community, and a strong gay community, and a strong Polish community, and a strong .. etc..

She will say: “The shared society is one that doesn’t just value our individual rights but focuses rather more on the responsibilities we have to one another. It’s a society that respects the bonds that we share as a union of people and nations — the bonds of family, community, citizenship, strong institutions.”

That Times article does the all too common trick of quoting Thatcher without the necessary context

For the past 30 years Tory social policy has been shaped by Thatcher’s declaration that “there is no such thing as society” as she outlined a creed of individual responsibility.

So here is that context, and I think it’s worth reading and thinking about.

But, if you will take Thatcher out of context like that, you could easily and convincingly argue that she was wrong when she uttered those words 30 years ago. But if she’d uttered those words today, people would have a far harder time  saying she was wrong.

We cannot make a shared society out of a diversity of “communities” that are all at each other’s throats, having been balkanized by successive waves of progressive policies, can we?

Because I feel no bonds with, or loyalty to, most of what May thinks of as society. I feel no brotherhood with the bitter Remainers, the entitled breeders, the Romanian beggars, the rancorous Islamists, the swivel-eyed feminists, the vindictive gays, the snowflake students, the sanctimonious celebs, the Civil Self-Servants, the NHS worshippers, the barmy Corbynistas, the antediluvian unions, the militant cyclists, the animal rights head-bangers, the fake charities, the self-serving lobbyists, the fucking statists.

And it isn’t one-sided. There’s copious evidence that these groups espouse agendas and attitudes that – actively or passively – demonstrate disdain for people like me. With one hand they stick two fingers up at us, with the other hand they empty our wallets, and they can all go fuck themselves in the eye-socket with a cattle prod.

And in that, I’d like to see Theresa May take the lead.


%d bloggers like this: