Boris v Corbyn, the Battle of the Ages or the Shamble of the Century? – Trustnodes

Boris v Corbyn, the Battle of the Ages or the Shamble of the Century?


Boris v Corbyn, Nov 2019

Boris is finally facing Corbyn head to head in what you would have thought would have been quite an election campaign, but there’s no Macron singing to En March here, no Trump or Sanders preaching to the rallying quire, no posters or gratifies. In fact at Piccadilly Circus we’d be surprised if most didn’t say: election, what election?

Thus Britain, the home of modern democracy, where the choice so stark you’d think, and yet many wonder if there is a choice at all.

In venues across the country, even in those of artists where they sing to each other for their own pleasure, the name of Boris or Corbyn is unmentionable.

The mood is sombre as revolts rage across the world. Here that revolt is not on the streets, but in the hair-style of the young, their punkness and sophistication, and in their songs.

Boris vs Corbyn you’d think would be the great fight of the age. The aristocrat vs the commoner, the rich vs the champaign socialist, but as it happens neither inspires. Both risk being rejected.

Skimming their manifestos, they have nothing for this generation. Nothing! No wonder this generation is acting like these two men don’t exist at all, and like there is no election.

Free this, free that, more and more free stuff for the already rich grannies, who don’t even need any of it, is all over their manifestos. For this generation, there’s the free cold winter.

Boris Johnson, the conservative, the liberal conservative, has put forth arguably the most socialist manifesto by a conservative candidate.

There’s hardly a word in it about business, let alone about this space. There are pages and pages about the NHS, which the young who don’t use it have to pay for while the old don’t have to pay for university, and yet there’s hardly a page about getting these young men and women to unleash the potential as their slogan says.

What potential? He’s referring to Brexit obviously, the most abstract now sickening word for so many times it has been said people get nauseated from it.

As if Brexit really matters or will really make any difference with the Brexit decision made in the 90s when they broke the Bank of England and prevented UK from joining the euro. Now, Brex-it or Brit-in, UK will need to have a special deal.

We get all that, you’ve been talking about it since… but what we don’t get is can you actually hear the people?

Some £100 billion will be invested in infrastructure pretty much by all three parties, which is good and fine, but aspirers get “the largest cultural capital
programme in a century, of £250 million. This will support local libraries and regional museums.”

Wow, £250 million. So massive. And largest before or after inflation? For libraries! Nothing said of course about the new nature of libraries. Aaron Swartz is probably a name these men have never heard of.

That stands out because the claim is so huge and the number is so small that you wonder where the priorities are. NHS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Another word most people are probably sick of hearing. As if we’re all dying in hospital, instead of being suffocated outside of it.

There’s almost nothing said on housing. Nothing sensible anyway. By either party. Gimmicks here and there, but nothing that would make a millennial think: oh, hmmm, that’s cool, well, one thing to lean me either way.

On entrepreneurship the deafness is revolting where the two main parties are concerned. Maybe we expect too much of incompetent donkeys, but we do expect at least a little.

There is nothing on the real big issues. Maybe because they have grannies in their focus groups who obviously have no clue beyond gimme gimme, but you’d expect something.

Inequality has reached the level of revolt. Do these people know it, or do they look at those men on the streets of even France and London and think let them eat cake?

And we’re stuck a bit at Boris’ manifesto, but that’s because the choice is between nationalist socialism and communism. The same applies to both.

You’d think at least conservatives would have some sense since they’re so in the lead on the polls, but the conservative manifesto is basically the ‘going back to just before the referendum manifesto.’

Same aristocrat, tho named Boris rather than Cameron, same skull worshipping club, same “liberal conservative” while being neither liberal nor conservative as it became obvious once libdems were off the coalition.

On the labour end they think money is of better use to give all free internet. Because people need yet another reason to revolt: state control of maybe even these pages.

The NHS is untouchable in their bubble, but they think they can touch our internet which shows you how far the donkeys have gone down the donkey road.

They don’t see us, the two main parties. They don’t hear us. We don’t vote apparently, so we don’t exist, until presumably they raise the fist of revolution as they have in many places.

The utter lack of objective behavior and the game like approach to issues that at time concern even peace and war was apparent during last month when the question was never what is right, but what action will get me most votes for myself, or a bit more votes even if one loses overall.

We talk about short term focus in corporations due to stock price bindings, but in these political guilds it’s more donkey focus.

You’d think labour out of all parties would seriously take the rage in regards to housing, but their offer is social homes. Because we want to live in soviet blocks!

Do these people wonder why those revolting are burning banks in particular? Do they even know they are burning banks or are they stuck 24/7 on the gamification of politics?

They burning banks because banks are engaging in discriminatory policies against all but the rich. There are negative interest rates in many countries and yet getting a loan or mortgage is almost impossible.

The grannies have paid off their houses, however, so they don’t care. And the grannies vote, so the donkeys don’t care either. Because democracy is only voting, it can’t also be revolting.

No one in their right mind thinks the brexit vote had anything to do with Europe. Nor did the Trump vote have anything to do with his donkeyness. Yet clearly no one quite thinks in our political class within the two main parties beyond giving grandma another Rolls Royce because she obviously drives this country, not the ones building it.

What is far more concerning is that both main contenders wish to play with constitutional matters, wish to play with fire.

“In our first year we will set up a Constitution, Democracy & Rights Commission that will examine these issues in depth, and come up with proposals to restore trust in our institutions and in how our democracy operates,” Borisov says.

He is angry the judiciary humiliated him and forced him to apologize to the queen and did so very rightly in our view. He is also angry Parliament blocked him at every step. Going by that paragraph above, presumably now he wants to declare himself dictator?

In this matter, all three parties sort of agree though in different flavors with Libdems wanting a written constitution. Presumably they don’t know constitutions are written after revolutions, not as a fun exercise.

Labour’s difference is that for the above, they’ll call a Citizens’ Assembly to decide. That makes red very interesting, but lacking any detail on how this Citizens’ Assembly would be called exactly, it is difficult to see – as tempted as we are – why should that sway us instead of it being seen as a rubber-stamping facade.

Libdems plan to call a Citizens’ Assembly for one issue or another too, with their manifesto actually having quite a few things about business, including a start-up allowance, and in general focusing more on getting the economy going, instead of focusing on just giving grannies more and more of our taxes.

But what stands out and quite considerably is the complete silence on foreign policy which suggests UK either doesn’t have one or doesn’t want to tell its own public what it is.

There’s talks about trade deals obviously on the conservative side, like that even means anything, but in concrete form only hints are given.

Boris is accused of being an islamophobe. Corbyn is accused of being anti-semite. We’re sure neither is true, but that an entire peoples are – or are perceived as being – subject to conservative or labour is the height of donkeyness.

Instead of having a wholistic vision of the people they are meant to serve, and indeed the world they live in, they view all things as our ground or your ground, our votes or your votes, to the point if you are pro-Israel or pro-Arabia the other party has to be the opposite of your position.

Because of course what is right is irrelevant and what matters more is allegiances or tribalism. What is good is of no care, what grandma says, because she votes, is what matters.

So leading to a race to the bottom to queen grandma where even our shoes with toes out are taken for the pleasure of decorating her Christmas tree.

It’s either the rich or the poor. Serving both is presumably impossible in this donkey land.

You either treat immigrants as humans or subject to a hostile environment. Of course even life is subject to grandma.

And grandma at least gives us cookies, but you all know what we mean by grandma. The skull worshipers that back Boris, and the other skull worshipers that back Corbyn, both claiming their skull is better despite us all looking and shouting: they’ve lost their heads.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>