Archives for posts with tag: Conservatives


Voting Conservative is like voting for the school bully, that while he (or she) is ragging someone else, your arse is safe, but really you’re just sweating, hoping to stay under his radar for another day.

And, of course, part of appeasing the bully is picking on his victims, currying favour through emulating his actions. Flattery, you hope, will get you everywhere.

The ultimate act of a coward is to betray the weak, and bullies and their sycophants always attack the weak.

But that flat eyed hatred you see in his eyes is the mark of the xenophobe, who is grand in his own eyes through causing abject misery to others.

He doesn’t care about you. His cunning is such that he knows you are ruled by fear, he knows that he is the leader of cowards, he knows that he can turn on you or any one of his simpering acolytes and the pack will follow and you will be reduced to nothing but red hot shame.

Severed from the crowd, your panicked, desperate, eyes search for an escape that has been closed off by your own cowardice, terror and abject fear. In your heart of hearts you know just what you are. You might pray for courage, but the thought of ever standing up to your tormentor only reduces you further into abject misery and fear.

You’ll never be as confident as him, never swagger like him, never know his power which is what you think of a bravery.

But the brave do not swagger, the brave are those who stand when everything seems lost, when every bone is melting, when terror is at its height and, with trembling lips, say, ‘No’, and whatever else follows, do not step back from that line, who stand or fall but never surrender.

Even after perhaps years of abuse, when that day comes, a moment that you have no idea whether you will even survive, on that day you truly find out what liberation means. No matter how battered, broken and beaten you are, the first time you stand up is the day you come home to yourself.

I grew up the appeaser, the smiler, the coward, broken by bullies, hiding, with shame as my constant companion. I ceased to even exist to myself with not a single thought my own. The first time I said ‘no’ didn’t come in some blinding flash of revelation, it came when I realised that nothing and no one was going to save me. I knew that I had to put myself, body and soul, in harms way, and say that one terrible word, for the first time ever. I knew that it had to come out of my mouth, and knew, once released, that there could be no turning back.

Today I know that perhaps the hardest word in the English language is merely two letters long. A fateful word, a word of power. “No.”

When you say that word for the first time and mean it, you cease to be a victim and take the first step to becoming your whole self.

I started with Conservatives and I’ll end with them, because what they are is a pack of arrogant bullies, who have held this nation in thrall through their appalling abuse of power. In this election, voting against them is a vote against the most despicable bullies and the one thing bullies are not, is strong and stable. They rule by fear and they are rotten to the core.

I’ll be voting for the many, not the few. Think about that for a moment, so very few to have caused so much harm and their bully in chief won’t even face us in this election. Wow!

KOG. 02 June 2017


01_november_2015A letter a day to number 10. No 1,246

Sunday 01 November 2015.

Dear Mr Cameron,

I’ve just spent a little time with a small group of friends in Dorset and returning home, to write another letter a day to you, I was faced with an overwhelming sense of dreariness. Reading the news: Philip Davies who pledged to speak up for carers in parliament instead, along with three others Tory MPs, talked out (filibustered) a motion to give carers free parking in hospitals thus denying MPs the chance to vote, much, it seemed, to the amusement of the deputy Speaker of the House of commons. Then there was the story of a council overturning a lower tier tribunal judges decision that a disabled Royal Navy ex-serviceman, Guy Watts, should not pay the bedroom tax on a room which is too small to contain an adult single bed. Why? A council worker writing to Watts said that the authority believes that the court decision was made in ignorance of the material fact that a child’s bed would fit into the room and would therefore continue to charge Mr Watts for the bedroom tax.

What struck me about these and other stories is their fatuous, colourless, supercilious top down authoritarian uniform drabness. And as we discovered this week in the battle over tax credits, you and Osborne care nothing for the real lives of ordinary people. Yes, Osborne said he’s listened, but he did so with all the grace of a thwarted child and was clearly angry. You claimed this week that ‘the Conservatives have become the party of equality’. A more ludicrous statement it’s hard to imagine and you can only make it because you don’t give damn about the lives of real people living in the real world. You talk down to us with sneering, patronising, contempt.

Spending time with my friends, on the other hand, was full of invigorating colour. We discussed politics, of course, reviewing much of the horror story that is unfolding in Britain today, but the conversation was all about being engaged, talking up individual and collective responses, some rooted in action, and some simply exploring our thoughts and ideas. Even when the conversation turned to individual difficulties and intense problems, there was no hint of defeatism over issues that chance, circumstance or policy had thrust them into.

I think that is one of the great strengths of socialism, that it is essentially outward and upward looking, seeking to better society for all, rather than the self interested, self serving, attitude, and idolisation, of the self. One of the common expressions for Conservatives today is ‘self-servatives’. It harks back to Thatcher saying, ‘there is no such thing as society’, framing it in the miserly narrow terms of what people expect government to do for them and saying, ‘There’s no such thing as entitlement, unless someone has first met an obligation’. That’s pretty rich in a country in which those born into privilege dominate the social structure of Britain, as they have always done. Your announcing the end of life time tenancies in social housing in order to ‘help increase social mobility’ is another mealy mouthed attack on communities, social cohesion and society in its broadest terms.

Listening to my friends talk was at times invigorating, disturbing, absorbing, thought provoking and even distressing, but what it never was, was trivial, bland, lack lustre or ‘couldn’t care less’. It provided a stark contrast to Philip Davies contempt for carers for whom he couldn’t give a tinkers cuss.


A letter a day to number 10. No 1,145

Sunday 12 July 2015.

Dear Mr Cameron,

I had an interesting experience on Facebook last night. I shared a video made by a young woman and her 16 year old brother entitled “WE LOVE GEORGE OSBORNE’S BUDGET!!!”. The first moments were very well done, the young woman adopted an entirely convincing vacuous dipsy look and said, ‘I think George Osborne did a really good job’ *pause and down-slide* ‘Yeah’. They then proceeded to talk about Osborne’s vile, malicious and unwarranted multi pronged attacks on young people.

As a short film, Tarantino it wasn’t (though he might have enjoyed it), but it was none the worse for that and I was delighted to hear what they had to say. Some of the comments roundly attacked them and it occurred to me that people hadn’t actually taken the time to watch the video before hitting the comment box. Friday nights on social media can often be a little volatile and as a recovering alcoholic I am well acquainted with the kind of eloquence that emerges after a few bevvies, like a (or an actual) fist in the face.

What struck me was that these two young people were vulnerable if for no other reason than their youth and, sadly, that was exactly what the unkind comments were aimed at.

Being vulnerable is to find oneself in the realm of exposure to great unkindness or great kindness. Vulnerability is risky and anyone who is vulnerable, for whatever reason, is exposed to risk. You Conservatives, it seems, hate vulnerability and will never admit to the least mistake or weakness and regard it as a moral failing in others, to be attacked and penalised. You and your fellow privileged popinjays seem to regard a good day at the office as finding another vulnerable group to kick.

Attacking those less well off or simply more vulnerable than oneself, is not ever a failure of the victims of such attacks. There is no more excuse for unkindness as there is need for an excuse for kindness, they are just reflections on where we are, and yet I have heard people apologise more for their kindness, fearing to intrude, than others apologising for vicious and brutal unkindness.

You know, there’s a biblical expression, the meek shall inherit the Earth. It’s quite true, it is the meek who hold all the Earth and life gently in the palm of their hands and treasure it, doing no knowing or malicious harm. The same can in no way be said of you and your government but I neither expect you to understand that nor care because, frankly, I don’t think you are capable.

05_june_2015A letter a day to number 10. No 1,107

Friday 05 June 2015.

Dear Mr Cameron,

The Mirror reports that some creative rascal, using what may have been a government computer, amended the Wikipedia entry on right-wing dictatorships to include – United Kingdom, Conservatives, 2015-, David Cameron.

I’m not sure where the tipping point is from potential to actual, when it becomes an inarguable, indisputable and self evident statement of fact. Whoever was responsible may well, like me, have decided that we’re already in the grip of a nascent right-wing dictatorship, so why not call a spade a spade right now even though at present it may more resemble a trowel?

If a government removes access to justice by cutting legal aid, plans to scrap the Human Rights Act, oversees the worst inequality in the western world, bails out the banks and then attacks the poorest and most vulnerable in society to pay back the debt, creates appalling job insecurity and pay, refuses to address 13 million people in poverty whilst the richest people see their wealth double and sanctions people of the means of survival, what else can you call it? That trowel is rapidly growing into a spade, not the biggest Conservative voting fool in the UK can pretend its shrinking into a tooth pick.

Then, of course, there’s the matter of you saying, “For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens ‘as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone’.” That brief sentence is a fascists wet dream of a sentence that any dictator would be proud of. If it’s the fart that you know is going to choke everyone in the room, there’s no point in being shy about it.

Last, for now, but by no means least, it seems that George is going to sell off the nations RBS holdings at a massive discount to the city of £13 billion even as he plans £12 billion in welfare cuts. Yes, that’s a £13 billion freebie for the same people who crashed the economy, who least need such an enormous handout, whilst preparing to take the food out of the mouths of the poorest and most vulnerable people who need the most help, to the tune of £12 billion.

The fabled Sheriff of Nottingham would be feasting, capering and applauding whilst Robin Hood would, quite rightly, be holding forth in glade and glen with his merry men, not in the least amused at such epic daylight robbery and be planning the redistribution to the poor and needy of what he might call ‘Gideon’s Heist’.

03_april_2015A letter a day to number 10. No 1,047

Friday 03 April 2015.

Dear Mr Cameron,

In a report by the right-wing think tank Policy Exchange called “Clearing the Fog of Law” the authors state the following: “The British armed forces should not be above the law. But which law? The ever-expanding reach of the ECHR is now supplanting far more practical laws of war – the current Geneva Conventions and later Protocols under which our forces have fought since 1949.

By contrast, the ECHR – which is partly incorporated into British domestic law under the Human Rights Act 1998 – is designed for conditions of peace in post-war Europe. It is a wholly impracticable code for regulating the conduct of the British military in violent combat scenarios. What place do peacetime concepts of “proportionality” have on the battlefield?”

So what we have, it seems, is one set of rules designed for war and another set of rules designed for peace and the two are seemingly getting their knickers in a legal twist much to the chagrin of Policy Exchange, Defence Secretary Michael Fallon and Justice Secretary Chris Grayling. Policy Exchange recommend that the government should use article 15 of the ECHR to exempt armed forces from the constraints of the ECHR and to strengthen the Geneva Conventions for the conditions of modern warfare.

Chris Grayling, however, says,  “We can’t go on with a situation where our boys are hamstrung by human rights laws. I made it clear last year that I want to rip up Labour’s Human Rights Act and that it is only the Conservatives who will make real changes to the human rights framework to restore some common sense.”

Let’s apply some common sense here. Fallon claims that ‘legal claims such as those emerging from the Iraq War had undermined the military’s work and had cost the taxpayer millions of pounds’ and calls for an end of the  “abuse” of the Human Rights Act, disregarding the issue that the invasion of Iraq was an act of aggression without provocation. Under those circumstances the people of Iraq have a right to prosecute the aggressors by any means available because they have not engaged in acts of war against the UK or the USA but are the victims of an illegal invasion.

Before anyone tears up the rule book we need to look at who is breaking the rules. If, as Grayling says, ‘our boys are hamstrung by human rights laws’, that is a matter so serious as to cause the very heavens to pause. Human rights laws exist to protect life, if an aggressor threatens to tear up the rule book then that in itself is a crime against humanity. The only people calling for the end of human rights law are those who are routinely abusing them for self serving reasons and no prizes for guessing who they are. Here’s a common sense rule of thumb to be applied at all times and under all circumstances – Never Trust a Tory!