Whoops!  We’ve done it again.

‘ALRIGHT!’  Clueless and deflated Natalie Bennett takes inspiration from useless ‘windbag’ Neil Kinnock¹, but she just needs to weigh-up her options and get the balance right.

‘RUDDY’ STRANGE BEDFELLOWS

Why does the Green Party keep missing out?  The answers are: it has no clearly defined purpose and it has no constituency.  Nobody gets excited about the GP and its policies, no matter how many claptrap bullet-points Our-Natalie fires at Conference.  Nobody is interested because other parties have grabbed their attention.

The UKIP² won four million votes because it had a purpose; it wanted to put British people first; it wanted Britain to leave the EU³ and it wanted to control immigration.  The SNP⁴ won most of the seats in Scotland because it had a purpose; it put Scottish people first, and it offered them devolution.  The LP⁵ is resurging because it has a purpose; it wants to stop austerity and to start prosperity for the working class.

All of those policy areas overlap basic ‘green’ principles, but the GP has been tainted by conventional political ‘wisdom’, and now it is preoccupied with trying to imitate its ‘ruddy’ Green allies in Germany.  The GP needs to be careful, because it is becoming increasingly irrelevant and it risks being smudged into ‘last year’s ruddy Labour Party’.

What is going wrong?  An old maxim states: ‘If you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas’.  The GP is infested with backbiters.  They are the ‘enemy within’ and they are busy bleeding the GP to death.  They consist of three main types: Luvvies, Stooges, and Spooks. 

Green Swipe will tell Our-Natalie what to do.  She must read this ‘Guide to Fumigation and Pest Control’, and then she must use her bushwhacking skills to disinfect the Party.  If she goes around with a ‘puffer-gun’, swatter, and net, she ought to be able to track-down and bag every dastardly bug, varmint and critter.

LUVVIES

Smug actors get called luvvies because of their affected and often camp behaviour.  It is a derisive sobriquet which is joyfully used by critics to describe actors who display ingratiating self-satisfaction or outrageously artificial style.  The term also fits the GP’s ruling ‘in-crowd’, who inhabit the cabalistic land of ‘Green Luvviedom’.  GP luvvies are of two kinds: the ‘pseudo-falso’, ‘Festival Hippie’⁶, and the puke-inducing ‘Dude‘ and ‘Chick’ couple. 

Luvvies can be recognised by their easily doffed tokens and vestiges which include things like kaftans, head-bands, woollens, bandannas, beads, sandals, or tunics, cravats, chiffons, frills, jewelry and kinky-boots.  Their wardrobes are important to them; festival-hippies pretend to buy their aged, ‘vintage’ clothing from charity shops, while kinky-couples buy their clothes at retro-fashion boutiques.

Luvvies are like cardboard cut-outs: they conform to an unwritten profile or person-specification.  The typical luvvie is a middle-class, twee, hippie, but kinky-couples might appear as ‘Jason King’⁷ or ‘Tara King’⁸ look-alikes.  Both types are stuck in the 1960s.  Luvvies from other classes also exist.  Upper-class luvvies are rare, but they are welcome to join the ‘in-crowd’.  Working-class luvvies are commonplace, but they are not welcome.

Luvvies are generally university educated, and most of them are intellectual, social, and cultural snobs; they actually speak their own ‘gobbledygook’ language which nobody else understands.  Luvvies usually have some kind of made-up back-story; they might have been forced to rebel against their ‘well to do’ but ‘oppressive’ parents, but money does not really matter to them; they were able to choose their alternative life-styles.  All luvvies respect ‘Diversity’ within narrowly defined limits; they think their devotion to that nonsense provides them with the only credential they need.

The luvvies are the GP’s very own courtiers; they are a coterie of amateur-career-politicians, apologetic-spin-doctors, and ‘hangers-on’.  They appear to be harmless, like a sack-full of ‘wombles’,⁹ but they are equivalent to Stalin’s commissars and apparatchiks; their scheming is legendary.  If you cross them, you might end up in a ditch with a knitting-needle stuck in your back.

The luvvies continually swarm around Our-Natalie like drones that are protecting their queen bee.  They will not let anybody else get near her. Apart from smothering Our-Natalie, they think that they have the right to gag everybody else.  They are, in fact, self-appointed, insincere flatterers and ‘do-gooders’ who make everybody else feel sick.  They give Our-Natalie bad advice, and they make her and the rest of us look bad.

Perhaps the most famous GP luvvie was ‘holier-than-thou’, ‘dominatrix’, Sara Parkin.  She was in a hurry to get the GP organized into an election winning machine, but she did not bond with the ‘non-luvvies’ who formed the majority of the party’s members.  The GP was always a disparate bunch of troubled people.  They knew what they did not want, but they were unsure of what they did want.  Even the Anarchists were willing to let somebody lead the party, but they did not want ‘Goody-Two-Shoes’ Parkin chastising them.  That was bound to lead to an almighty row and a ‘slanging-match’.

Parkin left the GP, and then she ran after her pin-up idol, ‘Arch-Luvvie’, Jonathon Porritt.  They are now freeloading members of the ‘rent-a-green-glitterati’.  They enjoy the ‘jet-set’ lifestyle, touring the corporate lecture circuit, spreading their ‘happy-clappy’ messages, and telling their ‘fat-cat’ audiences that they invented Green politics.  She has since been awarded an OBE for meritorious service to the government.  ¯‘And she’s buying a stairway to Heaven.  Oh, and it makes me wonder.’¯

At the end of her essay on ‘Sustainability and Democracy’, Parkin says: ‘So, down with political parties! And up with collaborative democracy! Anyone want to join my revolution?’  Our answer is, ‘No, just shut up and go away’.  The GP does not need to waste its time pondering visionary ‘What if ... ?’ scenarios which she has dreamed up; it has got to concentrate on finding real-life solutions to today’s real-life problems.

That is an example of the way in which luvvies distract the GP away from its proper business, but Our-Natalie has already been bitten by the ‘luvvie bug’.  In her conference speech she said: ‘In the Green Party we know what our policies are, we know that our values and principles are solid, unmovable foundations.’  That was good, but then she said: ‘We can’t go back to the failed 20^th-century model of centralised administrative monoliths imposing models on diverse local communities.’  That sounds like classic Parkin gobbledygook.

What happened to the ‘solid, unmovable foundation’ of Population Control?  Multiculturalism has failed.  The solution to, ‘diverse local communities’, is to send them back home, and then they will not be a problem anymore.  Green politics really is that simple.

GP members cannot ignore the need for Population Control, just because it does not comply with luvvie political-correctness or ‘brainwashing detergent’.  Population Control is none-negotiable.  GP members who cannot accept that need to explain why.

STOOGES

Stooges are of two kinds; some of them operate overtly, and some of them operate covertly. 

Overt stooges may be regarded as ‘double-agents’ who are motivated by their consciences.  They often suffer from psychotic delusions like the ‘messiah complex’ which compels them to ‘bear crosses’; they feel they must sacrifice themselves for the rest of us, whether we like it or not.  They can be identified easily; they insist that the GP is just a pressure group.  How annoying is that?

Covert stooges are utterly treacherous, and they are compulsive liars, but they can be recognised easily by listening to their consistently negative and pessimistic opinions, and by observing their malicious vandalism.  They are always spreading ‘doom and gloom’, ‘chucking spanners in the works’, ‘pulling out rugs’, and ’backstabbing’.  They are always voting for pro-LP co-operation and against GP initiatives.  They are always trying to sabotage the good work that genuine green activists are doing.

Stooges do not conform to any visible stereotypes.  They can take on any physical form, but their mental ‘make up’ is always the same.  They seem to be very sensitive and ‘serious’ people, who often display confusing or ambiguous sexualities, and who often suffer from superiority-complexes.

The stooges are generally LP supporters; they are political ‘moles’ who pop-up in all kinds of radical organisations.  They have infiltrated the CND¹⁰, Animal Rights, Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and Women’s Liberation.  Their mission is to convince those organisations that they must support the LP: if those organisations want to succeed, their members must vote Labour.

Stooges use psychology to manipulate people whom they have ‘marked’ or targeted.  They are ‘hard to kill’, because they protect themselves by exploiting the kindness and goodwill of their ‘marks’; they try to make their ‘marks’ feel sorry for them.  They also shield themselves with extemporized political-correctness; they feign allegiance to ‘untouchable’ minority groups.  Their pathetic personality traits make them appear convincing.

Perhaps the most famous overt stooge was self-styled ‘father of the British green movement’, ‘media-dude’, and ‘silver-spoon fed snob’ Jonathon Porritt.  He abandoned the GP, because he did not want to be associated with the common riff-raff whom he thought were ‘raining on his parade’.  He returned to his own privileged circle, and he got himself a respectable job as Special Advisor to Prime Minister Tony Blair.  He achieved nothing as Blair’s underling, apart from a red face; he got ‘slapped down’ regularly by Blair’s junior ministers.  His biggest achievement was to belittle the British GP, and to lead many of its supporters ‘up the garden path’.

In an interview with The Observer newspaper in 2000, Porritt said: 'This conflict has been true all my life. I don't see it as a tension, but as a set of opportunities. I have always felt that. The fact that I know how the establishment world works, because I was born into it and educated into it, has not been a disadvantage to me or the organisations I've worked with. The opposite is true: it has helped me to do much more useful work. At Friends of the Earth, being at ease with the people who were on the inside track, in the corridors of power, it was plain useful for us. I could take this radical message to people who simply wouldn't have listened to others, but who would listen to me.’

The ‘father of the British green movement’ sounds incredibly pompous, but credulous too.  He needs to learn that the GP cannot rely on ‘the establishment world’ to alter its course; the established order of society has been steered in the direction in which it is going by vested interests that regard him and his gang as ‘flotsam and jetsam’.

Our-Natalie does understand that the GP can rely only on itself.  She reminded us in her conference speech that: ‘We don't tack around with the political winds: we stand up for what we believe in’.  She continued: ‘Many new members told me that they had come to realise that lobbying, campaigning, pushing against the closed door of old politics, just wasn’t going to deliver the results that our economic, social and environmental crises demand.  We can’t keep electing the wrong people and hoping they’ll do the right things.’

She then said: ‘No more of this unfair, inhumane, unjust immigration system’, and: ‘The GP is ..... the natural home of the immigration rights advocate’, and: ‘If you’ve suffered under our abusive, inhumane immigration system – join us and fight it’.

What was she talking about?  The only people who are suffering and being abused are displaced British people, who have had to move out of their homes to make way for larger immigrant families.  Who is fighting for the rights of British people?  The GP is not.

That part of her Conference speech came straight out of the LP’s ‘Champagne Socialism for Dummies Handbook’, which was written for the politically naive.  The GP ought to be opposed to all kinds of immigration.  Britain is overcrowded; it already has thirty-five million people too many, FULL STOP!

SPOOKS

Spooks are real undercover government-agents or spies who work for the police or the military intelligence.  They infiltrate every radical or subversive organisation which they consider to be an ‘enemy of the state’.  They do not care about white-collar corruption, organised crime, and terrorism; those activities are spiralling out of control, but they think that ‘green activities’ pose a greater threat.  Spooks can be identified easily; their credentials are impeccable and they are usually the most popular and charismatic characters in their groups. 

Spooks are of two kinds; some of them are simple scouts who write reports, but others are ‘les agents provocateurs’ who are legends in their own minds.  They both sound fascinating, but they are really just a nuisance; they undermine democracy, they waste taxpayer’s money, and they spread paranoia.  Instead of sneaking around in their own imaginary worlds of intrigue, accompanied by their own favourite action-soundtracks, they ought to ‘get lives’ and proper jobs which would make them useful to society.

Amateur spy-catchers can ‘home-in’ on Spooks by simply watching them and waiting for them to do something obvious: they will eventually reveal themselves because they have missions.  They will try to cause trouble; they might try to discredit genuine activists, or they might try to bring the GP into disrepute.  Genuine activists can counter their tricks by openly challenging them; spooks do not like having their ‘covers blown’; they will start sulking and then they will disappear into the shadows.

Perhaps the most infamous spook was ‘conspiracy theorist extraordinaire’ and all-round ‘stupid faker’ David Icke.  He had been a popular BBC TV presenter, and they had fired him after he had refused to pay his ‘Poll Tax’.  He then started talking about the ‘Illuminati’¹² and shape-shifting lizards.  He also implied that he was the Son of God, and he said he was a member of the GP.  He caused a lot of damage.  Everybody in the GP got tarred with his sticky brush.

Green Swipe believes in the ‘black-box’ approach to analysis: people do not need to know how a system works.  They just need to examine the peripherals: the inputs and the outputs.  They do not need to understand what goes on inside the ‘black-box’ which is usually located in the middle of a system.

People do not need to study History, Philosophy, Economics, and The Law to understand politics; they just need to examine the causes and the effects, or the raw materials and the finished products, or the winners and the losers.

Icke’s ‘stuff and nonsense’ is ‘black-box’ thinking taken to the extreme outer limits; it is cult ‘flypaper’ which is designed to trap gormless plebs who are searching for something which is larger than life; it is blended ‘moonshine’, which is 50% mysticism, 49% psychobabble, and 1% truth.

In his book ‘Tales From The Time Loop’, Icke explains his ‘order out of chaos’, or ‘problem-reaction-solution’ theories.  He says: ‘You want to introduce something you know the people won't like ... So you first create a PROBLEM, a rising crime rate, more violence, a terrorist bomb ... You make sure someone else is blamed for this problem ... So you create a ‘patsy,’ as they call them in America, a Timothy McVeigh or a Lee Harvey Oswald ... This brings us to stage two, the REACTION from the people – "This can't go on; what are THEY going to do about it?" ... This allows THEM to then openly offer the SOLUTION to the problems they have created ...’.

That is an example of machination.  It is commonly known as ‘un fait accompli’.  It is one ‘dirty-trick’ which is well known to all ‘scape-goats’, who might have been victimised in their playgrounds or in their workplaces.

Spooks like Icke try to double-bluff their opponents.  They are confident because they know that most people accept their quick and simple answers.  We might be expected to say that Icke is a fool thus everything he says is foolish and, because he is still associated with the GP, the GP is foolish.  Neither conclusion is correct.  That is another example of a ‘dirty-trick’: it is known as ‘guilt by association’.

In her Conference speech Our-Natalie said: ‘In the European Parliament, the Green’s group is leading the way in calling for fair, just, humane treatment of refugees across the Union and outside it.’  She does not seem to know that ‘the Green’s group’ in the EU is yet another bunch of ‘ruddy strange bedfellows’.  They are not allies; they were ‘smudged’ into a murky shade of red a long time ago.

The current refugee crisis is an example of Icke's 'problem-reaction-solution' theory.  This would be Icke’s and Green Swipe’s explanation of the refugee crisis.  The European Union wanted to ‘INTRODUCE’ people trafficking on the back of continuously increasing mass immigration, so that European workers and their organised representatives would be threatened, overwhelmed and subdued.  The EU created the so-called refugee ‘PROBLEM’ by disturbing the middle-east region; it sold weapons to all sides; it bombed or invaded countries; it deposed governments.  The EU then ‘BLAMED’ terrorists and dictators.  The EU’s ‘REACTION’, was a drummed-up, humanitarian, clamour to ‘Save the refugees’.  The EU’s ‘SOLUTION’ was: Germany will accept one million refugees and the rest of Europe will follow suit.  ‘Il est un fait accompli.’

THINGS AIN’T WHAT THEY USED TO BE

I remember standing up at the Newcastle Conference back in the 1980s and demanding that the GP must: ‘Boot out the LP Stooges.’  I received some cheers and applause.  Those were the days.  Current GP Conferences are much less tolerant places than they used to be.  They seem to be much more stage-managed; they appear to be marshalled like rallies.  That is because they are patrolled by the ‘Thought-Police’ and the ‘PC Brigade’, who make sure that the delegates stay ‘on message’.

Parkin, Porritt and Icke were contemporaries.  They were members of the GP at a time when it was emerging as a positive alternative to the back-pedalling, ‘can’t do’, duff, British political parties of the drab-1970s.  The GP was a serious threat to the ‘establishment world’, but the antics of Parkin, Porritt, and Icke led the GP up many ‘dead-ends’, ‘blind alleys’, and ‘creeks without paddles’.

Despite many years of New Labour government, Britain retained its nuclear arsenal, and Toffs with their ‘inbred-farmhands’ continued to defy the law and go merrily fox-hunting, and women still suffer terrible abuse and inequality.  GP supporters need to understand that the LP’s ‘achievements’ were historic and temporary, and that its methods are now passé.

Parkin, Porritt and Icke used the GP to make names for themselves, to further their careers, and to sell books and merchandise.  They left the GP because they wanted to damage it.  They hoped that GP members would beg them to come back.  They hoped that their sorrowful and remorseful followers would tear themselves apart.  Did they fail?  Nobody listens to them now, except Our-Natalie and her luvvies.

The current multicultural leadership with its retinue of whining luvvies and bizarre, whinging, ‘rainbow-snatching’, ‘in your face’, LGBT oddballs, provide a travelling, vaudeville show where bored, low-ranking, ‘journos’ can go for a good laugh.  Their ‘entertainment’ is as bad as anything that Parkin, Porritt and Icke produced, and it ought to make GP members wonder: ‘What is going on?’

During the election campaign GP members were asked to believe that Our-Natalie got stuck for an answer when she was asked about the cost of the GP’s housing plans.  They were asked to believe that she was ‘bettered’ by a wheezing, ‘fatty-backside-for-hire’, ‘bargain-basement,’ ‘Z-list’, radio hack.  She and the GP were made to look incredible.

If we give Our-Natalie the benefit of our doubts, we must assume that Our-Natalie had been drilled by her luvvies into taking interviews too seriously instead of treating them as opportunities to vex journalists.  She could have answered like this: ‘I have no idea how much our housing programme is going to cost.  I’m not a builder.  Next, you’ll be asking me how many bricks we intend to use.’  She could then have added: ‘Anyway, it’s not a question of cost.  If the houses need to be built, we will have to find the money.’  She could then have hammered-home her point to thunderous applause with a bit of patriotic fakery: ‘If Churchill had quibbled about the cost of fighting the war, we’d all be speaking German now.’  If ‘fatty’ had continued to press her, even after that show-stopper, she could have reminded him that building estimates are always inaccurate.  She could have reminded him about Wembley Stadium.  She could have said: ‘Its initial budget was around one million pounds, but it eventually came in at about six billion!’  She would have been talking rubbish, but she would have made her point, and she would have won a skip-full of votes.

Our-Natalie ought to be the Leader of the Opposition, because the GP is the only party which could offer a real radical alternative.  She is instead traipsing after the moderate leaders of the LP and the SNP.  She needs to ignore Neil Kinnock and to listen to John Major who led his party ‘back-to-basics’.

Our-Natalie has tried to lead the GP the luvvie way and she has ended up in the political wilderness.  She now needs to believe in herself and to lead the GP her own way.  Our-Natalie has a natural ‘cuddly mummy’ image, which is friendly and likeable.  She could exploit that; she would be more jovial; she would smile more often, and she would have more fun.  If it would help, she could wear a flower in her hair; it would not mean anything.

WINDUP

This item has got nothing to do with Britney Spears. 

Here are three games for you to play at home or in your groups: ‘Spot the Luvvie’, ‘Spot the Stooge’, and ‘Spot the Spook’.  Have fun, good night, sleep tight, and do not let the bed-bugs bite.

Notes:

1. Neil Kinnock was a Labour Party leader who clucked ‘Alright!’ at his party conference.

2. UKIP - United Kingdom Independence Party

3. EU – European Union

4. SNP – Scottish National Party

5. LP – Labour Party

6. Festival Hippie – This type of hippie is not to be confused with the original New-Age Hippie of the 1960s.

7. Jason King – He was a flamboyant character played by Peter Wyngarde who was a wooden actor of the 1960s.

8. Tara King – She was a ‘sex-symbol’ character played by actress Linda Thorson in the fabulous TV series: ‘The Avengers’.

9. Wombles – Those were pretend furry animals that lived on Wimbledon Common.  They appeared on children's TV.

10. CND – Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament

11. Corbynisters – This is the name which has been given to LP leader Jeremy Corbyn’s supporters.

12. Illuminati – This 2^nd century, secret Christian society was also known as ‘The Enlightened Ones’.

Don’t miss our postponed next post:

‘You’ve Been Conned – Multiculturalism’

‘peace man’ÿ☮[♀Ⓥ

You may send your comments to greenswipe@gmail.com

ELECTION BREAKDOWN

Who is the bigger fool?  Clegg and Miliband did not put on a good show,
but puppeteer Cameron laughed all the way to number ten.

CLASH OF THE TINIES

Forget democracy, 2015 was a British version of an American style presidential-election, but it attracted as much interest as a Punch and Judy tent on a rain sodden beach.  The ostentation soon broke down into an embarrassing public spectacle.  The show featured B-list celebrity contestants who had nicknames like Cleggover, the Kid, and Flashman.  Which one had the X-Factor?

CLEGGOVER

The Conservative party was the Liberal party’s traditional rival.  How was the Coalition government possible?  Power corrupts and every man has his price, but some men are cheaper than others.

Cleggover became conspicuous as Flashman’s sidekick.  The Tories could have given him make-believe job titles like ‘Permanent Undersecretary’ or ‘Keeper of the Privy’, but they took pity on him and they gave him a Deputy’s badge.  It was a token gesture, because he was treated like ‘Number Ten’s Doormat’; the Tories walked all over him.  His Liberals got blamed for everything that the Coalition did wrong, and Flashman’s Tories got praised for everything that the Coalition did right.

After the fun and games were over, the Tories no longer needed a court jester on Downing Street.  They slammed shut its doors in Cleggover’s face, and they banished him.  He departed ungracefully like a whipped dog that bears the noise of derisive laughter ringing in its ears and the pain of a hobnailed brogue up its backside.

Honour mattered in the good old days of Empire.  It mattered for the sake of one’s self respect, one’s family name, one’s King, one’s Country, and one’s Club.  A British gentleman who had brought shame and disgrace upon himself would be handed a revolver, and he would be expected to do the decent thing.  Honour no longer matters in modern multicultural Britain.  Blokes like Cleggover think that they can dodge moral judgements by dramatically falling on their swords; he has resigned as his party’s leader, but that ruse might not preclude a volte-face; he could come back.  If the Liberals seriously want to get rid of him, they will have to 'bump him off' with a red hot poker, and then he really will be sorry.

If Cleggover ascends to Heaven, he will receive moral judgements in that great courtroom in the sky.  He will be accused of being a nondescript entity; a good-for-nothing waster; a faithless traitor; a spineless coward; a toadying sycophant; a useless mug; a pushed-over patsy; a slut; a rent boy, and he will be reminded that ignorance is no defence.

Cleggover’s legacy is virtually worthless.  He has ruined the Liberal party.  They won 62 seats at the 2005 general election.  They held 8 in 2015.  The cause of their decline was ‘camp follower’ Cleggover’s decision to carry the Conservative party’s inadequate government.  The Fates can be so cruel.  If the Liberals had lost just two more seats, Cleggover could have been accused of decimating his party’s delegation.  Damn!

KID MORIBUND

The Kid’s official nickname was ‘Brains’.  He was dubbed that by his mate, ‘Red’ Balls, who has since been kicked into touch.  For some reason, ‘Brains’ never caught on with the general public.  It was just used inside the Kid’s immediate circle of nannies and sycophants and by a few sneering newspaper critics.  Green Swipe decided to give the sad no-hoper a more appropriate, 'double-barreled', nickname, and it got repeated on TV.  Result!

During his time as leader of the opposition, the Kid’s sparring tactics with Flashman were a bit limp-wristed.  He would provoke Flashman with annoying petty gibes and frivolous quips, and Flashman would retaliate with hurtful, incisive sarcasm and scathing put-downs.  It was like the Kid was tip-toeing around Flashman and tickling him with a feather duster, while Flashman was wielding a cast-iron frying pan and repeatedly smashing it in the Kid’s face.  The Kid got knocked-out every week, and that cruel humiliation went on for five years!  Somebody ought to have stopped it.

The Kid’s campaign tactics were inept and barrel-scrapingly desperate.  He relied on dim-witted gimmicks rather than clear messages to convince younger voters.  The Kid was trying to look like the new Justin Bieber but he looked more like a Spinal Tap tribute act.

His male-bonding session with Russell Brand was intended to rub on some street credibility, but they both looked like they were hamming it up for the cameras, and Brand’s sudden conversion to Labour looked deceitful.

The Kid’s encounter with those hen-party groupies was obviously a staged photo-opportunity.  If those girls had been genuine revellers, they would have debagged him and they would have smudged lipstick all over his face; his minders would never have risked that.

The Kid’s centrepiece was his precious tablet of stone.  He thought that an overworked Biblical cliché would provide earnestness for his ambiguous manifesto, but it just symbolized stupidity and it became a laughing stock.

He spoke unintelligible gibberish and jargon when he was addressing Britain’s older generations and they just did not understand him.  They thought he was talking about something or other which did not concern them.  As a result of his failure to communicate with them, he lost most of Scotland and the south of England.

The Kid’s legacy is mass concussion.  The British working classes are about to receive another austerity barrage.  History will be less kind to the Kid.  It will not blame his failure on ‘impetuous youth’ but juvenile delinquency.

FLASHMAN

Flashman was the name of a school bully in a novel called ‘Tom Brown’s School Days’.  The Tory leader received the nickname because he used to bully Labour’s last Prime Minister, Gordon Brown.  Flashman would have his evil way with Brown and then, when he had finished with him, he would leave him sobbing on the chamber floor. 

Flashman is a petulant sadist who is capable of wanton cruelty.  He soon found another victim in Kid Moribund.  He always outwitted the Kid.  If the Kid turned up to PMQs wearing boxing gloves, Flashman would pull a knife.  If the Kid brought a knife, Flashman would draw a pistol.  Their encounters carried on like that until this election when Flashman finished him off for good.

Flashman is an anachronism in modern society; he is a cad who captains a motley crew of madcap bounders.  They have no sense of noblesse oblige; they go about their ‘privateering’ with reckless abandon; they chuck confidential documents into public bins; they call policemen plebs; they play Reality-TV games in the jungle; they invite their friends on diplomatic missions; they get involved in phone-hacking scandals; they tweet lewd photos of themselves; they believe that disabled workers are not worth the minimum wage; they allege that rape is not always rape. 

Flashman may do better in the future if he is not surrounded by that lot.  Can he not find the staff or are they chosen deliberately to make him look good?  He is quite capable of tarnishing his reputation.  When Flashman visited the USA in 2010, he grovelled and slobbered around President Obama's trouser legs like a frisky dog that was trying to grab his master's attention. His obsequious flattery was sickening to hear but nobody was prepared for his supreme treachery.  He told US news agencies: 'We were the junior partner in 1940 when we were fighting against Hitler; we are the junior partner now.  I think you shouldn't pretend to be something you're not.'

Flashman had revealed his true colours; he had torn down the Union Jack and in its place he had hoisted the Stars and Stripes.  The cowardly blackguard had sold out his country for personal favour.  The entire nation was outraged, but his Liberal deck-hands refused to mutiny, and those Labour swabs just muttered a few vapid comments and assumed their bent-over positions.

Flashman was out of line, and he ought to have been sent to the Tower, but the treacherous rascal got away with it, and he is still at large.

NO MORE PUNCH AND JUDY

Where have all the statesmen gone?  Nobody loves a loser, but in this contest, nobody loved a winner.  Top banana Cameron did not make a fool of himself, but he is now living in a fool’s paradise.  In spite of his election success, he cannot gloat.  He achieved a ‘scrape-through’ win against mediocre opponents who ought to have ensured him a landslide victory.  The result infers that the electorate considered him to be the ‘best’ pick out of a rotten bunch.  Who can blame them?  Who would vote for candidates with nicknames like Cleggover, The Kid, and Flashman?

Cleggover and a few other Liberals survived their election massacre.  He will act as though nothing has happened; he is so arrogant he probably believes that greatness was thrust upon him and that he has not yet fulfilled his destiny, but his once faithful followers must feel like they have been led to the slaughter.  Their experience in government proves that integrity is essential.  They gained nothing by compromising their policies but they lost nearly everything.

The Kid got what was coming to him.  His campaign was doomed to fail as soon as he plunged his dagger into his brother’s back.  The wound festered into a running sore and his opponents rubbed salt into it.  They accused him of fratricide, and he was unable to wash the blood from his hands.  The electorate, who understood simple metaphors, lapped up the juicy gossip and they suspected the Kid of being a sociopath; they remembered Norman Bates, who knifed people in the film Psycho.  Bates claimed he would not have hurt a fly, but nobody in her right mind would have trusted him.

Flashman said: ‘I'm fed up with the Punch and Judy politics of Westminster, the name calling, backbiting, point scoring, finger pointing.’  He cannot help himself.  He will always be a cad and he ought to heed his own words: ‘I think you shouldn't pretend to be something you're not.’

What about Our Natalie?  She did well.  Nobody else could have done better.  She made one mistake; she disagreed with Nicola Sturgeon during their televised leaders’ debate.  Natalie did not need to distinguish herself from Nicola.  The three ‘female agents of change’, who included Leanne Wood, could have presented a united front.  They would have offered the electorate a harmonious angelic alternative to the four discordant ‘horsemen’ or ‘pallbearers’ who represented the other parties.  Rest in Peace, Great Britain.

Our Natalie suffered extreme prejudice from the BBC’s right-wing pseudo-journalists.  That place wants shutting down.  The Licence Fee is just a tax on the poor; they have to pay lots of money just to watch ‘Hoorah Henries’, ‘luvvies’ and ‘friends of ...’ having fun at their expense.

The Green Party must explain the BBC’s raison d’être; it is the voice of the establishment; it is the servomechanism which regulates public opinion; it is the propagator of propaganda and codswallop; it is the transmitter of mind-numbing banality; it is the crystal-set-methamphetamine poisoner of the masses.

One last point needs to be made.  The Conservative party bought their 2015 election victory.  They were expected to spend thrice as much as all the other parties combined. 

WINDUP

We thank the Guardian’s most readable snipers Mary Ann Sieghart and Esther Addley for demonstrating their humane shoot-to-wound techniques.

Don’t miss our postponed next post:

‘You’ve Been Conned – Multiculturalism’

You may send your comments to greenswipe@gmail.com

‘peace man’ÿ☮[

THE SEVENTH ENEMY

The Human Factor in the Global Crisis

What happened to Ronald Higgins?  Did anybody take any notice?

A Voice in the Wilderness

The Seventh Enemy is the definitive ‘Green Bible’.  If you want to understand Green politics, read this book and try to see the film.  Ronald Higgins wrote it in 1978, and the BBC made a film about it in 1979.  Their ‘Everyman’ series produced a gem.  It entranced viewers so much; they did not want it to end.  Many went out and bought the book, and they probably joined Greenpeace, Friends of the Earth, and the Ecology Party¹.

The Seventh Enemy concept was ambitious; it attempted to show us how to save the world.  It identified six ‘enemies’ which threatened our survival:

1)   Population Explosion

2)   Food Crisis

3)   Resource Scarcity

4)   Environmental Degradation

5)   Nuclear Abuse

6)   Science and Technology Unleashed

Then it added the seventh ‘enemy’, which it called The Human Factor; Political Inertia and Individual Blindness were preventing us from overcoming the other six threats.

Higgins was a prophet, but he was not all gloom and doom; he was not a ‘drama-queen’.  He explained how to overcome The Human Factor with ‘An Inclusive Sensibility’.  He pointed at seven ‘lamps’, which would light the way:

1)   Rational Fear

2)   Self Awareness

3)   Visionary Awareness

4)   The Revaluation of the Feminine

5)   A Welcome to Tensions

6)   The Ethic of Consciousness

7)   A Reawakening to the Religious

This is not a review or a synopsis.  The Seventh Enemy is a complex concept and it contains a myriad of inspirational ideas.  Here we shall ponder just three topics: ‘The Population Explosion’, ‘The Food Crisis’, and ‘The Revaluation of the Feminine’.  A soupçon of irony has been infused for bad taste.

The Population Explosion

Higgins outlined the history of the world’s population growth.  He said: ‘By the time of Christ it was probably about 300 million.  By 1850 there was 1.3 billion of us.  By 1900 there were nearly 1.7 billion.  By 1950 there were 2.5 billion.  By 1975 there were 4 billion.’  He added: ‘A world population growth rate of two per cent a year may sound modest until one realises this could double our numbers in thirty-six years.’

His prediction was too close for comfort.  Today’s world population amounts to over 7.3 billion, and it is rising.  People on Earth are like maggots crawling over a corpse which is decaying rapidly.  No conventional wisdom can stop that trend, but one or more of the other creeping threats will eventually stop it.  The least likely dooms-day scenario is a catastrophic nuclear war, which would probably decimate the world’s population with fire and radiation.  The survivors would hate the smell of ozone in the morning.  We may count our blessings because our political leaders have not yet been stupid enough to let that happen.

Higgins said: ‘Many governments are frankly pro-natalist – they positively want enlarged populations.’  He was correct.  Overcrowded Britain continually gets more people stuffed into it.  Our governments pay parents to have more children, and they leave Britain’s borders open to all kinds of mass immigration.  Britain’s short-sighted economic policies demand ever increasing populations so that capitalists can take advantage of ever increasing economies of scale.  That kind of inflation continues until the bubble bursts, and then the ‘plebs²’ are told to mop-up the mess.

Most British political parties want to swell Britain’s population with unlimited immigration.  They refuse to talk about it, so we may assume they want billions ad infinitum.  They plan to make room for them alongside Britain’s natives by concreting-over Britain’s countryside.  They want to build sky-scraping, multi-storied, blocks of flats³, on a grid-pattern, which will span the land from coast to coast.  Towns will be numbered; streets will be numbered; doors will be numbered.

When the civil engineers have finished re-constructing the surface, they will start burrowing underground.  Happy, multicultural, plebs will dwell in subterranean, tenement-bunkers, which can actually be previewed in that old Expressionist film: ‘Metropolis⁴’.

More foreign plebs could be accommodated if the native plebs could be forced to share their houses as well as their country.  Mixed plebs could work, rest, and play to a rota; they would simply clock-in and clock-out of their factories, houses, and shops.  Sleep could be rationed to eight hours so that three plebs could use the same bed.  It is not a new idea; plebs could be tagged, ‘chipped’, or bar-coded; those kinds of systems would completely regulate their lives and deter them from squabbling with one another.

Our ruling elite will not concern themselves with any of that; they will live in secure ‘gated communities’ which will keep out the riffraff.

The Food Crisis

Higgins said: ‘Ours is not just a world of hunger but of unnecessary hunger.  There is sufficient food to sustain all four billion of us.’  He added: ‘About a third of the world’s cereals are fed to Northern livestock.  So is a quarter of its fish catch.  So is much of our powdered milk.’  He persisted: ‘Britain’s ten million cats and dogs eat enough protein to satisfy half a million humans.’

Britain is supposed to be a nation of animal-lovers, but it is not.  Anyone can view YouTube clips of performing animals, or TV animal-rescue programmes, or they can visit their local RSPCA⁵ centres; they will see clearly that Britain is a nation of animal abusers.  Fewer cats and dogs in Britain would not make much difference to the world’s food shortage, but it would cause less suffering to animals.

Higgins explained: ‘The essential point is that greater food production need make little difference to the famished.  Millions in the South simply cannot afford what they need.’  That is still true, but we can now add millions in the north who cannot afford the best food that money can buy.  The quality of food is decreasing while the price is increasing.  Many of Britain’s pampered cats and dogs eat better food than the grub that British plebs can afford.  Plebs are not given much choice.  Fast-food outlets like MuckDonald’s churn out buckets of bland, ‘no frills’ swill, made from the cheapest ingredients; their menus include all sorts of offal, ‘filler’, and chemical mixtures.  The vegetarian diet really is becoming the healthier, cheaper, and tastier alternative.

Politicians, who represent the ruling 1%, try to convince the rest of us that the answers are factory-farming, genetically modified foods, and poisoned crops⁶.  Variant processed slops from tubes, or hydroponic drip-feeds might provide answers in the future.  Our ruling elite do not concern themselves with any of that; they eat clean fresh food, which is organically reared or grown.

Higgins said: ‘Carried far, this must amount to a willingness to use starvation as an instrument of economic policy; as a tool indeed for seeing to it that the rich stay rich and the poor stay poor.’  The European Union still hoards ‘mountains’ of food and ‘lakes’ of drink.  Those reserves allow it to dump cheap produce on the world market whenever excluded countries try to compete with its exports.  The EU also uses food-aid as a weapon in its offensive foreign policies; sanctions and restrictions are always being applied somewhere to discipline needy and starving people.

That has always been Britain’s normal domestic policy.  Rationing never ended; if plebs have just enough cash for a pint⁷, some fags⁸, and a flutter⁹, they are content to be poor; they think to themselves: ‘Things could be worse; look at those starving Africans.’

According to the Trussell Trust, which runs the country’s largest network of food banks, ‘13 million people live below the poverty line in the UK.’  During the year 2013-2014, over one million people relied on food parcels; a third of them were children.

The Trussell Trust’s All Party Group for Poverty and Hunger, with the support of the Archbishop of Canterbury, has reported that: ‘Hundreds of thousands of tonnes of perfectly edible food which is euphemistically termed “surplus”, is destroyed at a substantial cost, when it, alone, could eliminate hunger in our society.’

Here are some figures which have been provided by The World Hunger Education Service.

The number of hungry people in the world has been significantly reduced during the last thirty five years by 42%.  805 million people, or one in nine, still suffer from chronic undernourishment.

Hunger is worst in Southern Asia (525.6 million) and Sub-Saharan Africa (214 million).

Poor nutrition causes nearly half of deaths in children under five (3.1 million) each year.  Every ten seconds, a child dies from hunger related diseases; that is 8,500 children per day.

Those are mind-boggling statistics, but that is supposed to be ‘the good news’.  The bad news is, according to the World Food Programme, the world still produces enough food to feed everyone.

The Revaluation of the Feminine

Sixty percent of the world’s hungry are women.  The Hunger Project believes that women could be the key agents of change.  They must be given the chance, so they must be empowered and supported.

Higgins said: ‘... something of the maternal orientation may be essential if we are to counter the masculine rape of nature and patriarchy’s indifference to intimacy...’  He was not suggesting a total inversion of roles.  The Queen Bee and her retinue of drones are just as unbalanced as the rampant lion and his pride of females.

Men are allowed to remain childlike.  They just pretend to grow up, and they act paternally; that is why many of them beget children and then run away.  Women are really forced to grow up; they get pregnant and through that rite of passage they get transformed into adults.

Mother Nature suffers like women all over the world; she gets things done to her against her will.  Rabid feminists scream: ‘All men are rapists!’  That is true, figuratively speaking.  Men have always used their physical strength to get what they want.  They know that might is not always right but they do not care about that because it usually gets results.

Higgins explained his premise: ‘The maternal orientation gives women (typically, not invariably) a particular feeling for nature and the organic – perhaps also for place.’  Women are not from Venus and men are not from Mars but men behave more like aliens.  Women understand the Earth better than men do because they function in harmony with it.  They instinctively understand order; they want a place for everything and they want everything in its place.  Most women expect their men to go out to work and earn a wage, while they expect to stay at home with their new born babies.

Higgins said: ‘Women probably therefore invented agriculture where the cyclical, seasonal patterns of seed-sowing, growth and harvest mirrored their own rhythms of fertility and reproduction.’  Women probably did invent agriculture because they got sick of being chased around fields and then inseminated by delusional men who thought they were bulls or stallions.  Husbandry is a conceited male invention.  The assumption that a woman is just another farm animal that may be worth two cows, or four goats, or eight chickens is anachronistic in our supposed age of reason.  The value of women may be properly estimated by observing their ability to adapt, survive, and flourish underneath such grotesque chauvinism.

Women are not free because they are still defined by men.  Black men call women, bitches and whores.  Our pandering society excuses that kind of profanity; it appreciates vulgar multicultural idioms and motifs.  We can designate it post-feminist art, but we know it is really just persistent deep-seated misogyny.  Society allows it and respects it by designating it a modern art form or vulgar multicultural idiom.  Most women yield to it; they want to be regarded as sex objects.  They act the part; they wear the costumes; they talk the trashy vernacular language; they stick around like putty in men’s hands.

The ‘trophy wife’ as paraded in the TV series ‘Real Housewives’ is another male creation.  In that fantasy world, women aspire to become the possessions or accessories of rich men.  They submit to plastic surgery and, no doubt, they succumb to drugs; their lives imitate those in that other great work of fiction: ‘The Valley of the Dolls¹⁰’.

Man made religions denigrate women.  Everyone knows that religion is just primitive superstitious nonsense, yet corrupt and hypocritical British politicians have extended the blasphemy laws; those now include ‘Religious Hatred’.  Zealots are now allowed to abuse women with the full protection of the law.  Women will only be able to escape from that living-hell when they are allowed to cast off their religious bondage gear: rings and veils.

Those are just some examples of distorted reality which ought to be corrected, but does anyone want to do it?  People have been shaped to fit into this warped world.  They cannot imagine an alternative reality; it would cause acute cognitive dissonance, blurred vision, and severe headaches.

Higgins said: ‘... the masculine and the feminine must be harmoniously combined to fashion an undistorted view of reality.’  Yes, he was talking about Yin and Yang but without the Taoist mystical explanation and ‘pearls of wisdom’.  Masculinity and femininity have become separated and therefore detached from reality.  They need to be reunited so that they will complement each other.  Men and women will not have to engage in the ‘battle of the sexes’ or ‘gender-politics’because they will be identified as people.

The New Dark Ages

Britain is experiencing a baby boom and most of the children are the offspring of immigrants.  British natives will soon be outnumbered; their relatively civilised mono-culture will be wiped out by multiple primitive cultures which treat women like animals, and which treat animals like ‘dead meat’.  Ancient patriarchal attitudes will prevent evolution, development, and progress; masculinity and femininity will not settle into equilibrium and change will not occur.

Human development in Britain was arrested once before.  Vandals and Barbarians wrecked the Roman Empire across Europe, and their disruption extinguished the relatively civilised era of Pax Romana in Britain.  It was followed by one thousand years of backwardness, which became known as the middle-ages, or more accurately, the dark-ages.  Not much is known about that period of history because nothing much happened, and nothing much changed, and the authorities made sure the plebs remained ignorant.  The stagnation ended in the fifteenth century with the Renaissance, but a whole millennium was wasted.  If western civilization had not been held-back by superstitious religions and hypocritical politicians, it might have landed a rocket on the moon one thousand years earlier.

Natalie Bennett (Greens), Nicola Sturgeon (SNP), and Leanne Wood (Plaid Cymru) are the three female agents of change in this 2015 general election.  They are demonstrating the value of femininity in British politics.  They are different from ‘man-made’ female politicians who represent other parties; their ideas are original, they answer questions, and they say what they mean and they mean what they say.

They are up against a Tory-Labour-Liberal ménage à trois.  Cameron, Miliband, and Clegg are not the ‘Last of the Summer Wine¹¹’; they are the kitchen-sink soap-stars of real-life domestic tragedies.  Those double-dealing, second-rate, shysters will do nothing about the population explosion, the food crisis, or women’s liberation, but many British plebs will continue to vote for them.

Natalie Bennett will finish this campaign with a clear conscience.  She is right to keep ‘banging on’ about climate change.  It is likely to cause more poverty and hunger.  Farmers will struggle to adapt to increasingly frequent droughts and floods.  They will have to adopt new methods and practices.  As more British plebs become hungry, more of them will listen to the Green message.

Poverty remains the principal cause of hunger.  People remain poor because they lack resources; the wealth gap between north and south is as wide as ever; ‘west versus east’ power-struggles continue to disrupt the development of southern regions.

The Green Party must return to its roots.  It must insist that Britain takes measures to reduce its population.  Couples must be encouraged to have fewer children.  All immigration must cease.  All immigrants and their descendents who have settled in Britain since the Second World War must be returned to their countries of origin.  All bogus refugees and bogus asylum-seekers must be deported.

Higgins said:  ‘Mankind’s nightmare may literally foreshadow a rebirth.  Fundamental change only occurs in and through individuals.  Perhaps some of those who are thought today’s eccentrics or cranks, heretics or outcasts, may yet guide us through the maelstrom and fashion a safer more durable if always imperfect, post-catastrophic society beyond it.  Meanwhile, even the ‘Cassandras’ have their role.  Cassandra was not shunned because her prophecies turned out to be wrong but because they proved right.’

Ronald Higgins is still active.  Green Swipe has written to the BBC, and it has asked them to produce a follow-up programme.  They are considering it.

WINDUP

Notes:

1) The Ecology Party was the original name of the British Green Party.

2) The word ‘pleb’ is an abbreviation of plebeian.  British Conservative politicians use it to describe common people.

3) Flats are self-contained lodgings or apartments.

4) Metropolis is a science-fiction film which was directed by Fritz Lang in 1927.

5) RSPCA - Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals

6) Herbicides and pesticides

7) Beer

8) Cigarettes

9) Bet

10) The Valley of the Dolls is a classic American novel by Jacquelline Susann.

11) The Last of the Summer Wine was a long running British TV comedy series.  Its most popular characters were Foggy, Compo, and Clegg.

www.trusselltrust.org

www.wfp.org

www.thp.org

www.worldhunger.org

You may send your comments to greenswipe@gmail.com

Don’t miss our next post:

‘You’ve Been Conned – Multiculturalism’

‘peace man’ÿ☮[