June 1, 2017


The short answer is that the Conservatives are still on course for an excellent victory BUT the interesting answer is where the support for both leading parties appears to be coming from:
The Conservatives are gaining from UKIP, while Labour are pressing the Greens and the Liberals (especially the former) for support. Both the Left and Right are coalescing.

Date Conservative Labour UKIP Liberal Democrat Green
17/04/2017 42.8 25.5 11 10.7 4
18/04/2017 43.3 25.5 10.5 10.7 4
19/04/2017 44.3 25.3 9.8 10.8 3.8
20/04/2017 46.5 25.7 8.3 10.7 2.5
21/04/2017 46.5 26 8 10.7 2.5
22/04/2017 45.8 26.7 8.3 10.5 2.3
23/04/2017 45.8 27 8.3 10.5 2.3
24/04/2017 46.5 26.3 7.3 11.2 3
25/04/2017 46.7 26.5 7.2 10.8 2.7
26/04/2017 46.2 27 7 10.8 2.7
27/04/2017 46.5 27.7 6.5 10.7 2.3
28/04/2017 45.7 29.2 6.7 9.7 2.2
29/04/2017 45.7 29 6.7 9.7 2.2
30/04/2017 45.7 29 6.7 9.7 2.2
01/05/2017 45.7 29 6.7 9.7 2.2
02/05/2017 46.7 28.5 6.8 9.5 3.2
03/05/2017 46.5 28.5 6.3 9.8 2.7
04/05/2017 46.8 28.7 6.7 9.5 2.5
05/05/2017 46.5 29.3 6.5 9.8 2
06/05/2017 46.5 29.3 6.3 9.3 2.2
07/05/2017 46.8 29 6.5 9.2 2.3
08/05/2017 46.5 28.7 6.7 9.5 2.8
09/05/2017 46.8 28.7 6.2 9.3 3.2
10/05/2017 46.8 29 5.7 9.5 2.8
11/05/2017 46.7 29.7 5.8 9 2.8
12/05/2017 47.3 31 5 9 1.8
13/05/2017 47.3 30.8 4.8 9 1.8
14/05/2017 48 29.8 4.7 8.7 2.5
15/05/2017 47.8 29.8 4.8 8.2 2.8
16/05/2017 47.8 30 4.8 8.2 2.8
17/05/2017 47 31.5 5 8 2.8
18/05/2017 46.7 32.5 5.2 7.5 2.3
19/05/2017 46.2 33.5 4.7 7.7 2
20/05/2017 45 33.7 4.7 8 1.5
21/05/2017 45.3 33.8 4.3 8.2 1.5
22/05/2017 44.7 34 4.2 8.3 1.8
23/05/2017 45 33.8 3.7 8.3 2.2
24/05/2017 44.8 34.2 3.8 8.3 2.2
25/05/2017 44 35.3 4.3 8.3 1.8
26/05/2017 44.5 35.5 4.7 8.2 1.3
27/05/2017 44.2 35.8 4.5 8.3 1.2
28/05/2017 44.2 36 4.5 8.3 1.2
29/05/2017 44.2 35 4.5 8.3 1.5
30/05/2017 42.8 35.8 4.2 9 1.7
31/05/2017 42.7 36.3 4.2 8.7 1.5
Average 45.8 30.3 6.1 9.3 2.3
Current compared with start of campaign. 3.0 4.8 -4.9 -1.4 -1.7
Percentage (above) 7% 19% -45% -13% -41%

William Hague is fully committed to Cameron’s Fraud

February 22, 2016

The opinion piece in the Telegraph can be found here.

Few if any European leaders can any longer be under the illusion that Britain can be dragooned into a more centralised Union.

Hague is either lying or completely unaware of the paper-thin nature of this claim. The Prime Minister knows full well that the statement by the European Council of Ministers is only a statement of intent with regards to possible inclusion in the next treaty change.

The problem is that there is no treaty on the horizon. The French and Germans have both poured cold water on this idea.

The fact is that this statement of exemption from “ever closer union” without being included in the treaties is worthless. Every step towards “ever closer union” will involve and affect this country because the legal basis in located in the treaties, which have not been altered, nor will be altered.

The first of these is my strong belief that if the UK leaves the EU, Scotland is much more likely to leave the UK.

This statement is completely misleading. Hague is alluding to the threat by the Scots Nationalist leader, Nichola Sturgeon to call a snap referendum in the event of a Brexit vote.

The Scots would have no legal right to call such a referendum, any result would not be legally binding or valid and the Scots Nationalists would be guilty of sedition. The only way that the Scots could hold another referendum would be if they were granted on by act of Parliament.

Second, we need some kind of European Union to exist whether we are in it or not. Otherwise, Europe’s seething nationalisms and tensions will break loose again, as they did in the Balkans in the 1990s.

What happened in the Balkans was nothing to do with the European Union and everything to do with the suppression of religious and ethnic hatreds going back hundreds of years. This claim by the EU’s supporters for the EU to have been instrumental in securing peace is palpable nonsense. It could only apply to the former Yugoslavia, most of which is not even within the EU.

This is akin to the ludicrous claim that Russia fears the EU and desires its breakup. How many divisions does the EU have?

What Hague is claiming is that power has to be taken away from the populace into the hands of the enlightened pseudo-aristocracy of the EU in order to prevent the populace’s vile instincts from coming to the fore. His claim may even be attempting to refer to the silly argument that the EU is the reason why there has not been a militaristic Germany since 1945. Obviously nothing to do with NATO, the thorough-going reform of German culture and its constitution or the experience of two terrible wars which brought nothing but ruin to Germany. Obviously not.

If we leave the single market, the effect on business confidence and investment would be very damaging. But if we seek to stay in the single market, then that would certainly mean we would have to keep the rules, regulations, payments and freedom of movement of that market. The key difference would be we would no longer have any say over those things.

Here he is echoing his lying master. This is going to be the great refrain of the Europhiles – “in or out but take the consequences”. This sounds frightening until one realises that we’ve heard these lies for years.

Leaving the Single Market could be very foolish, even suicidal. That is why the sensible Eurosceptics have not advocated this “WTO”/”bi-lateral” route. The risks would be great. But even then, Britain would regain its position on the international bodies which draw up the regulatory agreements on trade and so forth. We would actually regain not just sovereignty but influence, contrary to the nostrum of being in a club of 28, where we have been outvoted 72 out of 72 times in twenty years.

This is why Flexcit has been advocated now for more than two years – this as a completed body of thought. If anyone would like a shorter copy, please read the thoughts of Owen Patterson on UK2020.

What we should do is rejoin the European Free Trade Association, from which we can negotiate membership of the European Economic Area. An agreement similar to that of Norway (the so-called Norway Option) would leave us both with access to the Single Market in terms of tariff barriers and technical trade barriers and give a crucial voice in how internationally agreed regulations (on whose councils the UK will sit) shall be implemented throughout the EEA, which includes the Single Market. We would be on the true councils of influence alongside Norway, Iceland and Switzerland and the EU itself as represented by the European Commission.

Better yet – we would not be obliged to accept EU regulations. We would have a right to refuse without penalty. The EU would cease to have influence or authority over the UK. We would regain, even with the EEA freedom of movement agreements, the right to block or halt immigration from the EU in the event that such movement placed an undue strain on national resources.

In the EEA, the UK would be a true partner state instead of a servile, subject state.

William Hague, like his lying master would rather remain in hoc to an autocratic, sclerotic institution with dreams of becoming a full state.

Leave Europe to its fantasies of reunion. Britain has a separate destiny.

Disney is Problematic (more First-World Problems)

February 8, 2016

The Washington Post has published a new article on Researchers have found a major problem with ‘The Little Mermaid’ and other Disney movies. It follows the usual path of “girls are oppressed” and here is some feminist theory to demonstrate this.

Unfortunately, the central premise of social constructionism is deeply flawed. Scientific studies have shown that sex differences manifest “in the pre-socialization stage of their cognitive development”.

This continues throughout childhood and is tied to the development of the brain.
There is also a simple problem with this theory. It’s all based on the simplistic idea that representation creates reality.
The basic thesis is this: Girls watch Disney. Girls learn how to behave.
Excuse me? You mean that their mothers and their friends have so little influence on their psychological development that little girls grow up passive, narcissistic and helpless?
There is a strong strain in Western culture of blaming representation (theatre, novels, comics, films, tv, video games) for what is perceived as aberrant behaviour in children, which has never been borne out.
This is the same strain of argument which argues that video games make for psychopathic killers (Jack Thompson) or woman-haters (Anita Saarkesian). It is a monomaniacal obsession with trivia, ignoring the far-more important effect of family and parenting.
This same argument has been tried with children’s toys (Sex-Specific Toy Preferences: Learned or Innate?). This does not hold up because it is an unscientific belief, rooted in a wish-fulfilment fantasy where the power of mind rules over the body and the human soul is plastic and subject to the will of the guardians of society.
These Disney films are very popular with young girls because the age group is already intensely gender-defined, which happens by the age of four. This process defies parenting wishes because it is a natural (yes, I’m using a signifier) outgrowth of normal development.
Did anyone else notice the choice of films studied? I notice that Wreck It Ralph was ignored, as was Toy Story (in any of the versions produced) or Big Hero 6 etc? No. Because those films are not princess-films. Disney produces more than just princess-films because it caters to a wide audience. Aladdin is the exception and Aladdin is a hero-tale aimed at all members of the family. The others are, broadly speaking, romance-tales and romance tales appeal to women and girls more than men and boys and is amply expressed in the market.
So why do the stories compliment girls on their looks?
Well, good looks attract attention. This is not just true for girls but for boys. A handsome boy has charisma amongst his friends and attracts female attention. It’s a simple part of sexual attraction and competition within our species. Good looks give pleasure to the viewer and praise for good looks gives pleasure to the possessor. This is well attested in the ancient sources, as we can see in the myth of Narcissus and the numerous beautiful girls pursued by amorous gods.
Conversely, ugliness repels. Again, this is attested in the ancients, such as the story of the Spartan princess, who born ugly, was taken to the shrine of Helen at Therapne. The divine Helen touched the girl-child’s head and prophesied that the girl would grow into a beauty (Herodotus). Women prize beauty because it is the quickest way to high value in the sexual market place – this is not just a pleasing appearance. Beauty indicates fertility and thus the probability of plentiful and healthy children. There is a great deal of truth, I believe, in the phrase “Built for the Stone Age”.
This sexual competition takes place primarily amongst women. One of the best measures against cruelty towards losers in this competition to counsel girls not to be cruel to girls who are not closest to the ideal. No one is crueller to girls than other girls.
So to return to my question: why do the stories compliment girls on their looks?
Because every girl wishes to be beautiful and noticed for her beauty. Yet the stories do not end with “what a pretty face”. The princess must also be kind, gentle and considerate of others. Again, from an evolutionary perspective, this makes sense. A woman who beautiful may bear healthy, good looking children but if she is cruel and selfish, not only is she likely to be unfaithful and endanger the family relationship, she will a bad mother to her children.
Note that this does not mean women who have strong characters are ipso facto bad mothers. Such would be a straw-man distortion of the argument. Strong characters in mothers are often desirable, the ancients again attesting to this. Coriolanus’ mother imploring her wronged son not to attack his own city. The famed strength of character of Aurellia, mother of the Gracchii. The biblical expression “the price of a good woman is above rubies”.
All these point toward the necessity of moral education of girls. We educate all children in Western society not to be cruel toward others because this is an altruistic end. The princess is not just beautiful but has a strong, well-balanced character, though the expression of this character changes with time. So, the ideal in the 1950s was the house-wife (an ideal is not an always expression of reality but often an aspiration). So the modern Disney films have princess-characters who are also invested with moral agency.
Belle chose to protect Beast, because she recognised his worth and saw through Gaston’s veneer of heroism. Gaston was a braggart and a bully, where as Beast had a noble heart hidden beneath his pride and suffering.
In the princess-tale, the beauty of the princess is an outward recognition of her noble character. It acts as a visual signifier yet does not complete the story. Often the princess has to overcome her own pride, usually because the hero is of a lower status than herself (see hypergamy). Other times, this dynamic is reversed, where female hypergamy is recognised in the heroine’s desire to marry the prince, who must overcome his pride because her character becomes essential to his completion as a hero and a man (as opposed to a boy).
The prince/hero in the tale is complimented for his achievements because men compete for status through ability. Yet still the hero must also demonstrate good character if he is to succeed. It is no good to compliment the hero on his looks – this would just inflate his self-regard and sabotage his abilities, thus his position within the group.
Why don’t we praise girls for achievements? Actually we do (Mulan is a great warrior; Anna in Frozen is brave and courageous to the point of recklessness). But in the sexual market place, achievements compliment the basics of the heroine. The vulnerability of women is child-bearing and rearing. Here the hero must act as the shield and this is implied in our requirement for the hero to achieve and show good character.
In all princess films, the father figure is weak. I note that this article did not pick up on this aspect of the tale. When the father is weak, the princess is placed in danger (sent to live with Beast, kidnapped, exiled or hunted) or has to leave the role of princess and behave as a hero, the key is the disruption of the family. In the latter sub-role (inversion of social role), the heroine discovers herself and self-reliance (she grows into a woman). In the former role, she is rescued by the hero (who has to become a man by doing so).
Where is her mother in these tales. Either ineffective, dead or acting as the voice of reason to a weak father. Again, here the parental influence on the princess is weak or at an end.
This points to a fundamental tenet of the princess-tale. The growth from child into adulthood. which is a symbolic act of rebirth, marked by the presence and danger of death (both physical and spiritual).
These tales appeal, not because they are instructional on how we should present ourselves but because they are moral tales, like Aesop, on how to be a good person.

I -The Market Solution: A soft landing

January 22, 2016

Nothing much to add here but I like the emphasis upon regaining our sovereignty and the exit as a process, not an event.

Bat Ye’or’s EURABIA: more relevant than ever

November 15, 2015

Clare is on the money. Prophets are never believed in their own time.

YDS: The Clare Spark Blog

anti-women-2Eurabia: The Euro-Arab Axis was written by Bat Ye’or and published in 2005 by Associated University Presses. The author had already published other books on this and related subjects, mostly in French and translated into English, Hebrew, and Russian. Her general terrain has been the transformation of Europe in its ill-conceived alliance with the Arab world; she dates the turning point in 1973 (the oil crisis), but also alludes to Charles De Gaulle’s foreign policies in the 1960s.

Her argument is easily summarized: European elites made common cause with Pan-Arab elites, establishing the EAD (Euro-Arab Dialogue) to further the aims of 1. Muslims interested in re-establishing the caliphate that would compensate for its losses in Spain and Southern Europe during the late medieval and early Renaissance periods; and 2. A mostly French elite that wanted to challenge US supremacy in the world after the second world war.
The result was…

View original post 362 more words

A Standalone Reserve

September 22, 2015

Independent Britain

After lunch, Dr Richard North returned to the podium to deliver what was undoubtedly the most inspiring talk of the day; the culmination of all the groundwork laid in the previous sessions.

As a supplement to the “conventional campaign”, which an establishment organisation like the Electoral Commission will expect and, indeed, demand to see, the RPG also intends to mobilise “something special and separate” that “will win the real battle for us”. This campaign component depends intensely upon “understanding the strategy and developing the tactics” to make the strategy work.

The primary role of this “reserve structure” is to back-up the conventional “leave” campaign and rescue it from the inherent failures already identified—specifically, the lack of strategic co-ordination among the various campaign groups and the absence of a consistent message. To illustrate the point, Dr North turned our attention to the 1964 British film classic, Zulu, which he says…

View original post 1,141 more words

What Russian Intelligence Knows About Hillary Clinton

September 6, 2015

Fake but tremendous fun!

The XX Committee

It is my privilege to reveal to you this highly classified National Security Agency intercept which reveals just what Russian intelligence knew about Hillary Clinton and her email security problems. While I believe that classified information should remain classified, this is a matter of such national importance, since Hillary could be our next Commander-in-Chief, that I am going whistleblower here and leaking this historic document.


TO: Q07


DOI: 23052009 1045Z

This intercept was received by an NSA covert SIGINT site. It is a conversation between two (2) senior officials of the Russian General Staff Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU). It discusses GRU SIGINT intercepts of conversations between high-ranking US Persons (USPs) in their official USG capacity and is to be handled on an EYES ONLY basis. FBI/NSD has been informed. White House/NSC and STATE are not – repeat NOT – authorized to receive this information due to…

View original post 1,212 more words