The Grand Betrayal

The Grand betrayal.

Democracy betrayed

All around the world the word democracy is being deliberately devalued. The expectations that people have when promised a democratic government, is being undermined. People are losing trust in democracy, and this is no accident. From Venezuela to China, from Russia to Britain, the people are told they vote in a democracy.

In some countries, especially those that only allow one political party party, this is just a farce, but the people are still told theirs is a democratic nation. In other countries, a degree of democracy exists until an extremist faction—left or right—gain control, and then the very idea of secret, free, open, and honest elections, become only memories; yet the people are still told they live in a democracy.

In a true democracy the will of the people, expressed in secret, honest ballots, becomes the policy of the government. The recent experience in Britain is evidence that there is a grand betrayal of this basic democratic principle. If the basic principle is discarded, then democracy itself has become a sham, a fake.

Britain held a national referendum to ask the voters to express their desire, either to stay part of the EU or leave it. It is important to realize that the vote was not to alter geography, but to alter the political governance of the nation. By a relatively narrow majority the vote was to leave. The number of votes cast was large and while the majority, when measured as a percentage, was not big, it was around a million more votes cast to leave than those to remain. Democracy should be clear, leaving the EU has to be government policy.

Democracy was betrayed. The elite, most of whom wanted to remain, were aghast, horrified, and outraged. Their attitude appears to be summed up by their annoyance that the majority of voters did not simply vote as this elite told them to. It is not easy to find why the collective elite, the “liberal left” who are the self-proclaimed rulers of political correctness; want to stay in the EU. It may be that since most are wealthy, they see the EU as guardians of the status quo, or it may be that they are a group, which includes just about all the managing bureaucrats, and they know the EU is the most bureaucratic, controlling group ever invented. It may also be true that they wanted this since remaining in the EU dilutes democracy in every member nation. The betrayal came in the form of a very well-financed and organized attack on the result, every legal avenue was attempted, every possible outlet for fake news was used. Every media outlet was conscripted to a sustained effort to frustrate the will of the people. When it became clear they could not legitimately stop Britain from leaving the EU, they used dubious political processes, including changing centuries of parliamentary convention regarding the impartiality of the speaker of the house and the governing relationship between the government, the house of commons, and the house of Lords. They also started political maneuvering to ensure the negotiations (that started between officials of the EU, and officials from the British government, regarding the apparatus for leave the EU, and the continued commercial and social relationships between British companies, and the people, and their counterparts in various nations of Europe) were deliberately obstructed, and biased in a manner to make the terms of leaving a disadvantage to Britain. They seem to have done this out of spite, in an effort to punish the people for daring to ignore the demands of the elite. Their main tool was to say that Britain could not leave the EU without an agreement—without a deal. Would any sane person enter into any sort of negotiation, and declare at the start, that they have to accept some sort of deal, however bad? In just about any set of negotiations, it is only the fact that either party can leave without a deal that makes both parties seek a reasonable compromise, and a mutually acceptable deal. If a car salesman knows you can walk out without buying anything, you get a better price than if you tell him in advance, that you will not leave until you have bought something.

Every aspect of the media was conscripted to fully support this nonsense, always demanding they be publicly told what the British negotiation strategy and aims etc. were. This is a sabotage to any hope of Britain getting a reasonable deal from EU; why else would anyone in public ask for advanced details of a negotiation strategy? Britain will get a rubbish deal on leaving, and this is down to three things. The remainers, and their attempts to stop a no deal. The inept government negotiators and the media always try to tell the EU what Britain is thinking. They are the saboteurs. They are to blame for a poor exit deal, and they should be the ones who pay the price, not the public or the tax payers. These three factions are all complicit in the betrayal of democracy itself.

The remain advocates now claim the referendum was a mistake—that is, they claim that democracy should not have been allowed to say leave. They choose to ignore the situation that was building up before the referendum; if there had never been a referendum, the dissatisfaction with the EU would have grown and found no outlet. Political and social pressure would have increased with no democratic safety valve; this is what is still happening in the rest of the EU, and pressure that continually builds up leads to explosion.

Many of those expressing extremes of disquiet over the vote leave referendum; are young people who are being encouraged by the far left. It has also to be recognized that some are being mobilised by the far right to agitate for leaving. The far let and the far right both wish to destabilise democracy and overturn it, and the young and inexperienced are perfect tools for this job. They may shout loud that they support democracy, but they actively seek to overthrow a democratic decision, only the naïve and the extremists can do this, saying one thing, yet doing another and still believing both actions are right.

A Harvard neurology professor is on record as saying that the teenage brain is different from an adult brain. There are physical reasons that teenage “feelings” are more intense than they will be in later life. It is also now an accepted fact that the average brain takes a long time to form completely, and in a teenage brain it is only around 80 percent completed, and the synapses are not fully wired until a person is in their mid to late 20s. In this period, when the brain is not fully wired, a person behaves more impulsively, and has less reflective thinking than they will when they're older. This is known to political scientists and it's also why the socialist left want to lower voting age and try to get young people out on the streets protesting. It is a cynical ploy to gain recruits and force their views on the whole electorate; and to do so before these “cannon fodder” activists start to actually think about the issues, especially longer term issues.

The EU governing bureaucracy has a history of allowing public votes, then if they do not like the result, ordering another vote, and if necessary another, until they get a result THEY want, then the matter is closed forever. This is not true democracy, it is manipulated and distorted democracy, part of this grand betrayal. In Britain, a new leader of a party calling itself the Liberal Democrats; has openly declared that if elected, she will overturn the democratic decision of the people. Those seeking to overturn and frustrate the referendum are openly doing what is being done, rather more subtly, in other parts of the world. Beware of those claiming to uphold democracy, in so many cases they are actively trying to ensure it does not work.