What Jeremy Corbyn, like David Cameron, understands about the cold, dark heart of the British public - leave compassion to journalists and Lib Dems. Voters want a dash of acid.Oh yes, I can relate to that and so, it seems, can the "cold-hearted" British public:
I think Mr Parris is on to something. When the little boy refugee was found drowned on a beach in Greece, the media tugged hearstrings for the plight of all refugees. But I found a much colder attitude amonst people I knew. There was universal sadness that such a small child should suffer such a tragic fate, but that sadness did not translate to a willingness to be open armed to every refugee. Rather, the sadness was offset by questions about why the family left a safe location in Turkey, the responsibility of that family, and the responsibilitry of the people smugglers. I do not think this is new - the British have always been a less emotional, more pragmatic, more realistic, people than, say, some continentals. Whether Jeremy Corbyn, champion of the underdog, will connect to this realism is another matter - I doubt it.In came an SJW, to whose guff about a fairer society and equality I had to reply:
You really believe Marx cared, don't you? Moses Mordecai Levi's flawed analysis, leaving out key required actions and conveniently forgetting that society never gets to the Stage 5 nirvana, actually knew that fullwell, as he was backed by people wanting society irreversibly caught in Stage 4, while the same ruling elite hoarded the shekels as per usual.I believe The Who had a little ditty to that effect. The problem, for all SJWs through to those who see themselves as the compassionate centre-left, e.g. Liz Kendall, is that they are naive. They do not think through consequences, nor take into account Them.
And if you ignore Them, you have a flawed analysis. Thank goodness many more people are seeing now what we were banging on about 7 years ago. "Them" means the UN, EU, royalty, Masons, Tavistock, crony capitalists like JPM and GS, the old money, faux Jews like Rothschild, then Benjamin, Alinsky, plus today, Sutherland, Mandelson, Blair and the rest of the visible spectrum - Osbourne is one, as is Peston, as are other key writers, Common Purpose, Internet of all Things, Information Awareness, Common Core in America and World Core Curriculum elsewhere, Chatham House, Strong, Gore and the environmental Shambalists, feminazis ... and so on.
I'm well aware that many readers of a sort of vague leftwing libertarian mode see a post such as this as cold-hearted, even Tory. No, Osborne is your true Tory, if you define coldhearted as Tory. Hence Cameron cannot rid himself of Osborne as the latter is their man, running Cameron.
It's always been - Kissinger ran Nixon, Bush, then Cheney took over, Colonel House ran Wilson, Chatham runs our cabinet members. The CFR had sufficient clout to get Bush, Martin and Fox together to have a shot at the supra-state, the NAU or as it was subsequently named, the SPPNA. March 23rd, 2005. NAFTA was the forerunner. Quite a few other Tories are quite compassionate, e.g. Davies, Carswell - they're the rebels, the EUsceptics.
We're blunt because we're exasperated at the dishonesty of Them and the way the naive lap it up through the captured media. Knowing fullwell that the British public are largely compassionate, not coldhearted in the least - look at the level of volunteering, the way we used to support charities before they were shown up as scams - Them know most people will gladly take in 500,000 "refugees" because of a contrived picture of a tragic child's body.
Where the supportive left and us fall out is that we can see straight through the PTB and why they used a tragedy, why they continue to use atrocity after atrocity to further their agenda. And yes, I still bang on about WTC7, which stands out a mile, the precursor of the already organized by 2001 Patriot Act, waiting to be rolled out. They see through the Kochs all right but have a blindspot when it comes to Soros.
Katie Hopkins is the end-product of the exasperation. People see the coldhearted exasperation but not what led to it. I attacked Benjamin and Marcuse and one reader came in and called me a Tory, the worst insult he could think of, because I had dared to disparage his university years reading who present themselves, natch, as the good guys.
And the infested university staff aid and abet it, nay introduce it. I was in there, I taught primary, secondary and tertiary, I do know that of which I write. It's the naivety but no one likes to be called naive, do they? I'm fine with it - I'm still naive on many things and that's only because I haven't yet read or heard them. Once I see or hear them, I'll be less politically naive.
But at an absolute minimum, one really does need, if interested in politics, to at least know about the machinations of Them.
Which doesn't address the coldhearted British public directly. There is, as well as the factor mentioned above, a certain penny-pinching, charity begins at home attitude and it's a product of a cold climate, austerity for decades whilst the US and Australia were living a more luxurious lifestyle, the utter bastards in charge behind those in Westminster ... and so on.
We are what we are. But it's really not lack of compassion. We're quite compassionate towards those who deserve compassion.