Questioning Johnsonism Group.

questioningJohnsonism - Copy

Questioning Johnsonism Group.

[Posted By Lara Keller 16/4/20 ]   anchorTableSmall - Copy Blog Table Of Contents

Articles questioning the nature of the UK Boris Johnson Government and the hard-right of the UK Conservative party (Cummings, Gove, Duncan-Smith etc). [ Questioning Johnsonism Group  ].

Articles 2020:      (4)

4. A Postcard To Dominic.

3. Exposing The Real Hard Right Libertarian Politics Of Dominic Cummings During The Covid-19 Crisis.

2. Cull Cummings The Anger Of An Old Soldier.

1. Cull Dominic Cummings’ Influence.


A Postcard To Dominic.

dominicCummingsNostafaru - Copy

A Postcard To Dominic.

[Posted By Lara Keller 10/4/20 Updated 16/4/20 ]   anchorTableSmall - Copy Blog Table Of Contents

Send Dominic Cummings -the hard-right, highly destructive, enabler, liar, manipulator and special adviser to the UK government- a postcard wishing that he gets well soon from alleged Covid-19 symptoms. Here is an example I have seen, he has is and has been compared to Nosferatu.

getWellSoonDominic - Copy

The reverse side is a more human response, to the wit who worried that Dominic Cummings was recovering. It appears the address is very well known, as Cummings claims to be anti-elite activist while living in a 1.6 million town house in Islington in London, bought in cash by his father in law Sir Humphry Wakefield. You could not make it up.

getWellSoonDominic2 - Copy

Dominic Cummings is well known in Islington, and often doorstepped by the media. I believe Thomas Hutter was the character who exposes Nosferatu in the silent film of the same name.

cummingsAddress - Copy

It is believed that Dominic Cummings suffers from High Functioning Anti Social Personality Disorder, in which most ordinary people simply do not exist in his emotional universe. Dominic and other hard-right activists have used a period of failed politics to lie to ordinary people that is disastrous to their own long-term democratic interests. Dominic is congenitally indifferent and aggressive, rather than evil. He is very intelligent but not a genius. The resemblance to a silent vampire Nosferatu is oddly apt.

nostefaru1 - Copy


Exposing The Real Hard Right Libertarian Politics Of Dominic Cummings During The Covid-19 Crisis.

dominiccummingsWarning - Copy

Exposing The Real Hard Right Libertarian Politics Of Dominic Cummings During The Covid-19 Crisis.

[Posted By Lara Keller 8/4/20 Updated 16/4/20 ]   anchorTableSmall - Copy Blog Table Of Contents

[ Source = Coronavirus diary: Libertarians, Pandemics and Populism. Author: Miles King. 23/3/2020. ]

[Start Extract] 

[Note: Essential article on the real politics of Dominic Cummings beyond the smoke of his populist antics. Article starts describing criticism of people ignoring coronavirus instructions, and where this obsessive individualism comes from….]

“….. The Government, now being run by the likes of Dominic Cummings and his mates from the Vote Leave campaign, who are in turn drawn from a small cabal of activists on the libertarian right – all of whom work for a small group of ‘think tanks’ mostly based in Tufton Street, Westminster. These are the people who have spent the last twenty years quietly plugging away at a narrative, a narrative which finally came to fruition in the Brexit campaign.

The narrative is simple – Government is bad. The state is bad, it is by its very nature oppressive. It inevitably gets in the way of the Natural Order of things. The Natural Order is that everyone is an individual and that individual liberty is more important than anything else. And that the natural collective of individual liberty is enshrined in the Market. Public Spending is bad because it’s Taxpayers Money, being stolen from them by the state. Public services are therefore bad and need to be privatised. The private sector is part of the Natural Order of things and will always do a better job than the public sector. Rich people are rich because they worked harder or deserve to be rich. The poor are either lazy or stupid. Interestingly this point is one of the intersectional points between the Libertarian (or Hard) Right and the Authoritarian or Far Right. The Eugenic theories espoused by the likes of Toby Young and Dominic Cummings seek to provide a pseudo-scientific justification for the argument that ‘the poor are genetically inferior, which is why they will always be poor.’

Everything that gets in the way of the Natural Order must be swept away. This includes Regulation, the Civil Service, The BBC, and anyone who seeks to challenge the narrative of the Natural Order. Money should also have its own liberty, and be free to flow wherever it can. If that means it all ends up in the pockets of multi-billionaires, massive transglobal corporations and offshore tax havens, that is part of the Natural Order.

Naturally multi-billionaires, massive transglobal corporations and offshore tax havens are the places where money also flows from, into the coffers of those Think Tanks in Tufton Street – the Taxpayers Alliance, Policy Exchange, The Institute of Economic Affairs, The Adam Smith Institute, the Centre for Policy Studies, etc etc.

Think back over the past 20 years and there have been some very significant victories by the Libertarian Right

They saw off plans for the UK to join the Euro.

They put a massive hole in the public’s perception of trust in (Westminster) politicians with the expenses scandal.

They cemented the idea that public spending was bad in the media. It’s a basic Libertarian tenet, but it was dressed up as Austerity in the wake of the 2008 financial crash.

They saw off electoral reform in the no 2 AV campaign.

They poisoned the mind of the public against the EU resulting in the Brexit win. In doing so they simultaneously exploited the rise of populism across Europe (and more widely) and the opportunities to be gained from weaponising social media as a propaganda tool.

Having created this narrative so successfully, [Dominic] Cummings and his Tufton Street mates seized power in 2019. Let’s face it, with Jeremy Corbyn and his own little cabal running the Labour Party into the ground, and with a pliant media to pump out their slogans, it was, in hindsight, an easy win. The ground was prepared to transform Britain – or perhaps Greater England, as Northern Ireland would need to be sacrificed to have any decent sort of trade deal with both the US and the EU, while Scotland would only become ever more restive – into their dream: the small state, everything privatised, dream. With the clown Johnson as their front man/patsy, the stage was set.

Then came the Coronavirus, like Banquo at Macbeth’s feast. Or Thanos, if you prefer a modern analogy. The natural response from the Natural Order boys (and they are almost all boys), was ‘it’s all part of the natural order, we must let the virus spread through the population so the healthy will survive and everyone will have herd immunity.’ That’s straightforward Social Darwinism, the survival of the richest, who can disappear off to their second homes in the Caribbean or sail out to safe places in their superyachts. Once it became clear that not only would half a million people die in very short order of CV-19, but many others would also die because the NHS had collapsed under the strain, panic set in. The awful truth dawned – The Government would have to Do Something.

Consider what the exquisite messaging that had been deployed by [Dominic] Cummings & His Mates:

Don’t Trust Politicians. They are all self-serving liars.

Take Back Control

Give the People The Power to Decide for Themselves.

The People’s Parliament.

The People’s Budget.

You get the idea. The Libertarians aren’t interested in populism other than as a mean to their ends, which is dismantling state and public power.

Now, the Government was going to have to take control, to start telling people what to do. The messages are simple – wash your hands and keep 2m away from other people. But the messages coming from Johnson and the Government have been disastrous. Firstly they prefer to persuade, the Nudge Unit, another bit of fake science, was tasked with producing messages to persuade, and came up with the Herd Immunity line. Secondly they gave the job to inveterate liar Johnson.

Not surprisingly the messages have failed to get through. Instead we’ve lurched through a series of mishaps and delays, before finally closing pubs and other public gathering places, finally closing schools. Weeks have been wasted.

Instead of a wall to wall public information campaign we have dribs and drabs, a daily press conference with Johnson at the helm, automatically negating any credibility it might have.

But the biggest problem is that, having told the public for years to mistrust politicians, take back control and decide things for themselves, that is exactly what a significant chunk of the public are doing. Can they really be blamed? This, coupled with a traditional ‘I’m alright Jack’ British exceptionalism, will prove, is proving fatal.

Given that in order to be effective, a large section of the public need to act on the key messages (hand washing and social distancing), two paths now offer themselves.

The ‘Herd Immunity’ path is still there. Without a massive behavioural change from the public, the virus will spread, exponentially. The NHS will fall over. Half a million and more will die in a very short time. Mass Graves. Essential workers not at their stations. The fabric of society will be threatened, as food and energy supplies come under pressure. The Army will be on the streets.

The other path is scarier for the Libertarians. It’s a strong state, verging on the authoritarian, as has already happened in France, Spain and Italy. Permission is needed to venture outside your home. Gatherings are banned. Perhaps even the state takes over the media to pump out the necessary messages. The state has already taken over paying people’s wages, or at least made several large steps in that direction. Next will be essential services being brought into state ownership, including the food supply. This is, after all, what happened in the last great national crisis, World War Two.

Which would you prefer?”

[End Extract]

Why South Korea Approach To Covid 19 Can Be Different.

covid2 - Copy

Why South Korea Approach To Covid 19 Can Be Different.

[Posted By Lara Keller 26/3/20 Updated 18/4/20 ] anchorTableSmall - Copy Blog Table Of Contents

Business men like Tim Martin of the UK Pub Chain JD Wetherspoon, have irresponsibly moaned that South Korea has managed to fight Covid-19 without lock-downs. This is an argument based on shameless ignorance.

According to South Korea’s rapid coronavirus testing, far ahead of the U.S., could be saving lives [LA Times, 14/3/2020]. The Korea Centers for Disease Control and Prevention responded to past outbreaks of MERS and Zika viruses by creating the infrastructure and resources of a new system for rapid mass testing.

They started this system as soon as the Covid-19 outbreak was reported in nearby China. Preparation allowed for a rapid response to the growing number of cases, which involved tracing the contacts of infected people. Under a preemptive approach people who might be infected were pursued. While full government transparency raised awareness among the public.

Even with this system the city of Korean city Daegu had to be locked down. There also appears also to be a high cultural predisposition to voluntary cooperation in Korean culture. In a letter in the New York times the strategy was summarized: “From an early stage, the Korean government has set key principles to combat Covid-19: Be quick, transparent and pre-emptive, …..” Someone should tell bar room experts like Tim Martin, that the South Korean system is the result of good government intervention and a culture of public  cooperation.

Cull Cummings The Anger Of An Old Soldier.

dominicCummingsv2 - Copy

Cull Cummings, The Anger Of An Old Soldier.

[Posted By Lara Keller 23/3/20 Updated 12/6/20 ]   anchorTableSmall - Copy Blog Table Of Contents

A satirical poem of utter disgust.

There was a young drunk who left Oxford,
He tried to sell the Russians Corruption,
Finding alcohol fueled rhetoric was his vocation,
He went to Newcastle to sell them–
not taking back more local control by – devolution,
Graduating to bigger lies with Brexit,
He sold it on oath as a benefit for the nation.

Retired folk like me are proud of my nation,
So having fought for my country in more than one war,
And feeling no need for more exploration,
I felt it was my obligation,
To put my trust in the verity of the Vote Leave declaration.

Now I know Cummings is a shit down to his core.
Such a manipulative sociopath of morbid tendency,
who would rather I was dead of covid-19 asphyxia,
Than his blue blood friends get a dip in their dividends.

I have been betrayed,
But his face is my consolation,
He looks less like Dorian and more like the painting,
And so sweet drink do us a favour,
Pickle his liver and with sweeter sewage float him,
surely on that old river of sane moderation,
Who with cleansing design, flushes out the mistakes in time.

[ by D.W Sunday 22/3/2020 ]

Cull Dominic Cummings’ Influence.

dominiccummingsmustgoMra2020 - Copy

Cull Dominic Cummings’ Influence.

[ Posted by Lara Keller 22/3/2020 Updated 16/4/2020] anchorTableSmall - Copy Blog Table Of Contents

There needs to be a Cull of Dominic Cummings’ influence on UK Government Policy. His contempt for the ordinary people of the UK is entirely obvious. His Brexit campaign was built on huge lies. It claimed to want to improve the lives of ordinary people in the UK. It succeeded because of the lack of anyone offering a credible alternative. Now the benefits of Brexit are shown as to be the exact opposite.

Cummings comes from an entitled privileged background and has never succeeded in anything he has done that involves the real world, rather than the rhetoric of political pressure groups. According to Dan Hodges a journalist at the right wing UK newspaper the Mail On Sunday, a civil servant leaked this damning assessment of Cummings: “He basically reads books by experts and thinks he’s assimilated that information and understands it as well as the writer.” The man is deluded, with a habit of showing contempt for people around him.

He is an Oxford graduate who got a First in Ancient and Modern History. He was greatly influenced by his mentor the right wing academic Norman Stone, who specialized in the military history of Imperial Germany. Stone was a supporter of Margaret Thatcher, and defender of Pinochet’s mass torturing Chilean dictatorship. Stone was a heavy drinking nasty opinionated gifted sociopath, not unlike Cummings himself. Dominic Cummings has an obsession with Bismarck, the ultra cynical conservative German chancellor who had contempt for democracy. Bismarck unbalanced Europe by creating a Unified German state, whose foreign policy and military continued to be dominated by a small clique centered on the Emperor, that ultimately dumped him.

Now Cummings has been revealed again as a sociopathic eugenicist, who was arguing until recently that old poor pensioners in the UK should be culled by coronavirus in the interests of the wealthy. In an article in the UK Sunday Times on 22nd March 2020: “At a private engagement at the end of February, Cummings outlined the government’s strategy. Those present say it was ‘herd immunity, protect the economy and if that means some pensioners die, too bad.’ ” [Sunday times, “Coronavirus: ten days that shook Britain — and changed the nation for ever.”,…/coronavirus-ten-days-that-shoo… ]

sundayTimes22Mar2020 - Copy

Cummings should not be advising any democratic government, he and his putrid influence, must be culled from UK government. He needs time to dry out, and examine his own deficiencies rather than those of others. He is threatening legal action due the Sunday Times article, time will tell if this arrogance is his undoing.

dominicCummings - Copy

Basic 101 Statistics On Covid-19.

covid19 - Copy

Basic 101 Statistics On Covid-19.

[Posted By Lara Keller 21/3/20 Updated 18/4/20 ] anchorTableSmall - Copy Blog Table Of Contents
Perspective on Covid-19 statistics and normal flu seasons: Social media has attracted posts claiming that Covid-19 outbreak is comparable to a normal flu season, and government restrictions are therefore unnecessary. This is close to the genocidal stupidity of the climate change denying fraudsters.

1. Looking at US CDC stats (compatible to UK) in the bad year of 2018, 0.13 % who got flu died and 1.8% needed hospitalization. Compares to 2% – 3% death rate for covid-19. Roughly 20 times higher.

2. The first world advantage in critical care is obviously lost when intensive care units are overloaded. In a normal flu season UK NHS critical care for example is reported as nearing capacity.

3. Last bit on this. Disease stats are difficult. Under-reporting of cases reduces death rate figure, while time lag between getting disease and dying with a spreading pandemic increases actual death rate figure. Bio-security report above incorporates SARS coronavirus data in taking account of these factors.

There is no journalistic excuse for the media to pander to the views of climate change deniers or Covid-19 emergency deniers. In contrast both should be exposed as dangers to effective public freedom of information.

Syria And The Responsibility To Empower.

responsibilityToEmpowerv2 - Copy

Syria And The Responsibility To Empower.

[ Posted by Lara Keller 7/3/2020 Updated 15/4/2020] anchorTableSmall - Copy Blog Table Of Contents

The “Responsibility To Empower” should be the cornerstone of political relations domestic or foreign, because nothing can be justified without it, and all constructive actions can be justified with it. (I leave the reasoning that supports this statement as an exercise for you general reader).

The ten year long war in Syria shows there must be a “Responsibility To Empower” (beyond R2P) built into international relations, with the focus on human beings not states. The current international order is based on the politics of the inevitable of the end twentieth century.

The core idea that authoritarian countries will “catch up” with democratic representative governance is absurdly complacent in the gloom of Assad’s Political Genocide powered by Russian and Chinese regimes.

The lack of strong centralist political ideals in the West and the growing success of authoritarianism – at least from an elitist perspective – in a world of mounting crisis of nature, is a threat stronger than the West’s walls, both physical and mental.

If you wish to imagine the future then think what dignity means. To all those apologists for dictatorship, imagine Tommy Robinson (UK Far Right politician-thug) being the law not being arrested by the law, running the prisons not being in them, deciding what is true from false. Understand that this is what dictatorship really means.

Why inaction in Syria has been the Green Light to the New Cold War, the West will lose.

wakeUp - Copy

Why inaction in Syria has been the Green Light to the New Cold War, the West will lose.

[ Posted by Lara Keller 16/2/20 Updated 7/3/20] anchorTableSmall - Copy Blog Table Of Contents

The Syrian Revolution is being ground out under the boots of the Assad, Khamenei and Putin regimes, frozen in the snow or burnt alive in the torture centres. No need to look for Left or Right in the West, stick a label of “extremist” and “Iraq” on it all, and ignore it. Nothing.

They say Syria is in the sphere of influence of Russia and Iran, and this is the New Cold War, not the West’s business. CRAP. This Cold War is about promoting client authoritarianism by Russian and Chinese regimes, WITHOUT any ideology or restraint on the terror to create and preserve them. Inaction on Syria has been the huge Green Light to the Russian and Chinese regimes in this New Cold War.

Meanwhile Trump is the president for the last century (that is his appeal), and so are his anti-war opponents stuck in the past. The West needs an active “pro-representative governance humanitarian” foreign policy (that it has never really had) to compete with the cynicism of the Russian and Chinese regimes. Who out there is really awake to demand this? Anyone?

More information see:

Jeremy Corbyn’s pacifist illusion.

corbynStopTheWarEconomist - Copy

Jeremy Corbyn’s pacifist illusion (2018).

By Bagehot, “Economist”, 19th April 2018, Source=

[ Author Bagehot, Posted by Lara Keller 25/1/20 Updated 7/3/20] anchorTableSmall - Copy Blog Table Of Contents

The Labour leader’s reluctance to use force threatens to make the world a more dangerous place Britain.

GEORGE ORWELL wrote, a little wickedly, in “The Road to Wigan Pier” that the British left acts as an irresistible magnet to cranks of every variety: fruit-juice drinkers, nudists, sandal-wearers, sex-maniacs, “nature cure” quacks, and, a particular peeve of his, pacifists. On the whole the Labour Party has done an admirable job of keeping its crank-wing under control when it comes to serious issues like national security. Ernest Bevin was one of the architects of NATO. Nye Bevan slammed supporters of unilateral nuclear disarmament with a rhetorical flourish about sending a foreign secretary “naked into the conference chamber”. Tony Blair’s failure, if anything, was to go too far in the use of force.

There are two exceptions to this tradition. One was in 1980-83, when Michael Foot committed Labour to unilateral nuclear disarmament and shrinking the armed forces. That hardly mattered because Foot was crushed under the wheels of Margaret Thatcher’s chariot in the general election of 1983. Another was in 1932-35, when the party was led by a committed pacifist, George Lansbury. In 1933 Labour’s annual conference passed a resolution calling for “the total disarmament of all nations” and pledging never to take part in any war. The party routinely opposed rearmament. This mattered enormously. Adolf Hitler and his confrères took it as evidence that they could proceed with impunity.

Enter Jeremy Corbyn. Today’s world has more than a whiff of the 1930s about it. The old order is shaky. Strongmen are on the march. Wars on the periphery are threatening to spread. And the leader of the Labour Party is talking about peace. The big difference this time is that Mr Corbyn is much more powerful than Lansbury ever was. He has a tight grip on his party apparatus and is the most likely winner of the next general election.

Mr Corbyn says that he is not a pacifist. He is willing to sanction the use of force in certain circumstances—“under international law and as a genuine last resort”—and gives the second world war as an example of a conflict he would have been willing to support. It is true that he is not a pacifist, but not for the high-minded reasons that he gives. He has spent his life opposing the use of force by Western governments. He not only objected to the Iraq war, and acted as chairman of the Stop the War Coalition in 2011-15. He also opposed the West’s decision to strike against Serbia’s Slobodan Milosevic in 1999. He not only spent his youth campaigning against the Vietnam war and nuclear weapons. He has also been a longtime critic of NATO.

But his conscience has been less sensitive when it comes to opposing the use of force by anti-Western regimes or by various non-state actors. He half-justified Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in 2014, saying that the roots of the conflict lay in “belligerence” from the West and that Vladimir Putin was “not unprovoked”. He has often found time to hold meetings with left-wing groups that have sanctioned the use of violence to achieve their aims. In 1984, a few weeks after an IRA bomb nearly killed Thatcher (and did kill five others) at the Conservative Party conference in Brighton, he invited Gerry Adams, the leader of the IRA’s political wing, to Parliament for a reception. The essence of Corbynism is the rejection of one of the basic tenets of British foreign policy: that you side with the West, rather than its enemies. He is a pacifist of ideological convenience rather than principle.

Two noxious events in the past two months—a poisoning in Salisbury and a chemical attack in Syria—have given a vivid sense of what Mr Corbyn’s quasi-pacifism means in practice. He has repeatedly raised questions about the government’s (and indeed the West’s) version of events. He has called for the government to delay acting until international bodies have had their say—despite the fact that, in the case of Syria, Russia’s ability to veto any decision by the UN means that this would be like waiting for Godot.

Mr Corbyn’s prevarications are a reminder of what a risk Britain would be taking with its foreign policy if it sent Mr Corbyn to Downing Street in the next election, which is due in 2022 but could happen earlier given the government’s lack of a majority and the agonies of Brexit. A Corbyn government would weaken Britain’s relations with its allies. The United States might well refuse to share sensitive information with a leader who has built his career on anti-Americanism. It would weaken NATO, since Mr Corbyn has refused to say whether he believes in Article 5 (which states that an attack on one is an attack on all) and has opposed the use of nuclear weapons (bizarrely, he supports maintaining Britain’s nuclear submarines but not arming them). It would also embolden Mr Putin, who could assume that, through the UN, he could exercise a veto over British foreign policy—and thereby neutralise one of the world’s strongest military powers and one of the West’s most consistent champions.

Nudists in the conference chamber.

The classic objection to pacifism is that it makes conflict more likely, because bullies conclude that they can act unpunished. This is even more true of Mr Corbyn’s quasi-pacifism. It insists on erecting endless obstacles to the West’s use of force, from the seemingly reasonable (such as a parliamentary debate before the use of force), to the deliberately impossible, such as international consensus. At the same time, it makes endless excuses for the use of force by the West’s enemies.

In 1935, as the strongmen flexed their muscles, the Labour Party replaced the hapless Lansbury with Major Clement Attlee, who combined a vigorous support for Britain’s entry into the second world war with unceasing work to found the post-war welfare state. Today, alas, Labour’s parliamentary party is bereft of Attlees. Meanwhile, the party in the country is dominated by sandal-wearers and nature-cure quacks, who are willing to give the slippery Mr Corbyn the benefit of the doubt in return for the vague promise of a more just society.

This article appeared in the Britain section [Economist] of the print edition under the headline “Jeremy Corbyn’s pacifist illusion”.