Socialism in Britain 2024
Socialism at work:-
A new socialist government has come in, elected with about one third of votes cast in a very low voter turnout. They claim amazement that the national finances are in such a bad way—yet, unless they are stupid, they, like everyone else knew the economy was still suffering due to global problems. They declare things so bad they must raise taxes and cut benefits to pensioners; a generalised group who are experienced enough to never vote socialist.
They then, despite all the claims of no money, they award large pay increases to state employees, union members (who just happen to have financed their election campaign) and they embark on renationalising the railways. Increasing political indoctrination of children in schools. They spend money like it is freely available—to them it is, as they still get their pay and expenses, they just tax everyone else to meet the costs. They place their own activists into position of power within the state bureaucracy, presumably as they know they will lose the next election but want their saboteurs in place to ensure a democratically elected right of centre government is denied cooperation from the fixed and unmovable bureaucracy. They then try to position the nation into a subservient position in a socialist controlled group,(the EU) despite knowing that a referendum showed the majority were opposed to this. It can only be assumed that, although not declared to voters at time of the election, it has always been their plan to try and prevent any future, non-socialist government, from operating freely and delivering what the people want. Socialism is above all else, about state control of everything, personal freedoms are considered to be anti-state and so must be prevented. State control is all and everything.
A tax on rural living is suggested, a tax designed to totally impoverish the rural poor. Traditionally rural communities do not elect socialist representatives to parliament. Road tax per mile- Big brother recording every journey you make and claiming a tax is paid for every mile you travel in a personally controlled vehicle.is being actively considered. Ignoring the fact that this is the only way most people in rural communities can travel. State control is all and everything and controlling movement is a step towards that objective.
Changing the names and labels rather than changing the reality, has become the way of doing things. Straight out of Geroge Orwell’s prophecies, we get Illegal immigrants relabelled as irregular arrivals, we get media reports that judges in trials of people, charged over recent disturbances, are allowing the prosecution to claim “far right” activities in all those charged. Do they allow defending lawyers to say the prosecutions are “far left” actions? Violence against people and property is a criminal offence, it should not matter if the political views are left of right. Have the political affiliations of the defendants been established and anyway it is not a crime (yet) to be “far right” politically. We get reports of two-tier policing in which the police forces are ordered to treat criminal activity differently if the political aims of the criminals causing a public disturbance, are opposed to the socialist government’s wishes. They wish to discharge criminals from prison before their sentences are over, in order to make room for those who use any form of violence to oppose illegal immigration into Britain. There are reports that being an observer to a violent act, which is committed while showing opposition to the socialist government, is being considered an act of violence itself and so is punishable by law. Is it right to release some criminals so make room to jail those labelled far right? Is this a slippery path to take?
There has been an intellectual distain for the views of the majority, since the writings of Karl Marx were published. The growth of a “champaign socialist” self-appointed elite has been observed and they have taken over the Labour party. As the name suggests the party was formed to provide a political voice for the workers, at the time of formation, this was manual labourers, those who laboured with bodies rather than minds. The present leader of the Labour party (socialist) government is a barrister- a senior lawyer. The term champagne socialists is applied to people who are relativity wealthy, have never done prolonged bouts of manual labour, have never gone hungry but claim to be socialist. They believe in a modified version of the state knows best; in their version they know best, and if they control the state, everything will be as it should be. The real workers are unknown to them, the champagne socialists do not live in sink estates, they do not have their societies destroyed by multiculturalism and they are disdainful of the genuine workers. They may indoctrinate a form of socialist idealism, in the deprived, but this is to provide support for themselves not the workers. They claim the protests by working class people who oppose the destruction of their communities and societies, as far right, fascists. Which is the ultimate in Orwellian new speak, the twisting of words and language.
These people have a total distain for any pride in being British, they appear to believe in a united world, united that is in the sense that every single person on the planet accepts their rule, accepts that they know best and so there are no national boundaries. No national identities, no differences between anyone. There can be no religious belief as this creates a difference they cannot accept. They still have their gated communities; they still have their social boundaries but everyone else glories in being controlled (they claim- looked after) by the group.
In Britian they have the guardian newspaper as their guiding text. The name shows what they think of themselves, they are the guardians of all things good and the aspirations, even needs, of others must be subservient to this. To this self-appointed group any opposition, any deviation from what they believe, is by definition wrong and abhorrent. Hence the claim that those objecting to unlimited immigration into Britian, whether illegal or not, are “far right.” The ultimate in horror to the champagne socialist. The fact that most objectors are from working class, the class they claim to represent, is ignored because this elite do not have to pay the cost, socially, economically or intellectually, of over population. Since they do not believe in a national identity, they wish to ensure any idea of a British identity is destroyed. The concept that people may have views, beliefs, customs, social norms, that are different from those the group try to impose, is totally alien to them. They cannot understand at all, the concept that people can live in relative harmony while being different in many ways. Perversely they seek to impose multiculturalism, as opposed to integration, on the British people. It would be logical to think that socialists would be the ultimate exponents of integration, the merging of everyone into one social group. Logic has nothing to do with this, all over Europe, multiculturalism is a weapon designed to destroy national identity, and so a step towards the brave new world where there are only people of the world and these ruled by the socialist bureaucracy, no elections no democracy . The state knows best. Once the weapon of multiculturalism has done its work, it will be abandoned, and socialist dogma will be imposed on everyone.
The ultimate aim of socialist politics is a one-party state with no real democratic governance. If democracy is to survive in Britain, things need to change, before they can bury Britian in the EU socialist state and halt the election process in Britain, things have to change. Elections need to provide parliaments that reflects the will of the majority, We need to insure that never again will a vote of 34% of only 40% of the electorate, proves a parliament with over a hundred seat majority for any political party. Also, it is imperative that the control of the bureaucracy has to change with the change in government, and referendums on major issues must become normal.
About the Creator
Peter Rose
Collections of "my" vocal essays with additions, are available as printed books ASIN 197680615 and 1980878536 also some fictional works and some e books available at Amazon;-
amazon.com/author/healthandfunpeterrose
.
Keep reading
More stories from Peter Rose and writers in The Swamp and other communities.
Democracy in danger
Democracy in danger Modern politics is harming voter participation Democracy used to be said to be government by the people for the people. Now that does not exist. Lies and deceit by political parties, is so common that the people just shrug and say, “they all do it”. There is not even great outrage at the discovery of deliberate deceptions. On the 4th July 2024 in Great Britian, an election was held. The socialist “labour” party won the most seats in Parliament, by a large majority but the voter participation was the lowest for 20 years, it is widely accepted that many votes were cast on the basis of the voter did not want the centre right party, the Conservatives also known as Tories, to continue in power. So labour won because of voter dis-satisfaction with the Tories rather than because they have better policies. This is not good for democracy.
By Peter Roseabout a year ago in The Swamp
Swiss NYE Fire Tragedy Exposes Deadly Oversight Failures
New Year’s Eve is meant to symbolize fresh beginnings, celebration, and hope. In Switzerland, however, the arrival of the new year was marked by tragedy after a deadly fire tore through a crowded bar, killing and injuring multiple people. As investigators piece together the causes, one revelation has stunned the public and shaken confidence in safety oversight: the bar had not been inspected for five years. This single fact has transformed a tragic accident into a broader national debate about regulatory enforcement, accountability, and whether complacency within safety systems allowed a preventable disaster to unfold. A Night That Turned Fatal According to preliminary reports, the fire broke out shortly before midnight as revelers gathered to welcome the new year. Witnesses described panic, thick smoke, and confusion as people rushed toward exits. Emergency responders arrived quickly, but for several victims, help came too late. Authorities have been careful not to speculate on the precise cause while the investigation continues. However, early findings suggest that flammable interior materials, overcrowding, and inadequate safety infrastructure may have played critical roles in how rapidly the fire spread. What has fueled public anger is not just the fire itself, but what it revealed about long-standing failures behind the scenes. Five Years Without an Inspection Swiss regulations generally require hospitality venues to undergo regular fire and safety inspections. These checks are meant to ensure functional alarms, clearly marked exits, fire-resistant materials, and compliance with occupancy limits. In this case, investigators confirmed that the bar had not been formally inspected in half a decade. That lapse has raised serious questions. How did a popular nightlife venue operate for so long without oversight? Were inspections delayed due to administrative backlogs, staffing shortages, or simple neglect? And most importantly, could lives have been saved if authorities had intervened earlier? For many Swiss citizens, the idea that a bar packed with people on one of the busiest nights of the year escaped inspection for so long feels deeply unsettling. Systemic Gaps in Enforcement Switzerland is often viewed as a country with strong institutions and high safety standards. This tragedy, however, suggests that even well-regarded systems can fail when enforcement becomes inconsistent. Experts point out that safety laws are only as effective as their implementation. Regulations on paper do little if inspections are infrequent or poorly tracked. In some cantons, responsibility for inspections is divided among multiple agencies, creating gaps where accountability becomes blurred. In this case, authorities are now examining whether the bar slipped through bureaucratic cracks or whether warnings were issued but not followed up. Either scenario points to systemic weaknesses rather than a one-off mistake. Owners Under Scrutiny Attention has also turned to the bar’s management. Business owners are legally and morally responsible for ensuring their premises are safe, regardless of inspection schedules. Investigators are assessing whether safety equipment was missing, outdated, or deliberately ignored to cut costs or maximize capacity. If negligence is proven, criminal charges could follow. Legal experts note that Swiss law allows for serious penalties when safety violations result in death, including prison sentences for responsible parties. Yet critics argue that focusing solely on owners risks missing the bigger picture. When inspections fail to occur for years, responsibility extends beyond individual businesses to the institutions tasked with protecting the public. Public Anger and Political Pressure In the days following the fire, public reaction has been swift and emotional. Vigils have been held for the victims, while social media has filled with calls for resignations, audits, and sweeping reform. Many are asking how many other venues might be operating under similar conditions. Political leaders have promised answers. Several officials have called for immediate reviews of inspection records across the hospitality sector, particularly for nightclubs and bars hosting large crowds. Some lawmakers are pushing for mandatory digital tracking systems to ensure inspections cannot be delayed or overlooked. The tragedy has also reignited debate about whether local authorities are adequately funded and staffed to perform regular safety checks. Lessons From Past Disasters History offers painful reminders of what happens when safety oversight fails. From nightclub fires across Europe to deadly crowd disasters worldwide, the pattern is often the same: ignored regulations, delayed inspections, and warnings that came too late. In many cases, meaningful reforms only followed public outrage and loss of life. Switzerland now faces a similar crossroads. Will this tragedy lead to lasting change, or will attention fade once headlines move on? Safety advocates argue that true reform requires more than promises. It demands consistent inspections, transparent reporting, and consequences for both regulators and businesses when standards are not met. A Wake-Up Call for the Hospitality Industry Beyond government action, the fire serves as a stark warning to bar and club owners across the country. New Year’s Eve crowds, pyrotechnics, candles, and packed dance floors create heightened risks. Cutting corners on safety, whether intentionally or through complacency, can have irreversible consequences. Industry associations are now urging members to conduct voluntary safety audits and update emergency plans. Some venues have temporarily closed to reassess fire exits, alarms, and occupancy limits. While these steps are welcome, many argue they should not depend on tragedy to be taken seriously. Remembering the Victims Amid investigations, political debates, and public anger, it is crucial not to lose sight of the human cost. Families are mourning loved ones who went out to celebrate and never came home. Survivors are grappling with trauma that will last long after the fire scene is cleared. Their loss gives weight to the questions now being asked — and urgency to the demand for answers. Conclusion: Accountability Must Follow Tragedy The Swiss NYE fire is more than an isolated incident. It is a stark reminder that safety cannot be assumed, even in countries with strong reputations for regulation. A bar left uninspected for five years represents a failure not just of paperwork, but of responsibility. If there is to be any meaning drawn from this tragedy, it must be change — stricter enforcement, clearer accountability, and a renewed commitment to public safety. Otherwise, the lessons learned will come at a cost too high to justify.
By Muhammad Hassan6 days ago in The Swamp
Comments
There are no comments for this story
Be the first to respond and start the conversation.