Now I'm imagining a creative law that a petty nationalist dictator (like myself, if nominated) could come up with, where we say "Sure we'll allow immigration from any country, but it must be reciprocated in quota by forced immigration of white Americans into your former home country. And that country must treat our colonists with the same rights and services that we provide to you and your brethren."
What do you expect, the native politicians are bunch of cucks.
That's partly to blame on the voters and no I'm not doing the whole 'British people are pathetic, enslaving themselves' gimmick, I mean because party politics has become 'I only vote for my team, if I don't like my team I don't vote'
It's the opposite of the US where there was obvious fuckery happening in certain areas, the UK electorate has a bad tenancy to not switch their vote easily. If the dissolutioned voters switched instead of not voting for a party like reform or more regional parties, in one election they would cripple ALL major parties and force every one of them to negotiate for power including removing laws on speech.
Because they have this team mentality, they'll never be able to get rid of the weak politicians.
I mean because party politics has become 'I only vote for my team, if I don't like my team I don't vote'
It's not even that. The core issue is that in pretty much any supposedly developed country, the government is only for show, and the place is run by unseen bureaucrats enforcing a tangled web of international treaties that literally nobody understands completely. So it doesn't matter who you vote for, you will get more globohomo - and people cope by treating elections as a team sport.
Yes the civil service, a less glamorous boring version of America's deep state. They do hold a lot of power because a lot of the politicians just can't be bothered to do their work and just pass it off to bureaucrats so they effectively run the country.
It's very easy to stop them, bring in people that only care about their area and don't trust the civil service so do the work themselves and you'll see their power cracks quickly. Harder in the US as last guy that tried ended up with a hole in his head...
Neither Sunak nor Yusaf were voted in by the people. They're both appointed by their party.
The voters are somewhat to blame for not going hard behind single issue parties like they successfully did with UKIP, but the ultimate blame lies with the politicians, who are all owned by the you-know-who bankers.
To an extent true, but because the voters don't go as hard domestically on single issues like they did with the EU, instead remaining 'loyal' to a party and just not voting if the don't approve of actions (which never do, never be loyal to ANY political party) it's allowed the politicians to not really fear the electorate that they'll easily lose their job if they go corrupt.
It's always best to have politicians fear that if they fuck up, they will quickly lose their power.
I’ve heard leftists justify this because of English colonies in the past. Of course the people whining about colonialism today never lived in a colony, but that aside, if you believe that then wouldn’t you want to stay in your own country to not be influenced by the “evil” British Empire?
Ironically, a lot of the former colonies voluntarily joined the commonwealth which doesn't sound right for an 'evil oppressive empire'
Then you have the ones that stayed under British rule after a democratic vote than join the country next to them, which Hong Kong wishes it could've done.
Exactly. Looking at the history of colonialism I’d rather my country be taken over by the British than others. I met a guy from Nigeria once and he had British citizenship through his parents because before British gave Nigeria its independence they offered citizenship to those who wanted it. He had nothing but good things to say about England. Now I’m sure it wasn’t all sunshine and roses but forgive me if I don’t take seriously any European history told today by self hating leftists or minority activists who are millionaires
If you want an example of how British rule helped 'save' a people, look at Somalia
This video breaks it down but the northern region (now called Somaliland) was once ruled by the British but they left the tribes to rule most of the area, only enforcing control over the port areas, compared to Italy that enforced top down control.
Decades later after a massive civil war, the British decision saved Somaliland as they still had the tribal structure so had elders with respect that called for peace and were listened to. Compared to the rest of Somalia that is mad max without the cool vehicles.
I only vote for my team, if I don't like my team I don't vote
If only. They vote for the team they don't like nevertheless, just so they can stick it to the other team.
On the other hand: I really hold a grudge against the fact that there's no mechanism to leave a seat empty. I mean, if 40% of the population didn't vote, shouldn't be 40% of the availiable seats empty? Why do people nobody wanted to vote for getting payed because the majority of the rest voted for them?
One is a billionaire through marriage, one was a lawyer for Islamic terrorists and the other is a vehicle for the self-loathing and hatred that left-liberal progressives feel for themselves.
And all of them are laughing at the pathetic white cattle that 'voted' for them.
It's not happening, but it is happening, and it's a good thing.
Now I'm imagining a creative law that a petty nationalist dictator (like myself, if nominated) could come up with, where we say "Sure we'll allow immigration from any country, but it must be reciprocated in quota by forced immigration of white Americans into your former home country. And that country must treat our colonists with the same rights and services that we provide to you and your brethren."
Even better! See that's why I'm not a dictator. I don't think outside the box enough like that.
What do you expect, the native politicians are bunch of cucks.
That's partly to blame on the voters and no I'm not doing the whole 'British people are pathetic, enslaving themselves' gimmick, I mean because party politics has become 'I only vote for my team, if I don't like my team I don't vote'
It's the opposite of the US where there was obvious fuckery happening in certain areas, the UK electorate has a bad tenancy to not switch their vote easily. If the dissolutioned voters switched instead of not voting for a party like reform or more regional parties, in one election they would cripple ALL major parties and force every one of them to negotiate for power including removing laws on speech.
Because they have this team mentality, they'll never be able to get rid of the weak politicians.
It's not even that. The core issue is that in pretty much any supposedly developed country, the government is only for show, and the place is run by unseen bureaucrats enforcing a tangled web of international treaties that literally nobody understands completely. So it doesn't matter who you vote for, you will get more globohomo - and people cope by treating elections as a team sport.
Yes the civil service, a less glamorous boring version of America's deep state. They do hold a lot of power because a lot of the politicians just can't be bothered to do their work and just pass it off to bureaucrats so they effectively run the country.
It's very easy to stop them, bring in people that only care about their area and don't trust the civil service so do the work themselves and you'll see their power cracks quickly. Harder in the US as last guy that tried ended up with a hole in his head...
Neither Sunak nor Yusaf were voted in by the people. They're both appointed by their party.
The voters are somewhat to blame for not going hard behind single issue parties like they successfully did with UKIP, but the ultimate blame lies with the politicians, who are all owned by the you-know-who bankers.
To an extent true, but because the voters don't go as hard domestically on single issues like they did with the EU, instead remaining 'loyal' to a party and just not voting if the don't approve of actions (which never do, never be loyal to ANY political party) it's allowed the politicians to not really fear the electorate that they'll easily lose their job if they go corrupt.
It's always best to have politicians fear that if they fuck up, they will quickly lose their power.
I’ve heard leftists justify this because of English colonies in the past. Of course the people whining about colonialism today never lived in a colony, but that aside, if you believe that then wouldn’t you want to stay in your own country to not be influenced by the “evil” British Empire?
Ironically, a lot of the former colonies voluntarily joined the commonwealth which doesn't sound right for an 'evil oppressive empire'
Then you have the ones that stayed under British rule after a democratic vote than join the country next to them, which Hong Kong wishes it could've done.
Exactly. Looking at the history of colonialism I’d rather my country be taken over by the British than others. I met a guy from Nigeria once and he had British citizenship through his parents because before British gave Nigeria its independence they offered citizenship to those who wanted it. He had nothing but good things to say about England. Now I’m sure it wasn’t all sunshine and roses but forgive me if I don’t take seriously any European history told today by self hating leftists or minority activists who are millionaires
If you want an example of how British rule helped 'save' a people, look at Somalia
This video breaks it down but the northern region (now called Somaliland) was once ruled by the British but they left the tribes to rule most of the area, only enforcing control over the port areas, compared to Italy that enforced top down control.
Decades later after a massive civil war, the British decision saved Somaliland as they still had the tribal structure so had elders with respect that called for peace and were listened to. Compared to the rest of Somalia that is mad max without the cool vehicles.
Thanks! I’ll check it out
If only. They vote for the team they don't like nevertheless, just so they can stick it to the other team.
On the other hand: I really hold a grudge against the fact that there's no mechanism to leave a seat empty. I mean, if 40% of the population didn't vote, shouldn't be 40% of the availiable seats empty? Why do people nobody wanted to vote for getting payed because the majority of the rest voted for them?
One is a billionaire through marriage, one was a lawyer for Islamic terrorists and the other is a vehicle for the self-loathing and hatred that left-liberal progressives feel for themselves.
And all of them are laughing at the pathetic white cattle that 'voted' for them.
What the fuck is wrong with these people?
What the absolute fuck.
"South Asian". Just say Indian. We know what you mean.
Scotland FM is from Pakistan
If I told you somebody was Asian or Indian, without elaborating further, which one would be closer to Pakistan? You know the correct answer is Indian.