Propaganda, Censorship and Tory Party Conference
Film still
This week in the UK sees the Tory Party Conference in Manchester.
These conferences are largely an opportunity for whichever political party to grab all the headlines and outline a taste of things to come. If they are the opposition party then outline what and how they’d do things differently (but not that differently!)
The Tories (or formally known as The Conservatives) have now been in power for 13 unlucky years and have seen five Prime Ministers in that time. They might call an election in 2024 or wait until early 2025.
The headliner this year is Rishi Sunak the UK’s first PM of ethnic descent. However, he’s hardly our Obama (in the sense there were no illusions in him), and he isn’t immensely popular even in his own party, being seen as firmly in the camp of the elite wealthy.
The headline is whether the Tories are going to cut taxes or not.
Sunak has stated that the government’s priority is to check inflation. Officially about 7% (6.7%) it feels palpably higher. Common discussion ranges around “sticker shock”. This is the experience that every time you go food shopping prices have gone up.
To date the Tories have kept to their “triple lock” pension promises, which have also led to a pressure to keep benefits in line with inflation too. However, for workers who have suffered a decade of below inflation pay rises the “sticky” inflation has led to a dramatic rise in strike action, most notably by the train drivers.
Recently the Bank of England didn’t raise interest rates (just like the Fed), and which now stand at 5.25% which has increased swiftly over the last year. In August last year interest rates were raised to a measly 1.75%. We are now in a position where a lot more of the UK’s budget has to be spent on servicing the debt, but that doesn’t seem to be a topic at this years conference.
Instead lowering taxes is set against spending on benefits. This sets workers against those in receipt of benefits, the poorest section of society. The inflation is posited as the result of a strong economy with a strong labour market. This then leads the Tories to shape a policy whereby all they need to do is get people off benefits and into work. Promising conference to potentially withhold benefits from those “disengaged”.
Meanwhile there seems to be no limit to the depths of the coffers when it comes to war as the defence secretary has used the Conference to announce a £4bn investment in hunter killer submarines. Although Sunak has stated there is no immediate plans to deploy British troops to fight in Ukraine, is that leaving the door open?
The Tories have been cheered in some quarters in the UK for not kowtowing to environmental legislation and concerns. For example, Michael Gove (the levelling up secretary – sounds like a made up title to me), has announced his plans to axe river pollution laws in favour of more housing development. Plus Sunak displays contradiction over meeting the UN Agenda 30’s net zero carbon targets.
This policy orientation is the one met by the biggest reaction from those protesting outside the conference.
Naturally “stopping the boats” that come across the English channel with migrants has been an issue. Revealing the racist nature of the Tory Party. Equally banning trans people from male or femal- only NHS wards demonstrates their anti-woke sentiments.
Meanwhile failed ex PM Liz Truss addresses the fanatics at fringe meeting called “Great British Growth” rally.
Of course the main question underlying the conference is can the Tories win the next election. Only time will tell is the answer.
Censorship
Russell Brand facing criminal charges?
It’s been several weeks since the allegations in the media have been raised against Russell Brand. Reportedly police are now investigating the matter but they have stated that they are non-recent and to date no arrest has been made.
This has not stopped calls for him to be de-monetised from his YouTube channel by none other then the British government. Some commentators have pointed out that the UK parliament is trying to do what the US government cannot do because they are bound by the first amendment – the right to free speech.
This trial by media must be seen clearly for what it is. An attack on an individual who has a growing audience where he poses questions, information and interviews that challenge the prevailing narrative. Do these allegations mean his interviews with Vandana Shiva, Dr John Campbell or Joe Rogan, for example, are null and void? Not to mention the misconception that Brand is some kind of far right winger! He is, still for now “Stay Free” on Rumble who stood up for free speech.
It is part of a disconcerting trend. Some say starting around the time of Occupy Wall Street.
Image from wired.com
It ramped up during the 2016 election campaign. You couldn’t say anything pro-Trump (and lies about him were also fair game, such as being a Russian agent) as he posed a threat to democracy. Saying anything critical of the Democrats and Clinton, in particular, was also to be in the pro-Trump camp.
Next came the “pandemic” and if you criticised the approach to the “pandemic” – masks, lockdowns, alternative treatments, vaccination concerns etc, you were viewed as harming public health and undermining the vaccination campaign. In some cases this resulted in out and out censorship whereby the government reached out to social media platforms to remove and censor comments.
Now we are moving to the next level where anyone who says anything critical about a government or ruling ideology is undermining the state and thence a traitor committing treason. You don’t think that’s where we are heading?
For some time now the trial by media and #metoo movement have been steered in this direction.
It was only in 1782 that the last woman was executed in Europe for being a witch. Now the media have taken on the role of witch-finder general and the obedient public still bay for blood. Despite the seriousness of the allegations Brand has not been charged. It is a police matter and why do the British government need to intervene to hinder his podcasts. Does anyone else find this questionable? It used to be that they tied a stone to an alleged witch and threw them in the river. If they drowned they were innocent and if not then they were in league with the devil. Sound familiar?
To paraphrase Comedian Kurt Metzger; If you dress like Jesus you’ve got to expect them to come after you.
More Censorship
Censorship and over reach have further raised their head in the UK in regard to alternative news channel GB News. GB News has now suspended three people following Laurence Fox after making sexist comments on air.
Fox claims GB News put him through a “show trial”. This followed his remarks that he wouldn’t have sex with political commentator Ava Evans who now claims she fears for her safety. After failing to apologise on air he was suspended. Following Fox’s suspension two other colleagues have spoken up in support and have found themselves suspended too.
It’s now blown up into another story about free speech.
Is it possible we can disagree with what someone says on the TV but still reserve the right to accept that they have the free right to say it? I think he should have apologised for any upset that he caused her though.
It’s a long way from the sexism and racism blatantly on display on the TV in the 1970s when I was growing up in the UK. We know we don’t want these kind of attitudes but we are treading on dangerous waters when the state is looking to close down any expression of free thought at all. Sometimes it’s better to bend the stick the other way otherwise we will lose all sense of perspective.
Whatever happened to sending an angry email or two!
Online Safety Bill
Meanwhile waiting in the wings is the UK’s Online Safety Bill due to be introduced next month.
As Russell Brand says it is an attempt to “create a totally curated sphere of reality”.
The bill will allow pretty much anything to be included under it’s scope of what the government feels you need protecting from.
As we understand this to be an agenda driven by the global ruling class it is no surprise similar legislation is being introduced across the Western world under different names -
Taken from Russell's Brand recent video entitled "In 29 days the Internet will change forever".
This censorship is ushered in under cover of being against hate speech, protecting children, etc, which we can all share – but this will give government’s unlimited power to control the narrative.
Further the bill talks about the ability to incarcerate people who fall foul of the new law.
Make no doubt about it, this law will incorporate “misinformation”. Which is a grey area – who determines what is and isn’t misinformation? Where will remain the forum for free and open debate?
So, by implication it seems that by allowing Russell Brand to speak openly on Rumble, the Rumble executives will be made legally responsible.
It’s a very paternal attitude, one in which we are going to be protected from people’s opinion and free speech whether we like it or not. I suppose if you trust the media you’ll see nothing sinister in this. I do not trust them. I think they have an agenda.
The implementation will be down to Ofcom, a communications regulator in the UK, who with unprecedented levels of censorship will be able to fine or imprison those who don’t comply. Utilising government approved software social media sites will be required to scan user content to identify illegal content.
Going forward if you disagree with your government’s official story you will be more likely to keep it to yourself for fear of being punished.
