Notes

The BBC are reporting they have revealed a shocking truth about the disgraceful Royal. Some of the money which he got when he sold his little house might have come from a corrupt source. The truth is much simpler.

When the Queen’s favourite son (you know, the one who likes hob-knobbing with a convicted paedophile ) married Sarah Ferguson, he was given a cosy little multi-million pound mansion by his mum. Then when his sweet little old granny kicked the bucket, he moved into her gaff and put his own little place up for sale.

Asking price? £12 million. But there were no takers. Probably because it was overpriced.

Yet, a few years later, a billionaire businessman from Kazakhstan took it off his hands for a mere £15 million. According to the BBC, probably close to double its market value.

For the BBC, the scandal is Andrew’s Kazak buddy. Timur Kolabayev is the son-in-law of the dictatorial ruler of Kazakhstan. And he got to be a billionaire oligarch in the same way they all did — by cashing in on the corrupt sell-off of national assets for a fraction of their real value. Kolabayev’s corruption is not so much his association with a company being investigated for bribery, as his involvement of the rip-off of Kazakhstan;s wealth for private profit.

Back in the UK, the corruption at the hear of British society, has been obvious for decades. It is not the inflated price Andrew received a mansion that cost him nothing to acquire. We don’t need the BBC to investigate what mutual back-scratching was involved in that deal. The corruption that lies at the heart io British capitalist society is the obscene level of unearned wealth floating around the aristocracy and the finance capitalists of the City of London.

The BBC’s ‘revelation’ shines the spotlight somwhere the BBC chooses not to go. It exposes, once again, the chasm that separates working people from the ruling class. And it serves to remind us we have our own oligarchy here in Britain.

• 

‘I am really proud of the parliamentarians. Some of them have taken a great risk, knowing that their own constituents are against some of what they voted for in parliament. And that’s what our system is about.’

Yasmin Alibhai Brown speaking on The Papers (BBC News channel)

Yasmin Alibhai Brown is really proud MP’s are working to overturn the referendum result.

She realises that many constituencies voted to Leave the EU. She also implicitly concedes ‘in many cases’ the majority of those constituents still believe that the UK should leave the EU. But Ms Alibhai Brown is proud of those MP’s who are consciously working to thwart the wishes of those electors. ‘And that’s what our system is all about.’

The truth has been laid bare, to many people, that bourgeois democracy (so-called ‘parliamentary democracy’) is about a small cabal of 650 people making decisions about the future of the country, and over-riding the will of the people.

One of the gains of the political process over the last 3 years has been to lay bare the truth – that ‘parliamentary democracy’ is in fact bourgeois democracy, and is merely a facade covering what Marxists have always termed the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. Those who hold the real power in society, those who control the money, financial institutions, media etc. are the ones who exercise power in practice.

Conservative MP Philip Davies was asked on The Daily Politics today how many MP’s would be present for the vote on giving 16-year-olds the vote in the EU referendum. Has answer was: “There’s no votes today and lots on MP’s go back to their constituencies early.” I checked my calendar, and today is Thursday. So that means these hard working MP’s have put in nearly three days of hard graft at the coalface of Westminster politics before starting their weekends.

Remember that when they bleat about how hard working they are. Bless.

“Capitalism has always been progressive, something Voltaire noticed in the London Stock Exchange of the 18th century, where he saw Christians, Jews and Muslims trading together.”

Ed West. Evening Standard

Sorry Ed, capitalists trading together is not progressive. All that tells you is that capitalists stick together. They are a class, and as such they have more in common with each other, whatever their religious beliefs, than they do with the working class of the same religion.

The same goes for us – whatever our country of origin, colour, creed, gender or other characteristic, we are, first and foremost, workers. And we have more in common with our own class from anywhere in the world than we have with the ruling class of our home country.

 

 

When the Tories and Lib-Dems say “difficult decisions” they mean cuts. Cuts.

They would rather use six syllables because cuts is the C-word in politics.

So when they use the euphemism we should call them (the politicians) “difficult deNcisions” – its like Cuts, but with an extra N.

Obama: When I hear the young people around this table talk about their experiences, it violates my belief in what America can be, #Ferguson