Wednesday, 20 September 2017

Category » Articles

Disability Update

MEMBERS and supporters of the National Liberal Party – NLP – may recall that we’ve featured a couple of articles written by West-Midlands based, Simon Stevens. Simon describes himself as an ‘independent inclusion issues consultant, trainer and activist’. He is regarded as one of Britain’s foremost disability advocates.

You can check out the articles we’ve previously carried here http://nationalliberal.org/disability-a-voice-for-change and here http://nationalliberal.org/from-disability-to-politics-%e2%80%93-does-the-media-have-its-own-agenda

In the very near future we’ll carry some more of his articles – all aimed at sparking debate relating to disability issues. In the meantime, readers can check out his new web-site http://www.simonstevens.com/ You can also find him on Facebook https://www.facebook.com/simonstevens74 or join the 21.5 thousand follows of his Twitter feed @simonstevens74


Please note that there is no official link between the National Liberal Party and Simon Stevens. Thus, it should not be taken that Simon endorses the NLP or that we unconditionally support everything that he writes. As we noted earlier, we’re simply interested in stimulating any debate relating to disability issues.

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

Read Issue 4 of New Horizon
.
ISSUE 4 of New Horizon – the ideological journal Of The National Liberal Party – is now available. To get hold of your FREE pdf copy click HERE.

Articles covered in this 24-page issue include Brexit and Self-Determination, populism, thoughts on a new multipolar democratic political system by the Russian writer, Nicholas Popov, and a look at Lujo Brentano (1844-1931) who was a major influence on liberal German trade unions. Coupled with a review of Mehr Seth’s Transnational Organised Crime In The UK and a thoughtful editorial, this issue of New Horizon makes for interesting – and in-depth – reading.

There are two very interesting factors relating to this issue of New Horizon.

The first is the link betwwen to two completely different articles – BreXit and Self-Determination and Populism – A New Dirty Word? Both have different authors but are linked by the fact that the Brexit vote was probably the greatest popular expression of anger (against the Global elite) ever experienced in British political history.

The second is the announcement of the birth of the Centre Alliance, founded as a campaigning and electoral coalition. The aim of the Centre Alliance – CA – is for likeminded ‘small parties, groups and independents’ to co-operate together ‘to reclaim the country for the benefit of the ordinary citizen’.

The CA will campaign on five central points:

1. Social Justice e.g. introducing a meaningful Living Wage.

2. Democratic Renewal/Electoral Reform e.g. a campaign on making referendums part of the political system e.g. ‘Initiatives’ as in Switzerland.

3. Anti-Globalisation e.g. opposition to TTIP

4. Anti-Corruption e.g. a campaign against the honours system per se or how constituted.

5. Consensus Politics e.g. encouraging pacts, coalitions and the Swiss style of government (cross-party National Council).

A more in-depth review of the latest New Horizon is currently being written. It’ll appear on the main National Liberal Party web-site – http://nationalliberal.org/ – as well as our two Facebook sites here https://www.facebook.com/NationalLiberalParty/ and here https://www.facebook.com/groups/52739504313/ in the very near future.

We’re also looking to encourage a culture of multiple reviews of all of our publications. Therefore, if you’d like to submit a review – good, bad or indifferent – on what we have to say, please feel free. As we always say, debate (and hence speech) is free with the NLP!

In the meantime we urge all National Liberals to promote this ‘mini-review’ as well as this promotional artwork http://nationalliberal.org/issue-4-of-new-horizon-ideological-journal-of-the-national-liberal-party-out-now via social media.

One last thing. A special mention must also be given to the striking – and very positive cover – relating to Brexit. When all is said and done, there’s no point in having an ideological journal if no-one is going to read it. We feel that the cover of issue 4 of New Horizon will have both convinced National Liberals and those curious about politics reaching for it. And today, where politics is dominated by the soundbite and milisecond media, that’s no mean feat!
Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

Words Of Wisdom – Daniel De Leon (1852 – 1914)

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

What The Papers Say – A Very Dangerous Man Indeed
‘SPEECH Is free with the NLP!’

MEMBERS AND SUPPORTERS of the National Liberal Party – NLP – will be very familiar with the above slogan. We use it to underlne our absolute commitment to the idea of freedom of thought and speech. With this in mind, we’ve reproduced an article (which appeared towards the end of May) by Leapy Lee, said to be ‘possibly the most controversial columnist’ attached to Euro Weekly News. EWN is Spain’s largest group of free English language papers, with a circulation of 134,000 per week.

Whilst we don’t agree with everything that Lee says, we both defend his right to say it and admire his honest and forthright approach. This is particularly so of the article we’ve reproduced (below) concerning Tony Blair.

We were particularly taken by Lee’s assertion that ‘Millions of UK subjects hate and despise’ Blair. We feel that this accurately sums up the way ordinary working families view members of the establishment. Those who make up the establishment are so arrogant – so full of their own importance – that they can’t believe that the ‘plebs’ don’t fall over themselves to worship at their feet. This description is fairly accurate when it comes to Blair, given his narcissism and almost messianic complex. For its part, the NLP hopes that, one day, Blair’s arrogance will lead to his downfall.

It goes without saying that there are no official links between Leapy Lee, Euro Weekly News and the NLP.

.

A Very Dangerous Man Indeed

Tony Blair - former Labour Prime Minister, Remainer and War Criminal

AS sure as night prededes day and the Pope follows the teachings of Catholicism, the Blair person is now up and running.


As I predicted some months ago, this thick skinned, arrogant individual, who many consider an indictable war criminal, is now poised waiting to pounce. The omens of opportunity for this dangerous opportunist to present his ‘new’ alternative party, are all coming together like some ominous web waiting to engulf all who fail to see the trap.

This odious creature and his equally abhorrent mate, now see themselves presented with exactly the same set of circumstances they were confronted with when he commandeered the Labour party in 1994. His initial move has been to work on his personal public image. He now looks the part.

Tanned, toned and slightly greying at the temples, he presents the perfect picture of a supremely confident future party leader. Before him he sees the mouth watering prospect of a Labour party with a weak inept leader, that is coming apart at the seams, no other party with enough support to form any serious opposition and a public confused and uncertain with the outcome of their decision to leave the European Union. What better time to reveal that he, Tony Blair, has the answer to all its problems?

His opening political gambit has been to announce that the Brexit decision could be reversed. Brilliant. This statement alone could gain a new alternative party millions of followers. And that’s just the beginning. When Labour is hopefully routed in the coming elections, disgruntled and despondent left wings will flock to a party formed by an ex-Labour leader who successfully took them to victory on three separate occasions. Make no mistake Blair is a very clever and extremely astute individual.

Any man who begins his career in public service by becoming Prime Minister, when most aspire to that position only after many years in the political arena, is a very dangerous man indeed. As fas as resources are concerned, I have no doubt that with the cronies he has accrued over the past number of years, his party funding pit will be all but bottomless. Unfortunately for Mr Blair, he has overlooked one glaring fact of life. Millions of UK subjects hate and despise him.

Many, including yours truly, consider him responsible for the death of thousands, and, along with Bush, the root cause of the whole Middle Eastern tragedy which resulted in the demise of millions. So, assuming the notoriously short memory span of the British public doesn’t rear its ugly head, I’m afraid all this Antichrists efforts to regain power are doomed to failure. At least I sincerely hope so.

Meanwhile back at the old homestead, with ever increasing desperation, Corbyn is promising the British public … well just about everything. With not one suggestion, except for robbing the rich, to pay for any of it. All together now Jerry Corbyn, Jerry Corbyn, riding through the glen …
Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

Liberal Future: Alderney & Sark Youth Say BreXit Now!

.

A YEAR has come and gone since the EU Referendum. As everyone should know by now, on 23rd June 2016, a majority of the electorate took the brave and historic decision to get Britain out of the EU. On a national turnout of 72.2%, 17,410,742 (51.9%) people voted to free Britain from the shackles of the European Union. Indeed, as the Guardian at the time – https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2016/jun/23/eu-referendum-live-results-and-analysis – noted, ‘Britain has voted by a substantial margin to leave the European Union.’

Despite this, members of the elite still don’t get it. One particular case which raised the hackles of many people involved the well-known evolutionary biologist and writer, Richard Dawkins. Here’s what he had to say: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-39218108

Liberal Future are the first to concede that Dawkins raises many valid points. We feel that Cameron called the EU Referendum in an attempt to both shut up the Eurosceptic wing of the Tory party and kill off the threat of UKIP. (Ironically, the Eurosceptic wing of the Tory party walked all over Cameron and internal rumblings within UKIP seem to have killed it off. That’s politics, folks!)

Dawkins also notes that Cameron should have insisted on a 2/3 majority for the EU Referendum, held a ‘cooling off’ period and so on. Maybe he should of – but the fact is he didn’t and that the majority of the electorate opted for Brexit. We wonder if Dawkins would still be calling for a 2/3 majority and so on if the Remain camp had won the vote?

.
Dawkins then gets arrogant and nasty. He infers that the Brexit vote was achieved by a simple majority of “ill informed voters.” Those who opted for a form of self-determination are “ignorant” and “misled.” Is he really saying that nearly 17.5 million voters can’t be trusted to make up their own minds and vote accordingly? Talk about stereotyping on a mass scale!
.
Liberal Future is not a class or racially based organisation, but we feel that Dawkins really believes that the (white) working class – and especially the English and Welsh White working class – shouldn’t have the vote. This is especially so if they are going to vote the ‘wrong’ way! Quite apart from the fact that all classes, racial and ethnic groups voted Leave it suits some to ‘pigeon hole’ votes into fixed groups. Maybe calling folks “ill informed” and “ignorant” is his ‘polite’ way of saying that we’re all Untermensch?
.
In short, Dawkins is saying that we should simply just know our place. He views ordinary working folks as mere economic units of production: we can be cast aside when not needed (or cheaper labour can be imported) or when we vote the wrong way! We should know our place – as long as we use our brawn and/or brains in the ‘correct’ way and pay our taxes, we’re ok. Our function is to keep the elite in comfort, not to think for ourselves and vote against the wishes of the establishment.
.
Others have reached a similar conclusion when it comes to Dawkins and other elitists. As the author Mick Hume – http://nationalliberal.org/from-the-liberty-wall-%e2%80%93-free-speech-how-do-we-protect-it-%e2%80%93-tyranny-of-the-minority-part-2 – has previously noted: ‘In the Left-wing New Statesman magazine, Professor Richard Dawkins, the leading evolutionary biologist and renowned humanist was unable to suppress his true feelings that the large slice of humanity who voted Leave were ‘stupid, ignorant people’. He protested that ‘it is unfair to thrust on to unqualified simpletons the responsibility to take historic decisions of great complexity and sophistication’.
.
Presumably such decisions would be better left to highly intellectual minds such as his own. Great atheist that he is, he appears to think the rest of us should have blind faith in people like him.’
.
As the Brexit negotiations continue and the date for Britain quitting the EU grows ever closer, the blood pressure of the elite will go through the roof. They’ll probably ditch all niceties and try every trick in the book to derail democracy and stifle self- determination. You have been warned!
.
• THIS ARTICLE should be read in conjunction with the following:
.
Liberal Future Says BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/liberal-future-says-%e2%80%a6-brexit-now
.
Liberal Future: English Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/english-youth-says-brexit-now

Liberal Future: Scottish Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/scottish-youth-say-brexit-now

Liberal Future: Ulster Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/ulster-youth-say-brexit-now

Liberal Future: Welsh Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/welsh-youth-say-brexit-now

Liberal Future: Cornish Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/cornish-youth-say-brexit-now

Liberal Future: Guernsey, Manx and Jersey Youth Say BreXit Now! http://nationalliberal.org/liberal-future-guernsey-manx-and-jersey-youth-say-brexit-now
Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

From The Liberty Wall – Free Speech: How Do We Protect It? – The Historical Importance Of Magna Carta Day
THURSDAY 15th June marked the 802nd Anniversary of the signing of the Magna Carta. As National Liberals will know, its signing – by King John and his Barons – represented the first time a Monarch accepted that he/she had responsibilities and their ‘subjects’ had rights.

We feel that the signing of the Magna Carta was the first step in establishing the right to free of speech and assembly. These rights were further strengthened during the reign of King William III (who, along with his wife Mary, were crowned joint monarchs of England, Scotland and Ireland in 1689) which ensured ‘Civil and Religious Liberties for all.’

To mark Magna Carta Day our friends at Free Speech: How Do We Protect It? – https://www.facebook.com/groups/1607711629485795/ – produced an e-poster and article, which we reproduce below. They asked their supporters to viral it out via social media to remind everyone of the historic importance of the day and to wish everyone a Happy Magna Carta Day.


The following article – supplied by Free Speech: How Do We Protect It? – examines why the issue of freedom should remain central to any political agenda.

.

The Historical Importance Of Magna Carta Day

FREEDOM LOVERS recently took time out to celebrate Magna Carta Day. However, immediately afterwards we resolved to re-double our efforts to defend free speech, especially – but not exclusively – from establishment attacks.

Why? Because we feel that the establishment will use the rise of Islamist terrorism in Britain as an excuse to clamp down both on freedom of speech and assembly. During the recent election campaign Theresa May made plenty of noise about the need to curb ‘extremism’ as well as combating terrorism. Free Speech realises that much of this noise, to some degree or other, would have been sound bites, designed to appeal to reactionary Tory ‘right’ supporters – basically, the ‘flog ‘em and hang ‘em brigade.’

However, freedom lovers should be wary of Theresa May’s approach for several reasons.

Firstly, at the moment Theresa May is down – but she’s not out. And that makes her a very dangerous woman indeed. Election promises aside, she does have a reasonably long-term record of wanting to clamp down of Human Rights legislation. And when it comes to freedom of speech and assembly she is more ‘hawkish’ than many of her fellow Tories.

Secondly, her ‘government of certainty’ with the Democratic Unionist Party (DUP) may wish to lay down a marker when it comes to Islamist terrorism. It’s probably fair to describe the DUP as a socially conservative political party that is totally opposed to any terrorist group which threatens the United Kingdom. This is hardly surprising given Ulster’s recent past. With this in mind, we’re concerned that it wouldn’t be difficult to persuade the DUP to clamp down on ‘extremism’ in the name of fighting Islamist terrorism.

Free Speech feels that it would be sheer hypocrisy and political opportunism for the establishment to use the terrible events of Manchester and London to justify clamping down on freedom of speech. Our position is simple: either we all have rights or none of us have rights.

(As an aside, are we alone in wondering if the Manchester suicide bomber and London Bridge terrorists are, to some degree or another, mere pawns in a wider geopolitical ‘war of position’?)

Thirdly, May – and others on the reactionary right – talk a lot about ‘extremism’ but never seem to provide a legally binding definition of ‘extremism.’ What exactly is ‘extremism’ – indeed, how would you define it? We’re worried that its definition could be left so vague that it could potentially include those opposed to capitalism right through to those who would go out and kill people in the name of Allah.

With all of this in mind, we feel that it’s essential that we stand up for the right of free speech and assembly – as well as the concept of Civil and Religious liberties for all. Free Speech appreciates that, on a personal level, it may become very uncomfortable to make a principled stand on this issue. No doubt, some elements of the establishment mainstream media will twist our position and produce fake news stories claiming that we support terrorism!

However, if freedom lovers don’t make a principled stand, who will? We should not abandon our ancient rights (effectively granted by the signing of the Magna Carta at Runnymede in 1215) and merely surrender to political expediency, media pressure, the need to be ‘popular’ or simply go with the herd.

Remember, the establishment is smart and will use any excuse as an opportunity to ban groups and organisations. Any legislation designed to silence ‘extremists’ will simply be the thin end of the wedge. In the past the establishment has picked on ‘unpopular’ groups – in the recent past it was the British National Party or Religious (but non-violent) fundamentalists – and demonised them. If the ‘unpopular’ group is not banned outright, the establishment will try to make it near nigh impossible for it to organise. It will be subject to numerous restrictions and smear jobs. ‘Counter gangs’ could also be used to fight it on the streets.

To reiterate, when making any informed decision subjects relating to freedom, we must always examine the cold hard facts, figures and evidence. In addition, we should not let our emotions get the better of us. As we noted earlier, we should not abandon our ancient rights and merely surrender to ‘political expediency, media pressure, the need to be ‘popular’ or simply go with the herd.’

As a pressure group, Free Speech is not interested in being ‘popular’ – we’re only interested in being right. And it is right and proper to both support free speech and assembly and the concept of Civil and Religious liberties for all.

Share:
  • Print
  • Digg
  • StumbleUpon
  • del.icio.us
  • Facebook
  • Yahoo! Buzz
  • Twitter
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Add to favorites
  • blogmarks
  • Blogosphere
  • Google Buzz
  • PDF
  • email
  • Live
  • MSN Reporter
  • MyShare
  • MySpace
  • Technorati
  • Webnews.de

By continuing to use the site, you agree to the use of cookies. more information

The cookie settings on this website are set to "allow cookies" to give you the best browsing experience possible. If you continue to use this website without changing your cookie settings or you click "Accept" below then you are consenting to this.

Close