The history of England is one of an uneasy alliance between two traditions. The first is that of the Libertine, the fun-loving rake, which reaches its apogee in the character of Shakespeare’s Falstaff. Politically, the Libertine is akin to the Civil War Cavalier: a romantic figure full of fun and adventure, willing to brook all the trauma and tragedy of life provided he is left alone.
The second is that of the Puritan, the austere number cruncher, devoid of fun but desperately trying to save your life or soul with ‘facts-facts-facts’, as Dickens’ Gradgrind – the archetypal Puritan – would have it. Politically, Puritans are the Civil War Roundheads: great talkers for rights, freedom and dignity, but give them an inch and they’ll cancel Christmas and close the theatres.
The Cavalier concept of liberty is particularly pertinent when addressing the issue of home. It is an old adage in England that ‘an Englishman’s home is his castle’. This phrase has always meant that despite what ravages affect the outside world, what happens within the four walls of one’s house are strictly private affair, upon which not even the state has a right to intrude. Pitt the Elder alluded to this when he said:
The poorest man may in his cottage bid defiance to all the force of the Crown. It may be frail, its roof may shake; the wind may blow through it; the storms may enter, the rain may enter, but the King of England cannot enter; all his forces dare not cross the threshold of the ruined tenement!
The Libertine takes these words to be sacrosanct, a universal call to mind your own business. The Puritan, by contrast, is that much-despised figure throughout the Anglosphere: the nosey parker, determined to make everyone as miserable as they are with their incessant spying.
In 2020, the Puritans won. No longer was home the cradle from which others should keep out; it was now a danger to a regime that deemed it inexcusable to think of anything other than the spread of germs. Home was where we were all expected to stay but were given strict rules to follow while there. The common person could no longer escape the ravages of the world through entering their front door. The living room itself was now a battleground and subject to the most base intrusions – chief of these being freedom of association, which was now no longer acceptable. To have people in the home meant you were dangerous, a conspiracy theorist, a granny killer. Flying in the face of hundreds of years of tradition, police could now enter your home and issue fines if they suspected you were harbouring that nightmare called ‘other people’. You could be locked up, brutalised and spied upon with impunity.
Not only did the Puritans win, but just when it looked as if things had swung back the other way, just as the Libertine spirit was reviving and gaining ground, one home in particular took centre stage with the ‘Lockdown Party Scandal’, giving the Puritans a much needed second wind. Yet this mess is entirely of the Prime Minister’s own making. One only has to read Boris’ old journalism to realise that he is by nature a Cavalier. He is part of a coterie in Parliament of people who place individual liberty at the heart of their politics and aren’t afraid to say the odd occasional irreverent thing to ruffle some feathers. In March 2020, his commonsense left him and he decided to become a Roundhead – at least publicly, and therein lies the problem. One can’t join the Temperance League and keep sneaking to the pub; one can’t tell the entire population, in no uncertain terms, that if they go out people will die, and then start the party when everyone’s back is turned.
This is the whole reason Boris’ position looks so shaky. He is a traitor to the two traditions. The Puritans hate him because he abandoned the Covid restrictions. The Libertines, his natural audience, hate him because he imposed them in the first place. So what’s the average lockdown sceptic to do? Occupy Parliament square until Desmond Swayne takes charge?
If there is one excuse that can be given for Johnson turning into Cromwell, it is that he has not been alone. The English-speaking world has been pretty disgusting during the pandemic years. Australia has reverted to its former status as a Prison colony, Canada has decided that it should make clear the differences between it and the United States by abolishing liberty altogether, and New Zealand has based its new look on North Korea. These were frontier societies in which people stood and fell by their own efforts; they were hardy and strong. Now they twitch behind curtains while their governments threaten them with fines. England, as Nicola Sturgeon pointed out, is an outlier in this game. Our restrictions were lifted last July and barely touched since, despite a slight panic around Christmas. Even if one looks at out nearest neighbours, the Puritan strongholds of Wales and Scotland, one can see a stricter policy than we enjoy between the Thames and Hadrian’s wall.
It seems clear then that no matter how incompetent Boris is, there are worse people waiting in the wings. Almost all centre-Left parties called for longer lockdowns and tougher restrictions; they are the summation of the Puritan tradition. The people calling for Boris’s head are the same who cheered as masked zealots broke up barbecues and dispatched drones to spy on walkers. They supported the lockdowns and they wish we were still under lock and key. Unfortunately, this is the gallery Boris has spent two years playing to when he should have stuck to his own tribe.
It is very hard to support someone who abandons principle for arguments that are proving more specious by the day, who handed the keys to the kingdom to zealots and killjoys. I find very little difference between the Prime Minister’s home and mine: both should be castles for those who live inside and it should not be anyone else’s business what goes on between their walls. I do not wish to see fines issued or anything else. But how can one feel any sympathy for a Cavalier turned Roundhead, for a man who decided that he wanted to ruin my fun but continue to have his? During the height of the lockdowns, if you wanted to do anything slightly outside the rules you had to be very careful who you revealed it to lest the Gradgrinds of England reported you to the law. Now this spirit of paranoia has reached No.10 and a nation salivates and drools for blood. Perhaps that is the perverse victory of lockdown: it has turned us all into nosey parkers – Puritans by proxy in a world where advocating the most basic freedoms casts one as a dangerous libertine.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
The thing is that if captain hindsight had been PM, he wouldn’t have a large majority and the tories probably would have been some form of opposition, so it probably wouldn’t have been like it was.
An accurate description. The Tories would have opposed everything Corbyn/Starmer would have done.
Starmer, in lockdown, was the equivalent of Neil Kinnock demanding the Poll Tax go further or John Smith and Tony Blair demanding VAT on domestic fuel be extended.
Starmer is scum.
Good analysis but it ignores the way the foundations of the Englishman’s castle have been undermined for years. That’s what facilitated the horrible, covid fuelled, puritanism.
He may be a Cavalier, but it doesn’t help that he is also a complete plonker.
He’s just a libertine. We needed a Libertarian.
Indeed, he only fights for his personal right to party.
He runs the country the same way!
The people are of no consequence whatever.
His appointment must amount to one of the gravest errors ever committed by the former “Conservative” Party.
I would think the gravest error was the MPs allowing Ken Clark and his little coterie to change the Tories to liberals. I was appalled that even Steve Baker called himself a Liberal Conservative. There is no such thing.
Yes indeed a ‘Libertine” is only concerned with himself and exploiting privilege and power to seek personal pleasure, a Libertarian wants liberty tolerance and freedom for others!
We need classic liberalism (which is now the space largely taken by Libertarians) which functioned as Conservative opposition until the 1920’s when the socialist labour party swept in promising milk and honey for all. As long as you handed them all your money.
In other words, the country was right wing (Conservative), or further right wing (Liberal), to the point of guaranteeing a small, efficient government and civil service.
I’ll give the labour party some credit in that it did force the issue on workers rights, in every other respect it’s been the most destructive force ever to sweep through this country.
Today, it’s utterly redundant as there is barely a working class any longer, and they know it. So they turned to identity politics to continue with the destruction of our country.
Tragically, the politicians best able to stand up to this scourge are in the wilderness. The Libertarian party is out there https://www.libertarianpartyuk.com it just needs your support.
Its policies and manifesto’s are online for all to see, and whilst it recognises the need for the NHS and welfare provision it recognises reform is needed for the former and that the latter was designed as a safety net, not a hammock.
We can hope for change amongst establishment politicians, of which even Nigel Farage is a participant, but if we want change we must do something about it.
And no, other than being a member of the party I have no other ties to it. All I know is that the Conservative party is only marginally further right than labour – in that their identity politicking isn’t quite as bad. In every other respect, they are indistinguishable.
Two cheeks of the same arse.
I have voted for the Libertarian Party when a candidate has been available. Unfortunately not often.
Classical liberalism has got us to where we are today: a country run by foreign incomers, moneyed halfwits and gobby women.
The individualism preached by classical liberals looked inviting, but in practice it has proved to be a false prospectus that has set our civilisation on the road to inevitable ruin.
No, it is collectivism that has ruined the country.
You attack a figment of your own imagination.
The classical liberalism you attack disappeared long ago, replaced by socialism.
If classical liberalism was replaced by socialism, then it got us to socialism, which got us to here…
If classical liberalism was any use to man or beast it wouldn’t have been supplanted by socialism.
D’you see?
Perhaps I should have said “the failures/weakness of classical liberalism caused it to be supplanted by socialism” but either way, my argument stands – RedhotScot’s claim that what we need now is classical liberalism is mistaken. Because if what we got now was classical liberalism, then it would merely be replaced once again by socialism within a generation.
No, your claim is moronic.
Philosophy got us to socialism, your claim that liberalism or capitalism gets us to socialism is a Marxist fallacy.
In fact, if faith and altruism are taught as virtues, socialism will follow. Socialism derives from faith and altruism. Capitalism requires reason and egoism.
What you are doing is posting non sequiturs as if they are fact. Your claims are balderdash.
Socialism is the negation of economics, the exact opposite of any use to man or beast but, according to you, it is superior to capitalism.
Says the guy who manages to claim that what I said – go on, give me a quote – is that socialism is superior to capitalism.
Don’t be so fucking obtuse.
Faith and altruism are not yoked together. Ask an Islamist or a fundamentalist Christian. Just because Anglicanism is for cucks, doesn’t make that universally true across faiths and denominations.
Classical liberalism was unsustainable. Socialism wiped its shoes on liberalism on the way in. That doesn’t mean it’s better, but it does mean it’s more ruthless, steadfast and hardcore. It is also my avowed enemy.
Yes, faith and altruism are tied together, altruism cannot be derived from reason.
Your examples of Islam and fundamentalist Christianity are examples of altruism, a termed coined by Auguste Comte to mean ‘other-ism’.
“If classical liberalism was any use to man or beast it wouldn’t have been supplanted by socialism.” – You did say socialism is superior to capitalism then said it was your avowed enemy.
You commit the logical fallacy of contradictory rubbish.
In what sense?
Are atheism and altruism tied together, then?
On an evolutionary scheme, altruism makes little if any sense, but thankfully we’re not restricted to the language of fairy tales, and of course one can make an argument for altruism from reason.
Given an evolutionary paradigm, define ‘reason’. What is ‘reason’ on an atheist ontology, and why should I give a brass farthing?
That’s a new one on me. What is this fallacy of Contradictory Rubbish?
Do you remember the heady days of 2008-2012, when there was a big buzz around the LPUK? I do.
Old Holborn running for parliament…. scandals relating to Rohan Kapur, Anna Racoon, Ian Parker Joseph and the insolvent Walter Mitty that was Andrew Withers? Chris Mounsey getting monstered on live TV by Andrew Neill?
It was great fun, but it was also an absolute shitshow.
Liberals cannot by essence be Conservative. Liberals mean anything goes. In turn this creates chaos. Small c conservatism is exactly that. We conserve the best in our society. We allow the individual to create his own life and future through a framework of traditional values and institutions.
Liberals are mow running our institutions and they have a tendency to want change for the fun of creating a new order.
Libertarians were the fighters of Liberty and freedom to be who you are and create a society that benefits all, not the few. This leads to classic capitalism which means opportunities, hard work, creating/manufacturing and profit that is given in philanthropy to the community. None of this prevails in the West today. Ancient Greece, England and America were the pioneers of this. Unfortunately liberalism has won out in this increasingly greedy and materialistic world. The stealing of labour, the mind control and the break up of the conservative order has created a society in limbo where men are no longer men and women refuse to nurture the next generation.
Your analysis is pretty near spot on. People need to stand up and be counted as individuals. Persons like Toby Young have been at the forefront of a ‘pushback’ and has been supported from the outset by people like myself who was behind him from Day 1 of the lockdown.
I have emailed my young Tory MP every 5 days or so for a year from March 2020 and then every 2 weeks for the 2nd year of lockdown regs. I have assailed him and Tory MSPs with facts, accurate graphs and proper intepretations of the Covid issue.
I have not worn a mask in Colditz Scotland since last June 19th and have assailed all and sundry about what they should be doing and why the Government was totally misguided with their ‘nudge’ fear campaign. I have taken a lot of stick and if more people stood up for their freedoms and stopped and studied the ridiculous untruths being spouted by the politicians and modellers, then we would not be in the mess we are.
More people, particularly the politicians in Westminster need ‘to grow a pair’.
Very true. A libertarian believes in the liberty of people. A liberal means anything goes as long as there is top down control. Johnson is neither.
I’m stunned that anyone should think Boris Johnson believes in anything but himself and his own personal gain.
Just look at his stance on energy.
The man reads the room and then decides.
Let’s be honest. Boris Johnson is a fake conservative. He only wants to please the far left.
Will they see sense about net zero? What do YOU think?
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/will-they-see-sense-about-net-zero-what-do-you-think/
Patrick Benham-Crosswell
Stand for freedom with our Yellow Boards by the road
Thursday 7th April 5.30pm to 6.30pm
Yellow Boards
The Meadows (A321) Marshall Rd
College Town
Camberley GU47 0FD
Saturday 9th April 2pm to 3pm
Yellow Boards
Loddon Bridge A329 Reading Rd
Winnersh (Outside Showcase)
Wokingham RG41 5HG
Stand in the Park Sundays from 10am – make friends & keep sane
Wokingham Howard Palmer Gardens
(Cockpit Path car park free on Sunday)
Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Bracknell
South Hill Park Rear Lawn RG12 7PA
Telegram http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
Johnson is Fake.
Look to his father if you want a glimpse of his real personality!
I’m not sure the comparison holds. The liberals have become intolerant legalists, tin-pot-dictators who want to ban everything not approved of by their own narrow view of the world. In terms of LGBT+ conversion therapy, the liberals want to ban it outright, while the descendants of the puritans, evangelical Christians, want people to have the legal freedom to choose. The Act of Toleration of 1689 gave non-conformist Christians the right to worship freely, and not attend and tithe to the Anglican Church – some non-conformists, such as John Whiting, even spent time in jail for their Quaker faith. Liberals have traditionally supported religious freedom (Tim Farron was the last old-style liberal standing), but now they have turned 180 degrees to oppose religious freedom.
In terms of Wales and Scotland – I can’t speak for Scotland which seems divided in itself, but for Wales a combination of religious revival, historic Norman overlords, puritan revivals, and unionised labour, has led to national social cohesion – they care about their neighbours, but that can be restrictive of growth and enterprise.
Should gay advocacy also be banned as that’s converting people from their biological sex?
That pendulum of government intervention is best left in the middle if you ask me.
Yes, it should.
I reckon evangelical Christians aren’t really too keen on sex changes, gay marriage and the rest of it. They’ve been pushed into appearing to not mind one way or the other so long as it’s a persons own choice. But really, what they think.- and I’ll go out on a limb here and suggest most ordinary people also think – that the less of it the better.
One may be somewhat libertarian and an Evangelical Christian. The importance of freely deciding for the Way is integral, as is the parable of the wheat and the tares. To endorse the right to choose is not to celebrate the tares, though it is also to acknowledge that it is often near impossible for imperfect humanity to tell the one from the other and also that the roots are so entangled that to try to tear one up risks damaging many others.
Certainly the optimum in these matters is to be clear-sighted and grateful for what you are in terms of male or female, to be what you are in the best way you can, and to love and appreciate both male and female, while being fascinated by difference, imbued with a sense of wonder and loyal to one another in a lifelong faithful marriage. That is the ideal; few attain it,and some complain about guilt before an ideal they have failed to attain. However to replace this ideal with other ideals is by definition less loving, (and no less potentially guilt-inducing for those who believe all the new ideals and fall short.)
Those of us who genuinely are evangelical Christians support the biblical teaching on these matters. Those who support these things are only playing at following Christ.
They are not liberals then, by definition.
Face up to the Puritans and don’t let them get their way. They have run the show for the past two years and look at the damage they have done; and on a spiritual, psychological, emotional, social and economic level.
They are soulless bureaucrats at heart and cruel beyond belief. What people have experienced over the past two years is akin to communism, and wasn’t it fun…
Well, now it’s time for some fun and a return to full-fledged freedom. But running parallel to this revived state of mind must be a fully independent investigation into who was responsible and why? To be followed by prosecutions and gaol-time for those responsible. Hancock, Whitty, Vallance, Ferguson et al., are you listening?
Even truths about actual vaccine injuries are dismissed in Parliament, it seems beyond hope that those responsible will get what they deserve
I wonder where Lord Sumption is on this. He was great re lockdown and cannot imagine that the injustices meted out to those with clear vaccine injuries could do anything other than rile him.
Missed out ‘I’ before ‘cannot imagine’. Sorry.
“To be followed by prosecutions and gaol-time for those responsible.”
In a galaxy far, far away, Reiner Fuellmich’s lawyers are on the job! Not long now….
We’d be well advised to view this as the end of WWI with WWII still to come.
The people who direct Hancock, Whitty, Vallance, Ferguson et al. will be back with another “pandemic”.
This time around they’ve set up the foundations for the system of global population control they have planned. Systems are now pretty much in place for a global bio-ID.
Most importantly the population has been primed to see jabs and vax passports as the solution to a global epidemic and to accept that speed of deployment is essential (so no time for anyone to question or think.)
As soon as the central digital currency is ready for roll out, they’ll hit us again. And that will be it.
My thoughts exactly. Billy has already told us a new “pandemic” is on the way, they now claim to be able to roll out poisons, silly me, I meant injections, in just 100 days and the current lull is simply that – a lull.
When they start WWII it is going to be carnage. I suspect there will be non-coincidental food and fuel shortages around the same time.
Gaol time for the perpetrators of the last two years, with a wholly Globocrap owned judiciary?
Fantasy land.
Puritans have run the show for at least 30 years, not just the last two. There is no return to fully fledged freedom while we have surveillance cameras in the streets and undercover cops deceiving women into carrying their babies.
Are we pretending that the Tories of the 80s and 90s were not puritans? The ones who banned ‘video nasties’ and legislated for how many BPMs your dance music can have before it’s a public order offence?
Those guys were only laissez faire when it came to economics.
Except they weren’t laissez-faire in that regard either, as the boom and bust, followed by the ERM debacle demonstrated.
True enough…. Thatcher and Lawson believed in Hayek & Mises, but Major and Lamont did not.
The cartoon says it all: he allowed sanctions to be imposed when he really didn’t believe they were necessary (or that a select few breaking them wouldn’t matter).
Not a face mask in sight at Prince Philip’s memorial service in Westminster Abbey.
Which is a bit odd during a pandemic, don’t you think?
These people know that others are still being fined for not wearing face masks…!
Actually, I had a look at the blown-up version of this image and I found three face masks – a few rows from the back on the right of the image! Still, as I noted in my comment above, there is always the odd exception!
Not true, this happened on March 29th by which time there were no rules in place for face masks in England, guidance yes but obviously no one paid much attention to that. Quite rightly.
There is supposed to be a pandemic – whether face masks are a ‘legal requirement’ or not has nothing to do with the fact that those who attended the memorial service were taking the piss.
The Queen herself said you are ‘selfish’ if you refuse to get jabbed to ‘protect others’ – what a hypocrite!
Cavaliers supported the arbitrary power of a vain, foolish, stubborn, short-sighted, treacherous man who thought that ‘a king and a subject are two clean different things’, and who therefore claimed absolute power, answerable to nobody, by ‘divine right’.
Just like Covid tyrants everywhere.
I believe that the “Toff” Bullington club smashed up various establishments because they could pay for all the damage for the peasants to clean up.
Now, who was it who was in the Bullington club?
Anyone need any journalists beating up? Boris can help!
Outstanding point. Not keen on the depiction of them as charming, raffish chaps who just believed in having a good time.
Props to you for using the word raffish.
I always wonder whose side i would have been on in the Civil War. As you say, the monarchy was pretty ghastly but I can’t see me being an austere Puritan either. Not sure how easy it would have been to sit on the fence!
It wasn’t much of a choice. As far as ordinary folk were concerned they probably mostly kept their heads down and tried to get through it all unscathed. Which is what I do now.
I’d have been for Parliament. Yes, things went awry, but they started in honest opposition to arbitrary power, and I’ll always stand with those who do that. And a thousand times more so, now that we know from first-hand experience what it is like to live under arbitrary tyranny.
Yes, and even within the Parliamentary cause, the principles of dissent were worked out. For example, when Cromwell began to get autocratic ideas, Baptists in his army were willing to confront him openly, whilst remaining loyal to the cause, and then to prepare their congregations to weather oppression with their convictions intact. And they recruited amongst working people, despite severe persecution under Charles II.
I studied the history of one such church (my own) and the lessons for conscientious dissent today are invaluable.
The idiot English then called for the reinstatement of the monarchy and ended up with Charles II:
“Charles had no legitimate children, but acknowledged a dozen by seven mistresses. His subjects resented paying taxes that were spent on his mistresses and their children.”
Always remember that it was (ultimately) the Royalists who wrote the history, and set the stereotype of the Puritans for people now.
Read the Puritans themselves and you get a different view – or see their legacy in the sciences (think Robert Boyle), in public education (look at the increase in male and female literacy under their influence), in family life, in the theory and practice of religious toleration, in democratic representation and the valuing of the trades, etc.
Remember that, in Britain, the non-conformist political legacy was Liberalism, and that of the Royalists Toryism of the hierarchical kind.
So according to Paul Charles we should just ignore Johnson’s deliberate destruction of our economy; the failure to carry out a cost/benefit analysis which may have stopped it; the wreckage of millions of lives; the suicides; the “vaccine” injuries and deaths; the destruction of a generation of children’s life chances; the £billions lost in fraud which the Treasury are going to do SFA about …… and everything else he authorised ….. because “he didn’t really mean it” and others could and have been worse.
No thanks. A betrayal like that can never be forgiven and, as far as I’m concerned, it never will be.
Kim Jong Johnson could have avoided ‘Partygate’ by not imposing lockdown to begin with.
However, it’s not obvious Paul Charles thinks we should ignore Kim Jong Johnson’s lockdown nihilism.
As a Kemal surely Johnson could have stuffed all that alcohol in his hump for surreptitious rehydration across the desert journey of lockdown.
Oh wait…
Yep: I have always been against capital punishment, but there is, also, always the exception that proves the rule.
A suitable punishment for Johnson is life imprisonment in Michael Moore’s underpants.
If you can think of anywhere more disgusting, except for Chris Christie’s underpants, please keep it to yourself….
Lockdown was as Puritan as it can be, everything that was even remotely enjoyable was either banned, denounced or made an unnecessary chore.
Actually historical records show that the ‘Puritans’ had a whole heap more fun than the people had during lockdown.
In which case, their spirit was distilled, as it were, by the new Puritans, the Greens and the Woke, and all fun really was abolished.
Yes, they could even get together to pray and sing hymns, which is more than any Christians were permitted to do under Covvie fascism.
The problem is that Boris is neither a Cavalier nor a Puritan. He’s just a lazy, unprincipled opportunist whose views reflect the last person who spoke to him.
Quite so – anyone who judges a politician by what they have said or written is clearly just a classic dupe! Ludicrous analysis; sorry, Charles.
Spot on.
His recent caveated support of biological reality won’t last long either. The weasel will reverse-ferret on May 6th, if he’s not cornered like a trapped rat on it before then.
Has it been two or three years, I’m losing track of time. Anyone would think a vacuum has been created by this government whereby all and sundry can push their own agenda with impunity.
The Captain of this ship, if indeed he is the captain, clearly lost control after we left port. Well here we are, we’ve been sailing for what seems like an eternity, visited just about every depressing harbour imaginable and finally reached our destination, if I knew where it was I’d send a postcard.
It’s been 2. But has felt like 20.
It’s been a literal lifetime for the most vulnerable and helpless among us, who should have enjoyed the most protection of their futures.
I think we are not at the destination yet. It really can get worse. Wait and see.
I expect it will be the equivalent to this. Captain’s log. Reached destination, according to navigator. No sign of land or anchor, now drifting. Day two, stumbled upon verdant island, believed undiscovered, will name this new place Johnson’s England. Abandoned ship with all supplies and waved goodbye to passengers.
I don’t think there’s much sign he believes in anything except himself and his own power. Probably his gut instinct is less totalitarian than some other leaders e.g. Starmer, but it’s fairly irrelevant given how utterly weak he obviously is.
I don’t think expecting politicians to leave people alone as much as possible is realistic – what you need is to build as much protection into the structure of your government, your legal system and your culture as possible, so that people are much more intolerant of tyranny. But that’s easier said than done. The USA managed something close for a while and remnants of that survive, but their history has been one of gradual encroachment by the state, especially the Federal Government, into people’s lives.
Only because to be a totalitarian you need a certain work ethic. I suspect he rightly sees being a totalitarian as too much hard work.
Being a puppet totalitarian doesn’t need that much work at all, one’s lines arrive as if by magic from on high. If in doubt hide in a nearby fridge.
That’s certainly Mark Dungford’s view.
Who is Mark Dungford?
The popular name in Wales for Drakeford i believe
Thanks. I often get confused with hip talk.
The rapist’s dad.
The one who didn’t wear a face mask at the Indians’ Diwali Disco, despite telling others they should.
You can give that as an excuse, but you’d be very wrong to do so since Johnson led the charge against liberty.
Nobody forced him to form SAGE.
Nobody held a musket to his head and told him that he must believe Neil Ferguson, a man who’s never produced a Model of Doom that wasn’t off by an order of magnitude or two, and who, lest we forget, also didn’t feel minded to act as though he believed his own Good Science.
It was ICL’s Report 9, fully sanctioned and eagerly grasped by Johnson’s regime, that provided the excuse for imposing the New Normal across the entire Anglosphere.
This is all on him, and nobody else.
Nice to see someone BTL gets it, or is at least prepared to say it. Not that it will stop Toby’s never ending defence of his indefensible chum.
“I’m sure it’s just a dreadful mistake, and bigger boys made him do it, then ran away.”
“This is all on him, and nobody else.”
I’d say the responsibility is all on him. The buck stops at the PM’s desk, after all, as the Americans put it.
But the blame spreads a lot wider.
Johnson has been the willing conduit through which every totalitarian policy and decision has flowed in the UK for the last 2 years. Without his spineless adherence and promotion of the Big Pharma, Imperial College, SAGE, Gatesian, WHO and WEF agenda we would NOT have been in this mess. To try and excuse him is simply not credible, as there has never been even two degrees of separation between Johnson and the perpetrators of major crimes (some murderous) against UK citizens (as in most cases our glorious PM had either personally appointed or endorsed the criminals).
Of course Johnson’s guilt does not render others blameless, but that is very different from trying to shift the principle blame from the leader of our country who has accepted the globalist script from on high, and effectively engineered this social and economic disaster via his communication of their every order.
SAGE was formed long before Boris became PM. Not excusing him in any way: just pointing out that he didn’t invent it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_Advisory_Group_for_Emergencies
Fair point, well made.
I’ll virtually-edit for “Nobody forced him to follow SAGE’s diktat”.
Remember, he was all about herd immunity and targeted protection before being brought to heel (and hell) by Witless and Unbalanced,
And so the rewriting of history begins … because it was overwhelmingly the number crunchers who were opposed to this insanity, and it was the idiots who spend their time partying and following each new fashion, who gleefully went along with the puritanism not just embracing it but eulogising it.
Yes, i wasn’t very happy with the choice of Mr Gradgrind as the Puritan. After all facts, facts, facts were what was denied, eg Carl Heneghan’s Institute for Evidence-based Medicine was ignored. A better choice i think would be Uriah Heep, claiming to be doing everything to protect and support his employer while lining his pockets all the while.
Uriah Heep are on tour this autumn, I do recommend you go and see them….
Yes, the numerate opposed this, the fantasists, the Piltdown man hoaxers, the purveyors of galactically inaccurate numbers extrapolated from false assumptions demanded lockdown.
On that particular point, there seems to be a good deal of evidence that our government nowadays runs on ethanol and cocaine. Is that why they can’t tell their arse from their elbow?
I hear Kim Jong Johnson snorts coke and the fizzy bubbles go right up his nose.
An enjoyable read but, really, come on. We’re an island, but we’re not an island. To characterise this as a domestic tiff between schools of the body politic seems like frippery. No need to provide further explanation just some buzz words: WHO, BMGF, Imperial College, World Economic Forum, Davos etc etc etc etc
Who was bribed? Who was compromised? Who was leaned on? Who knew what and when? This is about crime and corruption surely, not ideology.
This article rather belittles the pain and misery that the population has been put through these last two years. Oh, it’s just been a jolly jape between factions. The realities of course are to be found in the answers to your final paragraph questions CG.
I reject the premise that he believes in anything. It seems to me that the only thing he cares about is furthering his own agenda, which appears to be set quite rigidly by Mrs Prime Minister and her handlers.
This article proffers a false analogy and a bifurcation of English history. It is difficult to decide where to start with this. The analogy is horribly strained and simplistic.
For a start, the Puritans were dealing with the ongoing Reformation and its effects, and had genuine concerns both religiously and politically. In contrast, the SARS-2/COVID ‘Puritanism’ is nothing of the sort. Depending on who we are dealing with in this multifaceted cult, this ‘concern’ was in some cases – particularly among the establishment class – contrived, in some cases – particularly among the masses – born of an infantilised mind incapable of (and/or unwilling to) rationally coming to its own conclusions based on research… and so on. While the Puritans overreached in certain areas (in some cases understandably given what they themselves suffered or had witnessed others suffering), they had genuine concerns living in an entirely different period.
In short, the very Gospel was at stake here, and lives were genuinely at risk, whereas this pseudo pandemic has been one large pantomime.
Secondly, this bifurcation of history, where we are offered ‘Puritan vs Libertine’, is utterly simplistic. This excludes a necessary middle, leaving out the ‘conservative’ element which historically has made up at least a large portion of society, and I would suggest a majority of society over history, hence our society’s survival as a cohesive society up until relatively recently. Without this necessary foil to the two ‘extremes’ (though Puritanism was far less extreme), our society wouldn’t have survived for so long.
Moreover, the ‘Libertine’ has no foundation to argue against ‘moral puritanism’. On a consistent libertarianism, followed to its logical ends (for example, see the sexualisation of society and gender ideology), the ‘Libertine’ has no grounds to be arguing against the ‘Puritan’s’ position since the ‘Libertine’ has surrendered all moral authority.
This hasn’t been exhaustive, but I don’t have time to say more.
Hear hear.
True Puritans were honest, hard-working, God-fearing people who strove to live quietly, in accordance with God’s commandments.
Indeed, Annie. It’s usually liberals and libertarians who try to criticise and mock the Puritans, the very liberals and libertarians who have surrendered all moral authority, are without a consistent and objective mechanism by which to make any meaningful moral claims, and are thus reduced to arbitrariness.
Great to see you posting again, dear sister.
Great to see you posting again, dear sister. Indeed it is – never an uninteresting word.
But although I would broadly agree with you MR, I would argue that liberals and libertarians do not necessarily lack all meaningful moral authority. Many have bravely fought against earthly tyrannies, and not simply for their own sakes, but for the sake of others.
I wouldn’t disagree if you are saying that liberals (largely of the past) and libertarians have fought good moral battles, etc. My argument would be that they have done this from an inconsistent position. Given liberalism and libertarianism emphasise the primacy of the individual, and by extension individual tastes, and given that this stands in contrast to the needs of a healthy society, these of necessity lead to moral anarchy. Hence both liberalism and libertarianism surrender moral justification since they have, either explicitly or implicitly, abandoned objective moral norms and the objective standard which gives legitimacy to those norms.
Uptick from me.
“are without a consistent and objective mechanism by which to make any meaningful moral claims,”
Having an imaginary friend as an adult doesn’t give you a consistent and objective mechanism to make moral claims.
If that’s your level of argumentation then you’re out of your league, sausage. I suppose the big metaphysical questions passed you by.
Let’s get down to the nitty-gritty. Do human being possess intrinsic moral value? If so, whence did they derive this value? In what is this value grounded? Why ought Government respect other human lives and not do them harm or prevent them from living their lives?
The people who made the decisions seem to have an imaginary friend by the name of Moloch.
IMO They should post this above the fold as a counter to the published drivel.
What was significant was not the parties but the highly selective controlled-media outrage at the parties. The public was being told what to be outraged about. Where was the outrage at the lack of masks at the G7 meeting in Cornwall? Why did the outrage only appear 18 months after the event, when the final COVID restrictions were being removed in advance of many other countries?
Exactly.
Boris’s big mouth let the cat out the bag when he accidentally told the truth
Boris Johnson on boosters – YouTube
Then all MSM hell appears
Now be fair, they wore the masks for the press photo gathering…
Good piece.
“It seems clear then that no matter how incompetent Boris is, there are worse people waiting in the wings. Almost all centre-Left parties called for longer lockdowns and tougher restrictions; they are the summation of the Puritan tradition. The people calling for Boris’s head are the same who cheered as masked zealots broke up barbecues and dispatched drones to spy on walkers. They supported the lockdowns and they wish we were still under lock and key. Unfortunately, this is the gallery Boris has spent two years playing to when he should have stuck to his own tribe.”
This is the sad truth.
But also, we have to consider the Green puritan agenda, where Johnson is also playing the true believer without anything like the same excuse. Perhaps we can blame that on his woman (and his weakness, obviously).
We have to consider his regime’s anti-free speech laws.
We have to consider his regime’s refusal to confront mass immigration as the inherently harmful thing that it is, and properly control it. (Not helped by the current entirely gratuitous import of thousands of Ukrainians, apparently for virtue signalling purposes. Not that I’ve got anything against Ukrainians, per se, but it all helps to push the globalist interventionism that expats invariably encourage in their destination countries – many of the worst neocon agitators in the US are second generation eastern European imports).
On all these issues, the alternatives are if anything worse than the “Conservatives”. As I’ve frequently noted, our problem is not a corrupt and harmful political party, it is a corrupt and harmful political class and system.
No it isn’t. The Tory Party embraced the Green Agenda with their “Green Broccoli” logo in 2006, as was already preparing to be the NeoLib inheritor to Blair’s New Labour; Brown failed to understand the rules of the game. Thus the Conservative Coalition Government from 2010-15 was New Labour in word and deed, with administrations from 2015 onwards merely confirmed the shift.
The Roman Empire was divided East / West, so Centrist NeoLib Politics hangs onto quaint remnants of the past such as left and (err) right to keep the voters from crying foul. The current LabCon parliamentary coalition, that gleefully foisted covid coercion, crony capitalism & murderous jabs onto the populace has nothing to do with any workable definition of conservatism.
But hark!! Boris is addressing Russian citizens online (or those that know how to use a VPN, let’s ignore that his minions have banned RT and Sputnik in the UK) and pointing out those ‘undoubtedly Russian’ war crimes, while simultaneously sending much needed NHS ambulances to ferry Azov death squads and film crews around; just as they were used in Syria. Vanessa Beeley (independent journalist) has previously pointed all this out, while warning (two weeks ago) that White Helmet organisers have already moved to Ukraine, and to expect imminent false flag videos. We didn’t have to wait long.
Johnson is not a politician, just a disturbed elitist opportunistic Globalist stooge, working for the same boss as his colleague Zelensky. Both will have a sell by date tattooed somewhere about their person. Meanwhile the corrupt and corrupting UK party political system is now a tool for others, certainly not the voters.
Political left/right has nothing to do with the Roman Empire. It’s to do with the places occupied by coteries of the French revolutionary assembly on the ‘hemicycle’.
Did I ever say it had? I am not addressing the origin of left and right. ‘Centrist’ Neolib politics recruits from those places once ascribed to the now defunct left and the now defunct right. Blair’s New Labour 1997 followed the same instruction manual as successive post 2010 Conservative led governments have. The NeoLiberal globalist agenda in the UK moved to the most viable political location (party), and as such has remained in continuous power from 1997 to the present, only the name has changed. And ‘New Labour’ by any other name….
Likewise the Roman Empire didn’t collapse, it simply moved eastwards to a more viable geographic location.
The left/right divide wasn’t an infallible guide to political intentions in revolutionary France, and it certainly isn’t today.
Nor does the Cavaliers/Puritans argument fit the bill (though I rather enjoyed the essay from a stylistic point of view).
There’s something else at work: a concern for truth, perhaps even for the sanctity of the individual – taking the form of an objection to any form of tyranny.
I’m not any sort of a biblical scholar, but I love the first Book of Samuel – with its references to the taking of bribes and “perverted judgment”. Unfortunately, the people wanted to be “like all the nations” and have a king that would “judge us, and go out before us, and fight our battles” – despite the warnings.
Perhaps we find ourselves being required to ask why we subordinate ourselves to others, to examine the consequences, and to reconsider how we organise our societies.
No. Wrong. Nothing to do with ancient British history.
This has everything to do with allowing ourselves to be dictated to by intranational bodies – particularly those in Brussels and Geneve and the long term goal to fatally weaken all nation states.
It is all by design and that design is to kill 75%-85% of the population of these isles.
N.B. somewhere between 11 and 12, maybe I should have had a line……11.5 Introduce Marburg Virus from Ugandan Wombles which flew to the UK to get away from climate change and a new even more deadly vaccine launched to mandatory acclaim weeks after the new virus is identified.
That’s a pretty comprehensive summary.
Top of the class. Chapeau.
They call this activity “whoring”.
.
Rishi Washi, Bojo, don’t trust any of them
Is Rishi Sunak a bigger threat to the Elderly than the Death Drug Midazolam?
https://dailyexpose.uk/2022/04/07/is-rishi-sunak-a-bigger-threat-to-the-elderly-than-midazolam/
BY THE EXPOSÉ
Stand for freedom with our Yellow Boards
Thursday 7th April 5.30pm to 6.30pm
Yellow Boards
The Meadows (A321) Marshall Rd
College Town
Camberley GU47 0FD
Saturday 9th April 2pm to 3pm
Yellow Boards
Loddon Bridge A329 Reading Rd
Winnersh (Outside Showcase)
Wokingham RG41 5HG
Stand in the Park Sundays from 10am – make friends & keep sane
Wokingham Howard Palmer Gardens
(Cockpit Path car park free on Sunday)
Sturges Rd RG40 2HD
Bracknell
South Hill Park Rear Lawn RG12 7PA
Telegram http://t.me/astandintheparkbracknell
Excellent analysis of the situation BJ has got himself into. How does he get out?
By imprisoning himself in Michael Moore’s underpants for all eternity…..
We have to vote him out… …oh, wait a minute, who do we then vote in?
The key point missing from this analogy is that nobody at these parties had any belief that the whole social distancing, lockdowns and mask charades were necessary. If they had truly believed that they were at risk of contracting and spreading a deadly disease that could kill them or others close to them, which was the load of old bull they were busily selling to the rest of us, they would never have contemplated such meetings. If you believe that the water is contaminated, you don’t dive in and have a good swim. Again and again.
They knew that they were peddling tosh. It wasn’t just hypocrisy; it wasn’t just dishonesty; it was downright evil. Perpetrated in full consciousness of what they were doing.
Yes.
From the beginning, I have told everyone and anyone that I have been breaking all the rules, not wearing the mask, travelling without let or hindrance, and the latest breed of British Little Hitlers (and indeed most of other nationalities) have left me alone. They only prey on the ones who are afraid, you see, the ones who validate their nasty, stupid rules by trying to follow (or at least attempting to appear that they are trying to follow) their nasty, stupid rules.
Same here.
I’ve just returned from a GP visit – an unpleasant experience to say the least. Anyway I reported to reception and was asked to take a seat, which I did, it was marked up “Do Not Sit Here.” Well they can ‘eff you see key’ that.
The next person to report to reception was asked to wear a mask and he duly obliged.
Why wasn’t I asked to wear a mask? Why was the GP so brusque and unprofessional and keen to get rid of me?
Would I be correct thinking that my “card” is marked?
Covid denier. Conspiracy theorist. Non-believer, or perhaps just, trouble causer?
Denier of the efficacy of voodoo cultism masquerading as science, that’s what you are.
As for conspiracy theorist, well, you’ve used your eyes, exactly what cultists don’t do and cannot do, as cultists.
Thank you MVL.
You remind me.
I go to Scotch Whisky festivals and a former friend of mine went ballistic at me on Facebook for rejecting the whole lockdown sadistic farce. He said he had lost relatives to Covid. I could have said that lockdown nearly killed me but settled for blocking the turd instead.
There is a large whisky festival coming up very soon in the Highlands and I’m wondering if he’ll be there. If he is, I wonder if he’ll challenge me.
For information, I’m hardly Hafthor Bjornsson but I do have an enormous advantage in size and strength over him and I wonder if he has the courage in his convictions to take me on.
I can’t believe he’s learned anything in the intervening two years since I unfriended him.
You claim you have shown falsified documents at airports.
We have no evidence of that, just your word.
Far too kind to Johnson – arguably the most unreliable, most dishonest and disingenuous individual ever to squat in Downing Street.
He told us last year that his main ambition was not to run the country decently in the interests of it people but to make lots of money and have fun. To this end he will say whatever he is told to say abut anything.
So he is in fact just a fatter and slightly more coherent version of Joe Biden!
As in spite of his ample form, he has not one ounce of integrity in his body , we can trust and rely on absolutely nothing he says or does so long as he is in Office.
What we do know for certain is that it will be in his best interests and those of his monied Globalist backers and not ours.
Yes, when Biden was lucid, he was a weathervane, an indicator of the prevailing political wind and Kim Jong Johnson is the same.
The problem with Johnson as i see it is that not only do I think he is probably one of the laziest PM’s we’ve ever had but that he also lacks the courage of his convictions , he has been exposed as lacking any real backbone when it comes to the tough decisions, he has little of no courage in his beliefs which has been the hallmark of every great leader who ever lived from Ghandi and Churchill to Thatcher and Reagan – Johnson talked the talk for many years and when he had the chance to act on those beliefs he failed to walk the walk – he’s not a fighter like Thatcher who was prepared to go toe-to-toe with anyone and argue for what she believed in and I suspect he is the type of character who will almost immediately fold at the very first sign of pressure from those who surround him and advise him – to be honest I suspect they see him as a bit of a pushover and I think they’re probably right … ‘anything for an easy life‘ springs to mind when I think of Johnson the PM and this is where we have ended up – Johnson the man who promised so much if elected but then delivered so very little.
It is said that he basically listens to the last person in the room.
Yes, he is a ‘second-hander’, a walking or waddling receptacle of other people’s opinions.
Hear, hear. There’ll never be another Thatcher, sadly.
And she didn’t want the batons of the police against the hammers of the miners, as many say she did. No, she wanted to beat the unions with the strength of her ideas and beliefs alone. And beat them she did.
I firmly believe she would have stood up to the COVID maniacs and told Joe Public to get a grip.
RIP, Maggie. Your ideas haven’t died.
With you.
Spot on, she had a scientist’s training and was a very hard worker. I don’t believe for one moment she would have accepted Ferguson’s ‘models’, she would have seen straight through them.
Thatcher and her mates asset-stripped Britain. De-regulation of the bus services, anyone?
“Deregulation of the financial markets in order to allow the ‘poorer’ classes the ability to get into large amounts of debt was, for me, the worst of her policies. It has meant that people with enormous debts are unable to be without work, even if this work is low paid, demoralising, emasculating and management know this – so can abuse power and treat workforce less than fairly. She was without doubt clever, but evil none-the-less!”
And now all the coal mines are shut and thousands are going to die of hypothermia next winter. Well done, Maggie (and McGregor who had his tongue firmly up her bottom).
“Conspiracy theories are particularly popular among right-wing extremists”
https://elephantinthelab.org/how-conspiracy-theorists-get-the-scientific-method-wrong/
Yes, he has no ideas, no convictions, no beliefs, he is a populist, entirely dependent on what he believes will be popular.
He does what he believes will be popular or he does what he believes he will be unpopular for not doing.
Anything for an easy life is an extremely apt description of him.
In the first couple of years of Thatcher’s government the media portrayed her as knowing the price of everything and the value of nothing. When Argentina invaded the Falklands the Government was unpopular and many expected the PM to do little about it because it was not “cost effective”. But she showed a highly principled character and stood up for what she believed to be right. The mood of the country changed markedly.
Boris would do well to note that integrity and principles go down well with the voters.
It was shocking just how puritanical many people were prepared to be.
Being allowed to be a puritan would have been several steps improvement from where we were allowed to be. I cannot think that the Commonwealth authorities had police who arrested people for taking drinks on a walk, or sitting on park benches, or in their own gardens, or who stopped them seeing relations, or attending funerals and weddings or even getting married, or going to Church, or singing in groups, or holding prayer meetings, or sitting down to a meal with more than six people, or buying ‘unnecessary underwear… or…or…or (the list is endless). Whatever the Commonwealth authorities banned was a mere peanut compared to the very large hairy and inwardly putrid coconut of the truly Luciferian oppression we have suffered.
No, it was entirely puritan in nature, it was the ancient fallacy of original sin rehashed via Mao via German philosophy.
As such, all pleasure was forbidden.
Including drinks and definitely no singing.
But you could eat a Scotch egg.
Yes, that was a substantial meal and Gove was in no way laughing at the country.
An entertaining piece but there are far bigger forces in play.
This gets to the heart of what’s going on:
ATTORNEY FUELLMICH RE COVID-19 PANDEMIC: “THIS GENOCIDE IS NOT BY ACCIDENT” https://www.bitchute.com/video/SSRNPaWnYFiZ/
It’s a good argument. But, as with so many aspects of British social and political life, it ignores the class dimension, which creeps into just about every part of existence in this country.
And the class dimension played a huge role in the covid catastrophe. It was very easy for university-educated white-collar people to accept (indeed revel in) the notion of working from home. A bit more difficult for working class people driving vans, working in shops, and toiling in factories. It was easy for people with spacious private gardens (and well equipped home gyms) to dictate that public parks and recreation facilities be closed.
People living cheek-by-jowl in housing estates were much more likely to be tattled upon by their neighbours for having an illicit visit from a friend or relative. And you see this sort of rank hypocrisy throughout the covid-19 regulations. It was considered perfectly fine for the wealthy to employ, in their homes, gardeners, maids, cleaners, and nannies. But completely illegal for an ordinary person to meet a friend (in private or public) to have a coffee or pint of beer.
I don’t believe Johnson is to blame for the covid-19 catastrophe. He, like every other leader in the industrialised world, got caught in an unstoppable stampede to the bottom. A stampede started, and vigorously maintained, by an idiot cabal of junk scientists, megalomaniac public health mandarins, tabloid journalists, and power-mad petty bureaucrats. Boris Johnson would have had to have had the moral strength and character of Sir Thomas More to have stood up to the forces that engulfed world politics in the spring of 2020.
And BoJo ain’t no Thomas More.
It’s not so much class as Marxism behind lockdown, lockdown being communist and puritan, after all.
The ideas of Marx are widespread, as are the ideas derived from both him and Hegel, Green ideology is but one example.
All of this paved the way for lockdown.
SAGE were not advising that lockdown be implemented before Boris imposed the first one.
So on what basis and whose advice did he impose this disaster.
The basis that other countries had panicked and the public were panicking too, most likely.
Kim Jong Johnson was terrified he’d be unpopular if he didn’t lock down.
We need to know exactly what the reasoning was, what was Johnson’s excuse, it wasn’t ‘The Science’.
Whim, the reason he does everything.
You’re confusing class with wealth.
That’s a very good article.
I used to mutter about those who broke speed limits, or who crossed at the red man (or whatever we’re supposed to call it these days), but now I have a certain sympathy with rool-breakerz.
I have had similar thoughts myself. Covidmania has made me much less respectful of those placed in authority and left me with a grudging admiration for those who break the law.
It’s like tax dodgers. I used to deplore them, now I just think “good luck.”
“Rishi Sunak’s wife Akshata Murty defends non dom tax status and blasts claims she’s a tax dodger”
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/18191748/rishi-sunak-wife-akshata-murty-tax/
I have occasionally driven without a seat belt for the perverse puerile pleasure of choosing my own risk and refusing to obey a petty pedantic patronising law. Very immature I am sure, but a little frisson in an otherwise joyless existence.
Racist. The proper term is person of higher wavelength.
Boris is a libertarian but only below his navel and above his knees.
In every other respect he is a globalist and will happily crap all over the British people for a bribe.
This comparison between lockdown fanatics and seventeenth century Puritans is utterly fatuous. Based on tired and worn out cariacatures that have little connection with historical fact.
It was the Puritans who kept the churches open in London during the Great Plague when most of the incumbent ministers (generally royalists) fled in fear.
Boris is now a man without a country.
We do not have a proper Conservative Government and we haven’t had for a long time. The UK has seen soft socialism creeping in since John Major. Johnson is only concerned with Johnson. However, if we had properly chosen and elected MPs there would have been a very strong backlash in his own party. As we have seen the backlash yesterday in the Greek Parliament.
Westminster is controlled by the Globalists (men in grey suits). The Party Associations no longer choose their candidate. It’s done from Central Office in Whitehall.
the solution to this dire problem of managerial Government is to stop voting for the same old same old. Stop listening to the tired mantra that the Tories are better than Labour or Labour is the party of NHS and Benefits to working classes. Neither is true. Every single political party wants socialism. Top down control. They want to drain us of our money, our autonomy and our families.
I will never vote again. I will mark my voting paper ‘none of the above’ so those greedy career sycophants know exactly that I will no longer listen to their lies or obey their petty rules. When this country finally produces a Party that has backbone, policies that benefit the taxpayer, a leader strong enough to stand up for British values and has a moral compass to put UK before any other country, prepared to dissolve the corrupt Scottish and Welsh Parliaments and bring us back together, then and only then will I vote again. Pigs will fly before we see a truly patriotic government with strong, decisive leadership.
What the last two years has revealed is just how stupid and gullible most people still are. They have decided to side with the puritans because they are persuaded by lies that it’s the right thing to do.
In my day a Roundhead was someone who was circumcised a Cavalier not so.
As multiple others have already pointed out, it is historically incorrect to compare the Puritans to those pushing the covid narrative. And, frankly, this article does a disservice to the Puritans, whose history I have studied, and whose books I have read by the hundreds. Puritans promoted thoughtful discussion, wholesome activities, courage through hardships, and love for neighbors.
Rather, as I have observed, covid divided every category and group of people. Some religious folk fell for the narrative, others rejected it. Some atheists bought the covid lies, others saw the truth. Some conservatives swallowed the deceptions of the media, others refused the fiction. Some liberals went covid mad, others kept their sanity. Some recognized that the narrative was false, yet chose to publicly support it for fear of reprisals or love of money.
It is worthwhile keeping this in mind.
Think my analysis was better.
Fair comments! But the article was quite good fun.
The article seems to give the past 2 years a dimension which has almost a misty eyed romanticism…the Cavaliers and Roundheads in (now) eternal combat. However, this dimension isn’t what was played out although no doubt some elements were/are present as by products (the continuing rise of the killjoys).
This has been Al Johnson’s application of the gobalists’ plans. Other leaders in other countries tried it differently, perhaps contingent on social mores or history.
‘Libertarians’, ‘Cavaliers’, whatever the label, all had their price and were eager to be paid. We, the bedrock of societies, have been sold out, told to stay silent(censored left right and centre), told to accept the arms of the bio security State to be eternally ‘safe’.
Non compliance is our modus operandi and it will undermine the tyrants’ Shangri-la.
This article has more respect for Johnson than I do. I don’t believe his image as a cavalier is any more real than his adoption of roundhead policies. He does whatever is politically convenient at the time.
At a time when some of his rivals, notably Rishi Sunak, seem to be much more level headed and indeed very much more Conservative, I fail to see why anyone would cheer the idea of Johnson clinging on to power a moment longer.
Come off it: the Cavaliers represent the Norman conquest Dukes and Prince Bishops who feudalised the peasants for centuries, freedom for their own decadence and theft, the Stuarts were anti Parliamentarians, divine right of kings. Puritans theologically got the Bible into the hands of the ploughboy and taught him to read, they taught individual faith not the Inquisitorial state religion of the Covid regime and Woke – unless you confess the faith of the indefectible and infallible CEO in Rome, get burned. Yes Covid and net Zero is an oppressive inquisition, still going strong, and the Puritan Parliamentary tradition has been smashed by the arrogant entitled aristocrats who despise the people.
The problem being, come the next election, that the UK Libertarian parties are too fragmented, meaning that voting for them would just split the vote & usher in the Covid/Climate/Ukranian Nazi awfulness of Starmer’s Labour, or the equally dire SDP. Freedom loving Britons need to have a damn hard think about uniting under a single banner PDQ… #ReformUK? …You’d still need a lot of major defections from the current Tory benches…
Perhaps we’d all be better off if everyone voted ‘Monster Raving Looney Party’ …
Puritans? You have no idea of history at all. Secular nanny staters won. Puritans continue to preach the saving gospel of Christ, as we always have done. The most wonderful hope and joy it is possible to offer anyone.