The Neo-Beveridge report- creating Feudalism 2.0
This report is the result of 30 years of research into the benefits of reversing the original Beveridge report and reverting the country back to the five Virtues of Want, Disease, Ignorance, Squalor and Idleness.
Using utterly spurious evidence and anecdotal observations about seeing blokes in wheelchairs standing up to sign their benefit cheque, this report will categorically prove that not nearly enough wealth has been filtered out of the country into offshore tax havens and despite vigorous efforts, millions of British People are still being paid an unsustainable living wage and civil society still functions. To the detriment of us.
History and background
In 1940, Sir William Beveridge, a well known Communist and member of the Cambridge Six (along with Blunt, Burgess, Philby, Maclean and Cairncross) was briefed by his handler, Oleg Madeupbullshitovich, to infiltrate the very heart of the War cabinet and to diffuse Bolshevism within the heart of Government.
The success of this propaganda campaign was clearly seen even in Churchill’s actions with his decision to ally Britain with the USSR in the light of Operation Barbarossa. As a result, millions of innocent tommies were brainwashed by ‘Uncle Joe’ into believing that the 1930’s were anything but a delightful cornucopia of Brideshead Revisitedism in which the entire population of Britain laid luxuriantly on estate lawns eating strawberries and quaffing Mouthon Rothschild under the benevolent eye of landed aristocracy, bankers and the establishment.
Brainwashed by communist propaganda, (“Invasion of the Bodysnatchers” is now seen as a Documentary on what happened to Britain in 1945) Millions voted for the Trotskyite Clement Atlee who by and large implemented the ruinous hard leftist policies of the national institute of Women:
A planned economy which will eliminate mass unemployment. The re-organisation of industry is properly outside the scope of this inquiry, but it is a sine qua non of social and economic security. It is felt that this point cannot be over emphasised; any social securityplans for the future must, if they are to succeed at all, be based on a state of society in which there is possibility of work for all, and at an adequate wage.
At the same time, Beveridge published his report advocating the destruction of the five virtues of Want, disease, ignorance, squalor and idleness. The results were disastrous- full employment, living wages, social security payments, free healthcare at point of use, personal dignity, a sense of worth and equality at record scales.
This direct rule from Moscow only saw the Aristocracy, Bankers and establishment only moderately increase their wealth. It was clear by 1979 that Britain was ripe for revolution.
Ian Duncan Smith’s findings
Mr Duncan Smith visited Glasgow once, which makes him the ideal choice to investigate the effects of Blessed Margaret Thatcher’s programme to de-Communise Britain.
”I was appalled at what I saw. Walking around seeing people living in houses, going to their work and eating I instantly realized why the Midland Industrial Council, Lord Ashcroft and the thousands of other dodgy fuckers that fund the Conservative Party haven’t made as much money as they should. Further investigation uncovered that those that don’t work, are disabled or mentally incapable receive benefits from the state.”
“I knew at that stage that despite the work of our Blessed Margaret (crosses himself), there was still an immense amount of work to do to burn the tentacles of Beveridgist Bolshevism and re-instill Want, Ignorance, Disease, Squalor and Idleness for the good of all (not just the few) of our donors, the bankers and the establishment.”
The Plan- Feudalism 2.0
Armed with Duncan Smith’s findings and with the City’s fist deep inside his anus, George Osborne made a groundbreaking speech to either DEMOS, the Adam Smith Institute, Policy Research or some other god awful swivel eyed think tank, we don’t know, just choose one, they’re all the fucking same….with his fiscal plans entitled:
"It’s poor and Median income families fault the rich didn’t make more money"
In an impassioned speech, Mr Osborne set out Conservative plans to get the economy back up and running for the benefit of he and his mates:
''Despite burgeoning short term non-union contracts, despite chopping benefits to subsistence levels, despite vilifying the sick and ill, despite bending over backwards for Big Business, New Labour have simply failed to ensure me and my Banking Friends earn even more money than usual.''
Mr Osborne then made it crystal clear who was at fault for the recession:
''It is quite clear that the blame must lie at the feet of median and low income families. They have lacked the moral rectitude and will power to resist the easy lending, borrowing and ill advised mortgages relentlessly promoted by my friends the Bankers through aggressive advertising and crap aspirational programmes such as relocation, relocation, relocation.''
''Poor people have led Britain to this sorry pass. We are simply not making enough money. My fiscal plans will address the root cause of the economic disaster.''
Gurning like a gimp as his anal city fisting gripped his appendix, he proclaimed
''As it was clearly poor and median income families which got us into this mess it is wholly and fiscally responsible that they should be the ones to suffer. We Conservatives know our History and by studying past fiscal policies we can move forward.''
''I plan to implement pre-revolutionary French Tax laws. The ancien regime knew what they were doing burdening the poor with 99.98% of the State tax burden. This will have a threefold effect- 1. Keep the poor in their place 2. Make sure I don't have to pay any tax. 3. Make Britain great again!''
”For too long Britain has rejected Want, Disease, Ignorance, Squalor and Idleness- the results have been devastating- yacht and ferrari sales have been sluggish and Cristal champage filled baths are no longer de rigeur for many"
''Tough on the poor, tough on the consequences of the poor will make us rich again. Time put the 'Great' back into 'Great Britain'!''
Conclusion
We at the Conservatives will do everything in our power to ensure that we and those we represent will get richer. The entrenched prevalence of Communism since 1945 has been disastrous for us. The State bailout of the banks shows just how insidious State Socialism is.
By introducing Feudalism 2.0 and reintroducing Want, Squalor, Disease, Ignorance and Idleness, the Society Rupert Murdoch could only dream about will become a reality.
Join us, join us today as we do everything to make your life miserable, join the big society. Look into my eyes, you are feeling very sleepy, say after me, ”feckless scum have caused our disaster, fuck welfare and fuck you mate, feckless scum have caused our disaster, fuck welfare and fuck you mate, feckless scum have caused our disaster, fuck welfare and fuck you mate……………………….”
28 June 2010
11 June 2010
Dutch Politics and the Social Model
(**Disclaimer.** I can only claim to be reasonably proficient in Dutch. About 95% of the sources and media I have used have been in Dutch, so therefore I may have missed key points or the spirit of the source. This article is in no way definitive and is just written as a guide to the Dutch Political and Social model for those who have no previous knowledge. It has also been filmed before a live studio audience.)
As expected and is custom, the Dutch General Election of June 9th 2010 has produced a result with no clear majority for any party. As is also the custom, the closed doors horse trading and protracted negotiations begin in earnest. The processes involved in forming a new Dutch Government are notable for the length of time it takes. On average 79.8 days are needed to form a new cabinet from election day. The longest took place in 1977 with 208 days and the shortest 10 days in 1956.
This article will highlight 4 areas:
1. A little History and Geography
2. The Dutch Political System
3. The Dutch Social Model (Polder Model)
4. A brief analysis of the 2010 results
God made the world, but the Dutch made the Netherlands (Dutch proverb)
The Netherlands is an estuary and delta just over half the size in square kilometers of Scotland where the Rivers Rhine and Maas (Meuse in French and English) empty into the North Sea. With 27% of the landmass and 60% of the population under sea level, the History and Geography of the Netherlands has been one constant struggle against nature, a struggle which has shaped the Dutch psyche as well as the social and political model of the country. In the words of Professor Herman Pleij in his book Hollands Welbehagen (The wellbeing of Holland):
''The Netherlands owes its existence to the democracy of dry feet. We need each other literally in order not to drown and subsequently have to rely on co-operation for the means to stay alive.''
In addition, since the Industrial Revolution, the importance of water purification has been at the very heart of the Dutch social and economic base. The pollution of the Rhine and Maas from the 19th Century onwards combined with the exceptionally low non-salinated water table and high population density, have historically been the Geographical factors behind the Dutch practice of consensus and co-operation. It is of no coincidence that the earliest recorded civil organizations in the Netherlands is Water Boards. 800 year old Water Boards meetings and minutes are on display in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam.
Historically, the strict class distinctions at the heart of British of politics and society have been all but absent in the Netherlands. After decades long struggle, the Dutch Republic was declared independent of Spain in 1648. The struggle against the Spanish created and cemented common cause between the classes. The established religion of the new Dutch Republic, Calvinism, was an egalitarian doctrine which emphasized the personal relationship between man and God and taught thriftiness, hard work and tolerance, qualities which the Dutch are still thought to possess today.
The tolerance of the authorities to religion was the key to the flourishing of commerce, trade, arts and culture otherwise known as the Dutch ‘Golden Age’. Huguenots from France and Jews from all corners of Europe fled to the Dutch Republic in the face of persecution. Jewish and Huguenot renown in commerce and finance allied with the traditional Dutch skills in seafaring and mapmaking saw Amsterdam become the international capital of finance. The Dutch East India company (the first transnational corporation) had already been founded in 1602 controlled the flow of spices and gold into Europe and had a trade monopoly in the East.
The unprecedented wealth which now flowed into the Dutch Republic saw the flourishing of arts and culture. Although class was an issue, in general terms, all classes mixed freely with each other for the common good in terms of commerce, protection against the elements and religion.
The Socio-economic and Political model of the Netherlands (the Polder model) is a direct result of these Geographical, Topographical, Historical and Religious causes.
The Dutch Political System
The Netherlands is a Constitutional Monarchy with universal suffrage based on proportional representation established in 1919. The organization of the Dutch State is based on the principles of Montesquieu’s trias politica or ‘separation’ of powers. The legislature consists of two chambers, the Eerste Kamer and Tweede Kamer (first and second chambers).
The Eerste Kamer is elected by the States Provincial (the Regions) and meets part time. It has the right to accept or reject legislation but cannot amend or initiate legislation. In layman’s terms it is a political watchdog consisting of veteran politicians elected by the regions of the Netherlands to work on their behalf. It has 75 Senators.
The Tweede Kamer is the most significant chamber in the Dutch Government and is elected by the electorate using the d’Hondt method of PR. There are no electoral constituencies, the Netherlands itself is one large constituency when voting for the Tweede Kamer. In effect, this means every single vote has equal weighting. There are 150 seats in the Tweede Kamer, if a political party gains 20% of the popular vote, they gain 20% of the seats or 30 seats in this instance. Each party publishes a list of candidates for election with the leader at the top. The voter can ‘preferentially vote’ for a candidate on the list if the candidate is well known in a region but for all intents and purposes, the further the up the list the candidate is, the more likely they are to gain a seat.
The quota - that is the number of votes that entitles a party to one seat depends on how many votes have been cast. If 9 million votes are cast, this is divided by 150 meaning each party has to gain 60,000 votes to gain one seat.
Every advantage has its disadvantage (Johan Cruyff)
As representative as the Dutch system is in terms of voter preference and power, the permanent result of Dutch Elections and the subsequent criticism is that it leads to weeks or months of discussions and meetings behind closed doors. Or in other words, anti-democratic horse trading which does not reflect voter preference.
An example of this occurred yesterday. One of Geert Wilders PVV policies was staunch opposition to the raising of the retirement age to 67. As a result, he gained many votes from the 45 and upwards age group. In initial coalition talks with the largest party, the VVD who want the retirement age rise, Wilders immediately announced he had dropped opposition to this measure.
If the election creates only permanent coalitions where all parties drop core ideological beliefs to be in power, how then does the governance of the Netherlands avoid accusations of anti-democratic practices by a small party political elite? The answer is in the Polder Model.
The Polder Model
A ‘polder’ is a dyke. The loaded significance of this word is not hard to fathom and immediately harks back to the earliest struggles against the elements. The Polder model is a system of negotiation, consensus and representation between all ranks in society, between Government, Employers and Trade Unions.
In practice since 1945, Government, Industrial and Political policy has only been formed and implemented after series of negotiations which take place at the SER De Sociaal-Economische Raad or Social Economic Council. The SER which is a federation of employers and Trade Unions advises the government on fiscal, economic and employment policies. Employees and Trade Unions are represented by the FNV, the Dutch equivalent of the TUC.
The SER’s core principles are:
• balanced economic growth and sustainable development
• the highest possible level of employment
• a fair distribution of income.
Since 1995, the Government by law does not have to consult with the SER before passing legislation but in practice and tradition it still does.
At the heart of the Polder Model is the Works Council Ondernemingsraad. This Act makes all employers responsible in setting up a works council if they employ 100 or more people. The Works Council is involved in all major decision making processes made by the employer and by law must be consulted by the lawyer. The average Dutch worker is protected both by the Works Council which mainly deals with labour related, technical and organizational issues whilst the Unions deal with representing the employee as part of the FNV at the forum of the SER.
In companies with fewer than 100 employees, Works Councils are not a legal requirement, however 60% of all companies with fewer than 100 employees have done so. This gives lie to the Union and worker bashing policies within the UK that giving power to a worker means Industrial strife. For those smaller companies without a Works Council, they are legally obliged to consult workers twice a year and on exceptionally important matters.
If, like me, you believe that Democracy in the workplace and representation of your interests to Government are integral to being an active citizen, the Polder Model is a shining beacon of how this can work. The works council in my place of employment can be time consuming and slow, but there is a harmony between employers and staff which is unheard of in my experiences in the UK. There is disagreements and arguments and the system is not perfect, but the Polder Model shows that Industrial Relations within a Western capitalist society can be structured for the benefit of all.
The 2010 General Election
Even for Dutch standards, the result of the 2010 election is exceptionally fractured. Since 1919, the leading party has never had as small a margin of victory as the VVD has now. This will make the process of coalition forming even more difficult and time consuming than has been in the past. And of course the elephant in the room is Geert Wilders PVV.
From reading the newspapers, watching television and speaking to colleagues and friends, the general consensus (there’s that word again) is that Wilders PVV will fall apart from the weight of its own contradictions and the amateurish nature of the organization. However, the question on everyone’s lips is why 1/6th of the population voted for an avowed racist who campaigned virtually on one anti-Islamic policy. Organisations which represent Moroccans and Muslims have expressed shock at the support for the PVV and the suspicions the following morning after the elections that colleagues, friends etc may have voted for Wilders.
Exacerbating the coalition building situation is the economic crisis. An administration has to be implemented as soon as possible and the only alternative the VVD has to building a coalition with Wilders is to build one with the PvDA (Labour Party). Two ideologically opposed parties may join together to nullify Wilders and it would be in the PvDA’s interests to try to stem the hard right economic manifesto of the VVD.
What makes the VVD’s coalition problem worse is that although the VVD has not ruled out joining a coalition with the PVV, every other party has. Also preventing a coalition with Wilders is International image. Between 60- 70% of the Dutch economy is export based. Having an Islamophobe and Europhobe as a Minister of Government is not conducive to promoting Dutch exports abroad.
For the first time, every newspaper has a different opinion on what is going to happen, no one is sure in the short term. The one outcome of this election that everyone is concerned with is the popular vote for Geert Wilders and what this means firstly for the future of race relations and the Dutch culture of openness and discussion as the exit polls showed much less support for the PVV than they subsequently gained.
For the first time in its history, Dutch Politics may be entering ‘interesting times’.
As expected and is custom, the Dutch General Election of June 9th 2010 has produced a result with no clear majority for any party. As is also the custom, the closed doors horse trading and protracted negotiations begin in earnest. The processes involved in forming a new Dutch Government are notable for the length of time it takes. On average 79.8 days are needed to form a new cabinet from election day. The longest took place in 1977 with 208 days and the shortest 10 days in 1956.
This article will highlight 4 areas:
1. A little History and Geography
2. The Dutch Political System
3. The Dutch Social Model (Polder Model)
4. A brief analysis of the 2010 results
God made the world, but the Dutch made the Netherlands (Dutch proverb)
The Netherlands is an estuary and delta just over half the size in square kilometers of Scotland where the Rivers Rhine and Maas (Meuse in French and English) empty into the North Sea. With 27% of the landmass and 60% of the population under sea level, the History and Geography of the Netherlands has been one constant struggle against nature, a struggle which has shaped the Dutch psyche as well as the social and political model of the country. In the words of Professor Herman Pleij in his book Hollands Welbehagen (The wellbeing of Holland):
''The Netherlands owes its existence to the democracy of dry feet. We need each other literally in order not to drown and subsequently have to rely on co-operation for the means to stay alive.''
In addition, since the Industrial Revolution, the importance of water purification has been at the very heart of the Dutch social and economic base. The pollution of the Rhine and Maas from the 19th Century onwards combined with the exceptionally low non-salinated water table and high population density, have historically been the Geographical factors behind the Dutch practice of consensus and co-operation. It is of no coincidence that the earliest recorded civil organizations in the Netherlands is Water Boards. 800 year old Water Boards meetings and minutes are on display in the Rijksmuseum in Amsterdam.
Historically, the strict class distinctions at the heart of British of politics and society have been all but absent in the Netherlands. After decades long struggle, the Dutch Republic was declared independent of Spain in 1648. The struggle against the Spanish created and cemented common cause between the classes. The established religion of the new Dutch Republic, Calvinism, was an egalitarian doctrine which emphasized the personal relationship between man and God and taught thriftiness, hard work and tolerance, qualities which the Dutch are still thought to possess today.
The tolerance of the authorities to religion was the key to the flourishing of commerce, trade, arts and culture otherwise known as the Dutch ‘Golden Age’. Huguenots from France and Jews from all corners of Europe fled to the Dutch Republic in the face of persecution. Jewish and Huguenot renown in commerce and finance allied with the traditional Dutch skills in seafaring and mapmaking saw Amsterdam become the international capital of finance. The Dutch East India company (the first transnational corporation) had already been founded in 1602 controlled the flow of spices and gold into Europe and had a trade monopoly in the East.
The unprecedented wealth which now flowed into the Dutch Republic saw the flourishing of arts and culture. Although class was an issue, in general terms, all classes mixed freely with each other for the common good in terms of commerce, protection against the elements and religion.
The Socio-economic and Political model of the Netherlands (the Polder model) is a direct result of these Geographical, Topographical, Historical and Religious causes.
The Dutch Political System
The Netherlands is a Constitutional Monarchy with universal suffrage based on proportional representation established in 1919. The organization of the Dutch State is based on the principles of Montesquieu’s trias politica or ‘separation’ of powers. The legislature consists of two chambers, the Eerste Kamer and Tweede Kamer (first and second chambers).
The Eerste Kamer is elected by the States Provincial (the Regions) and meets part time. It has the right to accept or reject legislation but cannot amend or initiate legislation. In layman’s terms it is a political watchdog consisting of veteran politicians elected by the regions of the Netherlands to work on their behalf. It has 75 Senators.
The Tweede Kamer is the most significant chamber in the Dutch Government and is elected by the electorate using the d’Hondt method of PR. There are no electoral constituencies, the Netherlands itself is one large constituency when voting for the Tweede Kamer. In effect, this means every single vote has equal weighting. There are 150 seats in the Tweede Kamer, if a political party gains 20% of the popular vote, they gain 20% of the seats or 30 seats in this instance. Each party publishes a list of candidates for election with the leader at the top. The voter can ‘preferentially vote’ for a candidate on the list if the candidate is well known in a region but for all intents and purposes, the further the up the list the candidate is, the more likely they are to gain a seat.
The quota - that is the number of votes that entitles a party to one seat depends on how many votes have been cast. If 9 million votes are cast, this is divided by 150 meaning each party has to gain 60,000 votes to gain one seat.
Every advantage has its disadvantage (Johan Cruyff)
As representative as the Dutch system is in terms of voter preference and power, the permanent result of Dutch Elections and the subsequent criticism is that it leads to weeks or months of discussions and meetings behind closed doors. Or in other words, anti-democratic horse trading which does not reflect voter preference.
An example of this occurred yesterday. One of Geert Wilders PVV policies was staunch opposition to the raising of the retirement age to 67. As a result, he gained many votes from the 45 and upwards age group. In initial coalition talks with the largest party, the VVD who want the retirement age rise, Wilders immediately announced he had dropped opposition to this measure.
If the election creates only permanent coalitions where all parties drop core ideological beliefs to be in power, how then does the governance of the Netherlands avoid accusations of anti-democratic practices by a small party political elite? The answer is in the Polder Model.
The Polder Model
A ‘polder’ is a dyke. The loaded significance of this word is not hard to fathom and immediately harks back to the earliest struggles against the elements. The Polder model is a system of negotiation, consensus and representation between all ranks in society, between Government, Employers and Trade Unions.
In practice since 1945, Government, Industrial and Political policy has only been formed and implemented after series of negotiations which take place at the SER De Sociaal-Economische Raad or Social Economic Council. The SER which is a federation of employers and Trade Unions advises the government on fiscal, economic and employment policies. Employees and Trade Unions are represented by the FNV, the Dutch equivalent of the TUC.
The SER’s core principles are:
• balanced economic growth and sustainable development
• the highest possible level of employment
• a fair distribution of income.
Since 1995, the Government by law does not have to consult with the SER before passing legislation but in practice and tradition it still does.
At the heart of the Polder Model is the Works Council Ondernemingsraad. This Act makes all employers responsible in setting up a works council if they employ 100 or more people. The Works Council is involved in all major decision making processes made by the employer and by law must be consulted by the lawyer. The average Dutch worker is protected both by the Works Council which mainly deals with labour related, technical and organizational issues whilst the Unions deal with representing the employee as part of the FNV at the forum of the SER.
In companies with fewer than 100 employees, Works Councils are not a legal requirement, however 60% of all companies with fewer than 100 employees have done so. This gives lie to the Union and worker bashing policies within the UK that giving power to a worker means Industrial strife. For those smaller companies without a Works Council, they are legally obliged to consult workers twice a year and on exceptionally important matters.
If, like me, you believe that Democracy in the workplace and representation of your interests to Government are integral to being an active citizen, the Polder Model is a shining beacon of how this can work. The works council in my place of employment can be time consuming and slow, but there is a harmony between employers and staff which is unheard of in my experiences in the UK. There is disagreements and arguments and the system is not perfect, but the Polder Model shows that Industrial Relations within a Western capitalist society can be structured for the benefit of all.
The 2010 General Election
Even for Dutch standards, the result of the 2010 election is exceptionally fractured. Since 1919, the leading party has never had as small a margin of victory as the VVD has now. This will make the process of coalition forming even more difficult and time consuming than has been in the past. And of course the elephant in the room is Geert Wilders PVV.
From reading the newspapers, watching television and speaking to colleagues and friends, the general consensus (there’s that word again) is that Wilders PVV will fall apart from the weight of its own contradictions and the amateurish nature of the organization. However, the question on everyone’s lips is why 1/6th of the population voted for an avowed racist who campaigned virtually on one anti-Islamic policy. Organisations which represent Moroccans and Muslims have expressed shock at the support for the PVV and the suspicions the following morning after the elections that colleagues, friends etc may have voted for Wilders.
Exacerbating the coalition building situation is the economic crisis. An administration has to be implemented as soon as possible and the only alternative the VVD has to building a coalition with Wilders is to build one with the PvDA (Labour Party). Two ideologically opposed parties may join together to nullify Wilders and it would be in the PvDA’s interests to try to stem the hard right economic manifesto of the VVD.
What makes the VVD’s coalition problem worse is that although the VVD has not ruled out joining a coalition with the PVV, every other party has. Also preventing a coalition with Wilders is International image. Between 60- 70% of the Dutch economy is export based. Having an Islamophobe and Europhobe as a Minister of Government is not conducive to promoting Dutch exports abroad.
For the first time, every newspaper has a different opinion on what is going to happen, no one is sure in the short term. The one outcome of this election that everyone is concerned with is the popular vote for Geert Wilders and what this means firstly for the future of race relations and the Dutch culture of openness and discussion as the exit polls showed much less support for the PVV than they subsequently gained.
For the first time in its history, Dutch Politics may be entering ‘interesting times’.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)