Friday 1 January 2016

Cameron, Christmas and the New Year

1. Well, we know that David Cameron has form - when, for example:

he forgets which football team he 'avidly' supports;

and, quoting Corbyn out of context, disgracefully accuses Jeremy Corbyn of being a hater of Britain and someone who sees Bin Laden's death as a tragedy in contrast to the victims' deaths.

2. His latest gems have come from his Christmas and New Year messages.

(a) In his Christmas message, Britain, proclaims David Cameron, manifests Christian values of 'peace, mercy, goodwill and, above all, hope'. That sounds splendid, save for two mistakes.

First, Jesus was not consistently peace-loving - according to reports, for example, those who did not want him as king should be killed (Luke, 19: 27) - and some sincere followers of Christianity have hardly consistently manifested peace, mercy etc., but have forced conversions and also threatened many non-believers with eternal damnation.  Of course, there are nuances and nuances.

Secondly, courtesy of Cameron's government, Britain's recent treatment of the poor neither manifests goodwill nor offers them much hope - as many will testify, suffering benefit cuts or disparagement at job centres and by the well-off as work shy.

(b) In his New Year message, Cameron condemns those who "shout into megaphones, wave banners and sign petitions".

So, were he to be consistent, he would be condemning, for example, the suffragettes, the various anti-apartheid and anti-racist marches - and, indeed, his friends who marched in favour of fox hunting.

He seems to forget that there is more to democracy than a dubious 'first past the post' electoral system that delivers government to those who received the support of only around 25% of those registered to vote and  a much lower percentage of the total of those registered to vote combined with those who were eligible to register but did not do so.

3.  We could add to the list the delivery of the knighthood to Lynton Crosby for his 'political service' which, I heard, was described as his 'contribution to democracy'.  Now, did 'democracy' really benefit from that service and contribution?

Sigh, sigh, sigh

No comments: