Fox: We will leave the customs union / Hammond: We will stay in the single market
Rudd: We will list foreign workers / May: We will have a country for everyone regardless of where you are born
May: Being a educated ‘Liberal Elite’ is bad / May: We must promote a meritocracy
May: Foreign doctors will be allowed to stay until we can train more British ones / May: We will take the time to say how much we value doctors and nurses and thank them
Johnson: We will be part of Europe, we think they are great / Johnson: Insert insult towards EU of your choice here
Fallon: We will block EU efforts to enhance security capabilities / Fallon: We want an enhanced security relationship with the EU.
May: We must consider how the state responds to disasters like Hillsborough to make sure the suffering of families is better taken into account / But we will never again – in any future conflict – let those activist, left-wing human rights lawyers harangue and harass the bravest of the brave – the men and women of Britain’s Armed Forces.
May: We will protect and enhance workers rights / Rudd: Unless you are foreign
May: If you are a tax-dodger we’re coming after you / Rudd & Leadsom: Tumbleweed
May: Using the legal system to challenge a50 is undemocratic / May: I have a mandate
Doublethink
To know and not to know, to be conscious of complete truthfulness while telling carefully constructed lies, to hold simultaneously two opinions which cancelled out, knowing them to be contradictory and believing in both of them, to use logic against logic, to repudiate morality while laying claim to it, to believe that democracy was impossible and that the Party was the guardian of democracy, to forget whatever it was necessary to forget, then to draw it back into memory again at the moment when it was needed, and then promptly to forget it again, and above all, to apply the same process to the process itself – that was the ultimate subtlety: consciously to induce unconsciousness, and then, once again, to become unconscious of the act of hypnosis you had just performed. Even to understand the word 'doublethink' involved the use of doublethink
The power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them... To tell deliberate lies while genuinely believing in them, to forget any fact that has become inconvenient, and then, when it becomes necessary again, to draw it back from oblivion for just as long as it is needed, to deny the existence of objective reality and all the while to take account of the reality which one denies – all this is indispensably necessary. Even in using the word doublethink it is necessary to exercise doublethink. For by using the word one admits that one is tampering with reality; by a fresh act of doublethink one erases this knowledge; and so on indefinitely, with the lie always one leap ahead of the truth
George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four
Nineteen Eighty-Four is a warning. Not an instruction manual though you would be forgiven for wondering at the moment. This shit is propaganda. People are buying it. Its a technic that allows people to pick and choose the bit they are hearing and want to believe whilst the state can act in an alternative fashion. Often against their best interests.
^Orwell considered doublethink to be a feature of Soviet-style totalitarianism, as reflected in this statement from a speech by Joseph Stalin: "We are for the withering away of the state, and at the same time we stand for the strengthening of the dictatorship of the proletariat, which represents the most powerful and mighty of all forms of the state which have existed up to the present day."
This is Brexit all over. We want to get rid of those unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats whilst introducing unelected and unaccountable bureaucrats.
In Nineteen Eighty Four, any form of thought alternative to the party’s construct is classified as "thoughtcrime". So what has May said about the legal challenge to a50? They are "subverting democracy". This is not true. This goes against the rule of law in this country.
Yesterday a columnist for the Times, wrote an article which would define me as a militant.
www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/30/theresa-may-extremism-disruption-orders
The difference is spelled out in the detail of the policy, where it says that it is intended to catch not just those who “spread or incite hatred” on grounds of gender, race or religion but also those who undertake “harmful activities” for the “purpose of overthrowing democracy”.
This is an area fraught with difficulties that could see non-violent political activists in all sorts of areas deemed to be “anti-democratic”. The Conservatives already say that the policy would catch neo-Nazis, raising questions about whether the EDL or the BNP would be banned under the measure. But the official definition of non-violent extremism is already wide-ranging and, as Big Brother Watch has pointed out, the national extremism database already includes the names of people who have done little more than organise meetings on environmental issues.
May wanted in 2014 to bring in laws which would silence political opposition as much as tackle terrorism. Anti-terror laws have a long history of being applied to non-terrorist situations and people. This is not an unwarranted fear. Will she try and do it?
So the question is, would this make me an enemy of the state? Would I fall foul of an extreme disruption order for my postings on MN?
The answer is a simple yes.
May does not like, nor want debate.