Skip to comments.Scottish Court Prorogation Ruling Shows Anti-Brexit Establishment is Hard At Work
Posted on 09/11/2019 5:19:10 AM PDT by Jim Noble
Many years ago, the then chief of a very major US business shared his thoughts with me in respect of the British Establishment. He said that a major problem with the UK is that it is still controlled by holders of assets, in particular land, at inflated prices and that the economy was run accordingly. As a consequence, the incentives to be enterprising and to work hard were diminished. He was particularly struck by how successful the British Establishment had been at keeping a grip on their privilege.
A week after I resigned as head of the British Chambers of Commerce, in order to fight for the Leave campaign back in March 2016, I wrote for the Evening Standard a piece comparing the referendum to medieval England's Peasants' Revolt, I ended by saying :
But if this is a latter-day 'peasants' revolt', take a lesson from the original. As Wat Tyler, the leader of the peasants, found to his cost, you cannot rely on our leaders, corporate and political, being gentlefolk of the fair-play kind. The establishment are ruthless in defence of their own interests." ...
For me, Brexit was an opportunity to have a go at changing things for the better and of course, to also regain our liberty and prosperity as a free and independent nation. The next few weeks will determine the future of our country and see this delivered, or it will see our country condemned to disappear as a province of an EU state. But these weeks will also determine whether, dear reader, we peasants free ourselves from the yoke.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
It turns out that the Swamp is as deep as the Atlantic Ocean. Nothing, and I mean NOTHING, will be allowed to stand in the way of the emerging neoliberal World State, and certainly nothing voted in by the gammon (Gammon is British English for Deplorables).
Thanks for the post and clarification. I’ve been following a lot of Brexiters. They are determined but I can see where this nightmare is wearing at them down. I hope they are able to prevail.
Wat Tyler I have wondered why I only heard of him in Chesterton history of England.
I don’t see how one can call this a peasants revolt when you have the following leading lights:
Boris: Eton and Oxford,
Nigel: Dulwich college - a post boys school just below Eton
Rees-Mogg: Eton and Oxford.
These are quite the opposite of Margaret Thatcher, a shop-keeper’s daughter who was a true conservative.
A type of Brexit is nearly 100% sure to happen. Even in parliament there is no majority for canceling Brexit.
Now as to hard Brexit — my opinion is that the recent “you must ask for an extension” is nonsensical and won’t fly.
Can you imagine Boris going and saying “Trust me, we need 3 more months”
And the other countries say “Trust you?”
and then they say “what will you do with 3 months that you haven’t done in the past 6 months?”
And the UK has no answer to that.
Hard Brexit - I put at 95% chance of it happened on 31 October
The peasant’s revolt is also something of a vindication of the right to bear arms. Back in those days, the almost all common men were required by law to practice archery with a longbow, powerful enough to knock an armoured man off his horse at close range with a bodkin arrow. Although the revolt was crushed, concessions to address the peasant’s grievances were made to prevent a similar occurence and I think that the military power of ordinary Englishmen during the high and late middle ages helped make England’s rulers wary of those who ruled, and careful not to push them too far.
This was a Scottish court, not the Supreme Court, which latter I believe may be the next and final instance.
which latter I believe may be the next and final instance.
The UK will come to regret the day they adopted an independent Supreme Court.
Thanks for the assessment. Let’s hope for their sake it happens! I know I’ll buy British goods where I can if possible.
What, over a queen?
"Listen. Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony."
I rest my case. (Never mind the mild non-sequiturical quote above - you get the idea.)
Very funny scene from Holy Grail.
My point was, there were no legal verdicts in the UK that were not ULTIMATELY subject to either the monarchy or, later, the House of Lords.
That a court in Scotland has issued a ruling based on their beliefs about Boris Johnson’s MOTIVES, rather than his derivative authority as a Minister of the Crown - well, we here in America know all too well where that goes.
I was 13 or 14 when I first saw that movie (and around that time the Flying Circus series)...let’s say it influenced my sense of humor into later life...:)
But, frankly, I do not quite understand your argument.
Yes, a court in Scotland issuing that ruling based on “perceived motive” seems a travesty. OK, check.
But then, this is not the Supreme Court of the UK. Formerly, as you rightly point out (not that I know any better, not being a subject of Her Majesty), it would ultimately be up to either The Crown or the HOL (House of Lords).
HOW is there any advantage in THAT?
The HOL is mostly a collection of degenerate hereditary upper class twits (another Monty Python reference!) and more recently, if I read the press correctly, a sub-collection of utterly corrupt political hacks - commies, muslim extremists, and all that.
And then there is The Crown. I must say that I respect the current Queen (not the institution as such) just based on her personal history and conduct. Impeccable. Now close your eyes and think “King Charles” (or, worse, following some unfortunately devastating meteor shower, QueenKing HarryMeghan)...
Eeeek, you’d prefer those lunatics over an independent Supreme Court?
Of what is an independent Supreme Court independent?
In the USA, the Supreme Court is independent of the will of the sovereign, making increasingly bizarre rulings to which the people or their representatives would never consent.
This is what the UK faces now.
True enough, there is no such thing as a perfect legal system!
And all tend to get corrupted over time...
My view of Parliament’s deliberations on the eve of pro-rogation left me appalled. Johnson had said he’d rather be dead in a ditch than ask Brussels for an extension of time for Brexit. Parliament on the spot and out of Johnson’s presence and over the Government’s objections, passes a law making no-deal Brexit not an option, and right then they wanted to impeach Johnson based solely on the dead-in-the-ditch statement he made before they even passed the law! He “violated” a law that wasn’t yet in effect just by speaking his mind. These are not lawmakers, they are snowflakes! Are there snowflakes in Italy’s legislature, too? Is this some self-serving international mass hysteria to counter the rise of economic nationalism that Trump and Johnson represent? I can’t bear to watch another session. It’s a good thing they’re pro-rogated. “Girly Slap” indeed.
Thatcher was the real deal, for sure. But she was also an Oxford grad. Chemistry I believe....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.