Elites Versus People


German President Joachim Gauck was booed and attacked in the streets of Sebnitz, Saxony after he blurted out the following unbelievable statement:

“The elites are not the problem, the people are the problem.”

Peggy Noonan:

The larger point is that this is something we are seeing all over, the top detaching itself from the bottom, feeling little loyalty to it or affiliation with it. It is a theme I see working its way throughout the West’s power centers. At its heart it is not only a detachment from, but a lack of interest in, the lives of your countrymen, of those who are not at the table, and who understand that they’ve been abandoned by their leaders’ selfishness and mad virtue-signalling.

Related: How Global Elites Forsake Their Countrymen (Or Why ‘The Top’ Believes ‘The Bottom’ Needs Managing)

Political elites want Britain to stay in the EU, of course. The British people don’t. Indie:

Ministers are reportedly in discussions over a delay in triggering Article 50, the formal process of leaving the European Union, which could see Britain remain a member of the bloc until late 2019…

“Ministers are now thinking the trigger could be delayed to autumn 2017,” a source who has reportedly had discussions with two senior ministers told the newspaper. “They don’t have the infrastructure for the people they need to hire,” the source added, in reference to the new Whitehall departments being set up from scratch to handle the Brexit negotiations.

“They say they don’t even know the right questions to ask when they finally begin bargaining with Europe,” the source said.

Brendan O’Neill:

Betraying Brexit: the revolt of the elites against the people

Why is everyone so chilled out about the threats to Brexit? Why isn’t there more public fury over the plotting of lords and academics and experts to stymie Brexit and thwart the will of 17.4m people? In all the years I’ve been writing about politics, I cannot remember a time when democracy has been treated with as much disgust, with as much naked, Victorian-era elitism, as it is being today. And yet we’re all bizarrely mellow. We’re going about our business as if everything is normal, as if the elites aren’t right now, this very minute, in revolt against the people. We need to wake up.

Every day brings fresh news of the revolt of the elite, of the march of the neo-reactionaries against the mandate of the masses. At the weekend it was revealed that Brexit might not happen until 2019, because David Davis and Liam Fox can’t get their departments in order, the amateurs.

On a lighter note:

AMERICANS appalled by the prospect of Donald Trump becoming president are calling on the Queen to take back the former British colony.

Tens of thousands have shared an online letter calling for Britain – which lost America in the Revolutionary War of 1765 – to step in and save the nation if Trump and the Republicans win the election on November 8.


About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Elites Versus People

  1. Harleyrider1978 says:

    They can’t stand it because the people revolted against global domination

  2. Roobeedoo2 says:

    ‘A growing number of US citizens are making a call to ‘Make America Great Britain Again’.’

    So they can join the EU? ‘Cos the rate the British Government is plodding, we ain’t never getting out:


  3. Tony says:

    One of the most galling examples is Richard Dawkins. I used to have a lot of respect for him but not anymore.

    Prior to the referendum vote he berated Cameron for allowing the public to vote on it, saying that it was a decision that should be left to the experts. He lumped himself in with the general public as someone with no expertise and so someone whose views were irrelevant.

    Which I think is a somewhat contradictory position anyway in that if he had no expertise then what on earth was he doing weighing in on the matter in the first place.

    But after the referendum vote came in, it seems he didn’t agree with the result, despite not having the expertise?

    Then he campaigned for a second referendum. So suddenly the views of the public were relevant after all. Presumably they’d be suitably propagandised first and then this time they’d be honoured.

    It was like spontaneous intellectual combustion. Only explicable by his elitist attitude and agenda perhaps.

  4. Smoking Lamp says:

    Yes, how dare the subjects think they might be citizens! And in France, youths either don’t get the message or they decided to ignore the public health elite: “For French Teens, Smoking Still Has More Allure Than Stigma” at http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2016/08/15/480128005/for-french-teens-smoking-still-has-more-allure-than-stigmaOf course the obligatory (astroturf) comments berate the renewed smoking trend!

    • Tony says:

      Orwell said that “if there is any hope it lies with the proles” but he must have been aware of the truism that hope really lies with the young. That article gives me hope.

  5. Manfred says:

    The Progressive Left, those eco-globalists or less politely, eco-Marxists who with the aid of the tertiary educated MSM and institutional(ised) academics have driven the ideological mean of society Leftward. To position slightly Right of a balanced, notional politically ‘neutral’ mean serves currently to define one as rabidly Right of the current Left centered mean. While democracy still survives (only just) the threat of a push back to true Centre Right politics is greeted by derision, scorn, media bias, and a suggestion of and actual civil unrest. If Trump wins the US General Election, it will be as mesmerizing as it is distressing to watch a Progressive groomed societal ensemble choke on their own intolerance, rejecting and dismissing the democratic choice. The Elites, those Cultural Marxists who invert all societal values may be the greatest threat to democracy we have ever known.

  6. Rose says:

    We’re going about our business as if everything is normal, as if the elites aren’t right now, this very minute, in revolt against the people

    Before, I used to give politicians the benefit of the doubt, they are only human and humans make mistakes. By their reaction to Brexit all those who have been scheming against the will of the people are laid bare, that is probably why people are so chilled, for the first time, we can see the enemy clearly.

    Minister says UK ‘gold plating’ of EU laws has stopped

    “Gold plating is a term used to describe the process where a basic EU directive is given extra strength when being incorporated into UK law.”

    “Small businesses have been enthusiastic about the move. John Allan, National Chairman, Federation of Small Businesses, said: “We will make sure that the Government keeps to its pledge to refrain from gold-plating and adding in extra UK-only requirements that make UK businesses uncompetitive with other countries across the EU.”

    Given the excuse, our governments have been routinely imposing even heavier regulations on us than required and blaming it on the EU.

    And not just the EU, compared to other countries the UK smoking bans were gold plated to the max.

  7. Ana says:

    Whether you smoke one cigarette a week, one a day or 20 a day, a smoker is a smoker, and ‘regardless of the number, they are an addict to some degree and this has implications for their health,’ says Melody Holt, of the Roy Castle Lung Cancer Foundation.

    Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-3741875/Are-occasional-party-smoker-need-stop-telling-s-harmless-habit.html
    Seeing such a high intellect, my hope that a cancer cure will be soon found has just skyrocketed.

  8. Tony says:

    Way off topic I’m afraid but of general interest I hope.

    The MSA:

    How to steal billions of dollars, most notably from the poorest in society, on false pretences AND use the cash to bankrupt the states too. Greed, corruption and waste on an unimaginable scale.

    This article doesn’t address the theft at all, instead referring to the cash as “tobacco money”, as though it originated from mysterious entities called “tobacco companies” rather than from real people (ie customers, aka smokers). None the less it covers at least some of the fall out. So one to copy and keep I think although it is a little old.


    Of course there were almost certainly no health costs to the states from smoking anyway and most probably no-one has ever died from smoking either.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      FCTC GAG ORDERS TO KEEP THE PEOPLE QUIET and have no debate the same as banning commenters…………

      fctc gag order guidelines

      11. The broad array of strategies and tactics used
      by the tobacco industry to interfere with
      the setting and implementing of tobacco control mea
      sures, such as those that Parties to the
      Convention are required to implement, is documented
      by a vast body of evidence. The
      measures recommended in these guidelines aim at pro
      tecting against interference not only by
      the tobacco industry but also, as appropriate, by o
      rganizations and individuals that work to
      further the interests of the tobacco industry.
      12. While the measures recommended in these guideli
      nes should be applied by Parties as
      broadly as necessary, in order best to achieve the
      objectives of Article 5.3 of the Convention,
      Parties are strongly urged to implement measures be
      yond those recommended in these
      guidelines when adapting them to their specific cir

  9. harleyrider1978 says:

    A Call for a Framework Convention on Alcohol Control

    Lessons for Alcohol Control from the Tobacco Movement

    Similarly, the tobacco control movement faces an international problem, with 70 percent of deaths from tobacco consumption taking place in developing countries by 2030. The tobacco industry is a global industry that is stepping up its activities in developing countries in search of new markets. Tobacco advocates considered “intergovernmental resolutions” insufficient as an isolated strategy to slow the growth of tobacco consumption.8 Use of an “intergovernmental code of conduct” calling on governments to implement that code through enacting national legislation, and asking industries to voluntarily comply with the code, was not a sufficient strategy to address tobacco control. International action was needed to deal with the trans-boundary issues of global marketing campaigns and smuggling of cigarettes.9 In response, the World Health Organization adopted a Framework Convention on Tobacco Control which entered into force on Feb. 27, 2005.10

    Rationale for an International Treaty on Alcohol

    In light of the growing problem of unhealthy alcohol consumption and significant global marketing campaigns, alcohol control requires an international coordinating mechanism similar to the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC). There is no pre-existing international convention or framework within which alcohol control could fit. However, the World Health Organization (WHO) has the competence as the “directing and coordinating authority on international health work” to undertake the creation of international instruments relevant to health. The WHO has powers under article 19 of its Constitution to develop a legally binding international convention on alcohol.12

    Key elements such as trade, transnational ownership of alcohol production, sales, promotion and advertising, distribution and smuggling hinder the management and reduction of these problems and transcend national boundaries. Alcohol problems have proven difficult or impossible to mitigate by countries acting in isolation. There is illicit transnational trade in some regions and pressure by trading partners to reduce alcohol control measures which are often characterized as barriers to trade.4,11 Adjudications of trade disputes and negotiations of trade agreements have constrained the abilities of national and sub-national governments to restrict the alcohol market.

    A binding public alcohol control agreement is becoming more necessary to counter such developments. An international Framework Convention on Alcohol Control (FCAC), in the interests of public health, could usefully counter developments in trade agreements which seek to expand alcohol markets, reduce prices and weaken national and local regulation of alcohol.4,12,13

    A Framework Convention on Alcohol Control could serve as a counterweight and an alternative to trade agreements that threaten domestic policies and provisions and could provide more latitude for countries to protect health than without the treaty. Moreover, a FCAC may be able to take advantage of the World Trade Organization (WTO) Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade that permits countries to enact technical regulations to protect human health provided that international standards exist now or soon will be adopted. A FCAC could establish a body to set minimum standards without serving as a ceiling.13

    A FCAC could further international alcohol control

    While an alcohol convention could seek international action on trade and cross broader problems, the principle effect would likely be at the national and sub-national level by setting new norms and practices of alcohol control. Based on experience of the FCTC, in addition to specific obligations and principles contained within a framework convention, the process of negotiating the treaty would strengthen alcohol control efforts within countries by giving governments greater access to scientific research and examples of best practice and motivating national leaders to rethink priorities as they respond to an ongoing international process. The process would engage powerful ministries, such as finance and foreign affairs along with health ministries, more deeply in alcohol control and raise public awareness about the strategies and tactics employed by the multinational alcohol companies. The international collaboration would mobilize technical and financial support for alcohol control at both national and international levels and make it politically easier for developing countries to resist the alcohol industry opposition to effective measures, for example, raising taxes and other restrictions on advertising. The convention would help mobilize non-governmental organizations (NGOs) and other members of civil society in support of stronger alcohol control.10 Moreover, it would create a sense of obligation in States that are acting in good faith and wish to comply with their treaty commitments. It would serve to deter violations. Even without enforcement mechanisms, an alcohol treaty could bring about positive changes in how states, and ultimately individuals, behave.13

    Funding for a FCAC

    The mechanism for funding the tobacco convention, as outlined in Article 26, could be applied to an alcohol convention. The FCTC has each party provide financial support in respect to its national activities intended to achieve the objectives of the Convention. Moreover, the WHO Secretariat shall advise developing countries on available resources. The Parties shall review existing and potential resources and determine the necessity of a voluntary global fund to channel resources to developing nations, including from international organizations and agencies, and from nongovernmental and governmental sources.13,14

    Climate Favoring a Framework Convention on Alcohol Control

    A FCAC is a viable concept at a time when international organizations are considering global public health policy issues related to alcohol. In 2005, the WHO adopted a resolution, Public Health Problems Caused by Harmful Use of Alcohol. The resolution called for a report to the 60th World Health Assembly in May 2007 that would include evidence-based strategies and interventions to reduce alcohol-related harms.17 The report is expected to discuss the option of a Framework Convention on Alcohol Control. Moreover, the World Medical Association in October 2005 adopted a “Statement on Reducing the Global Impact of Alcohol on Health and Society,” which urges national medical associations and all physicians to take action to help reduce the impact of alcohol including promoting “of a Framework Convention on Alcohol Control” similar to the WHO tobacco treaty.3

    Lastly, the APHA has a precedent with previous resolutions to support an international tobacco control policy15 and a global financing mechanism to assist developing countries in strengthening their tobacco control programs pursuant to the WHO Framework Convention on Tobacco Control.16
    Therefore, the American Public Health Association:
    1.Calls on the World Health Organization to adopt and implement a binding international treaty, a Framework Convention on Alcohol Control, modeled after the Framework Convention on Tobacco Control;
    2.Urges national public health organizations and other non-governmental organizations to support development of a Framework Convention on Alcohol Control; and
    3.Solicits the U.S. government to support consideration of and planning for such Convention.


  10. smokingscot says:

    The one thing I’ll say about Tess May is she’s wired and she’s astute.

    She knows perfectly well what’s going on and who’s behind everything.

    This article’s dated 1 August 2016 and she’s quite resolute in her determination to get things moving on getting disentangled from the EU.


    She knows perfectly well what’s happened:

    “In terms of accusations of ‘What was the plan?’, the plan was quite clear,” she said.

    “We voted to leave. And we showed examples of how voting to leave could be effected and I certainly will make sure now that the Government does what the people asked it to do.”

    So let’s just see it from her perspective:

    – She got into No. 10 because of brexit.

    – Failure to act boosts UKIP. Some Tory seats will go to UKIP.

    – Cock this up and Labour get in.

    – Her job’s gone and the Tory chances of re-election, even in 2025, are woeful.

    – Allow article 50 to expire and the EU have got us by the shorts.

    Unlike the Lord, Dames, Ladies and Peers she’s accountable to us lot. Add to that is the constant whinge from the BBC as well as Sky that she should hold another election to validate her position.

    She won’t; doesn’t need to. All that’ll happen is UKIP score, mainly at the expense of Labour. They’ll side with the Tory Eurosceptics, then she’ll be under even greater pressure to evoke article 50 as soon as.

    Essentially she’s between a rock and a hard place, so a negotiated exit to our benefit is her only choice.

    I genuinely think she’ll pull it off.

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.