I do not as a rule, use cynical and satirical humour in the production of these articles. I may hint at my own cynical view of Government and its androids at the DWP who seem devoid of humanity, but I seldom actually write that.
However, in that vein of satirical musing, I have come to a point where I’m starting to believe that, certain ministers in their large country mansions of an evening, stroke a white cat and dreams of the day they will have their Victorian Age Britain, where the disabled and the great unwashed are finally out of sight and out of mind, with the DWP doling out food vouchers to the deserving and punishing the undeserving.
Why do I think that? Well, between IDS and the expensively educated Tory cabinet using divide and rule politics, and the general public appearing to have been hypnotised and lulled into accepting that the disabled, poor , homeless and those who seek shelter from war and abuses in their own countries, are somehow ‘undesirables’. I think if we lived in a war zone as we did 70 years ago, and from which the UN Charter on Human Rights was born following that conflict, then tolerance levels might be a lot higher.
It would seem that our memories of how propaganda, and the divide and rule tactics used across the world in the 1930’s have been forgotten. The media, of all kinds, has never been independent. The Press Barons have always supported one Political Party or another. That support polarised the public’s opinion, into two party politics. Now Cameron and his Ernst Blofeld wannabes have managed to set people against their national neighbours, and by using things like immigration and the benefits bill as blunt weapons they have set the general public against others who share these isles; set minds against the disabled, jobless and disadvantaged in society, and at the same time have used a willing media to raise intolerance levels above a point where moral indignation and outrage would normally kick in.
It would seem that the Government worships and reveres money and wealth to the detriment of its own disadvantaged citizens. That would be expected in a small “Third World” country funded by corporations who want to extract that country’s resources and mineral wealth, and only the elite would benefit from any generated wealth. Britain is not Third World but we do seem to have some of the attributes of inequality of wealth, attitude and disdain toward the disabled whilst at the same time favouring the elite, wealthy and those who finance political parties.
One of the the government’s manifesto pledges was to scrap the Human Rights Bill. There was no mention however, of any legislation designed to get rid of these in the Queens Speech.
Apart from those people who work in the front-line of protecting rights, like Shami Chakrabarti , it seems that very learned legal minds are voicing dissension, and the pledge has been set back for a year to take consultation.
To scrap the Human Rights act in its entirety seems like the present Government has a real tolerance problem with its own citizens– and other Europeans. The disabled already know exactly how officialdom seems to have an uncaring and cold attitude that encourages sanctions for the slightest transgression as they face assessments and continual delays for necessary benefits just to feed themselves or their families.
That’s why I think Cameron and his cohorts may just be evil geniuses to achieve that level of control over the public, without any real dissent or objection to a Government which apparently cares little about them, and actually get them to vote for them, thus giving a mandate to give up their Human Rights, by political spinmeisters practising the Black Arts that could convince turkeys to vote for Christmas or Thanksgiving as a great celebration.
Shami Chakrabarti campaigns with the organisation Liberty and is not a person liked by the establishment media or those UK politicians whose views are to the right of the Tea Party in America.
In the Independent recently she wrote a powerful article that sums up why the Human Rights Act is a vital piece of legislation to protect everyone from injustice.
“In 1998 a young and popular government enshrined the European Convention on Human Rights in law with cross-party support. The Human Rights Act was a beautifully simple piece of legislation that has repeatedly let ordinary people – soldiers, journalists, bereaved families, victims of domestic violence, slavery and rape – hold the state to account.
Our new Government wants to scrap the HRA. Its so-called “British Bill of Rights and Responsibilities” is an incredibly dangerous confidence trick. The omission of “human” and addition of “British” suggests this isn’t about “injecting common sense”. At best, it’s empty pandering to xenophobia.
It undermines the universality of human rights, which earlier generations paid for with their lives, and allows any government to pick when they apply, and to whom”.