[VIDEO] Shadow Chancellor John McDonnell’s Bizarre Maoist Spectacle: Final Nail in the Coffin for the Cuckoo Bananas Labour Party?

video-_John_McDonn_3509964b

John McDonnell audaciously brandished a copy of Mao Zedong’s Little Red Book

Shadow chancellor John McDonnell dropped a political bombshell in the House of Commons What was it over? A book. Not just any book, mind. A book conveying a philosophy that is most certainly taboo in British politics. A book that was none other than Mao Zedong’s very own ‘Little Red Book’. The commotion caused by it was far from little, however.

mao-propaganda

The immediate reactions of everyone in the House of Commons were indeed telling. The Conservatives were overjoyed. It was an early Christmas present for them. Many MPs were chorusing “more! more!” On the Labour side of the hall, some found it amusing; yet it clearly stirred up much discontent. Even Deputy Leader Tom Watson, who could be seen sat beside McDonnell at the time, had a faint look of despair as this historic book was pulled out; which is, to some extent, the scriptures, or holy book, of the far left.

Clearly it was done as a mere jest, and nothing more than a humoured attack at Chancellor George Osborne – who he ironically labelled “Comrade Osborne” – in criticism for his approach to Britain’s relations with China. His direct quote from Chairman Mao was as follows:

Archive/Getty Images

Archive/Getty Images

“We must learn to do economic work from all who know how. No matter who they are, we must esteem them as teachers, learning from them respectfully and conscientiously. But we must not pretend to know what we do not know.”

Yet it is an unsuitable affiliation. Surely you’d expect something like this from the Communist Party of Great Britain themselves; not from a serious opposition party vying to win power in modern-day Britain – where Thatcherism still lingers and private property is still at large.

[Read the full story here, at Ideology. Vision. Discussion]

Most Marxists I have ever associated with would actually distance themselves from Mao Zedong: a dictator of the People’s Republic of China, responsible for the deaths of millions of his own civilians – from famine and executing those against the rule. Even if you are going to cite a Communist figure at all in British politics, better to use a figure such as Lenin or Trotsky; not a brutal mass-murdering despot.

Cameron and Obsourne’s reactions show their delight

Cameron and Obsourne’s reactions show their delight

Many feel content with a more narrow view of politics. Even if it isn’t one that directly mirrors the Conservative party’s ideology, it wouldn’t drift too far from this. Hence by both the Conservative party and the then-austerity-favouring Labour party gained 330 and 232 seats respectively (562 out of 650 overall) in the General Election last May. Many predict the latter figure, which is that of Labour of course, will be trimmed away if trends stay the same. Read the rest of this entry »


CHILL: New Zealand’s Proposed Rape Law ‘Reforms’: No Right to Silence, Burden of Proof Shifted to the Accused

new_zealand_parliament_house

From the NZ HeraldDerek Cheng reporting:

Auckland University law professor Warren Brookbanks said both policies challenged two fundamental principles: the right to silence, and the presumption of innocence, which are both protected in the Bill of Rights Act.law professor Warren Brookbanks

Of National’s plan, he said: “It’s an intrusion into the right to silence.”

In the trial process, offenders are in any event always at a serious disadvantage relative to the prosecution, and there are some important protections in the trial process, and the right to silence is a fundamental right. These are part of our democratic rights that apply to all citizens.”

“Innocent people get caught up in the system, and these provisions affecting the right to silence and the presumption of innocence are there to ensure the prosecution has enough evidence to justify bringing a charge.”

Regarding Labour’s proposal, he said reforms in the 1980s already meant that an accused had to show an “honest and a reasonable belief” that the victim was consenting.

“The presumption of innocence is fundamental to our justice system and our society. Requiring an accused person to prove their innocence would undoubtedly result in many injustices and wrongful convictions.”

[Also see: Man falsely accused of sexual assault to sue]

“It means they have to have made some inquiry as to the attitude of the other person. And if they haven’t, then they are acting unreasonably and are going to be convicted.”

Professor Brookbanks said shifting the burden of proof would made it even harder for defendants, especially because it is often one person’s word against the other person’s word. Read the rest of this entry »


Mass Immigration: A Policy Intended to “Rub the Right’s Nose in Diversity…”

President Obama Laughs with Aides on Air Force One

Get a Whiff?

Labour-Wiff

Labour aide Andrew Neather

Via The Corner, Jay Nordlinger writes:

…A Labour aide, Andrew Neather, admitted that a policy of mass immigration was intended “to change the face of Britain forever.” He further said that this policy was meant “to rub the Right’s nose in diversity and render their arguments out of date.”

“To rub the Right’s nose in diversity” — that is one of the most pungent phrases of the modern political age, I think.

National Review Online