Sunday, 14 February 2010

The Tory vote-losing technique.

For thirteen years, anyone saying anything the government doesn't like has been shouted down. Try uttering the word 'immigration' and you'd be called a racist before you get to the third syllable. Try complaining about the controls and snooping and a sly voice will ask what you're hiding. What are you afraid of, why would anyone object to the cameras and inspections if they have nothing dodgy going on?

Labour have created this and it's made us paranoid. Now we look at attempts to silence someone and wonder why it's happening - because we've all experienced the same thing. Why do they want to shut up the BNP? The people watching are thinking 'They call the BNP racist, but they call me racist every day just for mentioning that there are too many people in my town, so is it true or is it just more shouting-down?' It's hard for people to tell because every slight dissent is clamped down so hard that now, it seems that the dissenting voice must be right.

Turns out it was true about the 'racist' chant all along. Crazy levels of immigration was deliberate after all, as was the deployment of the 'racist-Nazi-bigot' mantra. So now we have to wonder whether the other shouted-down people were right all along. Climate change atheists? Were they right? It's starting to look very much like it. The government have taken great pains to hide some things. Nothing to hide, nothing to fear has been their favourite line. But it turns out they have much to hide and in the simple logic of the common man, they must therefore have much to fear.

This has fostered a mindset that now looks at the one shouted down and defaults to 'they are right'.

Why does this matter to the Tories? It's a Labour game. The Tories won't silence dissenting voices with threats and intimidation. Will they?

In a recent Tory candidate selection process, none of the candidates were white heterosexual men. The shortlist was imposed from Central Office. One of those on the list was Iain Dale, whose political qualifications for the job are indisputable. He has the experience to be an MP and he'd be good at it. His sexual preferences are irrelevant to the job - or should be. As should the gender, skin colour or any other non-relevant aspects concerning the other candidates.

It is perfectly possible that all those candidates were selected because they were the best of the initial group. It is perfectly possible that no heterosexual white male made it onto the shortlist because none of those who applied were as good as the ones selected. Perception, however, is a powerful thing and especially so in the absence of explanation.

One of the councillors complained that all the candidates were primarily there as box-tickers.

Beverley Connolly, a Tory councillor in Tandridge, Surrey, said: "I'm sure they are all eminently able candidates, but some of these people have been parachuted in from out of the area. We have a black candidate, a gay candidate.

"I'm not remotely homophobic. It's not a reflection on their abilities or personalities but you have to ask if people are there just to tick boxes. It's not about what's best for the party in East Surrey, it's about what the party wants."

That's her perception, based on the list of candidates presented by Central Office. Is it an unreasonable perception, given that the entire country has been subjected to staffing quotas for the last thirteen years? Isn't it very likely to be the perception of much of that constituency? Is it likely, or unlikely, that Tory voters are looking at this and thinking exactly the same as Councillor Connolly?

So how will the Tory top layer react? The sensible reaction would be to lay open the selection process and show that all candidates were selected on merit, and that the composition of that list was based on no other consideration than their ability to do the job. If that were the case, then show the constituents the proof and the whole problem goes away at once.

However -

The Conservative leader was under pressure to take action against a Tory councillor in Surrey for making derogatory comments about his preferred "A-List" candidates.

Shout her down. Call her racist, sexist, homophobe. Do the same thing every time there are no white straight men on the list and a dissenting voice is raised. Offer no justification or explanation, just shout her down.

We're quite accustomed to that by now and don't you worry, Mr. Cameron, we are no longer taken in by the Labour shout-them-down game. We know how that game is played. We know what the shouting-down means.

And your voters will vote accordingly. Most likely for UKIP.

Perception, Mr. Cameron, is far more powerful than you realise. You can dispel it with reasoned and non-weaselly explanation or you can reinforce it with another roar of 'Shut up!'

Your choice.

12 comments:

Michael said...

My (Surrey Heath, Tory) MP is Michael Gove http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_Gove
so he will probably be returned...
... but UKIP will get my vote because he and his mate CallMeDave are spineless. No offence intended to invertebrates, many of which could probably do a better job!

Michael said...

PS
Just read this in the Telegraph, for Mr Gove:
“When you have any modernisation of any party, you will always find that there are one or two backwoodsmen who will grumble in the undergrowth.”
F*** off you tit. If you think your constituents in Surrey Heath are "backwoodsmen" then f*** off!
Your demise, if I can help it, is nigh.

Mark Wadsworth said...

"they call me racist every day just for mentioning that there are too many people in my town"

No, you're confusing them with the NIMBYs, who hate everybody equally, black or white, even their own children.

cast iron is very brittle said...

Good story in the Daily Wail about Dave's speech at the UEL ( univ east Londonistan )on 'openness and honesty' in society. His audience were bussed in Tory student activists who didn't attend the university and he didn't bother informing the university about it. UEL students were angry that they hadn't had the chance to attend and ask questions. They obviously didn't follow dave's tour of North Britain where the audience were carefully vetted for 'undesirables who might ask him tricky questions.

Leg-iron said...

Michael - another Labour technique adopted by the Cameroids. just as the gorgon calls climate heretics 'flat earthers', Gove has decided that any who disagree with enforced modernisation must be some kind of dopey redneck.

Well, insulting the dissenters really worked out well for Labour's core vote so it's no surprise the Tories want to play too. It looks like they're trying to drive their voters away, so they can dump the current mess on another party.

Leg-iron said...

Mark - Ah, the NIMBYs.

Equal opportunity bigots. Hideous Harman would be proud.

Leg-iron said...

Cast iron - he must have been noting how the Gorgon dodges questions and decided to give it a go.

Looks like we're in for more of the same then.

Frank Davis said...

Another good reason not to vote Conservative (or Lib Dem, or Labour, of course).

Norman Tebbit has a bit to say about this. I never used to like him much, but times change.

Leg-iron said...

Frank - I have to admit I always respected Spiny Norman. I didn't like him, was even scared of him but he said what he thought and didn't back down.

Now I wish he was running the country. It's time someone with guts took control.

Fat chance. The most likely result is still Tefal man.

Fausty said...

The diversity mantra spouted by today's politicians emanates from the UN.

The UN's modus operandus is "Think global, act local". Thus, it dictates from on high to the next rung down, and each leader on that rung does the same to its underlings ... until it gets down to the 'grassroots' level. The grassroots have no idea that they are being operated on by the UN.

That's how they've managed to propagate their 'sustainable development' agenda, which has its roots in the UN organisation, ICLEI.

During the swine flu frenzy, a government lackey (I'm guessing) told me that it was irresponsible of me to blog against having the swine flu vaccine! No. It was irresponsible of him to encourage people to have an untested vaccine against a non-threatening disease.

We can't allow them to label us without returning the favour.

Anonymous said...

This is actually even more of a smack in the eye for the "minorities" themselves than it is for the voters, because here in posh ol' Surrey the voters are bluer than a blue thing living in blue land coloured in with a blue felt pen, and they'd vote for Gordon Brown himself if he wore a blue rosette on election day (honestly - it's true). So the Tories have clearly put their good-but-not-quite-the-very-best candidates up for grabs here, where they won't have to do any serious campaigning or persuade anybody about anything, and are saving their top-notch candidates for the trickier seats where they're going to face much steeper challenges. I guess it kills two birds with one stone – the Tories get to look all look-at-us-not-being-the-white-male-middle-class-party-any-more, and at the same time they get to keep all their really experienced political brawlers for the areas which need the most "swaying." Which, as I say, is a bit of a backhanded insult those all those minority candidates who have been parachuted into the leafy Surrey countryside.

Stewart Cowan said...

Conspiracy theories:

1) The theory: mass immigration is being used to re-engineer society.

Typical response: "Racist scum," etc.

Now proven to be true.

2) The theory: climate change is not primarily manmade, but is a ruse to impose a world government which will tax and control us.

Typical response: "You climate change deniers will kill millions of people," etc.

Data now shown to have been falsified for political reasons and that the planet hasn't been warming for years. A world government is being set up to make laws, collect taxes and implement carbon trading which will impoverish and probably destabilise the West. As planned.

It is claimed that the large amount of land given over to the farming of biofuels has already caused millions to starve.

3) The theory: the BBC is a propaganda machine for liberals and socialists.

Typical response: "Get a life, you sad man. By the way, did you see EastEnders last night?" Etc.

As if it wasn't obvious enough anyway, we have revelations about Dr Who being used to try and topple Maggie Thatcher. The BBC is admittedly anti-Christian and pro-Muslim. There is also admittedly a disproportionate number of homosexuals in the Corporation, which, of course, is evident in the output.

4) The theory: the 9/11 attacks were an inside job.

Typical response: "You're an anti-Bush, American-hating scumbag with no respect for the victims' families," etc.

While numbers who deny the official story are increasing, many still have to overcome their aversion to facing up to the terrible truth that buildings don't turn to powder just because they are hit by planes. Building 7 wasn't hit by a plane, yet also came crashing down into a neat pile of rubble. If it was science fiction you wouldn't believe it, so why do so many still believe it when it is told in truth? Especially considering the history of false-flag operations carried out by Western governments.

5) The theory: the Theory of Evolution is a 19th Century misunderstanding, which is now clear from modern scientific discoveries.

Typical response: unprintable (based on replies to my posts on Richard Dawkins' blog, from which I am now banned).

Not widely known as a conspiracy theory due to the alleged wealth of evidence supporting the Theory of Evolution. When supporters realise that evolution has its limits, e.g. that mosquitoes can become resistant to insecticides, but they never ever become anything other than what they have always been: mosquitoes, then we will get somewhere.

Here's another part of the conspiracy: the Council of Europe want Creationism banned from science classrooms. Not just because they dispute the science, but because they reckon that, "If we are not careful, creationism could become a threat to human rights".

And of course, nobody is allowed the 'right' to have access to all streams of thought and knowledge, only those which our masters graciously allow us access to, like fraudulent global warming claims and other distractions that would make the Nazi propaganda minister, Joseph Goebbels, explode with ecstasy.

I would say this. We should enjoy the freedom to use the internet to discover the truth while we still have the opportunity.

opinions powered by SendLove.to