Context and fairness matters. I care about our country and the wider world, however our country and protecting our people comes first.
Vote Restore. 🇬🇧
After WW2 didn’t the UK do well under a more socialist government - it built the NHS, the welfare state and home ownership boomed.
Well yes and no.
The UK under a more socialist government went from the largest empire in history to needing an IMF bailout in the space of a single lifetime.
All western democracies built out a healthcare service and a welfare state in the 1900s. Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Western Europe, the Nordics, Japan, Singapore… All of them have sophisticated health services and welfare systems.
The UK didn’t actually do anything remarkable with the NHS relative to its peers. The standout system is the USA which chose a more commercial approach but it also contributes about 40x more medical breakthroughs.
Home ownership rates boomed across the western world too as banks relished lending to the two-income household for the first time in history.
Here’s what is remarkable…After WW2 Germany and Japan were in total ruin. They embraced capitalism and their economies grew larger than the UKs. Singapore and Hong Kong leaned into capitalism and became beacons of prosperity in an otherwise poorer region.
It could be argued that if the UK had of adopted an aggressively free-market capitalist approach after WW2 we would have had an amazing health service and a welfare system sitting on top of a powerhouse economy with a higher standard of living.
As Germany has swung back towards socialism, their economy has gone into decline. Prior to WW2 the UK was a global producer of manufactured goods of all kinds - today it’s nearly impossible to find things made in Britain because the regulations make it near impossible.
Socialism didn’t build the NHS. A health service was going to happen anyway. Socialism simply held back the productive economy when the UK needed it most.
Rachel Reeves has been demoted to a junior cabinet position
Sacked by Andy Burnham as chancellor before he's even taken the job. That's how bad she is.
An absolutely horrific story
A woman sexually assaulted by an immigrant
She begged him to leave
She's trembling on national television as she tells the world what happened
And what did she get for it?
Convicted for inciting racial hatred
Insanity has taken over Europe
THE LONELINESS OF OWEN JONES
You want to know what keeps him awake? Not being called privileged. He's heard that for a decade. Not being called a hypocrite. He wears that armor.
What keeps Owen Jones awake is knowing his own side despises him.
September 2024. Labour banned him from Conference. Cancelled his pass. The reason they gave: "safeguarding issues." The real reason: he was harassing MPs by asking questions on camera. Especially female MPs. His own party called him a risk to women.
2019. After years denying antisemitism in Labour, he admitted it was real in his book. Only after Corbyn lost. Only when it was safe. Jewish supporters who trusted him watched him lie, then watched him flip when the wind changed.
March 2024. He quit Labour. Called it "hostile environment." Senior Labour figures called him "pathetic." A "strategic blunder." His own side thinks he's irrelevant.
The Corbynites. The left he claims to represent. They call him a "shill." Say he gave Corbyn "mealy-mouthed support" while doing "nothing to defend him from antisemitism smears." They don't want him either.
The kill shot:
Owen Jones has no allies. The right never wanted him. The centre finds him embarrassing. The left has rejected him. He is banned from the party he quit. He is mocked by the movement he claims to lead. He is a columnist writing for an audience that has outgrown him, about a working class that never knew him, from a position that no longer exists.
He is forty years old and completely alone. And every column he writes proves it.
Your move, Owen.
I've had to stop for a minute and realise that I've spent the past hour arguing with people on the *amount* of victims of the Rape Gangs. People are annoyed that the 250,000 estimate as stated in the Inquiry Report is too high and that it's probably much lower.
How much lower? 200,000? 100,000? 50,000? I mean, how many victims is enough for it to be a scandal? Do we have a figure on this?
How should we word this? "An unspecified amount of children have been raped," "Probably a lot. At least way more than a thousand. Not sure tbh."
The figure is an estimate because that's ALL WE HAVE. The police didn't do the work. There are no clear logs. We will never know the full scale of this.
I personally cannot wait for some cunt to go through the estimated figures and come back with "Actually, only around 50,000 to 100,000 children were raped. Far lower than Rupert Lowe would have us all believe!"
The estimated figure exists precisely because we will never know the true number. And that should be a conversation all by itself.
Maybe that was the intention.
A message to the left.
We want Starmer out. You want Trump dead.
We want terrorists hunted down. You support them.
Patriots loved Charlie Kirk because he was a family man who stood for free speech. You loved George Floyd, a career criminal, just because of his ethnicity.
We want to stop the racially motivated mass rape of our children. You want to protect the perpetrators.
We want to educate our kids to be proud of their country. You want to teach them to hate it.
We want to work, have a house, a car, a couple of kids, and a holiday. You want to destroy society, sponge off others, and see everyone into abject poverty.
You are a cancer, and you have been brainwashed by Communists and Islamists to be hate filled little sheep who stand for the destruction of everything that is good about the West.
Wake up, you morons.
What a level headed and knowledgeable young man. Well said.
If anyone knows him please pass on my acknowledgement of a fantastic interview. I’d be delighted to chat to him.
My son has been asked to wear a Vote Labour t-shirt for 2 weeks as part of a social experiment to see how people react.
So far he has been spat on, punched and had a bottle thrown at him.
I'm curious to see what's going to happen when he leaves the house.
@KemiBadenoch@LauraTrottMP Excellent update Kemi, and good news that you are supporting this.
Now... Why doesnt the Labour Party hardly ever agree with anything anyone on the right of politics says? Why is it that they seem to go againt everything by default?
This government’s branding of DEI, inclusion, and open borders has led to grandparents and parents being arrested and dragged through the courts simply for protesting.
It is deeply authoritarian when people speaking out against Islamism, and calling for a more balanced view of the conflict are treated this way.
You don’t really understand both sides, do you, Zack? Your thinking on this is like an ignorant child.
The Labour Party has a working majority of 166.
And yet things are apparently so bad that the answer is to get one of their own MPs to step aside so Andy Burnham can return to Westminster, because he is being treated as the ONLY figure in the wider Labour tribe who might actually be able to lead the country.
What does that say about the makeup of the team already sitting on such a huge majority?
To me, it does not look like strength. It looks like a massive group of incompetence.