The tyranny of the majority

(This letter was sent by our Chairman to several local papers in the Midlands)

6th December 2016

Sir,

“The Tyranny of the Majority” is Sir John Major’s complaint of the EU referendum result. He, Tony Blair and friends are seeking to overturn it by the old EU trick of sending people to vote again until they give the “right” answer – that is, one favourable to the EU, which then becomes our lord and master for another forty years or so.

Looking across the Atlantic, we see the remarkable victory of Mr. Trump. The Albany Atlas and Argus once described a presidential candidate as “a slang-whanging stump speaker of which all parties are ashamed”. But that was Abraham Lincoln!

Mr. Trump won in spite of such widely held opinions about him. He did not win a majority of popular votes but a majority in the Electoral College where votes are apportioned to states so that the influence of the most populous states is moderated in this enormous country. It is one of the checks and balances which the Founding Fathers built into the constitution. They also provided that each state should have two Senators – from the smallest to the largest.

Considering all the fuss which the Americans have since made about spreading democracy around the world – often at the point of a gun – it is remarkable how little their Founding Fathers had to say about it. They were classically educated men and knew that all previous democracies had ended in dictatorship or disaster.

So to them “democracy” was a politically incorrect word, meaning more or less what “populism”means to Guardian readers today. As John Smith of Roanoke Virginia put it “Too democratical a constitution and we have but exchanged King George for King Numbers” . Sir John Major appears to agree. Except he does not want King George but Emperor Jean-Claude Juncker, his heirs and successors to rule over us.

Most people agree that Tony Blair politicised the civil service. He also did the same to the administration of justice to fit the EU mould. Nobody was clamouring for a Supreme Court but our previous arrangement with Law Lords, who also sat in the House of Lords, did not fit the Napoleonic model. New Labour aspired to “ continental-style Ministry of Justice” and simply imposed it. But our Supreme Court is, in fact, subordinate to the so-called European Court of Justice.

Long live Emperor Jean-Claude! His predecessor, Senhor Barroso ( the erstwhile Marxist now promoted to glory with Goldman Sachs) said the EU was an empire and he was in a position to know! Major, Blair and company are its faithful subjects.

Yours faithfully

Edward Spalton

Print Friendly

3 comments

  1. Phil JonesReply

    With his Government’s ratification of the Maastricht Treaty (original version of the Treaty on European Union), John Major turned the UK from a country (in the primary sense of that word) to a province in the new European Union federal state. Without giving the British people any say he approved a change which in effect made British citizenship meaningless — unless you think that having Florida or New York or Quebec ‘citizenship’ is worthwhile. And for those who then argued that the EU was not a legal entity separate from its Member States but was instead only an agent of those States, along came Gordon Brown’s ratification of the Lisbon Treaty in 2008, again with the British people being given no say. The Lisbon Treaty stated in a one-line Article that ‘The European Union shall have legal personality’. At that point, if not earlier, the European Union legally became the equivalent of the federal level of government in the US, Canada and Australia — in the result, on 1 January 2009 the European Union became clearly a legal federal nation-state even if any question in that regard had existed earlier. Meanwhile, Tony Blair had played his part in trying to lock the UK into being an EU province. Firstly, In 2000 his Government approved devolution for Scotland and Wales (even though Wales didn’t want it), knowing that Scotland and Wales would later provide impediments to the UK withdrawing from the EU — as has proved the case in regard to Scotland. Secondly, although he indicated that the British people would have a referendum on d’Estaing’s 2004 European Constitution (such referendum not being needed after the Constitution’s defeat in referendums in Holland and France), he played a part in Gordon Brown’s Government later rejecting the people having a say on the Lisbon Treaty amendments to the Treaty on European Union — even though the Lisbon Treaty virtually matched the rejected European Constitution provisions Article-for-Article. Finally, we have David Cameron who thought he could once and for all rid himself and his party of UKIP and Eurosceptics with a referendum that he expected to win and into which he poured all his efforts. He used every trick in the book to get a REMAIN outcome on 23 June. Major, Blair, Brown and Cameron — all traitors to their countrymen/women. In a different age they would all be executed for high treason. But they’ll go on, making their millions and continuing to criticize all British people who believe in returning the UK to being a country with full control of its borders rather than continuing as a province/part/state/’Member State’ of a larger federal country. With all my heart I despise all four of the traitors.

  2. George FeeReply

    I have such a loathing for war criminal Blair, that I regard anyone who so much as gives him the time of day as tainted with the same traitorous brush. When oh when is Blair going to be charged by the ICC? As for Brown (Blair’s CoC) they contrived together to sell off our gold stocks, a give away exercise, and Blair handed back the EU rebate hard won by Thatcher, in an act of total arrogance. And Major, what a useless comparison to Thatcher. All four of these clowns should be banned from all political life, with Blair being banned for any life after causing the deaths of hundreds of our soldiers in his lapdog boot licking of his joint criminal Bush.

  3. Edward SpaltonReply

    Dear Phil & George ( if I may be so familiar)

    We still have copies of A HOUSE DIVIDED ( can Parliament serve two masters – the nation and the European Union? ). Our inspiration for the pamphlet was the précis by Prof ( as he now is) Anthony Coughlan of the Irish National Platform ” The Lisbon Treaty – a constitutional revolution by stealth”) – by far the best summary of the constitutional position of EU member states we have come across. It is available in the pamphlets section of the website and in PDF. (Free)

    Probably the best account of the treason of Major and co is ” Treason at Maastricht” by Atkinson & McWhirter, now available at very small cost electronically. However, I do not think it is terribly helpful as a guide for campaigning action in the present circumstances, when BREXIT is going to depend on support from erstwhile Europhiles in the Conservative party in this parliament, unless you are prepared to defer it until after the next election which is not scheduled until 2020 under the present fixed term parliament arrangement – and you think that UKIP ( or similar) could then attain a majority.

    I am surprised that you advocate use of the ICC. I think this is a very dangerous supranational jurisdiction which is why the Americans have not ratified it. The British soldiers who have been pursued for alleged crimes in Iraq owe their plight to the existence of the ICC, causing our government to fund the process of their persecution/prosecution by shyster private investigators and ” human rights” lawyers to avoid the case ending up in the ICC.

Leave a comment