Understanding history is the ultimate passport to the future.

Studying history gives us the opportunity to learn from others' past mistakes. It helps us understand the many reasons why people may behave the way they do. As a result, it should help decision-makers become more impartial. The only trouble is that history seems to prove, time and time again, that we don’t learn from history!

A couple of weeks ago I wrote about Sir John Glubb’s research that showed how in the past all nations go through six stages ending with a decline into ‘Decadence’. Having written his essay ‘The Fate of Empires’ he was inundated with letters which prompted him to write a follow up essay ‘Search for Survival’ in which he analysed the reasons for our decline in more detail and proposed a remedy.

I had not read his second essay for a few years now, so whether subconsciously or not, I had also come to the same conclusions as to how we could at worse soften our decline and at best start a revival in our fortunes.

This is what his summary said:-

“The object of my first essay was not to moan that ‘the end is nigh’, rather the reverse. Our decline is due not to external forces over which we have no control, but to our own greed, selfishness and immortality, and to our loss of courage and energy, ‘The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars but in ourselves, that we are underlings.’ These failings which each one of us can help to rectify.

Our duty is therefore, to inaugurate movements for the reversal of these trends; scrupulously to carry out our duties to our families; to work as hard as we possibly can, and to carry our subordinates with us, through comradeship and personal relation; to seize every opportunity to speak and to write in favour of self-sacrifice, service and unselfishness. It is above all, the revival of our spirit which will transform our situation and guarantee our future.

Our country is obsessed by the grudging spirit of ‘why should I?’ We need leaders to inspire us once again with the spirit of selfless service. But if our leaders are incapable of setting us such an example, we must do it ourselves.

We need the spirit of the prophet who, when he heard that hard service was needed, cried joyfully, “Here am I! Send me!”

So, if our leaders won’t lead the way then we must do it ourselves and for me that means a peaceful mass movement providing relentless pressure on our politicians demanding they up their game and listen and react to their concerns. The BIG question is when will the people wake up to reality and then, importantly do something about it? It is because I believe reform to our system of governance, with the key recognition of the people’s inherent sovereignty, is a vital part of our renewal that I promote our agenda.

Finally, I would like to address those, who from the comfort of their mod con homes and life styles, believe that this age of ‘Decadence’ is grossly overstated and the ‘Liberal’ age in which we live has brought nothing but benefits. I would like to recommend that you read ‘Liberal Delusion – The roots of our current moral crisis’ by John Marsh and you might view things differently.

In conclusion it is certainly true that in the 10 years I have been promoting THA it has been a hard sell, which is because most people are still too comfortable, but as things get worse the people will demand change. When change comes it will not be one single ‘Big Bang’ improvement that will address our decline but hundreds of little changes that will set us on the course for our revival.

 

  

  

 

Why only the people can achieve radical political change.

 In 2006 the, 300-page, report ‘POWER to the People’ was published. This was an Independent Inquiry into Britain’s Democracy being a centenary project of the Joseph Rowntree Charitable Trust and the Joseph Rowntree Reform Trust.  

The report was chaired by Helena Kennedy QC and supported by a dozen 'Power Commissioners' and received submissions, in various formats, from around 1000 individuals and organisations as well as contributions from around 170 ‘experts’ which included 30 local and national politicians.

The Foreword opened with these two sentences "This is not a report simply about constitutional change. It is a report about giving people real influence over the bread-and-butter issues which affect their lives." There is nothing in the following four pages with which I would disagree as it outlined the need for democratic reform and the transfer of power from the centre to local communities.

However, the sheer fact I doubt many of you have any recollection of this report let alone any of the 30 recommendations, yes 30, to improve our democracy rather speaks for itself. I also note that its own website www.powerinquiry.org has been taken down, there now only being a Wiki entry and a copy of the report on the Joseph Rowntree website to prove it ever existed.

Looking at the recommendations there are a dozen, I’d support, which tie in directly with our six demands in areas like a Written Constitution, a Separation of Power and the People’s Consent. However, the majority would not improve our governance or our democracy at all which the Forward so clearly stated was their aim, examples include: -

• ·         Limits should be placed on the power of the whips – Good luck with that!
• ·         Voting age should be reduced to 16 – That should do it!
• ·         State funding for parties – Open to corruption.
• ·         Consideration of text and e-mail voting - ditto
• ·         Reform of media ownership – an old unsolvable chestnut.
• ·         A new independent Nat. Statistical Service to provide info to the public – open to bias.

In conclusion this type of inquiry, sums up the futility of such reports, produced by the supposed ‘Great and the Good’ because if the status quo is challenged the ‘Establishment’ will quietly ignore it and eventually bury it.

If the people want to reform our system governance and regain their inherent sovereignty they are going to have to wake up and demand the necessary changes or else accept the inevitable continuation of our national decline under our current incompetent, corrupt and self-serving politicians.

 

 

Political reform in the age of decadence.

Our present and future generally become easier to understand, and therefore accept, if you consider history.

So, for example those seeking ‘instant’ changes to our system of governance, need to realise that such changes take time and need to be fought for. It is in considering the above that I want to cover two points this week.

First, I came to the conclusion a while back that the radical reforms to our governance we seek, through our six demands, will take years to achieve and possibly even generations.

At one point I thought that modern communications would greatly assist to promote our cause but I’m now certain we need more than the internet to achieve our aims.

Since our conception, in 2012, I have often pointed out how long it took for the Chartists to get five of their six demands enacted. The first demand to become law took 20 years and the fifth 73. However, recently I realised that many of the demands of the Chartists were actually held by the Levellers, a political movement during the English Civil War 1642-1651.

So, if you factor this into the timescale one could justifiably argue that the Chartists reforms took 269 years to become law or around 10 generations – thus proving the old saying ‘that a good idea never dies.’

My second point follows on from the observation above that about 10 generations passed before the Levellers political reforms became a reality as this period of time is the same that Sir John ‘Pasha’ Glubb analysed in his essay, The Fate of Empires’, that it takes for a nation to rise, plateau and decline.

Pasha Glubb’s analysis sets out the six stages nations go through from, Pioneers, Conquest, Commerce, Affluence, Intellect and finally Decadence. For each stage he explains why they happen and the reasons nations progress through each stage. What I find fascinating is that throughout history, regardless of the era, the reasons and symptoms for a nation’s eventual decline are the same and by his analysis we are currently well into the age of Decadence.

The relevance to our agenda is that the ‘People’, who have to demand the changes as political parties won’t enact them without pressure, are rather preoccupied in just trying to survive and for the time being, any questions about restoring their inherent sovereignty, electing their PM and Separation of Power or the ability to stop government legislation they disagree with, are not at the forefront of their minds.

Link to Glubb’s essay is here -  http://people.uncw.edu/kozloffm/glubb.pdf?

 In conclusion, history proves that radical political reform takes time and will certainly not be helped by our country being in decline which produces poor quality leaders and currently a largely docile materialistic people. However, I’m confident that our agenda is a good idea and like all good ideas is the most resilient parasite for once it takes hold of the brain it’s impossible to eradicate.

Our six demands will happen, when the people finally wake up, it is only when that will happen that is in doubt!