The Hunting Ban reveals the real intentions of several of the MPs that
voted it in. These are extracts of thoughts expressed in public by one
of these MPs (Peter Bradley MP for The Wrekin, a Parliamentary Private
Secretary in DEFRA and probably with the tacit consent of others in
"Labour governments have come and gone and left little impression
on the gentry. But a ban on hunting touches them. It threatens their
inalienable right to do as they please on their land. For the first
time, a decision of a Parliament they don't control has breached the
"That old order no longer prevails (i.e. the authority of landowners
which these MPs equate with "gentry"! farmers? ). Deference has been eroded by a new, universal prosperity. It's the
recognition of that irrevocable change that has made the campaign for
hunting so fierce and yet so futile."
"But in an age in which we are all aspirational and few are deferential,
that is an increasingly unappealing philosophy. The tide is against
the Tories as it is against the hunters and, now more than ever, the
House of Lords.
And if Labour really wants a radical edge to the next manifesto, how
about the long-neglected issue of land reform?"
We have seen sentiments like these expressed in E.G. the Russian Revolution,
in Sinn Fein Ireland in the 1920s, in Zimbabwe now. Politicians did
not stop at landowners. Totalitarianism spread throughout seizing and stifling private enterprise.
The inevitable outcome in every case was loss of freedoms for significant
minorities and, eventually, the majority. The irony is that all these
grabs were in the name of democracy and the majority of the people.
AS HAS BEEN THE HUNTING BAN. Have the anti-hunt MPs ever realised that
they have been elected to govern wisely by compromising so as not to
have excessive bias towards the majority or towards any minority, that
is to say, in the spirit of government by tolerances just acceptable to
all of the people?---TRUE DEMOCRACY.
It is so easy to let the "Nanny State" and "Big Government"
develop towards totalitarianism. How much "help" do people
We have seen those in favour of compromise (e.g. The former Prime Minister Tony Blair)
"throw in the towel" in the face of the "emergent totalitarians".
What hope has TRUE DEMOCRACY now?
Where will the "Compromisers" next give way to the "Totalitarians"?
Shooting? Fishing? Reform of The House of Lords to become an elected
or appointed "poodle" of The Commons? Excuses such as terrorism
to further erode Human Rights? We have seen the last practised by several
Totalitarian Regimes. The last bastion of TRUE DEMOCRACY has often been
the Highest Court in the land. (THE "LAW LORDS"). Erosion of their stature is threatened in the
UK. The signs are clear.
ALL "TRUE DEMOCRATS" BE WARNED. SO LONG AS ANY PARTY, WITH A CHANCE OF WINNING POWER, EMBRACES "SOCIAL TOTALITARIAN" POLICIES, ANY GENERAL ELECTION
RUNS THE RISK OF A SLIDE TOWARDS "SOCIAL