Corbynmania: Does Big Jezza deserve the public support he gets?

Corbynmania: Does Big Jezza deserve the public support he gets?

Hello again.

If you can read and have subsequently read the title, you can probably guess that today I’m going to be discussing whether Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn is deserving of his massive public support. Whether you like him or not, there is no denying that he has a huge public following.

To give some context to the discussion, I’ll give my opinion on him first. If I was being polite I’d say he seems somewhat naïve, but he does provide something different to the usual textbook politician and he does speak some sense on occasion. If I was feeling less polite I’d say he’s a whinging old man who needs dragging into the 21st century, and who doesn’t seem to have been observing the political landscape of the United Kingdom for the past 40 years.

Although to be fair to him, he is a Jedi master.

Let’s discuss his policy first. I’m not going to go into much detail because I’m lazy, but if you know British politics, you’ll know Mr. Corbyn sits firmly on the left of the political spectrum. After watching parts of some his speeches on YouTube, I found myself agreeing with a lot of Corbyn’s points. This is because most of his points boiled down to “the Tories are bastards”, which is true. He also detailed various ways in which he would counteract this.

One specific point I’d like to discuss was to bring back the newly created free schools and academies under the control of the local authorities. In theory, a good idea, so it would be easier to make schools all have similar facilities and ensure no one gets an unfair advantage et cetera et cetera. Unfortunately, Mr. Corbyn has failed to mention that a lot of local councils are completely useless when it comes to matters of education. One of my parents is the head teacher at a local school and oversaw it’s conversion into an academy. Why? Because the school was getting toss all aid from the council, but it was sure as hell getting a lot of red tape and bureaucracy. The school isn’t now rolling in money, but it has more independence and has more freedom with the money it has. The Tories didn’t introduce free schools and academies to screw over poor people, despite what the left may have you believe, but they actually did it to help schools. I know. Crazy. Of course it’s not a perfect system, nothing is, and it’s hardly been a complete success, but council-run schools are hardly better.

However, you can sort of understand the frustration considering this man was in charge of education for 4 years.

Mr. Corbyn also says how big companies need to be taxed more. I totally agree. Unfortunately, we live in a world where that’s not going to happen. If big companies are taxed more, are they going to keep their HQ in Britain and pay higher tax? Of course not! They’ll move to a country with lower corporation tax. Subsequently, the British economy would take a dive. The government would have no money. And the government would need all the money it could get, to implement all the changes Mr. Corbyn wants.

Now, Mr. Corbyn’s policy is all very nice, all very idealist. The problem is, this is why he is unelectable. Britons don’t want idealism. They don’t want radicalism. They want everything to stay nice and boring. Nice and British. As long as the price of teabags doesn’t rise too much, they’re fine. This is why we will always end up electing very boring, very textbook politicians who will tend to be conservative. Britain likes conservatism. It keeps everything the same (at least on the surface). Change is bad for Britons (Mind you, Brexit actually happened so that might completely void my point, but shut up).

One way Mr. Corbyn could maybe inspire a bit more radicalism amongst the British populace is by having a bit oomph than a wet teatowel. I think this may be a British thing but he never gets above an irate tone. This makes him come off as a whinger, rather than someone who is protesting against the evils of the system. Be dynamic! Move! Raise your voice! For God’s sake do something! Start a chant! Stop being so bloody boring!

A photo of the audience of Corbyn’s last speech.

Take, for example, Russian anti-corruption activist Aleksey Navalny. Watch this video from 2:10 to 3:15 (don’t worry about not understanding him, that’s not the point). He’s dynamic, he’s loud, he projects, he gets the crowd going, he’s passionate, and that’s not just in that part of the video, that continues throughout the whole thing. He’s everything that Mr. Corbyn does not seem to be.

Mr. Corbyn also should probably be a bit more careful who he appoints. His spin doctor, Seumas Milne, is quoted as saying in 2006:

“For all its brutalities and failures, communism in the Soviet Union, eastern Europe and elsewhere delivered rapid industrialisation, mass education, job security and huge advances in social and gender equality. It encompassed genuine idealism and commitment (James says: HAHAHAHAHA are you fucking serious?)… Its existence helped to drive up welfare standards in the west, boosted the anticolonial movement and provided a powerful counterweight to western global domination.”

“Genuine idealism and commitment” apparently means gulags.

I’d like to see Mr. Milne go to the former Eastern Bloc and profess the joys and wonders of the Soviet Union and its satellites to those still suffering from the hangover of the communist era (and also to the millions upon millions of people who died under the rule of communist nutjobs). The mentalist.

Mr. Corbyn also needs to pick his words more carefully. Comparing Israel to Daesh is a bit of a stretch, Jezza. I’m not saying Israel are in the right, they’re being right dickheads to Palestine, but at the same time they’re showing the highest level of economic and social development in the Middle East and are way ahead of most other Middle Eastern countries.

Israel haven’t been doing any beheadings lately either.

As a final thought, many people go on about how Mr. Corbyn is real, unlike other politicans, and is actually honest and human compared to other politicians. Do you know which other politician people applied these qualities to? Nigel bloody Farage. Just think about it. It’s an interesting left/right parallel.

UK Independence Party (UKIP) leader Farage speaks during an interview with Reuters in London
“So charismatic and honest! He’s so different from the others!”

Anyways, that’s enough of that. If you disagree with me, cool, but don’t expect to change my opinion any time soon.

Until next time.


Quick note because I couldn’t fit this in anywhere else: I find it abhorrent that the Labour party have increased the joining fee from £3 to £25 so as to prevent more people from voting for Corbyn in the leadership contest. It is a disgusting perversion of democracy and whoever came up with it should be shot. Or at least given a very stern telling off.

Edit 13/11/2016:

I feel that I’ve been rather unfair to Corbyn in this post. He does seem like a genuine person, and a decent bloke. However, I still stand by the fact that he is an unsuitable leader for Labour, mainly due to the divisiveness which he has caused.


“The Greatest Nation on Earth”: Does it exist?

“The Greatest Nation on Earth”: Does it exist?

Good morning/afternoon/evening (circle whichever one applies to you).

As you will know if you are a politically aware resident of the United Kingdom, the Conservative party have recently been having a leadership contest. The remaining contestants are Michael Gove, Theresa May, and Andrea Leadsom. Now, I’ve always known Mr. Gove to be a bit questionable tosser, who (somewhat worryingly) backs up the hypothesis that the government are lizard people.


As for Ms. May, I have disagreements with parts of her policy but she seems alright otherwise. Well, compared to the other two. At least she seems more like a human being than Gove. However, I don’t really know much about Ms. Leadsom apart from the fact she supported Brexit. Some may say this alone is enough to write her off as anyone who supported Brexit is a freedom-hating fascist, but I would tell these people to kindly go and hide in a ditch for a very long time until they learn to accept that maybe they don’t know everything and that a lot of people who voted for Brexit are not imbeciles. What did write off Ms. Leadsom as a viable candidate in my opinion, is when she was quoted recently as saying “I believe this nation can become the greatest nation on Earth.”.

“The Greatest Nation on Earth”. Yes, I know you can apply this to literally every country in the world but that’s the point, every country has its shit bits, and thus nationalism is an idiotic concept.

Now this is (hopefully) simply fatuous rhetoric which Ms. Leadsom probably doesn’t believe in herself, unless she is actually mentally unstable. Do I say this because I am an unpatriotic (is that a word? I hope it is) traitor who wants to replace the Union Jack with the red flag of the workers and believes that the USSR was the greatest nation on Earth that was just spoiled by a few bad apples и пролетарии всех стран, соединяйтесь et cetera et cetera? No, I say this because, put simply, there is no such thing as “the greatest nation on Earth”. It is a ridiculous concept that encourages stupid amounts of nationalism and, subsequently, death and destruction.

There is no doubt that some countries are better than others in terms of living standards, social equality etc. If you can sit there and honestly say you’d rather have been brought up in the Central African Republic (the country with the lowest Human Development Index (HDI) in the world) rather than in the United Kingdom just because you’re a bit disillusioned with it all, then I think it’s time we call the carers to take you back to your padded cell. We should be thankful that we live in a country which is in the minority of those that offer such a high standard of living. Being thankful is good. Being patriotic is fine too, there is nothing wrong with being proud of the good things your nation has achieved over the years. Being nationalistic and claiming that your country has done no wrong ever and that all other countries are shit-tier excuses for nation states that should bow down to the almighty power of your country, is not good. That is called being a jebend.

But remember, Nationalism and Patriotism are two different things. Patriotism should not be a bad thing. Nationalism is.

No country is perfect. Every country has its flaws which will always prevent the existence of the “greatest nation on Earth”. One nation which seems to claim this title a lot is the United States. I’ve always found this quite funny because the US is probably the only country in the developed world to have as many flaws as it does. Gun control, stupid healthcare, huge amounts of poverty, crippling debt, and massive racial divides (I would provide articles that back these up but I mean come on, do you really need them?). Any American with half a brain would be able to tell you that they are not the greatest country on Earth. Unfortunately, a worrying amount of Americans don’t seem to be in possession of half a brain. Hank from Bumfucknowhereville in Missouri (who owns approximately 1/5th of a brain) may agree that America is not the greatest at the moment, but his raging nationalism will lead to his support for Supreme Overlord Donald Trump, purely because the saggy-faced oligarch promises to “Make America Great Again”.

It’s like someone held a candle under a waxwork.

Enough ranting about America, let’s talk about another country which seems to be effected by a terrifying amount of nationalism and the belief that they are/will again become the greatest country on Earth. Russia. The reason why Putin is so popular, retaking the Crimea and waging war in Eastern Ukraine, is because nationalist Russians want to see Russia ‘become great again’. Nationalism why a far-right party (which somewhat humorously pretends to be politically centrist) is one of the four main parties in the State Duma (parliament).  Hank’s Russian cousin, Igor from Nesushestvuyushiygrad in Yakutia, will maintain that Putin is doing a stellar job, despite the fact that although Big Vlad may be making Russia look like a big scary bear on the international stage, the economy’s gone to pot, the population is declining, and political freedoms are severely restricted compared to Western nations. And let’s not even get started on civil rights.

I’ve got to put in nice pictures of Putin otherwise they might not let me into the country.

Now it may sound like I’m trying to put these two nations down. And you’d be right. But I still think they’re awesome countries. I’ve visited both and I loved both of them. Hell, I’m going to be living in Moscow for a year from September and I can’t wait. If anything, I prefer Russia to the USA. Because I’m weird.


This has been an incredibly rambly (that’s definitely not a word, Microsoft Word’s underlined it) and probably incoherent post, so I’m going to try and summarise my thoughts in brief: There is nothing wrong with liking your own country. There is nothing wrong with liking other countries. There is something wrong with not recognising that your country has been a bellend to other countries in the past. There is something wrong with looking down on other countries and maintaining that no other country can compare to your country.

Got that? Good. I’m probably preaching to the choir here anyway but I felt like talking about this stuff so get stuffed.

Tune in next time to hear me ramble more. Yes. Tune in to my written blog. Makes perfect sense. Don’t argue.


Edit 13/11/2016:
I would like to retract my statement that Theresa May “seems alright”, and also would like to say that I have now lumped her in with the lizard people politicians. Because she is a lizard.

The Demographics Debate

The Demographics Debate

Hello again.

So the EU referendum’s been and gone (finally), and I have to say I’m disappointed with the result. However, that is not the main subject of today’s blog, mainly because I can’t be arsed and I feel everyone’s covered that to a good extent (i.e. they won’t stop banging on about it). All that’s left to do now is to get on with it. No, there won’t be a second referendum, no matter how many petitions you sign. We have no choice, so even if you’re angry, just try and calm down. Please.


The referendum did bring up an interesting issue outside of the matter of the EU though. Many young people felt rather shafted by the oldies voting for leave, as ‘they [the older population] are the ones who will have to live with their decision for the shortest time’ and are apparently all raving racists and general nutters. I do not agree with this. Likewise, I do not agree with the viewpoint that all old people are basically Gandalf and have all knowledge of many things. Old people are people. They are different from each other. All demographics will have their tendencies, such as oldies being more conservative, but that does not mean they are all neo-Nazis. To illustrate my point, I will now write four (entirely fictional) biographies of people who are allowed to vote.

Our first case study is 21-year-old Rob. Rob is a final year English Lit and Politics student at the University of Bristol. He is the first person in his family to go to university. He is an above-average student, predicted to get a high 2:1. Rob takes a great interest in the local politics of the Bristol area, and always goes to the Student Union when a notable political figure is due to give a speech there. However, he avoids student politics, rightly so, because he thinks student politics is bollocks. Rob is correct. Rob usually reads the Guardian, and occasionally the Independent. He voted Labour in the last general election.

Rob voted to remain in the EU.

I am happy that people like Rob are able to vote.

Our second case study is 68-year-old Dave. Dave is a semi-retired van driver. Dave is very angry at the moment, as he has found out his youngest son has started dating an Asian woman. Dave does not want any ‘towelheads’ running about his Britain, let alone his house! He plans on disowning his son as soon as possible. Dave goes to the local Tesco to get the paper. His face drops as he walks in and sees that the woman at the till is of Asian descent. Dave would use the self-service checkout but he doesn’t understand how touchscreens work. He believes they’re an invention by the EU to control us. After doing his best to buy his paper without speaking to or looking at the friendly checkout lady, he scurries out of the shop.

He regularly reads the Daily Mail. This morning, he becomes absolutely infuriated at the news reported in the Mail: 300 MIL. TURBOCHARGED IMMIGRANTS TO COME TO THE UK AND STEAL OUR BAKED BEANS: WATCH OUT BRITS! (ALSO: PICTURES OF A B-LIST CELEB’S ARSE ON PAGE 5). Dave likes his beans. He is enraged that the foreigners are coming over here and stealing everything British. However, he calms down after page 5. Dave likes page 5. He is a simple man. Dave’s hatred of immigrants has not stopped him hiring a Polish plumber to come fix his toilet. However, he only did this because he thought ‘Grzegorz Lewicki’ was a bad misspelling of ‘Gregor Lewis’. Dave goes to check on Grzegorz. You know. Make sure he doesn’t nick anything.

Don’t read this garbage.

“Y’know, you can stay. I like you. You fix my toilet. But the rest of you Polish vermin need to sod off.”

Boże mój…” Grzegorz thinks to himself.

“Why don’t you just go to Russia anyway? You’re all basically the same thing, y’know, Communists and that.”

Grzegorz resists the urge to cave Dave’s head in with his spanner whilst telling him that Poles and Russians don’t usually…uh…’get on particularly well’, and that the Eastern Bloc collapsed 25 years ago.

RU:”Ahaha! I drew my gun first, I win!” PL:”Sir please we are engaging in serious political discussion.”

Dave voted for UKIP in the last election. He voted to leave the EU.

I am not happy that people like Dave are able to vote.

Our third case study is 74-year-old widow Sue. Sue is a retired primary school teacher. Since she retired, she’s been taking more of an interest in political matters. She regularly reads the Times and always goes to meet with her local councillor whenever he presents to the public. Her granddaughter taught her how to use her smartphone and now Sue can keep in touch with family and friends and do multiple other useful things. Sue used to be quite wary of immigrants but when an Indian family moved in next door she has become more open. She regularly goes round for a cup of tea and invites them over at least once a month for dinner. Sue is fed up of the bureaucracy that seems to obstruct any process undertaken in government, local or national. She voted Conservative in the last general election.

Sue voted to leave the EU.

I am happy that people like Sue are able to vote.

Our final case study is 20-year-old student Tigerlily O’BangBang. Her original name was Alice Johnson, but she changed her name on the basis that a ‘normal’ name is an example of oppression by an ultra-capitalistic, neo-liberal, fascist government. She added the “O’” due to her 1/98th Irish heritage. Tigerlily studies Marketing at the University of Aberdeen. She regularly attends talks at the student union, much like Rob, but unlike Rob, if the speaker says something she disagrees with, she will shout and scream like a 4 year old. However her questionable facial piercings can sometimes distract people from the racket.

These have never been a good idea.

In a debate, Tigerlily’s beliefs are often questioned. Instead of offering a valid counter-argument, Tigerlily will instead crawl into her safe space and throw copies of the Communist Manifesto at her opponent whilst screaming about how Marx was right all along, completely ignoring the over 100 years of economic research undertaken since the publication of Das Kapital. She will rage about the worker’s struggle despite being born an only child to an extremely wealthy couple and having never wanted for anything in her life. Tigerlily also believes that Daesh are simply misunderstood freedom-fighters and that we should be understanding of their struggle.

One time in a marketing seminar, Tigerlily proudly ranted on about how she identified as a polymorphous pixie-kin, simultaneously asexual and pansexual, when fellow student Rachel questioned what this had to do with the common market, the topic at hand. At this, Tigerlily screamed, stood up, and threw her chair at Rachel, concussing her. Tigerlily had to be led away by university security. The next time Rachel saw Tigerlily, she slapped her round the face. Good on you, Rachel. Good on you.

Tigerlily voted for the Green party in the last general election, after nearly going for the British Communist Party. She voted to remain in the EU.

I am not happy that people like Tigerlily are able to vote.

I realise that the negative caricatures are much more detailed and exaggerated, but that’s because they’re easier and more fun to write. If I wrote a detailed biography of someone who was sensible, it wouldn’t be as interesting.

Now, as we can see, each demographic has their tossers, and each demographic has their sensible people. Is this a flaw in democracy? That the uninformed have the same say as the informed. I would say so. And the ideal thing would be to have to take a test before you could vote. However, this will never happen, as the backlash would most likely be immense.

So instead, just recognise that all demographics have different people within them. Not all people over the age of 60 will kiss Nigel Farage’s arse, and not all people under the age of 25 will be praying at their shrine to Jeremy Corbyn.

Also, Nigel Farage can piss off. Him and his big, smug, lying face. Git.

I really want to hit him.

Auf Wiedersehen.


P.S. Please, please, recognise that the negative caricatures are extremely exaggerated and people who match those portrayals are probably not too numerous. They are used to illustrate a point.

The Refugee Crisis: Oh God I probably shouldn’t talk about this

The Refugee Crisis: Oh God I probably shouldn’t talk about this


Welcome back. You know how I said last time that I would try and do a slightly more light-hearted post? Yeah, well, I lied. Sorry. I promise I’ll try to be funnier next time.

Anyway let’s get into it. I’m quite nervous actually. Help.

My face whilst writing all of this

It seems that these days, if you want to be taken seriously, there is no compromise when it comes to deciding your place on any major global issue. Everyone seems to either be a leftist or rightist, being very vocal on social media, plastering their views on the matter all over the place, and constantly sharing news articles that support their opinion. To these people, there is only one correct standpoint on a matter, and that is their standpoint. Anyone who disagrees with them is either a cold-hearted, idiotic, neo-Nazi bigot or an overly-sensitive, naïve, traitorous socialist. Now I’m going to disagree with both of them. Here are my views on this topic. Please don’t hate me.


The war in Syria, Iraq and the surrounding areas is a tragedy, it truly is, and there are lots and lots of people fleeing there who have come to Europe. Most of these are the refugees, seeking a better life, and I say we should do our best to accommodate them. People with a leftist standpoint on this issue at this point will be in full agreement, I would think. Their only query might be, “why only most of them? All of them have suffered, and we should let them all in as soon as possible”. It’s at this point in the discussion that I don’t particularly want to voice the next part of my view, but I’m going to anyway.

Not all of these people are refugees. Amongst them will definitely be those who sympathise with Daesh (if you want to know why I’m going to call ISIS by this name, read this article).

“But that’s ridiculous! Are you racist? Just because they’re Muslim that doesn’t mean they’re going to sympathise with Daesh!”

Well if you were listening earlier, you mug, I said that most of those who do come to Europe will be actual refugees. But let me detail why Daesh sympathisers are coming to Europe, hiding amongst refugees. Daesh are, unfortunately, quite a clever organisation. They would have to be stupid to not try and sneak a few of their people in with a massive group of refugees. They are practically untraceable, and would be able to perhaps convince those that they travel with, plus disillusioned Muslims in the European country they end up in, to take up the extremist cause. This is a sad fact.

Moving away from the issue of Daesh, it is a fact that crime (particularly sexual assault) has been on the rise in countries that have accepted large amounts of refugees (especially Germany), and that officials have actually tried to cover this up. An increase crime is to be expected with any large influx of immigrants, and no, that’s not ‘racist’. This happens because refugees will generally be deprived, poor and homeless, and it is people of this socio-economic status, whether they are refugees or natives, who will be more likely to turn to crime. If you can offer credible statistics/articles that can disprove this, I’d actually be quite relieved and glad, but unfortunately I don’t think that such things exist. It’s a crying shame, but it’s the truth. Sorry if you think that’s discriminatory. Actually, no, I’m not, because it’s your fault if you’re thinking like that. This has nothing to do with race or xenophobia or whatever the hell else.

At this point now, rightists will be saying “Exactly! Refugees cause an increase in crime, they have a negative effect on our country, we need to enforce extremely rigid restrictions on those we do let in!”

Right, and how do you suppose we go about doing that? What are we going to do with those thousands upon thousands of people waiting at the border?

“Tell them to go back to where they came from!”

Yes, because they will be so willing to go back to the place they just spent weeks/months escaping from. And no, we can’t just force them to.

“Why’s that? You liberal pussy!”

Well sorry for caring about human life, but that’s not the only reason why we can’t. It’s a completely bonkers idea even if you look at it from a practical standpoint. How are you going to force them to go back? Threaten them? They’ve got nothing to lose, if they go back they will most likely end up dying, so there’s not really much you can threaten them with. You can’t put them on a big ol’ plane/boat back to the Middle East, because that’s impossible. You won’t be able to transport hundreds of thousands of people back to an incredibly dangerous region without spending incredible amounts of money and risking countless lives.

Yes I’m sure they’d love to go back here.


So what do we do? On the one hand, you have a huge amount of desperate people, seeking a new life, escaping from the utter bastards that are Daesh, but on the other hand, if we let everyone in, there will be a rise in crime and Islamic extremism.

I believe that we should try to accommodate as many refugees as possible, as no matter which way you look at it, it is impossible to turn them away. However we should introduce drastic measures to help them integrate into the culture of the country they enter as quickly as possible, and to reduce crime amongst the refugee population. Of course, there is nothing wrong with having pride in the culture of one’s home country, but if you move to another country, you have to learn to respect the facets of their culture. One example of such a measure which I found to be a good idea is a class for refugees in Norway that aims to teach male refugees ‘Western sexual norms’, as they will be coming from a part of the world in which a very sexist culture is still prevalent (even in the more developed countries in the region, such as Qatar and Saudi Arabia).

I hope this article has proved that it is possible to have a decisive centrist viewpoint on major issues. I’m not a “bigoted rightist” and I’m not a “naïve leftist”, but neither am I just “sitting on the fence”. I just think we need to look at issues with a modicum of common sense (easier said than done).

Unfortunately true.

If you disagree with anything I’ve said and have evidence to back your view up, please tell me and I will be happy to engage in a discussion (but not a shit-flinging contest, which is unfortunately what so many people do on the internet these days).

I hope you enjoyed reading this, or at least found it interesting. I’m going to try and be funnier next time. Honest. I’m just bad at thinking of light-hearted stuff to talk about.

Thanks for reading!