It's the first day in November of 2019, the rain-sodden Halloween pumpkins have lost their manic grins and now sit
on doorsteps with charred sneers of swindled contempt. To some, it may be emblematic of how the public of Great
Britain -who voted to leave the European Union, feel right around now.
The idea that many in the world were raised with the belief that if a group were asked to make a decision, then the
majority who arrived at a determination would see that verdict implemented.
In the case of the United Kingdom leaving the European Union on 31st October, that accepted process is no longer
applicable.
Of course, it sets a precedence for any future decisions requested from the British public and the interpretation of
the result. In a hyperbolic scenario, it could be suggested that for a person living in this country wants to fulfil a wish,
that person should vote against it!
The pros-and-cons of being a partner in the European Union are difficult to research due to bias from each faction.
Objective truth is hazy because of the lame-stream media's manner and political rhetoric from a complacent Parliament
who's protective 'bubble' in Westminster has hampered their perception of the people they're supposed to represent.
If the UK had left on 31st March 29, a proposal offered by ex-Prime Minister Theresa May three years after the referendum,
then the agreed EU regulations would have seen the UK spending three years 'weaning' themselves off the disciplines that
the other twenty-seven countries adhere to.
With trade between the UK and these twenty-seven nations still paramount to the EU project and Great Britain, the 'Leaving'
plan was originally designed to utilise that time to adjust any accords that involved tariffs, Custom rules and security.
But in an environment where private and public companies would scrutinise the leaving process, accommodate their
businesses to use these changes and seek out other possible customer across the world, a decision that all the political
parties in the United Kingdom agreed to abide by was halted on the day of remembering the dead and the change of
seasons.
I have never known such a time when a democratic country arrives at a result from a binary question and the conclusion
is -not only ignored, it is argued against with poor contention. However and if you'll allow me, I do believe I know why.
There's been a fundamental change in the way that most of the populace in the first-world countries have consciously
become in their way of understanding what social leadership and communal awareness actually is.
A sentient group will go one way after intermutual acknowledgement is arrived at and the person deemed strongest of the
group is charged with the task of going forward with the agreed plan and testing for pitfalls -genuine pitfalls, that the group
may not have included in their thinking.
Checking that all is safe, the colony can proceed under the assurance that their chosen 'leader' has cleared a way of perils
and therefore, increased the chances of the group continuing to exist and possibly thrive. This idea of single-hegemony is
our basic tenet of tribal existence and has the luxury of advantage in two ways.
Remember, even a leader has to sleep and many alert eyes bring easier dreams!
But today, that type of overall continuation has been eroded. Simply put, we've become soft, complacent and weak.
Those same first-world communities believe the bar of merit, personal strength and natural conduction, should be lowered
to cater for the lesser, those who actually benefit from members of their group that are supposed to genuinely strive to
improve the whole. Those who succeed in thier individual skills are now frowned upon and asked to perform to a level
below their standard.
Those thought to have such commanding aptitudes are now graded on visual appearance, a predilection towards empathy
and always displaying an air of altruism. Again, feelings, emotions and a lowering of expectations.
Whether the above theory is self-inflicted due to the multitude of comfort, the fall of religious disciplines or a natural outcome
when an Empire has lived too long, I don't know. But if it's been part of a long-term infiltration scheme by others outside the
group, then it should certainly investigated.
But then again, how would you know the cause if you discovered it? A person who's breathed water all of their lives will
certainly balk if there's evidence that they're supposed to inhaling air and the ironic part is that in the current social climate,
you cannot even guarantee a democratically arrived-at result for which idea would benefit you!!
Strength is seen as a negative and I believe that comes from too-much time spent accepting excessive indulgence in pleasure
and luxury. Nobody is saying you should wear sackcloth and ashes and no one is suggesting that bread and water will make
you a more virtuous person, but democracy must be agreed on as ground we must not tread lightly.
But today, the footprints are there for all to see.
No, there was a saying that went 'Decisions are made by those who turn up' and sadly, it seems in today's society, that is no
longer true. Just like those same smoke-smudged gourds sitting in the morning November rain, we'll have to wait and see
where the UK ends up.
on doorsteps with charred sneers of swindled contempt. To some, it may be emblematic of how the public of Great
Britain -who voted to leave the European Union, feel right around now.
The idea that many in the world were raised with the belief that if a group were asked to make a decision, then the
majority who arrived at a determination would see that verdict implemented.
In the case of the United Kingdom leaving the European Union on 31st October, that accepted process is no longer
applicable.
Of course, it sets a precedence for any future decisions requested from the British public and the interpretation of
the result. In a hyperbolic scenario, it could be suggested that for a person living in this country wants to fulfil a wish,
that person should vote against it!
The pros-and-cons of being a partner in the European Union are difficult to research due to bias from each faction.
Objective truth is hazy because of the lame-stream media's manner and political rhetoric from a complacent Parliament
who's protective 'bubble' in Westminster has hampered their perception of the people they're supposed to represent.
If the UK had left on 31st March 29, a proposal offered by ex-Prime Minister Theresa May three years after the referendum,
then the agreed EU regulations would have seen the UK spending three years 'weaning' themselves off the disciplines that
the other twenty-seven countries adhere to.
With trade between the UK and these twenty-seven nations still paramount to the EU project and Great Britain, the 'Leaving'
plan was originally designed to utilise that time to adjust any accords that involved tariffs, Custom rules and security.
But in an environment where private and public companies would scrutinise the leaving process, accommodate their
businesses to use these changes and seek out other possible customer across the world, a decision that all the political
parties in the United Kingdom agreed to abide by was halted on the day of remembering the dead and the change of
seasons.
I have never known such a time when a democratic country arrives at a result from a binary question and the conclusion
is -not only ignored, it is argued against with poor contention. However and if you'll allow me, I do believe I know why.
There's been a fundamental change in the way that most of the populace in the first-world countries have consciously
become in their way of understanding what social leadership and communal awareness actually is.
A sentient group will go one way after intermutual acknowledgement is arrived at and the person deemed strongest of the
group is charged with the task of going forward with the agreed plan and testing for pitfalls -genuine pitfalls, that the group
may not have included in their thinking.
Checking that all is safe, the colony can proceed under the assurance that their chosen 'leader' has cleared a way of perils
and therefore, increased the chances of the group continuing to exist and possibly thrive. This idea of single-hegemony is
our basic tenet of tribal existence and has the luxury of advantage in two ways.
Remember, even a leader has to sleep and many alert eyes bring easier dreams!
But today, that type of overall continuation has been eroded. Simply put, we've become soft, complacent and weak.
Those same first-world communities believe the bar of merit, personal strength and natural conduction, should be lowered
to cater for the lesser, those who actually benefit from members of their group that are supposed to genuinely strive to
improve the whole. Those who succeed in thier individual skills are now frowned upon and asked to perform to a level
below their standard.
Those thought to have such commanding aptitudes are now graded on visual appearance, a predilection towards empathy
and always displaying an air of altruism. Again, feelings, emotions and a lowering of expectations.
Whether the above theory is self-inflicted due to the multitude of comfort, the fall of religious disciplines or a natural outcome
when an Empire has lived too long, I don't know. But if it's been part of a long-term infiltration scheme by others outside the
group, then it should certainly investigated.
But then again, how would you know the cause if you discovered it? A person who's breathed water all of their lives will
certainly balk if there's evidence that they're supposed to inhaling air and the ironic part is that in the current social climate,
you cannot even guarantee a democratically arrived-at result for which idea would benefit you!!
Strength is seen as a negative and I believe that comes from too-much time spent accepting excessive indulgence in pleasure
and luxury. Nobody is saying you should wear sackcloth and ashes and no one is suggesting that bread and water will make
you a more virtuous person, but democracy must be agreed on as ground we must not tread lightly.
But today, the footprints are there for all to see.
No, there was a saying that went 'Decisions are made by those who turn up' and sadly, it seems in today's society, that is no
longer true. Just like those same smoke-smudged gourds sitting in the morning November rain, we'll have to wait and see
where the UK ends up.
Edith Head Gives Good Wardrobe.