Brown, Gordon: More Toxic

With 'call me Dave' seemingly alienating potential voters by removing opportunity to gain a 'quality' education and maintaining and improving the chances of the 'upper classes', transparency actually gets even clearer. The 'working classes' are constrained to the low-road of progress by having opportunity threatened, while the 'upper classes' take the high-road: private schools, prep-schools and the route to Oxford. Anyone who is anyone always goes that route. It the way to becoming institutionalised and 'doing the right thing'. If there is no competition, any incompetent buffoon can walk into an influential (by definition well-rewarded) job ('for the boys'). The questions that carry equal weight:

doing WHAT and for WHOM?

The taxpayer funds it all, but who directs where these funds go?

Accountability

A term that is oft used today, but then attention is quickly shifted to something else. Classic misdirection. Obviously, 'Dave' doesn't care what the voters think: with Gordon Brown becoming more toxic playing the FEAR principle (Factual Exchange for Accepted Reasoning) and getting more toxic by the day, the choice between 'Dave' and Gordon Brown remains about the same. Don't ever forget the chancellor's raid on pensions that started a decade ago. The shape of things to come involves even more control. Terrorism is

STILL

the justifiction for all ills. Terrorism is a reality so we are informed. The similar scenario exists for climate change. The effects are not disputed, just the reasons provided. It's almost a guarantee that when things go quiet, or more public funding (money) and control is needed, another outrage will occur. The logic is that we all need more protection so throw another shedload of money at the 'problem', but don't ask too many searching questions. Rather like an Agatha Christie mystery: when the plot gets a little dull, introduce another murder to liven things up a bit. Cynical? It worked for Agatha Christie. The difference between the fiction and justifiction ('reality') is that a story has an ending (and implies a beginning), but 'reality' has any potential conclusion spirited away: hidden, buried, distorted, spun around, twisted, fabricated...

UNKNOWN.

Just like a good conspiracy theory: impossible to prove. All this promotes the appearance of collusion, but bear in mind though that the one ('Dave' or Brown) does something nasty and 'risks' alienation so the other (Brown or 'Dave') does something nastier to restore balance between the two.

Both of the nasty acts become acceptable because of the restoration of balance.

Stay alert and watch it all happen in front of your eyes. You'll need a strong stomach. You may have to remove your rose-tinted glasses to see through the illusion. A true double act with different labels. Pensions.