Views: 266
UK’s recent string of atrocious Prime Ministers have not represented a majority of UK subjects (subjects of the Queen, who is sovereign; they are not citizens of their country — a “subject” is the very opposite of “a citizen,” who possesses sovereignty, there being no dictatorship, of any type, over citizens). (To call a monarch’s subjects a citizen of a democracy is to lie, because wherever there is an aristocracy, there is no democracy.)
The only people the UK’s Government really represents are UK’s titled and untitled aristocracy. The late Queen was their figurehead, and she served them — not the public (who paid her “Highness”, in their taxes). She represented the aristocracy. Not every UK billionaire has a title, or is a member of the titled Nobility, but their media pretend that they rule a ‘democracy’, and many of their subjects believe it. Everything is rigged by the aristocracy’s Government, to deceive the public.
An excellent example of the UK’s dictatorship is their treatment of Julian Assange:
The U.S. regime is using its British vassal-nation to crucify Assange, who is a citizen of Australia, which has done nothing to try to protect him from their depredations against him.
On 27 October 2021, he had a stroke while in a court procedural hearing, but his condition after the stroke has not been made public. He’s provided no opportunity to communicate to the public, if he any longer is even able, any longer, coherently to do so.
Assange remains in solitary confinement (“23 hours a day locked in their cells”) in a super-max British prison, because the U.S. Government won’t stop its demand that he be extradited to the U.S. (and killed here, instead of die in Britain, while waiting). His only ‘crime’ was his publishing only truths (no one alleges anything that he published to have been false), especially truths that cut to the core of exposing the U.S. regime’s constant lying. All of his sources were whistleblowers. A dictatorship hates whistleblowers. So, this blatant and illegal injustice against an international hero (virtually everywhere except in the United States) is today one prominent disproof of the U.S. and UK lies to the effect that they are democracies. These and many other such examples in ‘the land of the free’, and in America’s and Britain’s ‘democracies’, during the post-1945 period, display the basic lie that these countries are democracies. (Maybe formally they are ‘democratic’ (or, at least the U.S. has a Constitution, which UK doesn’t — doesn’t even have that), but, in reality, at least during recent decades, they aren’t, but are instead a dictatorship by psychopaths. No real democracy would treat the world’s top champion of open government and of whistleblowers and of democracy, in such blatantly illegal, as well as abysmally unethical and even barbaric, ways.) On 26 September 2021, Yahoo News reported (based largely on reporting in Madrid’s El Pais on 5 January 2021) that the Trump Administration felt so embarrassed by some information that had been WikiLeaked, they drew up detailed plans to kidnap Assange at the Ecuadorian Embassy in London to “rendition” him for possible execution by America. The plans, including “meetings with authorities or approvals signed by the president,” were finally stopped at the National Security Council, as being too risky. “Discussions over kidnapping or killing Assange occurred ‘at the highest levels’ of the Trump administration”, even without any legal basis to try him in the United States. So: the Trump Administration then prepared an indictment against Assange (to legalize their extradition-request), and the indictment became unsealed or made public on the same day, 11 April 2019, when Ecuador’s Government allowed UK’s Government to drag Assange out into UK super-max solitary-confinement imprisonment, and this subsequently produced lie-based U.S. & UK tussles over how to prevent Assange from ever again being able to reach the public, either by continuing his solitary confinement, or else by, perhaps, poisoning him, or else convicting him of something and then executing him. On 4 January 2021, a British judge nixed Assange’s defense case: “I reject the defence submissions concerning staying extradition [to U.S.] as an abuse of the process of this court.” Earlier, her handling of Assange’s only ‘trial’, which was his extradition hearing, was a travesty, which would have been expected in Hitler’s courts, and which makes clear that UK’s courts can be just as bad as Nazi courts had been. However, the U.S. regime’s efforts to grab Assange continued on. Barack Obama, Donald Trump, Joe Biden, and the overwhelmingly compliant U.S. Congress, are all to blame for that dictatorial regime’s pursuit against that champion of truth-telling; and the same blame applies to the leadership in UK. On 10 December 2021, BBC bannered “Julian Assange can be extradited to the US, court rules”.
The judges in UK are appointed by the aristocracy; see, for example, in Assange’s case, this, which also notes that “The denial of Assange’s legal right to access materials necessary to prepare his own defence — including a computer, case-related documents and members of his legal team — has been raised repeatedly and greeted with contempt by judicial authorities.” There is no limit to how arbitrary a judge can be in the UK.
As I said earlier, the Queen was a “figurehead,” and she represented the aristocracy. She did NOT, in fact, represent the public. Most of her subjects have been snookered by their aristocracy’s endless river of propaganda to believe that, somehow, her subjects lived in a democracy. Her subjects lived in an aristocracy. They should ask Assange. Of course, the rulers won’t let that happen. And Prince Charles III will be no different, even if he might wish to be. Britain’s dictatorship is by its aristocracy, not by its figurehead-monarch, who represents them.
Blatantly, both America and England lie in order to refer to themselves as being democracies. In fact, America has the world’s highest percentage of its residents in prisons. Can the world’s highest-imprisonment-rate country be a democracy? How? But in some ways, UK is even worse. Can the Government of Australia be any better, since Assange is an Australian and they’ve done nothing whatsoever to protect him from his would-be executioners? After all: Assange will be dying in prison regardless of whether or not he even becomes formally tried for any alleged crime. That’s a democracy? Where is that a democracy? Of course it’s not! It is a country that is controlled by its roughly 1,000 billionaires. It is an aristocracy. And the public are merely their dupes. And that is the reason why, in the only international poll of this that has ever been published on approval/disapproval of Assange — and its findings then were suppressed — only in the U.S. did a majority of the public disapprove of Assange.
Assange WAS WikiLeaks, the world’s only publisher that protected the anonymity of whistleblowers and so allowed them with at least some degree of personal safety to reveal to the public the criminal acts that their bosses ordered or allowed to be done in secret by their organization so as to increase their wealth and power. When Assange got taken down by the U.S/UK regime (with the shameful acquiescence of his Government, Australia), that effectively killed WikiLeaks, and what remains afterward is only a shell. That poll asked in 23 countries: “Do you support or oppose this type of site that would post such materials (“copies of confidential government or corporate files and information to the public”)?” (The pollsters hid the fact that Wikileaks had not published anything that any government has ever shown to have compromised its national security or the safety of any employee in that field. Many respondents to the question might have assumed otherwise, which would have increased the “Oppose”-percentage.) “Support” was 39% in U.S. — the most-solidly-proven dictatorship. But it was 62% in UK; and, though that is vastly higher by comparison to U.S., it still was the second-lowest WikiLeaks-support among all of the 23 nations that were surveyed on this question, all of which ranged from 67%, in the third-lowest, which was Canada, up to 88%, at the very top, which was in South Africa. The mean or average from all of the 23 countries was 76% “Support” of WikiLeaks. (Australia was exactly at that average of all countries: 76%.) America was the only country that had lower than 50% saying “Support,” and this fact proves that its public are extraordinarily deceived by their aristocracy, the billionaires, and its millions of hired and otherwise paid agents. Only in America did the majority — 61% — say “Oppose” on that question. The second-highest “Oppose”-percentage was in UK: 38%. The third-highest was Canada: 33%. The fourth-and-fifth-highest were Poland and Belgium, tied at 32%. If those are the five main fascist countries among the 23, then the main reason for this might be that those five nations have the highest control of the nation by their billionaires. A reasonable statement about what WiliLeaks had been before the UK and U.S. took down Julian Assange would be: It was the sharpest point on the head of the global arrow that was aimed against the very heart of fascism throughout the world. But they (those fascists) took it down.
On September 5th, Yahoo News bannered “Liz Truss beats Rishi Sunak to become next prime minister – here’s what she’s pledged to do”, and reported that “The foreign secretary [Truss] beat her rival, former chancellor Rishi Sunak, by 81,326 votes to 60,399.” That’s only 141,725 voters, in total, and they had been voting in the primary election among only Conservative Party voters. So, Truss became the next Prime Minister. The election that had placed that Party into power was the one between Conservative Boris Johnson and Labour Jeremy Corbyn, on 12 December 2019. 13,966,454 of the Queen’s subjects voted for the Conservative Party in that general election, and that was 43.6% of the electorate. However, of those 13,966,454, only 141,725 voters cared enough even to vote in their own Party’s primary election on 5 September 2022 — and that’s exactly 1.0% of UK’s Conservatives, determining whom will be their nation’s (not merely their Party’s) leader, during the coming years. This is the aristocracy’s Government, not the public’s. The UK’s Government represents the UK’s aristocracy, as has been the case for hundreds of years.
In most of the world’s electoral dictatorships, such as in U.S. and UK, the billionaires need only to control the few voters in each of their Party primaries, so as to achieve a general-election ballot in which each one of the various Party nominees that ends up being on the ballot is effectively owned by billionaires — whichever of the billionaires have been funding that winning Party.
This is how aristocracies function, in modern times.
Originally published on 2022-09-09
Author: Eric Zuesse
Origins of images: Facebook, Twitter, Wikimedia, Wikipedia, Flickr, Google, Imageinjection, Public Domain & Pinterest.
Read our Disclaimer/Legal Statement!
Donate to Support Us
We would like to ask you to consider a small donation to help our team keep working. We accept no advertising and rely only on you, our readers, to keep us digging the truth on history, global politics, and international relations.
