North Stoke Life

What does this mean to the English citizen? This party calls for secession of England from the United Kingdom. That is, England leaves the United Kingdom, wholesale. And forms its own administration and reforms its pillars of state to serve its tenants by renewing the following: English monarchy English prime minister English archbishop Mantra: Its OK to be English With the future possibility of joining the US as a federal state , with its far greater protection and if it suits our tenants purposes.  In the mean time prior to the next general election, the party would offer to act as a local branch under the national umbrella organisation of Restore Britain . Or preferably as a hyper-local political party much like Great Yarmouth First. Or both. Whichever delivers the largest political platform. How to become a tenant of England? Becoming a Tenant of England, officially gives you the right to vote and this is the only way to gain that right. Tenancy of England is automatically gran...

In response to Mr. Lowe MP discussing his immigration policy. My response is that it is a good one but will be moot if he leaves taxation without wholesale attention.  <Snip> It is great. But you must deliver a bold and wholesale policy for taxation. Else the downstream immigration policy will be moot. Start by raising the income tax and NI threshold to the median wage. About £30. That way both the welfare trap and minimum wage neglects also become moot. And millions able yet not willing to work at the current rates due to high taxation, will flow immediately into jobs. Creating millions of new Restore voters. Further along, the incentive to migrate into Britain will largely be mitigated too. With such a huge reduction in welfare, much if it can be abolished. And the remains able to work and still not willing will be that much more visible to citizens as unjust players making it easy to induct them by right.

Dear father, I was listening to your podcast today on the plight of people convicted of brutal crimes. And it made me wonder about how you might understand the meaning of 'the grace of God'? I was alarmed that you are confidently committed to asking for the death penalty in the cases you support it for.  May I ask, if you were in the same position as those you want killed, would you have not done the same thing? I hear you. You might now be thinking "I would never commit such a crime don't be ridiculous". I would respond ironically by suggesting we have a veritable Jesus Christ before us, if so. My point is, how do you know that you would not commit the same crime in their position? You have been saved by the grace of God. Can you then know what you would have done, if you have already been saved by His grace? If my interpretation of grace is 'if I do not sin, God will save me', then I will think this way.  But if my interpretation of gr...

Where it matters. I spoke to Dermot Turing, nephew of the famous Alan Turing at a cypher networking event about this the other day. He was simultaneously horrified and confused though not disbelieving when I brought it up. He has no involvement in it I'm sure but obviously even being seen to hear these things is not good for his profile, obedience wise. The topic was on my cryptography quasi conspiracy theory, where no cipher is secure if it's allowed to be used in public. Because the nation state will always demand a back door from the developers on pain of blocking exports of the tech otherwise. The state must have control over all communications as a first principle, they will say because of national security, rightly or wrongly they will do it. This is my theory. I'm not saying this is a good thing or bad thing. It is simply observed. And arguably is sensible if one's philosophy leans toward state power. Still, this is all supposition from my own intuition. Remembe...

Capitalism is where a small group of individuals gets to decide who gets to keep the goodies and how they get distributed. Socialism does exactly the same thing.  I'm showing you how both socialism and capitalism are both a fallacy, used to gain power through the vote by causing division and conflict. Call it 'diversity' if you like.  As a capitalist, a small group of individuals gets to decide who gets the goodies and distribute them. Socialism does exactly the same thing.  Thats right. There is no fundamental difference between both. There are tiny differences at the margin, such as how the freebies and power get distributed. But that is all.  Even socialism has private ownership in those who run it for cryin' out loud. Even capitalism has state control and redistribution.  Both are neurotic worldviews. If you are possessed by either, GET HELP QUICKLY! It's a wonder that something which does not really exist causes so much division and conflict. But we are hum...