Seven days to bring them down and turn back the hard right.

It's been 47 years since another September 11th in Chile. Chile was a model democracy. It had powerful Trade Unions and a strong left wing party led by the charismatic Allende. A socialist government had been elected and provided free health care and an education system available to all. Chile had it's Jeremy Corbyn and his policies. There was a rich diverse and multi racial culture. It was creative and rich in literature, music and art. Democracy was well established and had you suggested the possibility of a coup backed by the army you would have been called deluded..

Yet on September 11th 1973 the Americans backed a military coup led by Pinochet. The Far right street gangs of the Chilean Far Right ran the concentraration camps and roundef up the left and the intellectuals. They came for the Trade Unionists and the young . These groups have echoes in the street gangs of the UK. The words on social media from the DFLA and the EDL echo the gangs that came for their enemies in Chile. Of course many will say I exaggerate. I will be called delusional yet I feel uneasy. The words "traitors" and ' enemies of the people" are used time after time. The "patriots threaten to come round and sort you out time after time in tweet after tweet in message after message. The threats are real and the anger palpable.

A large section of the white working class have moved to the right. Chile had a written constitution we do not. Johnson's actions are not a coup but instead a bending to the maximum precedent. There is a theory that because England was the first industrial nation that a curious hybrid structure grew up that combined elements of a feudal aristocracy with the growing plutocrats of the merchant class. We have no written constitution but simply a series of precedents that pretend to be a constitution . It's perfect for the uses of the organised hypocrisy that is the conservative party. By the way that's a quote by Disraeli the leader of the Conservative Party during a section of 19th century. An unwritten constitution backed by this hypocrisy , organised by a conspiracy aimed at power is about to create a post modern form of crypto fascism. It will be unique here and clearly can be defeated yet it's going to get very nasty.
It's fed by a kind of stassi capitalism that is quite unique to the curious 'frothy charm' of individuals like Mogg and Johnson. The defeat of this authoritarian tendency is essential. It's Socialism or Barbarism...come dungeons dark or gallows grim.. ..no paseran...it's time to decide Swinson and the Tory wets...whose side are you on?

And the days come down to this on Sky news Ken Clarke says he is prepared to back a Corbyn led caretaker government. What will Jo and her merry band do now? There are no other options now than a no confidence motion. We all know that with parliament prorogued it's not far from rule by the Privy Council. We know that provision and planning has been made with the armed services to prevent "civil disirder". In theory within the terms of our unwritten constitution we could have the suspension of civil rights and the abolition of trade union rights. Of course those who celebrate the prorogueing of Parluament know deep down that they would like to suppress dissent and abolish our civil liberties. The savage Gammon know what they want and there are Tories who see what is happening. There is no middle ground anymore my friends better decide whose side you are on? It's time Jo...the extremists have taken over the government. Even the Financial Times has condemned them.. what else do you need to know? Yesterday I asked a member of the prorogueing faction what she would feel if a Labour Government under Jeremy Corbyn did this. She replied 'well he is not Prime Minister" . The concept of precedence was clearly lost upon her. I have spent the time since having great sympathy with Enlightened Despotism and A certain Marxist Leninist outlook. What do we do with errant stupidity or ignorance? I really am horrified by this chronic lack of the ability to think...we must act quickly now as the hour is getting late..

`The mob alaways will shout for the `strong man` the `Great Leader`...take down the Union Jack it clashes with the Sunset

We are now witnessing the collapse of the British state and all the imperfections and poisons that was stored in its unwritten constitution are now coming to the surface. At best its midwife is Jo Swinson and at worst she reveals herself to be completely out of her depths and the enabler of this right wing coup. It is herfault simply and directly that there will be no vote of confidence against the Conservative government. Dominic Cummings sits like Cersei Lannister at the centre of a web of plots, betrayals and illusion. Joe Swinson sits like the mad woman of the Eyrie and her party waits now with her on the edge of the moon door.

This morning`s events leaves no other choice for a significant proportion of a Tory party to leave and bring down the Johnson government. A terribblehybrid slouching monster is about to be born from the right of the Tory party and of the Brexit party. The street gangs of the DFLA and EDL ready themselves to become the Essay of this new movement. The coming crisis will test the merits pf the opposition parties to the limit. The coming crisis resembles a constitutional crisis that has not been seen since the 17^th century. It is quite clear that whatever comes next will shatter the cultural, political and social fabric of the United Kingdom. This is the time of resistance to Ersatz  Fascism and authoritarian rule. 

Proroguing of parliament takes us right back to the reign of Charles t1 and all of the hidden contradictions and paradoxes that exists within our unwritten constitution will be exposed. This is the time for Corbyn, Nicolas Sturgeon and Adam Price, Caroline Lucas  supported by John Bercow to take decisive action. We stand at a crossroad now and there is no longer any middle ground or compromise. Let the centrists have the nervous breakdown now ,the only solution is to bring down this vial government and to create a Labour led government. In the words of W. B. Yeates “the centre cannot hold” and there is no middle ground anymore.

Sovereignity is more at risk than at any time in the last 400 years and I freely speculate what a government with no parliament will do. Will it be  martial law Will it be the abolition of workers right and the suspension of the Scottish parliament and the Welsh assembly? We are going to find out. In a time of dictatorship, rebellion becomes a duty. Chlorinated chicken is coming and the NHS is on the table…….I have been telling you about this for a long time…..

`The mob alaways will shout for the `strong man` the `Great Leader`. For the mobhhates society from which it is excluded.  Hannah Arendt

Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown is a 1923 essay by Virginia Woolf.

Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown  is a 1923 essay by Virginia Woolf. However, it should be noted that much of the argument of the essay Woolf also developed in a number of other texts, including “Modern Novels” (1919), “Character in Fiction” (1924) and “Modern Fiction” (1925). In fact, “Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown” is just one of several closely related versions of Woolf’s account of the state of the modern novel, and it seems appropriate to read the essay with other versions of the argument in mind.

There are at least two central features that “Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown” shares with texts like “Modern Fiction”; first, there is the shared concern with representation, and especially representation of character; and second, this concern is almost always explored with respect to the literary practices of Edwardian writers.

It is typical of Woolf to define her theoretical position against the generation of novelists that immediately precedes her own. Woolf assesses the state of the novel and voices her own expectations of the genre precisely trough the analysis of what she felt were the failures of Edwardian novelists. “Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown” is written as a polemical answer to Arnold Bennett’s claim that the novel is in crisis due to the failure of Georgian novelists in the art of “character-making” which he finds crucial for successful novel-writing. Woolf partially accepts both Bennett’s account of the current state of the novel and agrees with the claim that the representation of characters is central to the novel as a genre. She accepts that “the novel is a very remarkable machine for the creation of human character” (384), and agrees that it is precisely the crisis in character-making that sparks a wider crisis of the genre: “And it is because this essence, this character-making power, has evaporated that novels are for the most part the soulless bodies we know, cumbering our tables and clogging our minds” (383-384). The point of contention for Woolf is primarily the question of the origins of this crisis. While for Bennett Georgians are to be blamed, Woolf, predictably, locates the problem in the previous generation of writers – Galsworthy, Wells and Bennett himself.
Obviously, the dispute bears clear marks of a conflict between two literary generations, but in doing so it also touches on some crucial theoretical questions, and is highly instructive on the issue of Woolf’s stance on representation and on the status of character in fiction. The charge against Edwardian writers in “Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown” is that while representing a vast number of details, they fail in creating believable characters. In their writings “every sort of town is represented, and innumerable institutions”, but “in all this vast conglomeration of printed pages, in all that congeries of streets and houses, there isn’t a single man or woman we know” (385). It appears that in the Edwardian fiction Woolf sees signs of excessive pedantry and attention to detail, but lack of ability to convey complex characters. In this failure Edwardians are firmly opposed to the “astonishing vividness and reality of the characters” of the Victorian novel (385). Woolf apparently believed that after the end of the Victorian period, a crucial change took place in the English novel, undermining the task of character-representation.

Woolf identified several causes of this change. First, the turn towards moralism and social reform visible in authors like Galsworthy. The second factor was the influence of Dostoevsky whose characters appear to be constructed in such a way that undermined both the Victorian understanding of character and any attempt to seriously deal with character in English fiction. “But what keyword could be applied to Raskolnikov, Mishkin, Stavrogin, or Alyosha? These characters without any features at all. We go down into them as we descend into some enormous cavern. Lights swing about; we hear the bottom of the sea; it is all dark, terrible, and uncharted” (386). Although Woolf doesn’t go into great detail in juxtaposing Dostoevsky’s method of characterization with that of Victorian novelists such as Dickens or Eliot, it seems clear that she sees Victorian characters as clearly defined and coherent, while those of Dostoevsky bear a certain dose of unprecedented complexity, internal conflict and lack of definite shape (386-387). It seems that that the influence of Dostoevsky has brought the Victorian character into a state of crisis which Edwardians were not able to overcome.
For Woolf the dispute over character is clearly crucial. Character is both the central category of life outside literature and the constitutive element of fiction: “To disagree about character is to differ in the depths of the being” (387). And it is precisely the centrality of character that makes the failure of Edwardians so fundamental. It is also clear from Woolf’s argumentation that the success of “character-making” is inextricably tied to the category of verisimilitude.

Several far-reaching conclusions can be drawn from the Woolf’s argumentation in “Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown”. There is an assumption that the novel has character representation as its central purpose. It seems that for Woolf, this is not historically conditioned, i.e. “character-making” is not a function of any particular period of literary history, but rather an inherent feature of the genre. The question for Woolf is how is this task to be carried out. It is apparently at the level of the means of representation that historical change takes place. Portraying characters is central, but our understanding of what character is changes. As her discussion of Dostoevsky shows, the introduction of a new understanding of character can render certain ways of representing characters obsolete.
But while in “Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown” Woolf tends to provide an intrinsic explanation for the change that needs to take place in literature, in many other instances the argument runs somewhat differently, the emphasis being on the actual historical change in human character and human relations. Thus the famous comments on human nature radically changing around 1910 (422-423).
Although this point is not voiced particularly strongly in “Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown”, it is clear from the claims made elsewhere that creating a believable character, “a flesh-and-blood Mrs. Brown”, means abandoning Edwardian interest in outside details and embracing the full complexity and incoherence of what is to be represented. This can then easily be construed as a plea for a new kind of psychological realism. As Woolf puts it while praising Joyce in “Modern Fiction”, “let us record the atoms as they fall on the mind in order in which they fall, let us trace the pattern, however disconnected and incoherent in appearance, which each sight or incident scores upon the consciousness.” (161)

---

All quotations are taken from Virginia Woolf, Collected Ess

The 1960s Music Culture and Society Asclepius Autumn course Tuesday September 11 at 10 am

The 1960s The Decade that Shook Britain

This will be a 14 weeks course starting on Wednesday September 11 at 10am at Asclepius Therapy for more information please ring 07592330457 or e mail squabs@hotmail.co uk. The cost will be £70 and stretches over  the 14 vweeksin two hourly weekly sessions.


If the Fifties were in black and white, then the Sixties were in Technicolor. The ‘Swinging Sixties’ remain the defining decade for Britain. In just ten short years, London had transformed from the bleak, conservative city, only just beginning to forget the troubles of the Second World War, into the capital of the world, full of freedom, hope and promise. It was the centre of all excitement; the city where anything and everything was possible. And yet, does anyone truly know how it was possible for decades of change to take place in just ten years?
By the 1960s, the first teenage generation free from conscription emerged in Britain. Young people were finally given a voice and freedom to do what they wanted. The parents of the Sixties teenage generation had spent their youth fighting for their lives in the Second World War and wanted their own children to enjoy their youth and be able to have more fun and freedom. By the early 1960s, teenagers were already significantly different to those of a decade ago.
One of the biggest, defining aspects of the 1960s was music. Although rock and roll began having an effect on Britain in the 1950s, it wasn’t until the early Sixties and the emergence of ‘British Invasion’ groups like The Beatles, that music truly began its revolutionary changes. The Beatles are an excellent example of how music influenced the lives of young Britons. Although they continued the rock and roll genre of the 1950s for the early part of the decade, by 1967 Sgt Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band became the turning point in music and inspired other musicians, such as The Beach Boys and The Rolling Stones, to experiment with new sounds and develop innovative pieces of music. Their later albums included lyrics encouraging rebellion against the authorities, as seen in ‘Revolution’. Young people began to stand up for their beliefs and their individuality.

Recreational drugs were also synonymous with the Sixties and became more commonly used in the latter part of the decade. Images of the Woodstock festival show people high on marijuana and LSD, dancing in fields with paint on their face and their hair flowing free. It was very difficult for anyone in show business to avoid becoming involved in drugs in some way and as easily influenced young people looking for fun, many were encouraged to follow their idols and take hallucinogenic drugs. LSD made people feel happy and optimistic and helped bring about the ‘hippie’ movement. The effects of these drugs were also reflected in psychedelic art and films, bringing new, vibrant and exciting colours and patterns to the forefront. The ‘Yellow Submarine’ film with its combination of psychedelic pictures and music illustrates this perfectly.

Although Britain wasn’t directly involved in the Vietnam War, British musicians such as John Lennon brought it to the attentions of British people through protests against the conflict. Songs like ‘Give Peace a Chance’ showed people the horrors and pointlessness of war and fans followed in the footsteps of their idols to pursue peace and freedom. This became one of the biggest aspects associated with the ‘hippie’ movement. People began to challenge and question authority, something that would have been unheard of a decade ago.

The Profumo Affair, a scandalous mix of sex, spies and government, captured the public’s attention in 1963. The Secretary for War John Profumo was discovered to be having an affair with a woman who was also seeing a Russian military attaché. Profumo denied the affair but later admitted that he had lied to the House of Commons and resigned. The affair changed the relationship between government and press forever and seriously undermined the public’s trust in politicians. The traditional deference to figures of authority was now gradually being replaced by suspicion and mistrust.
Fashion in the decade mirrored many of the social changes of the Sixties. Mary Quant became famous for popularising the mini skirt which became the epitome of 1960s fashion. The mini was designed to be free and liberating for women, allowing them to “run and jump”. Her fashion designs used simple geometric shapes and colours which gave women a new kind of femininity. Women were free to wear more playful, youthful clothes that would have seemed outrageous ten years before. By the late Sixties, psychedelic prints and vibrant colours began appearing on clothes as the hippie movement gathered pace.

Feminism began to become a more influential ideology as more jobs became available to young women in the Sixties. This allowed them to move away from home and become more independent. The contraceptive pill became legalised for all women in 1967 and gave them the opportunity to broaden their hopes and dreams far beyond motherhood and marriage. The Women’s Liberty movement was in its infancy when in 1968 at a Ford factory in Dagenham, 850 women went on strike, arguing for equal pay with their male co-workers. This action resulted in the passing of the Equal Pay Act of 1970. Furthermore, women were becoming increasingly involved in politics. For example, in 1968, Barbara Castle became the first and only woman to be appointed First Secretary of State and women began finding a voice in society and the running of the country.

Technological advancements of the 1960s drastically changed how people spent their leisure time. The increase in employment in factories and increase in money allowed people to spend more on leisure activities. Colour television and pocket transistor radios allowed people to spend their free time listening to music and watching TV. Every teenager owned a transistor radio allowing them to listen to pop music on the move. The microwave oven shortened the amount of time women spent in the kitchen, further allowing them more freedom and time to enjoy themselves. By the end of the decade, Neil Armstrong and Buzz Aldrin achieved the impossible by becoming the first men on the moon in 1969. It ended the decade on a note of optimism and the ability to dream for something bigger and better.

The 1960s was a decade of rapid change. Blink for one second and you would have missed it. It was the period that finally allowed people the liberty and individuality people had fought for and what we take for granted nowadays. The sixties began bleak and restricted, but by the end, people were full of hope and optimism for a better future. Now we know what Charlie Fleischer meant by, “If you remember the ’60s, you really weren’t there”. I guess I wasn’t really there…
Written by Kimberley Watson, aged 17. It’s true, I wasn’t really there, but it has always been the most interesting decade for me because of the huge changes that took place in just ten years. I hope to study History at university to continue discovering more of the past.



Throughout history, music have defined or depicted the culture and social events in America. Music has constantly played an important role in constituting American culture, where people have expressed themselves through music during flourishing and turbulent times. In the 1930’s, Swing music created a platform for audiences to vent their emotions in the midst of Great Depression and political unrest. Such strong relationship between music and culture can be seen throughout history, especially in the sixties. The ‘60s were the age of youth, as millions of children’s from post World War II became teenagers and rebelled against the conservative fifties.S

Mind, Body and Being..Asclepius Autumn Course Wednesday September 11 at 10am

This will be a 14 weeks course starting on Wednesday September 11 at 10am at Asclepius Therapy for more information please ring 07592330457 or e mail squabs@hotmail.co uk. The cost will be £70 and stretches over  the 14 vweeksin two hourly weekly sessions.

Introduction. Outline of some different theories of mind and consciousness. What do we mean by a personal identity? What is the self? Is there something it is like to be me? Beliefs intentions and desires. Pearls and bundles. The hard problem of consciousness v the soft problem.
Views of the mind in different cultures and religions. Buddhist: Confucian: Christian esp. Catholicism: Islamic: Is psychotherapy culturally specific, or is there a universal approach? Ways of healing. Devils and daemons.

Other minds: What is it to be conscious and how do I know others are conscious too? Zombies and robots. Solipsism. Sense data, idealism and realism. Are our minds made up, if so, who makes them? Do our minds make our worlds or does the world make our minds?
Belief in others. We will look at how gender, race or colour affects our identity. Transhumanism. Human/ animal transformation myths.

Does mind depend upon brain/body? Materialism and other theories. Are mind and brain the same thing? Logical Behavioural and psychological behavioural theories of mind. The challenge and sometimes threat of neuroscience to a soul.

Psychology art or science?
Belief in animals.

Neurological theories of mind and consciousness. Neuroscience v folk-law. Latest theories in neuroscience. What is the raw material of consciousness?

Abnormal psychology. Disorders of consciousness. When we say someone is not ‘normal’ is it society or is it the person that needs healing? If we don’t know for certain what a mind is how can we treat it? Mind altering drugs.

Consciousness and morality. Are materialist theories of mind incompatible with having a free will and what are the implications for morality?

Spirituality without a soul. If materialism is true as most scientists and philosopher s believe today where does this leave us spiritually.

Universal consciousness. Is there such a thing as collective consciousness, a community of minds? Douglas Hoffstadter’s idea that everything has consciousness of some kind.
Natural and evolutionary theories if mind. What is the point of being self conscious?
AI and self consciousness.

"Almost Like The Blues"

Play "Almost Like The…" on Amazon Music

"Almost Like The Blues"

I saw some people starving
There was murder, there was rape
Their villages were burning
They were trying to escape
I couldn't meet their glances
I was staring at my shoes
It was acid, it was tragic
It was almost like the blues

I have to die a little
Between each murderous thought
And when I'm finished thinking
I have to die a lot
There's torture and there's killing
And there's all my bad reviews
The war, the children missing
Lord, it's almost like the blues

So I let my heart get frozen
To keep away the rot
My father says I'm chosen
My mother says I'm not
I listened to their story
Of the Gypsies and the Jews
It was good, it wasn't boring
It was almost like the blues

There is no God in Heaven
And there is no Hell below
So says the great professor
Of all there is to know
But I've had the invitation
That a sinner can't refuse
And it's almost like salvation
It's almost like the blues

Of Banter and Snowflakes

The excuse is the same but what banter does is simply reductionist and narrow.
We all  use banter and we should all struggle with it. It tells us about our own assumptions and limitations.if we can reduce others to a few basic words we diminish them. When we say they are only animals then we open the road to the gas chambers. I reflect on my own use of banter . Years ago I wince in shame and in years to come I will do the same to what I use  and say now. We are all on a path of challenging ourselves and others. Banter is never neutral and always oppressive. It lessens the complexity of our identities and reduces us. The term "remoaner" is a perfect example often used by the right. However I often use the term 'kipper or ' bluekippers' in similar ways . I excuse myself for doing it and to some extent it has a grain of truth in its reductionism Yet it is poor in its value.

The challenge is that we are all ever becoming ; becoming ever more self aware and learning to know ourselves evermore fully. Teasing our lovers and our close friends is acceptable in relationships of equals.

 The term "snowflake' used by the political right is a attempt to destroy the virtue of compassion...it's a term used by the narcissist and those who cannot walk a single step in another's shoes..it's a fitting device from Brexit Island..it's an attempt to say I am alright fuck you. ... sadly there are so many who surrender to it...they can't imagine another culture; another experience, another sorrow or wound. The only cure is to sit with the pain of others, travel, read and Google. Think how would I feel if? It challenges us to avoid the half baked experiences we have and not to project or displace our motives and fears onto the other and to listen and to say little...like Chiron we should use our wounds to understand the other and to heal them. The process will be reciprocated...this is simply why I am an ecosocialist and a therapist My wounds, sorrows, passions and knowledge are for others. The heart Kahil Gubran observed often has a great capacity for joy and ecstasy as a result of it's challenges and sorrows. And as the Eagles sing " Some dance to remember others dance to forget.

Night King declines candidacy for Brexit Party

Night King declines candidacy for Brexit Party in  next General Election saying other candidate’s views “too extreme” he claims that he has already been selected to stand for the Conservative Party in Brecon and Radnor...

BREAKING : In a blow to Nigel Farage’s co-opted Brexit Party, ahead of the General Electio U elections, the Night King has declined an offer of candidacy, stating the other candidate’s views are “too extreme”.
But it’s not only Anne Widdecombe’s views on everything from reproductive rights to prison reform that were a turn off.
”The lack of a manifesto is also deeply troubling,” the King of the undead said, “you just know this mob of zombies will be after bringing back the death penalty and I’ve already got my hands full on that score. Why won’t they declare their beliefs ahead of a ballot? That hardly seems like the decision of a group who are claiming to be democrats. Blind vote. Get out of here!”
Additionally it seems concerns over how the Night King’s possible association with the Brexit Party will be spun have played a part too.

”They heard my army is also called the ‘White Walkers’ and they were on the phone, expecting me to lead some prize idiot march of English nationalists down to London? No thank you. That’s not my scene at all. Bigoted muppets.”
But what about standing as an independent?
”I’ve already been selected to stand for the Conservatives in  Brecon and Radnor anyway. I just wasn’t planning on going public until I’ve  i have got over   Game of Thrones.”
But that party is almost exactly the same as the Brexit Party or UKIP these days. It doesn’t make sense.
”It does if you look at the average age of the membership,” the Night King smirked, “a lot of them already have one foot in my army as it is.

The religious faith of both Leave and Remain.....

What is that so many leavers want to leave? What is that the remainers want to remain in? The world has changed. Many leavers want to return to a world that never was. Many want a world that has never existed. Some wish to leave so that a new society or economy could be created. Perhaps a chance to return to an Eden that once was or might be.

For the remainers the world has moved on. For many that world ended in 2008 with the crash. For others it's a return to the world of Blair and Brown. Capitalism has hit crisis. Neither Remainer or Leaver can go back to what was or to what was once imagined. Too many leavers want a binary, white male answer. Too many remainers want a centrist solution when simply the middle of the road has shifted significantly to the left.

But what amazes me is the blank look in the eye of some leavers when you ask them about changing your mind. It's as if you can't do it. It's as if you argue that once you have made up your mind it is forever and that you can never change it again. It's a mark of maturity and reflection that often leads to it. We elect our parliament very frequently. we change our mind regularly. We fall out of love with people we once loved. Often we fall back in love with them again. Change is part of life it's only the rigid and narrow who think otherwise. it is the hobgoblin of the closed mind.

To remain in a situation without change is also a poor place to be. Another world or situation is always possible.

. I would still vote remain because of my love of European culture, history and literature. I have travelled widely and know the feelings in the ancient places of Europe. I love Florence and Rome and the way the sun shines on the marble of Venice. I love the taste of the food and the wine of the Mediterranean. When I say these thing some blue kipper leavers tells me that they are not against Europe. Yet when I ask them about these things they go blank and their eyes glaze over. I see their loathing of all things European They know nothing of its history culture or outlook I look at the bland empty faced Nigel Evans and Mark Francois and I see that they have no idea what I am talking about. And that's why I am European and Welsh and proud of it.

Brexit is a psychological event. It's an ontological and epistemological problem of security or identity. Research suggests that it is effecting our health both physical and psychological. It's an essential reflection of our internal state, experienced under late capitalism in our schizoid society. The remainers still do not understand the feelings and not think appeal of the Brexit Party. The leavers do not think about the implications of the simple message of openness and connection. When Salvini quoted Chesterton he went right back to the fascist roots. Farage knows like all populists exist to drag down and destroy that's why he is successful. But the world will turn as it did before and he will go the way of Mosley into obscurity. This is a moment of chance change .. perhaps the British state is cracking. Perhaps we stand at a moment as significant as the repeal of the corn laws. But this moment will pass as a new paradigm emerges. Perhaps the Brexit Party must choose between the destruction of the Tory Party or Brexit. There is no easy choice Farage which one will it be? I can no longer describe myself as a remainer. I must see myself as an activist who will write new thoughts ion new tablets and help others break out of the limitations of binary thinking. I feel both repulsion to the centrists and the blue kippers. The problem for me is neither teleology or determinism. It is about numerous possibilities and positions and it's a celebration of paradox and not pastiche. The system is rotten it's about the breaking of idols...its rather Socialism or barbarism as the true binary choice

In their obsession on remaining both Caroline Lucas and Jo Swinson reached positions where they obscured or obscure reality. Caroline Lucas without thinking created a white middle class female cabinet who were predominately centrists. The danger of obsession led her to the right partly by whom she ignored and partly because since may the Greens have inherited a section of former Lib Dem voters who left because of austerity.
The leave position has transported a section of the white working class to economic and political conservatism. The populist right and the populist Left now face one another in the political Ragnarok that is the next election
Jo Swinson so keen to gain the votes of Tory remainers could so easily have played it better. She had no problems working in coalition with the Tories for five years yet could not support a temporary government led by Corbyn.  She might even have gained from it and clearly shown that above all she wishes to prevent a no deal Brexit. Yet her ambition was revealed and made apparent for all to see. There is no simple position where Remain or leave are the only issues and we see clearly the Shadows and the Id of both Remain and Leave positions. The belief of both sides resemble a tenet or confession of religious belief. A confession of faith and fundamentalism lurks behind both and each side is still unable to see the reality. I trust you will forgive me my agnosticism that is tending more and more to atheism as we near the end of October.