The Establishment

50
971


Part 3 of a 3 article series

by Faux Cul

Let us start with the Imperial Strategic Objective.  What’s this you say; there is no longer a British Empire?
Yes there is.

The British Empire was the evolutionary outcome of the Treaty of Union. Before that it was the English one and in fact, it still is, as it always was, London based.

The British Empire was not a military one, although everyone knows about the battles and wars with whoever was squatting on the land they thought was theirs until “we” told them it was now “ours”

The British Empire was first and foremost an economic one with a military backup, as and when necessary. It was modelled on the Roman one which also was an economic one with a military backup; carrot and stick.

Just as the Roman one, there were slaves and liberated slaves, there were local “administrators” and honorary Romans.

Let us take India as an example of this

India was ceded to the East India Company as an economic colony and Clive (of India) arrived there as a clerk. He had been expelled from 3 schools and reportedly had developed a protection racket in his home town. Hand in hand with the economic exploitation went the military one and the East India Company had its own enforcers. It concluded treaties with local potentates, some of which were enforced by violence. Clive became a soldier in India, not for the Queen but, for the East India Company, the money and the glory.

The objective was to bring the riches of India to London and then trade back industrial goods.

Hong Kong, Canada, and the American Colonies were the same, except that the latter two were also seats of implantation of “British stock” as were Australia etc. What was the historic turning point in the wars of American Independence; the Boston Tea party, a reaction to taxation without representation, by a distant imperial power?

The object in all the countries of the Empire was not conquest for its own sake but conquest and control, directly or indirectly for long-term pillaging.

Thus the “Imperial” strategy was to take over lesser nations, by force, treaty, bribery and subterfuge, as necessary, to tax them, exploit their raw material and sell back processed goods. Having established the “Empire” the prime objective switched to then maintenance of that Empire, initially by military means and then by treaties and the installation of a cadre of local lackeys and nabobs who children were whisked away to Mother England to become honorary Englishmen.

Does something here ring a bell about Scotland after 1707 and the Anglicisation of a class of Scots? Apart from produce, Scotland was also useful source of cannon fodder for wars and intellect from the Scottish Enlightenment.

The Imperial Undertakers at the levers of power in London today have seen the loss of White Colonies and darker hued ones but the central strategy remains firmly in-place, suck the riches out whatever foreign lands they can, for the benefit of London, the home of Mother England.

The strategy remains the same, except now Scotland is effectively the last colony, apart from the Falklands, whose natural riches merits pillage and repatriation. The looting and pillaging just continues under a different veneer of democracy.

The fundamental strategy has not changed in 500 years, it has just nuanced.

 

 

Europe

To illustrate the reality of number 2, Europe, here is short video from Yes Minister which, despite its humour, is 100% on the button.

http://vodpod.com/watch/2920865-youtube-yes-minister-sir-humphrey-explains-foreign-policy

This strategy too has not changed since Napoleonic times and still represents what is happening today; playing the large European powers off against each other. In Europe but, not for Europe and, only there to bugger it up.

They will use Europe against as at every opportunity if they have to, and are already practicing their lines.

 


USA

Finally there is the 3rd strategy, which concerns the USA.

As the undoubted economic power of the larger part of the 20th Century, it has been the strategy to influence America’s own World vision to the benefit of Mother England. The common bases of English and American law gave the edge and the common language a second edge.

By piggy backing on the USA, it was hoped to benefit from being surrogate yanks. The deregulation of the City of London bears witness to that.

If they have to bend over backwards to the USA they will do it because it suits The Imperial Undertakers to pretend they have any real influence on a former colony of the Empire. It puffs them up in their self importance.

There we have it, for The Imperial Undertakers, Scotland is central to their continued existence. Without our oil, they will have a much reduced importance within Europe and even less use to USA. The World, as known to London, will fall in. No money for Trident, no seat on the Security Council, no seat at the high table anywhere and travelling in the back of the bus.  No more “punching above our weight.” Luxembourg could piss on them; Israel already does.

They have already co-opted in the USA against Scotland as the release of cables by Wkileaks over the attack on Kenny MacAskill for releasing Megrahi shows.

 

 

 

This is the hidden beast we must kill, not its handmaidens in Westminster; they are the sideshow, the deliberate deflection. Cameron, Clegg, Miliband et al, all will wither on the vine as The Imperial Undertakers’ construct begins to unravel. Politicians are the monkeys; politicians do as they “advised”, it is the organ grinder we need to tackle.

 

The SNP and the people of Scotland who wish for independence must grasp the following key points:

 

A. For Scotland there is but one supreme, strategically important objective for The Imperial Undertakers. Every available asset, fair or foul, will be used to maintain the integrity of that objective, including the sacrifice, in part, of the other two. Without objective 1, objectives 2 and 3 cannot be. We must be able to counter the other two strategic areas of influence open to London as well as tackling the number 1.

 

B. Number two is that The Imperial Undertakers have no real backup plan for us beyond that implied by strategic objective number 1. There is no plan B. We can take lessons from history as to the veracity of what I have just said. There sole response, once they are really beginning to lose, is the military option, overt or covert. Just ask the Irish, Kenyans, Ghanaians, Indians, etc.

 

C. Number three is that the SNP must have a majority of seats and votes, for independence to happen by evolution. This is vital, because it will counteract The Imperial Undertakers’ manipulations within Strategic areas 2 and 3 against us. Our democratic mandate would be caste iron solid.This means that the SNP has to confront a Sisyphean task embodied in the voting system for Holyrood. The Labour Party bloc in the West of Scotland is the road block to independence. It must be taken down and dismantled. This means that the West of Scotland question can no longer be tiptoed round. This must be acknowledged and tackled head on. There can be no democratic mandate without taking West Central Scotland. To think otherwise would be to try to sell a will o’ the wisp called independence

 

D. Finally, there is the disturbing thought that the enemy is not The Imperial Undertakers. It is an enemy much, much more powerful and frightening than any discussed before. Who is it and how can we counteract it’s all powerful influence?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The enemy is us.

 

 

 

 

Why?