No, W.H.O.. You don’t blame women until you help them. And this latest “blame momma she had a beer before even considering conception” , isn’t helping women.

There seems to be a drive from – mle dominated orgs such as the WHO – to pre blame women for conditions such as ASD, by asserting that no woman of child bearing age should consume alcohol, with all that that insinuates.

Apart from everything down to freckles (sarcasm) being dragged under the umbrella of “FASD”* , it doesn’t seem to occur to them that unless they fix global pollution and the worldwide poverty that overweeningly affects women – and give ALL women full reproductive autonomy AND comprehensive pre natal care – telling menstruating women to “lay off the sauce” , will achieve zip.

*FAS of course exists. It isn’t common but that in no way minimises it’s impact.
“FASD” – the “SD” meaning “spectrum disorder” – is somewhat contested. I’m no expert but it does seem that there’s an ever increasing drive to place more and more conditions, such as ASD, under its umbrella.

What we do know is that we live in an ever more toxic world. That we live in a world keener to blame women, than help them.

In a world where – already – one council in the U.K. tried to avoid funding the care of a child with FAS, by having a court judge the woman’s habits were responsible.
This was not successful as the judge – on taking expert advice – ruled that this could have the knock on effect of making already vulnerable women more help averse than they already are.

This is a chilling move. To make an assertion that women may damage a child even before conception isn’t about public health – not when the ocean is full of micro-pollutants such as plastics and the food they eat full of chemicals – it’s about scapegoating women before they even decide to have children, those with that choice, at all.

It’s a move that may be seized upon to further control women’s habits – their very bodies – and leave them with nothing but blame should they be unlucky enough to fall foul of a toxic world.

It’s worthy of the Republic of Gilead.

This isn’t class war – it’s class baiting – in a Tory culture war. And too many are eager to help

The Tories started the latest class war, and they’re winning.
Yes some middle class voters look down on people for being racist etc.
But that doesn’t mean the Tories didn’t nurture racism and give it apologia. It doesn’t mean that racism is a myth or a forgivable reason to vote against our own interests.
And – NEWSFLASH- many working class, also disdain racists.

Brexit is a prime example. “Middle class concerns” ? What, like food prices rising?
Like shortages of certain life saving drugs?
Like the cost of living – yet again – going up.
Like British workers losing British jobs as their employers relocate, as they warned they must?
THOSE THINGS?

We could always tweak freedom of moment. Other countries did. Local crime ya say? Well, if it isn’t the “g*ppos” or “t*nkers” or Irish …then …
The trouble with that is capitalism likes cheap labourers with no ties, another reason your food is cheap.
Like that or not.
And while it may be the case that incomers with no local ties may correlate to a rise in crime , such language – and the automatic assumption that something was down to said[insert nasty epithet], IS racist.

Council housing. I live in an area where < 5% population is foreign born. It’s overwhelmingly white and British.
The wait for a property isn’t as bad in many places but any wait isn’t ideal, even if – for various and expected reasons – a wait there must be.
But who’s “taking all the houses” in the 95% white British area?
“Them”. The “others”.
I’ve even watched Tory councillors – when canvassing – tacitly encourage that myth, that and many others.

The “they’re looking down on you” is a common Tory bait, from “we are all tired of experts” to the much more insidious class baiting that started with Thatcher and her tapping into inverted snobbery.

Back to council housing.
You own your own house you’ve “gone up in the world” .
It doesn’t matter that any honest person would admit that no such thing could occur without huge discounts , and that J Smith the factory cleaner is still J Smith the factory cleaner.
J Smith “knows” he’s gone up in the world, and therefore he “must” honour the contract that validated the snobbery that brought this about.
And it is snobbery.

It might take decades to undo what Thatcher started. To dissolve the chip that she placed on so many shoulders.
Major and later Blair – love or loathe – both had a fair crack at doing so. They made some inroads.
We can’t deny that the Britain of the nineties and early noughties was a better – more fair, prosperous , and relaxed – country than it is today.

But – as is inevitable it seems – events take over. World recessions brought about by the financial malfeasance of certain U.S. underwriting giants. Wars.
Which catastrophe capitalism adores.
And the exigencies such bring about will always impact J Smith, factory cleaner.

If he’s profited from his council house purchase and now owns a “portfolio” of rentals, he’ll offset his cost of living onto his tenants. They’ll blame the foreigners for pushing up local rents and he’ll not disabuse them.
Capitalism loves a scapegoat.
If he’s lost his job as a factory cleaner, it won’t matter that he’s not qualified as a Plummer , or electrician or that’s he’s in his late fifties and simply isn’t up to the manual work young Pavel from Warsaw is, it’ll end still being young Pavel’s fault. Or the EU. Or the middle classes. Looking down on him.

Nobody can say otherwise because that’s “looking down” on J Smith, who’s been very carefully groomed – by capitalism and the Tories – who’s tropes have been validated and subtly nurtured, to serve a long term culture war, where snobbery overrides all.

That’s not to say that the left haven’t played that game. Because they have. The trouble is – with that – is that it backfires.
You can’t nurture that sort of “class war” from within movements that seek progressive ideals. All you do is help the right, in their culture war.

Real class warfare is people moving forward against the serried ranks of the billionaire and his vesteds and pickmes.
Real class warfare is looking past tropes and baiting.
Kier Hardie knew that and wouldn’t have it in the movement. Real class warfare is rejecting any and all snobbery, including our own “looking down on me” themes.

What real class warfare is not, is the divide and rule that really is looking down on all of us, and laughing whilst we turn on each other. That’s – again and I’ll keep saying it – culture war.

Meh. Stay truculent. Maybe it’ll take a war.
A real war.
Because I’m starting to to think that were Clement Attlee* leading the Labour Party today, you’d all dismiss even him -as well – as a middle class posh boy – looking down on you – whilst the millionaire across the house , baits you in his culture war.
And suceeds.

I’m not making a comparison with any modern Labour leader, but especially NOT saint Corbs, because he and his coterie gave the Tories plenty of ammo, whichever way we look at it and no matter that some of us will not be baited- and vote for the many – regardless.

But then – never mind my plight now and never mind I live immersed in such grudges and tropes – in a poor district of a white area, I was raised middle class.
So you can dismiss every word.
Just ask yourself this though, who does it serve?

Yoghurt

So. Comfort food. Let me spin you a yarn. One of mine is low fat Greek yoghurt, and honey

Ok you’re all thinking that’s not comfort food there’s way too much in corpore sano in that, right there.
But I love the astringent creaminess, coupled with a drizzle of honey. I like it plain as well, but this reminds me of better times, when I wasn’t a the collateral damage of a couple of spiteful narcissists.

So, feeling peckish – not eaten all day – and a bit down, I remember there’s a fresh tub of the Hellenic loveliness calling my name ….”Sinead” it calls, probably in Demotiki rather than Katharevousa, as it’s not that expensive brand nobody can pronounce (far-hey FFS, not fayge)(yes I shop in a supermarket noted for its bottom smacking economy )
Anyway, I digress. It calls my name, and to the fridge I report..

Spooning some into a small bowl – you don’t need much for optimal yoghurt- I observe it’s silky thickness, how it adheres to the spoon, white and pure.

Next, the honey. I’m not going to lie..it’s the squeezy honey of the lazy slattern, the type who wants honey and wants it NOW.
Again, I observe. Watching the golden loveliness stream onto the snowily bright yoghurt – in slow coils – I anticipate the joy to come.

Assembly complete, I retire with my bowl of ambrosia. Sitting on the sofa – slowly commence – first licking the spoon, the way a child licks a milk lolly.
Slowly – spoon by reverent spoon – I consume the grecian happiness, revelling in the contrasting sweetness and lactic tang.

Lost in my reverie I startle at a knock on the door – who can it be ?
Unthinking, I speed away to the call of the knocketty knock – the rap rap rap – forgetting my snack.

Who indeed but the man from Amazon, delivering the puppy papoose that’s to serve as transport for my miniature Pinscher, old lady that she is.

Returning to my living room I observe a sights that may never leave me as long as I live, utter horror, loss , and carnage.
Where oh where is my yoghurt?

In the fcking dog. My yoghurt is in the fcking dog.

Ends.

Folie a deux, co dependent narcissism, and how – If Harry wanted to protect his wife- and she wanted to protect him, we wouldn’t be at this point

On reflection, the person who IS “like Diana”, and who is repeating history, is Harry.
He knows what the press is like, he knows what the firm is like.
Yet he’s playing all of that out exactly the way Diana did, in her latter dealings with the royal family and press.

The bombshell interview full of every manipulative gambit,what did it actually achieve for Diana ?
I’m not wholly sure – because ask a hundred and you’ll get a hundred.
But for every sympathy point it gained it also gained as much in antipathy. A great many people sympathetic, up to that point , were awoken to the carefully curated(and you’ll see that word repeated for good reason ) image, to “the game”. And many were like “see?”
And Diana must’ve realised it, as she tried to make amends.

We all know how Diana was treated as a naive teen, but naive teens join the military and purport themselves with more aplomb, in their thousands. Maybe because they’re more circumspect? I don’t know.

I’m not about to diagnose the cluster as it’s now become – thanks to its scattergun use against women – devalued. But behaviours are behaviours , traits are traits. And this time , it’s a man displaying them.
Now , you can point to childhood trauma – and I’d agree it’s a factor(and I shouldn’t have to say I sympathise, but it seems I do have to) – but I also ask the interlocutor this, is that being carefully curated, and to what end?

For someone SO terrified of history repeating itself , he couldn’t do a better job of making sure it does, if he tried.
His aversion to press intrusion and pursuit get played out before us in a never ending circle of courting that, then wheeling out his carefully curated role of “the hunted and haunted”, again and again.

If he’d have chosen someone truly different from himself, I’d say it was a sadistic and self indulgent game.
One can only speculate why the relationships with Chelsey Davey, and Cressida Bonas – both of whom were well liked by the firm – didn’t result in marriage , given they were both considered suitable, and clearly loved him ?
Davey in particular is said to have been very publicity averse, and – in retrospect- maybe both were conflict averse as well?

And it’s NOT a matter of unavoidability, or being royal. It’s a matter of playing a part, versus living a life.
We can see examples of “civilians” and royals of equal profile, just living their lives.

Wherever your sympathies lie – however you cast others not as “kind” – and as much as history is repeating itself , this is NOT a naive and damaged teenager with no precedent, but two adults – who entered this in their late thirties, having seen how this plays out – both WELL aware of the price of courting attention. Both well versed in courting attention.

But of the two of them, who do I feel more sorry for – co dependency aside?
My answer might surprise you …it’s Meghan.
Because he allowed her to carry on burning all her bridges , knowing full well that – unlike every other time she’s Markled someone – there’s no going upwards and onwards, just an almighty fall.
Just so – even if subconsciously- he could have a proxy.

She may walk away – if she walks away, if she can walk away -bathed in riches, but she may never be loved or trusted, for herself, again.
Neither might he, but he’ll always be a prince.

Should vaccines be mandatory? A feminist parses.

Well, that’s a loaded question, isn’t it? Because in some instances , they already are. Travel to certain places and practice in certain professions , are barred to people who can – but refuse to be – vaccinated against certain pathogens.

Businesses have every right to protect themselves, their workforce, and their clientele. Many will also have an eye on their reputation as fair employers and traders, mindful of the greater welfare optics – and the bigger picture – and how an apparent lack of that may drive custom elsewhere. Certainly nobody with an actual exemption would choose to feel unsafe.
Now, since unforced vaccine avoidance isn’t a protected characteristic under EA 2010, we will have to suck it up.
One hopes that the vaccine exempt will be able to access official proof – rather than asinine lanyards – so the “I don’t wanna and you can’t make me waaahhh” brigade, don’t crap on the truly exempt – as they currently do – with masks.

Which brings me to self identification. As above, we have already seen the damage wrought by allowing people to self identify as mask exempt – without any reciprocal right – of others, to request proof. Self ID has rendered the protections afforded to disability, nonsensical. It has placed the actually disabled in – in some cases – in actual danger. It has created wholesale bars on entry, widening the already multiple exclusions they face.

It seems to me- therefore – that anyone professing to radical feminism would apply the same material analysis to the rights of the individual.

For myself, there are(outside those appertaining to protected characteristics and the obligation toward children)three – and only three – rights which are NOT reciprocal, and inalienably so ; the first two being the right to refuse sex and the right to refuse childbearing.
The third is the right to life, once born.*

The right to refuse a vaccine CAN validly be argued as a matter of bodily sovereignty and boundaries. And I wholeheartedly agree with that. But, rights – apart from the three previously laid out – are reciprocal. You CANNOT insist that your boundaries be held sacrosanct whilst asserting others’ boundaries cannot.

We cannot oppose the patriarchal colonisation of the female body whilst asserting a right to free pratique in other’s spaces. Especially if we hold sacred – as I do – female only space.

The same applies to “free speech”. Nobody is obliged to listen/publish/promulgate/amplify/platform or promote any of us. When any of us wants to shout something to the rooftops, we should not be surprised if – having chosen to do so in someone else’s space – we are asked to leave. Freedom of speech =/= freedom of reach. We can choose to say what we like, but others get to choose if we stay on their lawn.*

And if we are not entirely supportive of any and everybody’s equal right to shout whatever to the rooftops, on our lawn – YES EVEN HOLOCAUST DENIERS.***YES EVEN PORNOGRAPHERS.(I suspect that most will flinch away my mention of Holocaust deniers and pornographers, rightly so)- then we all know why. We all know why all lawns are equally accessible, or not.

So. Have boundaries. Those are your right. But if you can’t accept that others have that equal right, then you’re not so very different from the colonists of patriarchy you think you oppose.

And, to answer the question? No. Vaccines should not be mandated by the state, and nobody is suggesting they should be. And others rights to meet our refusal – with their own – cannot be conflated with a removal of our right to refuse, unless (as above) our radical analysis isn’t as rigorous as we claim.

*however, this isn’t quite what’s at play where women are being silenced for defending their rights, deplatformed, threatened, doxxed and even assaulted. Not when what’s being enforced is the right of everyone to define, discuss , and quantify – what womanhood is and what women are – BAR ACTUAL WOMEN. Because – apart from anything else- where’s the reciprocality?

**the notional right to life (personhood, in fact) before birth does not supersede the personhood of the potential mother.
***of course , excluding incitement etcetera , if that’s possible .

The equal discourse fascism and hypocrisy of cry bullies(the woke) and the free speech absolutists.

On another note, the simple – profanity free – affirmative reply to my remark “those eyebrows tho”, lost someone their job.

I won’t supply any further details because social is patrolled by all the usual, but – trust me – there are truly sinister forces at play here .

One one side, we have armies of cry bullies intent on framing any and all difference – from the orthodoxy they wish to create- as hate speech , fobia and danger .
And – on the other – we have a rightist cohort gleefully feeding off this to demand protected , unfettered , totalitarian free speech. Not just for protection against overarching reaction to unintentional offence , but the untrammelled right to offend with intent to offend.

Well. Both sides are hypocrites. One side wishes to stifle people speaking their mind – even fairly or in the spirit of academia- whilst insisting on the right to force language.
And – the other – wishes to avoid consequence , while still pretty happy to wail about offence on every given opportunity*.
The “things we are not allowed to say”(yet never shut up about) brigade. Laurence Fox et al.

*I have personal experience of the latter, as l’m informed its more offensive to call someone a “twit” , than their sneering remark that solicited that reply.
** and these cats never meet my question of whether they’d similarly cheerlead the right to Holocaust denial, under their vaunted ideals of totally free discourse, with the straightforward “yes” their campaign would necessitate..the “quid pro quo”, if you will.

I’m not an absolutist. I don’t demand my views are validated. I do not believe all opinions have an equal right to exist , but nor do I believe that anyone has the right to force me to say that which I do not believe , or play along with ontological legerdemain.

Yeh I’m a total f**knit at times, and I’m all over Shinigami Eyes for the sin of being a medic and empiracist, but that is purely because of the black and white division between “the purest best kindest, woke victimy victims” , and the “bravest truest freest protectors of discourse (“things I cannot say but never shut up about”)(feezepeach) victimy victims”

Thousands like myself are collateral damage , caught up in a polarised war of egos on a Capulet versus Montague scale .

And I gotta say this , a plague on both your houses.

Please, just what IS Porn Hub C3PO meant to convey?

There’s something a bit *off* about a woman portraying the mother of modern feminism as a naked “everywoman” …almost as some feminist point regarding the undressedness (or its equally sexualised opposite )demanded by the male gaze – of all women – is being missed But I’m not sure, was this some part of feminism I’m getting wrong?

At least it’s highlighted the crass stupidity of modern liberal feminism, vis the clear absurdity of – bare nekked leddy, weakened looking and apparently tumescent = feminism distilled?

In fact it’s ironic that – given the female anatomy is neither hidden , arcane or abstruse – that there’s statues of naked women literally everywhere, that the artist, simultaneously makes the point perfectly and so , so badly.

Those arms , for starters. Even the artistic merit is questionable. Do we see Newton so disrespectfully, and badly – on every artistic or philosophical level – so portrayed, like a snikkering adolescent’s idea of Porn Hub C3PO?

And on the subject of porn, if I didn’t know better, I’d say this was some sort of revenge porn against the very idea of feminism.

Triage of self over other, Covid , and the expunging of true liberalism.

“And I quote “Governments are still resorting to doing away with human rights to protect the few most vulnerable. We need to push back “


The governments doing this have been doing it before Covid. They didn’t need an excuse because we elected them. And by human rights, some of us extend those to “the vulnerable”, and exclude the supposed right to expect service workers – amongst whom number such because poverty – to endanger themselves for our “human rights”.


I mean – cashless welfare …not a new idea?

Voter ID , late to that table , kids

Commodifying education ..oh do keep up

Privatising the NHS – sole purpose of Brexit , conformed by Vince Cable?

Repro rights ? Well, at least they know what we ladies are and we can have our own whatever they chivalry on us . How nice.

Press freedom …yeh I warned you about the BBC.Educational freedom …c’et un q’elle surprise. Not.

On and on. It’s amazing what the request to don a few microns of cloth reveal.


Go on. Caper about. No actual champion of the working classes expects them to stand into danger. I know , minor detail. I’ve got sweet FA to gain from any of this. Get mad at me because I pointed out the suave men in Saville Row hate women. Its not my inverted snobbery that has me swooning over them. I know them.


But one thing I will not do is entertain bargaining. What I’m hearing in “we’ve got to get used to this thing”, is “please orrend there’s nothing going on, so I can” . And that’s the charitable version.

“Few most vulnerable” ? That’s *at least* 45k such ON TOP of whatever else is taking said. And all people are being asked to so is wear bloody masks , wash their hands , and queue.
Everything else is NOT NEW.

And – amongst this – I’m seeing a lot of so called “leftists” and “feminists” returning to florid terms such as “terror” and “totalitarianism” to justify their triage of libertarianism and neo liberalism over the rights of the less privileged. Over the collective good.

Yes authoritarian governments love a disaster. Here in the U.K. , the Tories are in the belief that we won’t notice them breaking two international treaties , one – a peace treaty – that stood to be epoch making.However , they have a majority of 80. So they don’t really care who knows what , and would proceed regardless.

Where am I going with this ? I’ve said it before. Useful idiots. Look at Brexit. Nobody cared about the EU before 2010. People falling for the deliberate nudges of planted grudges. People nudged into the very hands of the far right , by the far right.People rebelling into the very measures the far right couldn’t justify otherwise, all the while revelling in their larping – of what ? – the Prague spring ? Dear lord.

Newsflash. They were protesting a regime already in place , and there were tanks. Not face masks. ACTUAL TANKS.I see no Hungarians here.

There won’t be tanks here. There will be weaponised austerity and the dismantling of the post war social contact. But there won’t be tanks. Protest against that? Too late , nudged into connipting about public health measures, nudged into terror of uncontrolled immigration and Turkey joining the EU , we have been played , played into giving up the right to protest against what we ARE losing , and permanently.If tanks do appear , it’ll too late. We’ll have connipted away our right to protest the loss of the NHS , because we didn’t like masks, and thought pathogen amelioration = fascism. As though capitalists wreck economies for fun.

There’s a right wing culture war happening at the moment, one they’re winning.They’re winning because of a post war phenomenon of an increasing population of kidults , always scared someone else has more , and unused to the full sentence “no”. So much so, they’ll triage their individualism over the collective good.And the people nudging them ? Laughing all the way to the bank.

Neoliberalism , florid fantasy, and libertarianism, have no place in socialism or radical feminism. I don’t believe in any totalitarian system, but what decadent* people think they’re protesting against , may yet bring about far worse.

As to rejecting liberalism? Oh wow.Ok- a lot of modern liberalism is rooted in the belief that most people are benign, and that none the vulnerable can never be egregious, or perpetrators.
Or – if they are – their victims must never speak out. This has brought about- on the back of such noble intention – a culture of aggressive cry bullying.

I am not a modern liberal , but a classic one. I don’t like people.Much as I care for them, I don’t trust them. My liberalism and socialism stem from what used to be called enlightened self interest. I am we. I have firm red lines. Thus far, and no further. I never punch down. And certainly NOT on behalf of one oppressed group against another.Therein lies madness. The madness that is the uber woke.

But I say this. A great deal of this rejection of wokeism and modern liberalism has one goal, to expunge all liberalism, entirely. There is a concerted populist drive to erase human rights, workers rights . Women’s rights? Oh , we’ll have our spaces, as long as they are attached to whatever the modern day equivalent Children , Kitchen , and Church is. One desired outcome of Brexit alone is that the resulting mass unemployment will drive women back into domestic servitude, thus reducing the care bill. And remember, all but child benefit are now paid to the higher earner. So women will be trapped. Just a few weeks ago the Tories tried to restrict an already extremely rare medical procedure that cannot ever effect men, late term abortion.

The bias of the BBC is not unforced. I have been consistent about this since 2010. The BBC has been under a sword of Damocles – since then – while you all carp about bias and the license fee. The BBC did not choose to end universal free licensing to over 75s, they were forced to.However, since anyone receiving pension credits will still receive one…this will effect few. And the disabled who receive this as routine , will not be effected. Never mind , the end result is the same, the propaganda coup against the BBC is almost complete. We are in Murdoch’s hands.

We have a government that – through planned disarray – has people rebelling into the very situations they rebel against, namely autocracy and neglect. The ONLY reason they’re pussy footing around herd immunity is they know there’s just enough of us left who reject the mass deaths of the vulnerable, and they’re scared an overwhelmed NHS just might wake a few more up. Terrified.

This is why the Internal Markets Bill was so important to them (and don’t wail about oppositions when there’s an 80 seat majority and weasel mouthed Tory “rebels” who are just the opposite) , it enables them to alter, repeal , or create whatsoever law or legislation they wish – should they see fit – without parliament.

By all means reject cry bullying and wokeism, I do. But – FOR THE LOVE OF HUMANITY – stop skipping along with populists and their culture wars. Their concessions are gateway drugs. Sops. Don’t be a useful idiot. Please. Because some of us have warned you, time and time again

*and yes. I said decadent. As a society we are. I’m poor. But I know there’s billions – far worse off than I’ll er be – looking the the US/UK , thinking we’ve all gone mad. Because we have. Explain it to the billions grateful for ALL vaccines, the objection to one that doesn’t even exist yet.

How “woman” means “sub-man”, until men want the title.

“Bbut *woman* excludes women of colour , so we need the inclusive “womxn.“, has become the latest cri de coeur.


No. Put simply , “Of colour” is a suffix type addition , so not exclusionary” as “woman” is already there as primary. Unlike the prefix “cis” which separates women as a sub category .
One adds TO women (of colour , of France , of, of ) the other takes FROM (cis-woman , trans-woman).


Which is why also I hate the imposition of “X” as it insinuates – again – exclusion of women by prefix…the prefix being “trans” (funny how that doesn’t apply to “cis” tho)And the inference that woman of colour aren’t already included in the category “woman” – and this need to be, is racist.


I also hate wombyn. It reduced us to uteri, and – contrary to some assertions – isn’t the ancient spelling. They were “wifman” and “werman” respectively , with men losing the frefix “wer” except in such cases as “werewolf “.


It’s interesting that there seems to be a push to impose this same linguistic othering of women , with the prefix “cis” , with the eventual end game of taking the title “woman” for themselves , and rendering us as a subset – “ciswomen”. Doubly interesting that this push suggests only one prefix is exclusionary, and it’s not “cis”.


Both historically – by retaining the prefix of “wo” in woman , as a subset of humans who are primarily “man” and “men” – and latterly as a subset of woman via “cis” , men are setting themselves as the default , this time by stealing what they’ve linguistically imposed over millennia.


Could it just be coincidental that this is happening in a west where “woman” no longer means “not quite a man” anymore ? In a west where men now glom over us in quite a different way? I don’t think so.

TTIP, Brexit, and the NHS. The tale of a murder plot.

The 2012 Health&Social Care act was designed to open the NHS to the international private market, and remove from the Secretary Of State the responsibility to provide healthcare to the country.

Both these aims, it achieved.

At the same time, we – as part of the EU – were negotiating with the US something called the “Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership” [TTIP], to open further trade links with the US.
However, the rest of the EU had one caveat and – holding firm and together – refused to allow any trade in terms of nationally provided healthcare , however funded.

Did we join that ordinance? Not until after a public outcry forced David Cameron to back down and sign it, leaving him – amongst some – persona non grata , his career in jeopardy.

However, it’s clear his career would’ve been toast had he refused. Hobson’s choice.

“What has this got to do with Brexit?” I hear you ask?Ecouter mes amis, ecouter.
Remember TTIP ? Shortly after that ordinance was signed, talk foundered and TTIP – basically – foundering now healthcare was no longer on the table.

At this point, Cameron’s career really WAS in danger. He had not brought home the bacon to either his paymasters or cabinet (most of whom had interests in US healthcare providers).
Whilst we remained in the EU the knives would be out, and Cameron the target.

So, the right wing press started gentle rumblings, telling the government “the people” (to whom the EU wasn’t even tenth on their concerns as polled) were unhappy. “Wanted their* country back”. That we were “swamped” , that “77 million Turks” were planning to come to the UK**” when it “joined the EU”.

“The people” duly obliged, falling for every nudge – and dog whistle -so adeptly employed by the demagogues of the right wing press and the far right.
Plant a grudge, tickle that grudge.

Cameron was under siege, from the far right, the ERG, his cabinet, and his paymasters.
And he gambled. He announced a referendum he thought he’d win , adding a “advisory” clause as a two way arse covering excercise.
Win, and he could take it back to the EU. Lose , and he could “follow the advice”.

I’m going to speculate he was NOT unaware of darker forces at play. Far from it.
How can he have been , when – even by then – we were known as the money laundromat of the EU, to every Russian oligarch and Middle Eastern “Prince” ?
And – it’s my opinion only – he never intended to remain PM, unless we remained in the EU.
He KNEW this was a gamble, that- even should he lose- his personal loss would be nil.

However, we were now in the eye of the perfect storm. On one side, we had an EU dedicated to both protected healthcare and the curtailment of tax avoidance.
On the other, we had a shadow estate of vested interests, aided – abetted and funded – by individuals standing to make much coin from the break up of such as the NHS(and a continuing ability to launder money) under the gaze of a foreign leader with much to gain from the almost inevitable geopolitical/mercantile vacuum created when one of the world’s largest economies crashes out of the worlds largest free trading bloc.

The result was inevitable. The most audacious campaign of demagoguery, data theft and foreign interference gathered pace, and the die was cast.

Racing forward from that day in June 2016, we have seen an ever frenzied atmosphere than even during the campaign. We have seen successful legal challenges result in death threats, we have seen politicians in fear for their lives (after Jo Cox, they weren’t wrong).
We have seen one PM try and square an impossible circle, all the while undermined by her own.
We have seen another PM (the previous PM’s main tormentor) swerve and writhe , bypassing Parliament and even closing it as necessary, to kick the can down the road , to run the time down on any possible deal.
We have seen unelected PM’s swerve Parliament, we have seen 3 general elections in four years.

We have seen our government behave as though they must achieve what they must achieve, and before everyone notices what they’re up to.

Back to yesterday and – in time – to 1948. Since 1948 they’ve hated the NHS , but – with a ear to popular sentiment – always kept their actions , and intentions, just discreet enough for their lies to the contrary to have the ring of authenticity.
“The NHS is not in danger” they said.
“The NHS is not for sale” they say.
And – yesterday – they voted against a clause to protect it against any sale in any forthcoming deal with the US, because “the NHS is not for sale” .

Remember the “advisory” nature of the referendum?
Added – and I am speculating – because Cameron knew (in my opinion-all the usual caveats) that the interference of a foreign state, would render any non advisory referendum null.
And – as above – he also knew of said.

And all so vested interests could launder money, sell off the NHS , and create a tax haven on their own soil.

—————————————————————————
*Its lost forever now.
**Turkey isn’t joining the EU. At the pace that’s progressing it’ll take at least a century. And 77million posied to come to the UK? It’s only got population (at that time) of 79million, as *if* Turkey would empty out.

Source for NHS re TTIP and Brexit ? = Vince Cable, google it.