Open Democracy has a straightforward but informative piece by Patrice de Beer on next year’s French presidential election.  The passage on Jean-Marie Le Pen told me two things I never knew before.

First:-

There is a snag - the same one that derailed his efforts in 1981. By law, each candidate needs the support of 500 elected representatives (from national or local assemblies, or mayors) to enter the contest; for the FN this is always difficult, as the party has few elected members (none in parliament), and Le Pen has always relied on courting rightwing village mayors.

Second:-

Jean-Marie Le Pen combatively proclaims a determination to win; and if he can’t reach the ballot, he threatens to unleash “his” voters against forces on the right he accuses of betrayal (thus the covert efforts from Sarko’s” camp to help him obtain the 500 signatures he needs).

Obviously, Sarko has his eyes on Le Pen’s 13 to 17% poll rating.  Right now, the Sarkozy-Royal contest is too close to call.  But get the old devil into the race and his supporters won’t vote for Royal.  Get the old devil out of the race at the first poll on April 22nd and they will have to vote for the Monsieur with the riot baton.

The interesting thing is that Le Pen is thinking along not dissimilar lines.  That 17%, polled in mid-November, is a record for him.  And there’s still ample time for a surge between now and April.  If the mainstream right is split going into that poll Le Pen could repeat his shock-wave performance of 2002, when he eliminated Jospin.  This time the victim would be Sarko, followed by a face-off against the left.

Le Pen, the unity candidate.  Well, maybe.

A last thought.  Which candidate would the denizens of les banlieues prefer to see in the Élysée?  Royal, no question.  But which of the others would they prefer her to contest the second ballot against?

And what methods do they have to hand to engineer that happy outcome?

A major story in Australia that has been little reported in England is the accusation by England’s South African-born batsman Kevin Pietersen of racism and corruption in the SA cricket authority.  The game’s international administrators have stuck together and are now threatening Pietersen with two investigations:-

KEVIN PIETERSEN may be investigated by the International Cricket Council’s anti-corruption unit after alleging that the game in South Africa is corrupt.

England’s best batsman is also facing possible sanctions from the England and Wales Cricket Board for claiming South African cricket is racist.

The statements were part of a wide-ranging interview by the South African-born Pietersen which appeared in the South African edition of GQ magazine.

... His comments have created a storm of protest in South Africa, with a furious Cricket South Africa writing to the ECB and the ICC demanding action.

Pietersen may face the serious charge of bringing the game into disrepute, which covers inappropriate public comment. It carries penalties ranging from a ban of two to four Tests or four to eight one-day matches.

... Pietersen has been claiming for several years that he was forced out of the game in South Africa because of racist policies against white players. There is a quota system where each first-class team in South Africa is expected to contain at least four non-white players.

During the magazine interview he also professed his admiration for the late Hansie Cronje, who was banned for life after a match-fixing hearing, and claimed that Cronje was a scapegoat for other players who were not punished.

In separate letters, Cricket SA has demanded the ICC’s anti-corruption unit investigate Pietersen and the ECB discipline him for his continued charges of racism against the country’s cricket system.

... There are concerns Pietersen’s comments are being used by right wing elements in South Africa to subvert the reconciliation process in cricket.

Denying he is racist, Pietersen told GQ what he thought of the appointment of Ashwell Prince, a coloured player, to captain South Africa in the absence of an injured Smith: “I just thought it was further evidence that things were going downhill.

“It’s got nothing to do with the colour of his skin. It’s just that better players are being left out for political reasons and until that system changes, South African sport will continue to go downhill.

“I’ve got some mates who are now on the fringes of playing domestic cricket in South Africa who are better than three or four of those players in the South African side.

“I’ve got a very good mate who is actually a better player than me, who is now working for (SA Breweries), because he can’t get into the side for political reasons and that’s wrong.”

READ MORE...

There was a small but good crop of interesting stories in today’s Brit papers, including this extraordinary one headlined straight from “the last days”.  The content doesn’t actually live up to the drama of that headline - yet - but the contrary dynamics are there.  They bring into prospect a deepening of cultural division which no government, however desperate for assimilation, will be able to resolve.  I get a clear picture of the good ship MultiCult, released from her great wooden slipway blocks and even now nosing ungainly into the dirty grey waters as the Minister and his lady wife frantically search for the broken shards of the magnum.

Sharia law as authority wanes

Islamic sharia law is gaining an increasing foothold in parts of Britain, a report claims.

... the BBC Radio 4 programme Law in Action produced evidence yesterday that it was being used by some Muslims as an alternative to English criminal law. Aydarus Yusuf, 29, a youth worker from Somalia, recalled a stabbing case that was decided by an unofficial Somali “court” sitting in Woolwich, south-east London.

... Dr Prakash Shah, a senior lecturer in law at Queen Mary University of London, said such tribunals “could be more effective than the formal legal system”.

In his book Islam in Britain, Patrick Sookhdeo, director of the Institute for the Study of Islam and Christianity, says there is an “alternative parallel unofficial legal system” that operates in the Muslim community on a voluntary basis.

“Sharia courts now operate in most larger cities, with different sectarian and ethnic groups operating their own courts that cater to their specific needs according to their traditions,” he says. These are based on sharia councils, set up in Britain to help Muslims solve family and personal problems.

Sharia councils may grant divorces under religious law to a woman whose husband refuses to complete a civil divorce by declaring his marriage over. There is evidence that these councils are evolving into courts of arbitration.

Faizul Aqtab Siddiqi, a barrister and principal of Hijaz College Islamic University, near Nuneaton, Warwicks, said this type of court had advantages for Muslims. “It operates on a low budget, it operates on very small timescales and the process and the laws of evidence are far more lenient and it’s less awesome an environment than the English courts,” he said.

Mr Siddiqi predicted that there would be a formal network of Muslim courts within a decade.

Then, from the home side, there was this:-

READ MORE...

... according to Joe Mathews, LA Times reporter and author of The People’s Machine: Arnold Schwarzenegger And the Rise of Blockbuster Democracy:-

... here is what Mathews said about driver’s licenses and the larger topic of immigration, listed as by voters in surveys before the election as one of the of the most important issues facing the state:

“What do you believe his view is on immigrant drivers licenses?”

“I believe there is a conversation. I believe his personal view is that he doesn’t care. He was willing to sign it. He certainly made a handshake deal with Gil Cedillo on his fourth day in office where he said “We’ll negotiate a bill I can sign,” and then he never did that when the heat became—the talk radio heat became too much. I believe there was a conversation between Duf Sundheim, the chairman of the Re;publican party, and him which went something like this: “Arnold, you haven’t given the people on the right a lot. The two things you’ve given them are taxes and this issue. There are people—there are Republicans in this state—that have pictures of you on the wall. If you sign that bill, those pictures come down and will never go back up.” And I just think this is an issue he will never give on even though he knows better.

I think the whole immigration issue he’s completely hypocritical on. He is essentially an immigration liberal. All his friends, so many of them are from other countries. He tells stories of all the ways he’s helped them manipulate the immigration system over the years and get them into the country. George Borjas is a great immigration scholar at Harvard, briefed him when he was running for office said it was pointless. That Arnold knew more about how the INS worked, if it was still the INS then… but knew how immigration worked better than he did. He had literally helped hundreds of people for years deal with immigration authorities; so, I mean he’s a complete liberal on that.

But even when he says things like Mexicans aren’t assimilating fast enough, and you really should, you know, leave your country behind when you come here - I mean, this guy hasn’t left his country behind - He’s an Austrian citizen. He’s really proud of it. He’s tight. He makes endorsements in Austrian elections. He’s—the OVP, the Austrian Volks Party, the Austrian People’s Party has been trying to get him to run for President. They keep sending him polling that says “You’d win.” So, I mean you know. His true views on that are probably poisonous for him politically.”

Thanks to Desmond Jones for the link.

As previously discussed in Entering the mainstream:  Hyperinflation within a year? (October 23) and Hyperinflation within a year? before that (July 16), it is reasonable to ask whether we might expect the first signs of hyperinflationary pressures by next July.  The Drudge Report may not be mainstream but when it headlines a story, as it did today, titled:

DOLLAR PLUNGES TO NEAR 15-YEAR LOW

Less than halfway to the prediction of next July, one is entitled to wonder if my question posed last July is going to be mainstream even before next summer. 

Some other stories since my October 23 revisit follow…

READ MORE...

Proposition 1

The flight of the middle classes from the inner cities is threatening to undo 30 years of progress that has made Britain the best place in Europe for ethnic minorities, the country’s race equality chief said yesterday.

Trevor Phillips, the outgoing chairman of the Commission for Racial Equality (CRE), said increased polarisation and segregation in areas deserted by the better-off was “the great threat” to the development of a diverse and harmonious society.

From today’s Daily Telegraph, reporting another speech by the first among equals.  This time he wowed a conference in London to mark the 30th anniversary of the dratted Race Relations Act.

Proposition 2

As members of the Kensal Green Tribe, a gang which robbed victims at knifepoint, Donnel Carty and Delano Brown thought themselves untouchable.

Their faces concealed by hoods, they terrorised late-night London Underground passengers, demanding their phones and money — a practice known as steaming.

The attacks were fast, lasting no more than 90 seconds to ensure they were completed before the train drew into a station.

Those who stood up for themselves were punched, kicked or threatened with weapons, often knives. If they continued to resist, they were “juked” — stabbed in the leg for showing disrespect.

... As the attacks multiplied, the gang grew increasingly confident of being able to operate without being caught. By the end of last year, it was out of control, having targeted 90 people in two months.

“They were easily one of the nastiest steaming gangs we’ve ever come across,” said a police source. “They were becoming more and more violent, acting like a pack of wolves. No one was safe. They attacked both men and women — anyone who had something they could take.”

From today’s Daily Telegraph, reporting on the pair of “teenagers” found guilty yesterday of the murder of London solictor Tom ap Rhys Pryce.  They were handed down sentences of 21 and 17 years.

Trevor Phillips is also seeking a life sentence for the English middle-class.

“This is alarming new evidence of the deep-rooted Tory failure to understand we don’t make remarks about people of different races without fuelling prejudices in the general population.”

These are the words of Dennis McShane, former Labour Europe Minister, as he comes barrelling out of the darkness like a Polish funnel web.  But in the process he inadvertently explains the corrupt motive of the political Establishment to which he belongs.  There is no attempt to explain away black criminality through some original sin of the English.  Nope, forget that.  It’s rubbish anyway.  Eradicating racial prejudice is the great shibboleth.  Everything obeys that.

Spider Man’s venomous moment was, in fact, an attempt to silence the (all-too) plain-speaking Tory MP Bob Spink, member for Castle Point in Essex.  Spink had the stupidly to put himself:-

... at the centre of a race row after insisting the majority of criminals are black.

Mr Spink made his claim in an exchange of emails with a constituent.

He was asked: “Are you saying that a lot more criminals are black than white - or that there are more black people in jail than white because they are stopped more often?”

The MP replied: “The former and that’s what people don’t seem to like. But I didn’t enter a beauty contest when I became an MP!!!!”

Mr Spink 58, MP for Castle Point, Essex, went on to say the problem was being ignored because of “political correctness”.

Yesterday, Mr Spink strenuously denied he was a racist.  He added: “Ministers have told the Commons that pro rata more young black people are known to the criminal justice system than white people.  It is a fact.

“The main parties have to address where the crime is coming from and stop that crime for everybody’s sake, particularly the black community.  It is about telling the truth.  I completely deplore racism of any kind but we need to identify the sources of crime.”

Only the Labour-supporting Daily Mirror carried the story.  And true to Mr McShane’s liberal agenda, the Mirror website does NOT report the end of the trial today of the two black killers of London solicitor, Tom ap Rhys Pryce, 31.  But The Times does, under the headline “Teen muggers found guilty of murdering City lawyer”.  The Guardian does, too, under the headline, “Teenagers guilty of murdering lawyer”.  The Independent goes with “Teenagers convicted of young lawyer’s murder”.  The Telegraph website doesn’t carry the story thusfar.  But the Daily Mail leads with, “Teenagers guilty of killing City lawyer”.  The Mirror’s competitor, The Sun, avoids words with nine letters if possible and just makes do with “Teens guilty of lawyer murder”.

Most of the reports carry the mugger’s mugshots.  So we can see that Donnel Carty and Delano Brown are, erm, of the race to whom Mr Spink was referring.  But then there’s the problem of what to write about them.  I mean, they’re black.  No, yes ... prognathicity ... heavy brow ridges ... wool ... yep, definitely black.  So at once we have a terrible moral problem.  How does a conscientious hack avoid the Spinkist fuelling of prejudices in the general population?

Of course ... these two young ragamuffins are teenagers, just.  That’s what is most noticeable about them.  That will get him off the hook.

Well, these hacks are all utter cowards.  An evil precept makes liars of them, and cynics of the readers they are unworthy to serve.

I don’t think we are widely read by MSM journalists or Tory MPs.  But in case one drops by, this is my no doubt simplistic and impertinent advice: Tell ... the ... truth.  Always.

Last week the Scottish Labour Party held its annual conference in Oban.  Scots-fathered, Fettes-educated Antony Charles Lynton Blair, born in Edinburgh on 6 May 1953, was the main speaker (notwithstanding the Man of Gloom).

His speech, touchingly titled Together not apart, confirmed the fears running through the Labour left that on Thursday 3rd May 2007 they will lose control of the Scottish Parliament, and thus over the fate of the Union ... and thus over the fate of England.

Today, a staggering ICM poll appeared in the Telegraph (interestingly titled “England wants its independence” for most of the morning, before mysteriously switching to “Britain wants UK break up, poll shows”):-

A clear majority of people in both England and Scotland are in favour of full independence for Scotland, an ICM opinion poll for The Sunday Telegraph has found. Independence is backed by 52 per cent of Scots while an astonishing 59 per cent of English voters want Scotland to go it alone.

There is also further evidence of rising English nationalism with support for the establishment of an English parliament hitting an historic high of 68 per cent amongst English voters. Almost half – 48 per cent – also want complete independence for England, divorcing itself from Wales and Northern Ireland as well. Scottish voters also back an English breakaway with 58 per cent supporting an English parliament with similar powers to the Scottish one.

Now, the sap of nationalism that is rising here is of the constitutional kind, not racial.  It is about the ending of governance from Westminster.  Scots and Welsh have traditionally defined themselves against their English neighbour, and for years noisily protested that Westminster was too remote and too London-centric to serve their respective needs.  But until devolution in 1998 it was very hard to get an Englishman to think of himself as other than just British, and of Westminster as other than just his Parliament.  That is changing now in an organic and impressive way, and it threatens not just to deprive the Labour Party of power for a time in Scotland and perhaps permanently in England, but to destroy it root and local branch.

So one would certainly expect that when the Prime Minister came to the dais in Oban last week for his very last speech to the Scottish Conference, he came armed with the most persuasive and powerful arguments for the status quo that man - or political speech writer - can muster.  Here they are, and when you read them think not just of the threat to Labour from constitutional nationalism ... think of a future time when the liberal elite as a whole has to defend its interests against a racial nationalism - against the real thing.

Blair said:-

READ MORE...