Saturday, 8 May 2010

Purple Rain

Regime-controlled media claimed victory for Viktor Yanukovych, handpicked by the corrupt sitting president. But credible exit polls showed Viktor Yushchenko, the opposition candidate, had won.

It was shocking enough that Yushchenko had been poisoned -- and nearly killed-- while on the campaign trail. When reports came in of blatant voter intimidation and damaged ballots, people were outraged. When they realized election officials were in on the fraud, the people had had enough.

In freezing temperatures, over one million citizens poured into the streets of Kyiv and took up residence there. They marched in protest and formed human barricades around government buildings, paralyzing all state functions. Restaurants donated food, businessmen sent tents, and individuals brought blankets, clothing, and money. At night, rock bands energized the protesters.

For 17 days, a group of ordinary citizens engaged in extraordinary acts of political protest. Capturing the songs and spirit of this moment in history, Orange Revolution tells the story of a people united, not by one leader or one party, but by one idea: to defend their vote

If they can, we can. It's started already. I'm wearing purple until my vote counts.


RantinRab said...

I just changed my background to purple too.

Great minds and all that...

John said...

Nick Cleggs coming out to meet the protestors was a very, very canny thing to do. Good work.

As OH has said on twitter, it could've been a defining moment, as it is, it was a little banal.

If Clegg had forced his way past Plod, grabbed the megaphone and started to go off on one he'd have made history - it might truly have been an Obama moment. As it is -- much, much less so.

D.G.Haslam said...

Purple matches your eyes honey.

Dazed And Confused said...

There is of course also a problem with some of these "Vote for change" organisations, in that they're not at all what they purport to be. Take Power 2010 for instance Billy Bragg? Neil Lees/UKFightback? Fucking Communists, who have attempted to hoodwink the Internet for months now on their alleged quest for transparent democracy.

Guthrum said...

Dazed & Confused

So what, I would sell my soul to the Devil (yes Mandelson that means you) to get PR

Then I want Swiss style referenda

The alternative is to be run by Techinical College Socialists and Tory Shire wanabees

If they want to get a few more than a thousand supporters out they need
to start by giving at least 24 hours notice to the rest of us, I will be there

Old Holborn said...

Bring it on.

Until my vote counts, I won't stop.

If the East Germans can do it, so can we. You have NOTHING to lose and everything to gain.

And this is our ONE chance. Take it and take it now. It won't be available again for a generation, if ever. Your grandchildren will thank you.

Dazed And Confused said...

@ Guthrum:

Having anything to do Neil Lees or Billy Bragg is a step back into the abyss of Soviet politics. How the hell can you encourage "change" or "democracy" by following Communists?

A Tad paradoxical isn't it?

Old Holborn said...

Ignore Bragg. I do.

Anonymous said...

That that is a bunch of labour activists.

zable said...

Dazed And Confused said... "How the hell can you encourage "change" or "democracy" by following Communists?"

They aren't telling people how to vote, just want their vote to count.

Old Holborn said...

And why shouldn't a communists vote count?

Tell you what, they wouldn't have given £680 billion of OUR money to the bankers

crisstoe and son said...


yeah...great thinking twatman...but we need a wall to break-up for about hadrian's...about 1600 years too late, i know...but it'll have to do...if the national trust don't give us permission we can fill in offa's fucking's not that hard to find with an ordnance survey map...get your wellies on...what? paint hadrian's wall purple? don't be bloody silly?

Stop Common Purpose said...

This whole Power2010 effort smells.

It is seriously suspect.


D&C "There is of course also a problem with some of these "Vote for change" organisations, in that they're not at all what they purport to be. Take Power 2010 for instance Billy Bragg? Neil Lees/UKFightback? Fucking Communists, who have attempted to hoodwink the Internet for months now on their alleged quest for transparent democracy."



"And why shouldn't a communists vote count?

Tell you what, they wouldn't have given £680 billion of OUR money to the bankers"

Perhaps not but the communitarians have.

jack the wrapper said...


shrinkwrap the houses of parliament and suffocate the cunts. use a lilac tinted brand, obviously.

Dazed And Confused said...

@ Zable:

"They aren't telling people how to vote, just want their vote to count".

Of course they are now, but later on in the piece, theirs will be the only votes that count, if they ever managed to reach their ultimate objectives.

Is it now a problem to oppose the far left on a Libertarian blog, for fucks sake?

D.G.Haslam said...

Oh dear Timmy, you hate blacks, Jews, Commies. I suggest joining the BNP but they were last heard of holding their annual congress in a phone booth in Dagenham.

Dazed And Confused said...

And to show my point about far left infiltration, McEgan appears as D.G. Haslam in an attempt to smear.

old ma cleanspeak said...

i don't have anything purple, mr holborn - could we change that to maroon please? it's also a bit chilly out there, so can we perhaps wait until the weather improves? i do however possess a purple cigarette-lighter with which i am quite prepared to spark up the cuntnest of british democracy, the filthy fucking vermin.

Tragic Tim Carr said...

I need to love myself...then I can learn to love others...I'm so stupid I keep calling folks "MacEgan" or "Haslam". I really am such a Ras Clart.

Hugh First. said...

Dazed & Confused have you ever considered a career in the police?

Rebel Saint said...

I hope I'm wrong but I suspect you'll be wearing purple a long time.

The difference between the British and the Ukranians is that they don't have free cash handouts, free housing, eastenders, and endless supplies of cheap booze to keep them pre-occupied. Too many of us are too pre-occupied to even bother voting let alone bother whether it counts or not. 81% turnout in Ukraine.

Gobshite said...

Are we getting a Soros revolution too?

He is an 'orrible cunt, that was more than happy to stick it to us when we went out of the ERM.

I want proper PR:

20% of votes = 20% of seats.
2% of votes = 2% of seats.

Like fuck are we going to get that.

Liberals have a Tory wing, and a Sandalista wing. I'd say most of them are the latter.

Do we really want the Beardie Weardies calling the shots in the next election?

I'd accept it under what I consider proper PR, as the price of democracy. But not under some bullshit system that discriminates against the smaller parties.

Top tip: The Sandalistas make Gordon seem rational, logical, and sane.

Barking Spider said...

The only thing PR achieves is a permanently hung parliament and that's not good for the Country - internal wrangling becomes more important than looking out for the Country's interests.

zable said...


The most honest PR I can think of would be a national constituency like OH flagged up recently as what Iraq uses, which itself would act as a barrier to single issue/independent/minor parties imo. They wouldn't have the money to campaign and wouldn't make a big enough impact to get enough support. With 650 MPs you'd need 60k+ votes to get a seat.

We have counties, we might as well use them as the basis for multi-member constituencies.

The bribing of voters that Rebel Saint flags up would clearly be an issue but I have no idea whether people on benefits vote in their droves to try and maintain their lifestyles or whether they are too lazy to vote at all. Who are the 15 million who don't vote?

All in all though I firmly believe PR wouldn't be needed if the quality of MPs was far higher. We are all represented in Parliament it just isn't always by someone we supported. Are they doing a good job of representing all of us? Not by a long shot and they are unaccountable to us once in Westminster. This Government in particular has got away with loads because of a useless opposition and a spineless back bench.

There are some diligent MPs who take their duty to hold Government to account seriously but they are too few in number. I think this is partly a symptom of how much Government has centralised matters. Local Government does what central Government tells it so it is no longer accountable to local voters. Central Government now has so much stuff on the go that Parliament is now unable to scrutinise it sufficiently.

Anonymous said...

"Barking Spider said...
The only thing PR achieves is a permanently hung parliament and that's not good for the Country..."

No, but it might be good for it's citizens.


Gobshite said...


You are right about local government.

Local councils have taken on way too many responsibilities.

What are they for?

Planning, refuse collection, and road maintenance can be done at a regional level. As could licensing and social care.

The minor roads in my city look worst than Baghdad!

Environmental health, transport and education at a national level.

Business development should be taken care of by businesses, with a suitable grant.

All that councils are doing is duplicating what could be done quicker and much cheaper if they were more centralized.

Council tax should be based off of one national chart, taking into account local wages. If not abolished completely!

They pretty much have to do what they are told anyway. Not that they would listen to the people if they could.

Gordon the Fence Post Tortoise said...

All these arguments about representation are redundant / moot if there's nil accountability apart from those brownie points gleaned for poking noses up bottoms.

Power 2010 - sheesh - that's nothing to the sleepwalking hoards that'll kick off when they have to make a choice between dogfood and TV tax (and they will...)

As to localism - maybe it'd work if the calibre of our councillors / intermediate representatives and their supporting public servants even hinted at an acceptable level of competence - anybody who uses their eyes and ears knows that the overwhelming competence of our public servants is on delivering suffocating, self serving process at the clear cost of a denial of public amenity.

This is a mess of epic proportions and the inevitable denouement is going to be very messy indeed - "planned" is not a word that comes to mind.

And yes - it's Labour and the Toynbees and the Braggs who are largely to blame for devaluing our public institutions - with some passive assistance from what passes for an opposition.

A sage see the last but one paragraph... I think I'm going to buy shares in petfood manufacturers.....

Anonymous said...

Do you think "they" tried to nobble Farage?

zable said...


You may have misunderstood me. Local Government should be doing as much as possible but crucially at the direction of locals rather than central Government.

It is the lack of accountability at every level that is the problem - the decision making process at a local level has been pinched by Westminster with council executives seeing their duty as imposing the Westminster rules on democratically elected councillors.

"All that councils are doing is duplicating what could be done quicker and much cheaper if they were more centralized."

No. Soviet style Centralisation is part of the problem not the solution.(In part because Government is loathe to ever economise - you would not see any savings because there would not be any sackings) Local Government has stoped competing with their neighbours for the affections of voters and instead competes with their neighbours for the affections of Westminster. Centralisation allows inefficiencies to flourish because the default stance is 'steady as she goes' and very, very resistant to a change of idea.

If far more money was raised locally than nationally different councils would be able to try different things rather than have to stick to Westminster plans. What centralisation does is remove the ability for local councils to take a chance on changing the way things are done for the benefit of locals. The more councils are forced to all do the same thing the worse and more expensive the services they provide become. They are no longer meeting the needs of locals but meeting the needs of Whitehall.

A comment another blog highlighted recently that chimed with me was that when politicians talk of fighting postcode lotteries in public services they are promising more centralisation. They cannot see that competition is good. They deny that the end result of centralisation is always a lowest common denominator of public services. If local councils do different things you can see what works and what does not. Centralisation is completely against such a notion and rigidly applies what central government has decided *must* work at whatever cost rather than what is rational, sensible and efficient.

I would like to see an inversion of the tax system. Income tax simply going to your local Government. National Insurance going to your County Council. A land value tax or council tax funding national Government. That sort of thing. National Government regulating local government not running it.

Barnsley Bill said...

OH, you are wrong on this one. email me.
Supporting a labour flash mob activated to pressure clegg into propping up Brown is not what you should be about. go and have a nice cup of tea.

Old Holborn said...

Zable, you have just perfectly described the Swiss Cantonal system.

I want it.

Old Holborn said...


Think long term. Once we have PR, they can never take it away again. If that means we have six more months of labour and then a vote of no confidence, so be it

Ron Broxted said...

I like this new purple background colour scheme. It reminds of the colour of the robes worn by a certain Catholic priest as he forced my head down between his legs...

What he did to me after that changed my life forever.

Ooooh Matron !!!

Englishman said...

Careful careful!!!! this lot are not the democrsatic bunch they seem! They are all Common Purpose...... Communists: and labour activists trying to preserve Gordon in No 10! PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE don't suppor this lot

Anonymous said...

Nobody cares what you write Haslam. You are a total non entity unable even to stalk properly. Not much of an epitaph!

James Stephenson said...

OH - listen to Barnsley. We live with MMP here in NZ. People still don't get out of the red v blue mindset, so you end up with one or the other propped up by minor party "tails" trying to wag the dog.

In our system, Jackie would still be at the trough thanks to a safe party list position.

Don't lose the right to fire any given MP...

Barking Spider said...

You are the fucking idiot, yes you, Lefty "Anonymong02.01", by the Country I mean the citizens - twat!

Have you ever experienced what PR achieves? No?

Then shut the fuck up - I have and it doesn't fucking work!

Ian B said...

Purple? Oh for fuck's sake.

Look at the 38 Degrees website. They're a front for Red/Green. Leader David Babbs is formerly head of activism for Friends Of The Earth. All the rest of them are Green apparatchiks. The funding is from Red/Green philanthropists (a Roddick, an organic profiteer called Henry Tinsley).

It's astroturf. They want PR to permanently emplace this "progressive consensus" that is the new meme. It's a British branch of MoveOn- one of the Board is an American from the Yankee network- with the same purpose of creating a shadow party to control the politicians and mobilise hordes of placard-wavers from one "ishoo" to another at their beck and call, the kind of people who go on a march and then ask what they're marching for this time.

It's astonishing how naive Libertarians can be, considering how cynical we're supposed to be. Don't be fooled. This sudden clamour for PR is astroturf.

Barking Spider said...

Spot on, Ian B.

Ratings and Recommendations by outbrain


Related Posts with Thumbnails