The people say they'll keep calm and carry on... but for how long?

Mr Heffer has an interesting article in the Torygraph, this morning.

Here's the comment I left with the moderators:

Jack Maturin on February 25, 2009 at 03:30 PM (only three hours after posting! :-)

I agree with virtually everything you say, Simon, but have you considered who a large minority, or even a majority, of these middle class people are? They are the placemen and the placewomen of the client state itself.

They can afford large houses, private schools, and expensive foreign holidays because they have large salaries from Gordon, with gold-plated pensions coming later from the taxes of as-yet-unborn children.

(Or at least they think they do - repudiation of these 'debts' to these people, is an idea whose time will come.)

This then makes two divisions of middle class people, in this country. The tax payer class who are forced to pay all of these client state salaries and pensions, and the tax consumer class who benefit from this coercive largesse.

I suppose you could brand them as the 'Telegraph' class and the rival 'Guardian' class.

I agree with you that taxes and real public spending must be slashed, with warm bodies out of the door in every single state organisation, with perhaps an exception for people whom we all consider genuinely useful, such as doctors and nurses.

The mood of the tax payer class may get ugly if the tax consumers are not sacked. However, the tax consumers are going to get very angry indeed, when they are sacked, leading to strikes and all sorts of other related problems, unless we can change the way that they think, and persuade them that they too will be better off under a new system.

We need more of a solution than just saying that government spending should be cut, because the current democratic system will never allow this, when almost half of the electorate are members of Gordon Brown's client state.

This is where the BNP is getting its growing support from, via this disillusionment in the entire democratic process.

We need to tackle this too, because if we are to be subjected to a takeover by these national socialists, some of whom seem keen to post their thoughts on your articles, then we really will be in a terrible mess - perhaps a new dark age.

It is also no good blaming David Cameron for being a weak-willed lily-livered coward. Half of the people he is trying to appeal to read the Guardian. He is afraid of angering them. It is not his fault that he is unable to see beyond this problem, because he is a fish and the water he swims in is the fluid of democracy.

I am not suggesting that I have any answers. I look to men of your calibre to provide these. But there is more to this than just cutting government spending.

We need an entire change of moral, ethical, and political thinking.

Democracy is a God that has failed. What we need to do is find a person who is capable of re-generating a cataclysmic change in political thinking. Margaret Thatcher would have been up to this. David Cameron, clearly, is not.

We need to find the person who is actually capable of tackling this major failure of democracy. Otherwise we are either looking into the abyss of international socialism or the chasm of national socialism.

The solution could be that nobody who works for the state is allowed to vote or it could be that you get a vote proportional to the taxes you pay minus the salary and benefits you extract from the state?

As an anarchist myself, I don't think either of the above solutions would work, but that is the kind of change somebody needs to be able to come up with and make stick.

I am carrying on and I am keeping calm. But unless we can figure out how to unlock this Gordian knot of the failure of democracy, the time for carrying on and calmness will soon be coming to an end.