Tuesday, 16 June 2015

Magna Carta, fables and misrepresentations.

There appears to be some variance in the interpretation of Magna Carta.

As I understand it, was a contract, drawn up by the Catholic Bishops, setting out the relationship between the three estates - The Church, The Monarchy and The Barons.

That same relationship persists today, with unelected Bishops in the House of Lords, unelected Lords in the House of Lords, and Corporate Barons in the House of Lords as well as Corporate influence over Government.

The only articles currently on the statute books, and thus active in Law, are the two which relate to the position of the Church and the City of London, both of which imply an acceptance of the status of the Monarchy as Head of State.

The reason why PR or a genuinely democratic voting system does not exist is to preserve that triumvirate of Power.

Cameron words must be read with that understanding...

"It falls to us in this generation to restore the reputation of those rights... It is our duty to safeguard the legacy, the idea, the momentous achievement of those barons."

This coming from a leader who is overseeing the privatisation of the NHS, who bombed Libya needlessly, whose Government is placing psychologists in Job Centers to mask the bureaucratic bullying of vulnerable people in pursuit of an ideological stance that is fundamentally institutional and inhumane.

What is the legacy of the Barons?

It certainly is not genuine participative democracy for all the people, where the people are treated as equals in the discussions and processes of decision making at the level of Governance.

Is the privatisation of the NHS into the hands of people associated with David Camerons Cabinet and social class mandated by the people of the UK?

Or is it closer to the kind of trade controls the Barons would have seen as appropriate to their standing?

Was the bombing of Libya mandated by the UK electorate? Likewise the invasion of Iraq in 2003?

They were not. Indeed there is very little of Government legislation in recent history that has been fully supported by the majority of the electorate in the UK.

I could be wrong.

I also know that Government has been undermining those constituencies that were behind the Power Inquiry of 2006 through the Big Society campaign.

This is because they - the Community Voluntary Sector - prepresented the most cogent, well articulated and well reasoned appraisal of the flaws in the current system which render it un-democratic, not least the Office of The Party Whip, which has no place in a genuine peoples Democracy and they proposed a series of proven reforms that would safely devolve decision making powers to the grass roots of Society through deliberative processes that would build bridges rather than create divisions.

The CVS had decades of self governance experience to draw from - dealing with provision of services, listening and responding to clients, managing funding and treasury transparency, dealing with Government and European bodies and legislation, handling crises, developing evidence based policies and implementing those... a vast body of experiential knowledge and wisdom, with a more defined and exact database than currently exists for climate change as a direct result of only fossil fuel use.

I also understand that Government will place activists to distract, dissuade, obscure the realities of History....and the activities of genuine activism, as a standard practice that has a long, long history.

There is much talk of Freemen, of Maritime Law, of Natural Law and of supposed rights of ordinary people inferred in Magna Carta that generates much attention, yet delivers nothing useful in terms of Democratic progress towards a more humane system of Governance.

The delivery is the proof of the pudding.

Here is a song that explores all of this...

I write songs like this because part of folk music is the honest recording of the lived experience in history as it really occurred, as a source of wisdom and strength. That is a core duty of the folk musician.

A good friend of mine commented that "
Half the pieces on the chess board carry the same title as those who sit in the Lords..."

To which I replied...

The key skill in Chess is predicting your opponents moves into the future, and then laying a trap for them to fall into through your own moves.

Government policy appears to be short term in the manner it is announced, yet behind the scenes that is not the case. We know that those who rule present an acceptable persona, a facade for public attention and consumption.

Our activism has to understand this, read past the headlines, and perceive what is coming and plan for it whilst being ready to adapt and change."

Kindest regards


Do what you love, it's Your Gift to Universe


blahme said...

Hi Cornelius this interpretation could well be the right one as we can all put our own interpretation forward.

I agree that we should be planning forward and I believe we are but we seem to be failing to get our message across to the many because in their forward planning they captured the Main Stream Media, the Police and the Judiciary. They only needed the top of the pyramid in these public services and the rest just follow orders like good little drones.

There are some good articles in the MC1215 such as article 39/40 and 61. The fact remains that the government cannot touch it as they were not the creators.

So they do have a problem, it's up to us to say NO we WILL keep the Charter as is.


corneilius said...

All three articles are directed towards protecting the Barons, and no others.

The fact that various claims were made throughout history for similar legislative principles to apply to a wider constituency, to give that same degree of protection to more people, says more about the way precedent within the adversarial system is used in English and UK Law, than about peoples rights per se.

The arguments that won extensions of those rights were indeed based on the LOGIC of that protection, (in essence 'fairness' - though that is always a moot point within a violent Hierarchical system) rather than on it's legislative application to all as a matter of fact, honour and decency, and each time it was used, it was used not for all, but for those who were, at the time, deemed important enough of a constituency from which certain political factions sought to gain support. In each case there was a threat of violence in the background - give us these rights or else.... the rights were ceded to avoid that violence, rather than as a matter of humane legislation.

Such behaviour is outdated, and the reality of the UN Human Rights Charter being ratified by most States sets a new domain, a new situation that must not be reversed.

Referring to Magna Carta as the basis of Human Rights legislation is an error.

Misunderstanding of Magna Carta's place and meaning is being willfully used to undermine Human Rights Law, not least because the war crimes of Afghanistan,Iraq and Libya are real, and those who enabled those crimes are liable under Human Rights Law now enshrined in English, Scottish, Welsh and NI Law, and as it happens, the 6 international treaties prohibiting war.

The Government are claiming that by reverting to a Bill of Rights based on the principles of Magna Carta will be an improvement. That is an outright lie.

Magna Carta provides no modern protections. None.

The Government are manipulating peoples indoctrinated perception and misunderstanding, they are deliberately using the concept of Britishness, of Englishness inferred by reversion to Magna Carta, and the Bill of rights, to undermine their obligations under the UN Charter which the Government has ratified, and is legally bound by.