The following discussion took place in the West Coast Reactionaries Skype group on the third of November, 2016, about the recent court ruling declaring that the prime minister of Great Britain does not have the power to trigger Article 50 which would begin the process, following from the pro-Brexit vote in June, whereby the United Kingdom would formally leave the European Union.
Octavian: Honestly I have agree with the court’s decision. Constitutionally, parliament is really the only way. If they block it there, yes there will be trouble, but that’s the problem with “referendums” in a constitutional monarchy: their legitimacy is sketchy as fuck. Hence why I think the Brexit vote will largely be symbolic at best, and if people get red-pilled on democracy, that’s a good outcome I think, but the real lesson for people in our circles is that relying on “the masses” to get us out of this mess is simply a fool’s errand. As long as people are moderately comfortable, people will not care nearly as much as you think.
Alexander: I’m beyond caring how — we need to get out, now.
Octavian: Plato’s criticisms of democracy still hold. It can be useful in riling up the masses and getting them to pay attention to certain urgent problems, but when it comes to actual leadership and problem solving, it’s fairly weak. Hence why I take the view that if they block Brexit, not all that much will happen. But perhaps I’m not qualified to say that since I’m a couple of oceans away.
Alexander: What are you on? [References the 2015 European Union referendum act.] Parliament had a vote on the referendum, and that vote legitimised the outcome of the referendum vote:
Octavian: The result isn’t binding, mate.
Alexander: Yes, well, nothing in politics is binding, really, anyway — it only works if everyone plays along.
Octavian: What the government will have to do is use the party whip and enforce a majority vote.
Alexander: Haha — oh boy that’ll be fun to see! A “do you feel in charge?” moment. They’ll expose themselves as the scheming traitors they are, and we’ll have the names. If they keep us within the E.U. in all but name, people will say: “Down with the November criminals!”
Octavian: Wishful thinking to be honest, but maybe I’m being too black-pilled.
Alexander: You are. The world and the West are on the brink of something extreme.
Octavian: Referendums in Australia are binding, but they’re only used in constitutional changes, such as removing the monarchy.
Alexander: That would be a good start.
Octavian: The idea that you can vote away the existence of your monarch is pretty bizarre.
Alexander: I’d rather bullets than votes… I’m being prickly because this has really rustled me. I can see the Irish and Greek votes and how futile they were. And I feel stupid for being hopeful about this referendum. I can see now that we would need to take more extreme measures.
Octavian: To be frank, you should’ve foreseen this happening.
Alexander: I did. I tried not to think about it. I dared to hope: stupid.
Octavian: I’m sorry. I know that feeling.
Alexander: I’m very emotionally invested in this. The House of Lords will betray us, that corrupt rat’s nest of profligates, drug addicts, and pædophiles.
Mark: There is a gay Muslim in the House of “Lords.” I’m seeing the hidden hand of the neoconservatives all over this decision. They were desperate to stop Brexit.
John: This is like Obama winning re-election with 52% of the vote and a Republican Congress voting in Romney instead. Liberals would be livid.
Mark: [Quoting the above-linked article.] “There are times when M.P.s need to rise above their party interests, their own interests and the views of their constituents. That may risk being voted out, but they may earn more respect by standing up for the national interest as best they can determine: that’s what representative democracy is for. In times of war or national crisis, defending the country from grave error, at whatever personal cost, is their duty. Brexit is the greatest threat to national wellbeing since the war, and this will test the mettle not just of individual M.P.s, but of the nature and purpose of a representative democratic system.” — Polly Toynbee, resident Guardian cunt, opines on how Liberal government really works.
Octavian: One problem was that the Leave coalition completely demobilised after the vote, whereas the Remain side effectively continued to campaign.
Alexander: [Responding to Mark.] She’s has nothing like the mind of her grandfather. Ha! She’d make heroes out of traitors — I can’t go on.
Octavian: “There are times when M.P.s need to rise above their party interests, their own interests and the views of their constituents. That may risk being voted out, but they may earn more respect by standing up for the national interest as best they can determine: that’s what representative democracy is for. In times of war or national crisis, defending the country from grave error, at whatever personal cost, is their duty. A non-Brexit is the greatest threat to national wellbeing since the war, and this will test the mettle not just of individual MPs, but of the nature and purpose of a representative democratic system.” — There we go. Add one word, yet the argument is entirely the same in that it’s actually not an argument at all.
Alexander: It’s a platitude, really.
Octavian: One thing’s for sure: Britain will never ever have a referendum again.
Alexander: I hope not.
Mark: If there was a decent royal left, there would be a coup following such a betrayal.
Alexander: They’re just as bad as the Lords.
Octavian: I think people may have to come to terms with the fact that Brexit will likely not happen. Yet we will have to wait to see what happens in the next six months.
Alexander: “Wait and see, wait and see…” — how long do you think we have left?
John: It’s actually not a bad argument, provided that the powers that be were Rightist. The whole justification of monarchy rests on the assumption that the people do not always know what is best for them, and that the monarch occasionally needs to step in and override them if need be. The problem is that they’re Leftists.
Octavian: It’d be a good argument if they were referring to a senate, but they’re not, they’re referring to the Commons, and the Commons are supposed to represent the wishes of their constituents.
Alexander: Yeah, and we don’t live in a representative democracy, really.
Octavian: Well… we sort of do. It’s just that it’s also a two party system, and parties act like corporations now
Alexander: I think people are beginning to understand that we don’t live in a democracy. And yes, I know that
Octavian: And, voters no longer elect people based mainly off the actual views of the member themselves, rather they vote for blue or red.
Alexander: The British Government doesn’t run the country.
Mark: [Responding to John.] Let’s try not to apply monarchical arguments to the thoroughly anti-monarchical system. The judge should be helicoptered.
Octavian: I don’t fault the judge for following constitutional procedures.
Mark: There is an order of due loyalties. Loyalty to sovereign comes after loyalty to the nation. If the Emperor of Constantinople says, “open the city gates” as the Muslim hordes descend, you are morally obligated to ignore him. Same is true here. The vote is not what is important, its the issue of the European Union itself. It has zero legitimacy, and is a threat to the native population.
John: Agreed, one-hundred percent.
Octavian: But sovereignty lies in the parliament. If the parliament rejected the vote, then your argument would have some justification. I’m speaking in de facto terms here. The Monarch has almost no sovereignty, really — and the courts only have preliminary power.
Mark: The parliament has no legitimate sovereignty in an absolute sense, as the power of the monarch was illegitimately ceded to them. A monarch does not have the authority to give away their monarchical powers. It’s why I don’t see any of these disgusting democracies across Europe as legitimate. We have revolutionary governments, like the Khmer Rouge.
Octavian: Fair enough, Mark. Perhaps I’m being too much of a lawfag.
John: Even the sovereignty of the monarch can be abrogated if he acts against the interests of the nation. I believe Thomas of Aquinas made that very argument: “When there is no recourse to a superior by whom judgment can be made about an invader, then he who slays a tyrant to liberate his fatherland is [to be] praised and receives a reward.”
Octavian: I’ve probably been reading too much Hobbes.
John: The fundamental problem is not so much any particular system of government as much as the governing ideology of the nation. The enemies here are not the politicians ruling over the people — the enemy is liberalism ruling over the minds of the politicians.
Mark: Anyone else find the “Love Trumps Hate” slogan to be really shitty. For most of the time I kept reading it as, the Left loves Trump’s hate.
Alexander: The modern Left is boring and shitty. They’re sarcastic, snarky, and “clever,,” and that’s very boring. Nothing vital, nothing primal, nothing dynamic.
Mark: I have to say, though, losing Brexit or Trump have never had better knock-on effects than now. If Brexit is denied by parliament, there will be mass unrest and disgust (in my opinion). Trump’s margins are now such that if he does lose, a fraud allegation is perfectly plausible — so yes, mass unrest and disgust.
Alexander: Yes, and hopefully D.B. will collapse and the Eurozone with it. Every crisis is an opportunity, and our people need to wait for the prime moment to strike — doesn’t mean the wait is any less painful.