Edmund Burke's idea of representative democracy, of MPs forming their own judgments, has collapsed and come to its end; our attorneys think themselves our rulers. It's successor, the era of direct democracy, via technology, has arrived.
"The building is a symbol, as is the act of destroying it. Symbols are given power by the people."
The world's oldest political party, the Tories, or Conservatives, has recently died. It's adversary, the socialist Labour party, died several years ago. Historically, one would hold one's nose and vote against the other. It's now unthinkable voting for either.
When the Torygraph editorial condemns the party in such unequivocal terms, history is being made; the dinosaur is keeling over, as predicted by Peter Hitchens since 2010:
"Lacking any meaningful plan for economic growth, and postponing many of the most difficult decisions on spending until after the next election, the Statement passed the costs of a ballooning state onto the productive parts of the economy when disposable incomes are collapsing."
Britons are long-suffering, gritty people; tolerant people full of hope, invention, and cheerfulness, with a dry, often somewhat black sense of humour. We will endure much, together, for one another. In fact, we measure ourselves on our fortitude during adversity. We like to formalise with institutions, and to explore the greater world. We are villagers, schoolboys, and shopkeepers. We like things as they are.
In 1215, the northern barons forced the King to certify the rights of men within the Magna Carta during three different wars.
In 1533, the King initiated the Reformation by removing the Pope from having any say in our business; the first Brexit, which still defines us today.
In the 1640s, the King was executed and the country became a commonwealth during three more civil wars which asserted Parliament's sovereignty.
In 1688, the Bill of Rights and the Glorious Revolution established Parliament's rule over the King and the modern foundations of the island's unified nation.
We did not need a bloody revolution to murder the Ancien Régime and form a much worse Republican aristocracy. The English solution was to share power with the monarch: incremental progressivism to preserve our traditions rather than chaotic transformation. It worked.
For three hundred years, Parliament has remained sovereign as the Executive and Legislative, while the Crown must provide assent.
Parliament's main function is, and has always been, the redress of grievances. The institution has been reformed many times in its ancient history. Much blood has been spilled shaping our traditions.
That history is replete with the struggle for aristocratic power and iterating over emergent improvements to its scope over us. Sharing with the monarch; supremacy over the monarch. And now, the balance of power with our own representatives.
Britons have repeatedly said no to internationalism and globalism. Our voice could not be clearer. No to mass immigration; no to asylum abuse; no to the EU superstate; no to foreign aid; no to imperial American wars; no to foreign political ideologies; no to global institutions; no to the World Economic Forum. Over and over again for decades.
Yes to charity, where possible. No, overall, to social democracy.
We know what we want, even if we disagree on how to achieve it. The ability to generate wealth, own a house, and take walks in our countryside with our families to the pub, knowing they are educated in excellent schools and won't be ruined by life events. Splendid isolation, except, perhaps, a nice holiday to Portugal. We like things small, and full of charm and character; which is why it hurts to kill the BBC even despite its behaviour.
Some of us, a tedious minority, want to be part of an imaginary socialist utopia and talk in hushed tones about the Brotherhood of Man expressed as a Euro state.
This conversation would be moot if they were able to generate wealth for themselves. Such talk has little to do with Rousseau's lofty social contract.
Parliament is not only refusing to listen; it is going its own way separately from the people, which means it is ceasing to function. It is no longer redressing grievances, it is causing them.
What does one do when one's own representatives vote against one's wishes and interests? Recall and fire your representative, presumably. Only to vote for the next candidate who then behaves the same way, with impunity.
As a pertinent example, Britons have repetitively spurned plans for ID cards, yet our government, again, is organising programmable digital currency.
In the aftermath of the largest democratic repudiation of Europeanism in the nation's history, and now the economic destruction of "lockdown" and the fool's pursuit of "net zero" carbon emissions....
Our second unelected Prime Minister, this season, is negotiating "closer ties" to the EU, and climate "reparations".
No matter how we vote, if we are allowed to vote, we receive the same abusive government. We receive policies we refused, over and over, until we stop putting up a fight to resist them. They're not our plans or our ideas.
It's one provocation too far. As people were locked in their homes protesting to see the bodies of their loved ones in nearby funeral homes, our "leaders" were having wine-and-cheese parties.
The country is in a state of collapse after being transformed into a replica of the USSR: record inflation, the highest tax burden since the War, a crumbling health system, a perverted ideological education system, a diminished military, overcrowding, it goes on.
But the State go on, and grow. The State must survive, and come first. There must be more taxes to fund the State. There must be more workers employed by the State. The State must have more powers contained in more Bills.
The State currently adsorbs over fifty per cent of GDP. And productivity has stopped.
We are not re-entering the EU. We cannot afford climate vanity when people can't eat. Our country is flirting with revolution, and the question is of how violent it will be. The proverbial frog has realised the water is close to boiling, and ready to smash the glass.
It certainly won't be a Marxist one.
One wonders if a deliberate attempt is taking place to implode the country from within as a joint political punishment for leaving the EU, and justification for re-entering it. Sabotage and treachery are required skills in the Civil Service.
A treaty handing over our Sovereignty and justice system to a foreign supranational government. Devolved assemblies fractionating the isles. The sale of our gold supplies and bankrupting of the Treasury. Rioting teenagers. Mass electronic surveillance. Mass bank bailouts during the Credit Crunch. Mass immigration without end driving the population over seventy million.
Refusing to investigate the mass religiously-inspired rape of 15,000 teenage girls by Pakistani immigrants. Courting China for critical infrastructure deals. Institutions overrun by activist pressure groups and policised law enforcement. Cultural disintegration: no-fault divorce, gay "marriage", statue defilement.
A navy of fifty ships. Inability to provide our own gas and electricity. Frivolous laws about "hate speech". Mandatory injections coerced by army brigades. Bankrupted high streets.
We're all painfully aware of the chronic incompetence of our aristocratic political class. Their mediocrity is an open secret we hold politely on their behalf.
Britain is a rent-seeking country club of six thousand people who matter, forced to share an island with sixty million who don't.
All of these injuries to date were borne with fortitude.
We even tolerate the unelected House of Lords.
Three years of our representatives doing everything within their Machiavellian powers, against their own electorate, to entirely usurp or reverse the result of the largest democratic exercise in British history. A seditionist endeavour from which warnings of civil war emerged.
The curtain was well and truly pulled back in a way it cannot be unseen by ordinary village-folk.
Shaming people. Making them vote again. Claiming fraud. Passing laws to force the Prime Minister to concede. Manipulating the paperwork. Removing ministers. Adjusting the deal. Poisoning the deal. Assisting EU leaders against our own negotiators. Keeping the ECHR. Leveraging Northern Ireland.
Here we are again. Our representatives want closer ties to the EU.
This time a "Swiss-style" arrangement of "frictionless" trade. Our representatives want us to be in the EU. Britons do not. We have said no. We will say no, again. Yet, here we will be again in future, with our leaders driving us back into the EU.
Britons have told Parliament what we want: a low-tax, low-immigration independent nation trading with the Commonwealth. A Singapore or Hong Kong on the edge of Europe.
The people of Britain know what they want. The State wants something else.
Our history is one of consistent reform, on the basis the optimal situation will emerge, rather than be imposed by design. Parliament was our vehicle to resolve disputes. We have lost our means to resolve grievances.
Our politics are no longer Blue vs Red or Left vs Right. They are localist nation state vs globalist social democracy state. Our Parliament, as a body, has chosen its side, and the people are on the other side. The institution itself, with the monarchy and its accompanying Civil Service, are adversarial to the electorate.
And this marriage has been achieved by the Civil Service, as always, deciding for the ever-switching politicians, on their behalf.
The House of Common People is an aristocratic PPE-from-Oxbridge class.
A collection of performers intellectually and academically underwritten and undermined by Trotskyist, postmodernist apparatchiks of the Administrative State.
These differences are irreconcilable. The damage of Managed Decline has been so consistent, over such a period of time, we are now at a point in our history where the electorate is keenly aware we risk constitutional and economic collapse tolerating this ongoing incompetence from any of the parties. Our country is on the brink of insolvency, inexplicably, again; for the Nth time in a century.
Working class people can't vote Labour, because it will mean more mass immigration and the institutional triumph of woke-ism.
Middle and upper class people can't vote Tory, because it will mean they get more Blairism and left-wing social democracy.
The rest of us can't vote for any alternative because the first-past-the-post political system will disqualify anyone but the dueling major parties.
But people can't eat or afford anything. There's no gas to heat their homes. Rationing has begun in an era of prosperity. Their children are sitting through drag queen story hour. Their children are socially arrested from two years of isolation.
Now they want us to go back into the EU, pay the most tax for a century, and send more money overseas for the imaginary Gnostic religion of the WEF. Our representatives are going against our wishes and making it ever worse.
Add it up.
The intractability of failing to achieve change means the inevitability of political revolution. In most cases, British regimes change every thirty years.
Britons are a long-suffering, tolerant people who bear their frustrations with great valour and gallantry. Until it's too much. After which nothing can stop what comes next.
The political class cannot investigate itself, fix itself, or reform itself. The electorate knows. It requires outsiders, made of steel, ready not only for a serious conflict, but to administer Churchill-style dissolution to an entrenched enemy.
Turkeys do not vote for Christmas. A fox does not remove itself from the hen house.
Parliament must be cleared of all living things, and ceremonially burnt to the ground. Its former inhabitants must be made to watch, while the reasons for it are explained.
The Civil Service must be completely dissolved.
Why? The building is a symbol. As is the act of destroying it. Parliament itself is not a building; it is a body of people, the Burgesses. It derives its powers from the consent of the Common People it is sovereign over.
Once consent has been withdrawn, because it has ceased to serve its primary function of redressing grievances, it no longer has legitimacy. It may belong to the monarch, but it is our House by rite of history. We have the right to burn it down.
Parliament is populism.
It is the purest expression of populism, in theory and practice. Burning it to the ground is an act of populist symbolism and unifying sentiment. Parliament expresses its Will through legislation; the People express their Will with footsteps and fire.
What replaces it?
Not a Cromwell, a Mosley, or a council of technology CEOs.
The answer, most probably, is the Direct Democracy of the Brexit Referendum as practised in Switzerland, with all its own weaknesses and flaws. And perhaps, Federalisation to deliver a more practical and effective antidote to the failure of Devolution.
The technology of the Internet - universal connectivity, instant data, cryptography, social media - is alive on every smartphone. We participate in it every day.
Open source Blockchain theory is replacing money by decentralising it out of any one entity's control. Our representatives want centralised, programmable digital currency they can switch off, and electronic passports which can deny travel. These are incompatible ideas separating leadership and electorate which cannot be merged or negotiated.
Technology is decentralising all the support beams of politics: money, news, television, voting, and more.
Something curious about the House of Commons is it is guarded by armed police officers who ensure the public take no photos. Of the place you fund, and you own. Commoners are not permitted.
It's inconceivable Britons will longer tolerate wayward proxies or treacherous representatives. Trust in them was never good, per se, but it rested uneasily on the fear of the terrible consequences should it be severely violated.
That violation is now a part of recent history. What remains is our response, as long-suffering as our people are. They've waited, and won't wait any longer to endure more provocations testing the extent of their patience.
Parliament must burn.
It must burn on live television, live radio, and naturally, the Internet, in front of the Commonwealth. Those who formerly inhabited it must stand on the square lawn in front of it, forced to watch.
The message being: this is what happens when you become the source of the constituents' grievance; you cannot exist on your own terms as an aristocratic adversary to express your own Will over the People. First, we beheaded the monarch; now, the Parliament itself.
What could be more British than that?