Immigration, News

The Tragedy of Jo Cox and the need to Put Britain First

1,594 Views 46

Yesterday a fifty-two year old man was arrested by West Yorkshire police for the cowardly attack upon Jo Cox outside Birstall Library near Leeds, which cost the Labour MP her life.

The man who was dressed in a grey T shirt and dark trousers is alleged to have attacked the Labour MP with a foot long hunting knife and a sawn-off shot-gun, stabbing her and shooting her several times, and also injuring a bystander who had intervened in an attempt to stop the attack. The suspected killer was later located and arrested by the police.

Jo Cox was rushed to hospital but later died of her wounds.

For me a deeply saddening aspect of this incident is that the assailant is reported to have chanted ‘Britain First’ several times during the attack. However he is not believed to be a member of the nationalist political party of that name and Paul Golding and Jayda Fransen of Britain First have, as one would expect, condemned the attack and expressing their hopes at the time that Jo Cox would make a full recovery.

While discussing this incident with a colleague yesterday as the news broke, I knew instinctively that the assailant would be revealed to be someone with psychiatric problems and not someone who is an active nationalist or active supporter of either Britain First or any other nationalist organisation. I knew this because within nationalist organisations, men who attack women are generally regarded with contempt and there is an unwritten code of honour requiring nationalists to acquit themselves with courage in any altercation in which they are confronted by our political enemies.

No man, nationalist or otherwise would expect an attack upon a physically small woman to be regarded as an act of courage, least of all an attack in which she was defenceless and he was armed with a large knife and handgun. Furthermore, while we on the so called right may have disagreed with her politics, Jo Cox was not a ‘big wheel’, she was not one of the prime movers in national politics, in the dispossession and ongoing genocide of our people, and accordingly, the attack upon Jo Cox was unjustified and cannot be regarded as anything other than cowardly and shameful.

The first rule of politically motivated murder is that the killing of one’s victim is seen by wider society as justifiable, and the victim seen as someone who had it coming. In this context, the killer of Jo Cox cannot have considered his actions in any rational way, because a killing of this kind would obviously be virtually impossible to justify and would for any rational, politically motivated person, therefore result in a political ‘own-goal’.

Jo Cox was a relatively recently elected MP who had yet to become widely associated in the minds of the public with anything disreputable. She was a young mother of two small children, slim, attractive, intelligent and sociably likeable. Her killer could scarcely have chosen someone it would be more difficult to justify killing, as far as the general public are concerned, except for perhaps an innocent child.

For these reasons, the killer had to be someone who has pre-existing mental health issues, who had no significant links with any nationalist organisation, and who acted while mentally deranged, and now that the identity of the suspected killer has been revealed, it appears my initial suspicions have been confirmed.

The suspect is described as an unemployed loner, who lived for many years with his grandmother. A quiet man who kept himself to himself and who rarely if ever expressed his political beliefs. He is described as someone who always said ‘hello’ in the street, who willingly helped elderly neighbours with their gardening and who volunteered to perform unpaid maintenance work in local parks and public spaces out of a sense of charity and the personal satisfaction this brought him. While the suspect is known to have had longstanding mental health issues, this description of him based upon comments made by neighbours, shows that he is not an intrinsically evil person and had he been the victim of a senseless killing, one can imagine him being portrayed by the media as a somewhat troubled, but none-the-less, almost saintly person, not so different from the media portrayal of Jo Cox today.

Jo Cox was an intelligent working class girl who performed well at school and progressed from grammar school to study Social and Political Studies at Pembroke College, Cambridge.

After graduating, she worked as an adviser to Labour MP Joan Walley, before moving to Brussels to spend two years advising Glenys Kinnock, who was then a Member of the European Parliament. She became an aid worker in developing countries for Oxfam, eventually becoming the charity’s head of policy. She was chairperson of the Labour Women’s Network and a senior adviser to the Freedom Fund, an anti-slavery charity.

Today, Jo Cox is described in glowing terms as a promising rising star in the political firmament and it is plain to see why — this young woman with so many admirable personal qualities, holding the liberal/left-wing views that she did – would be so highly regarded by our pro-multiracial, pro-multicultural, pro-Third World aid, metropolitan political elite. It is ironic therefore that the brand of politics pursued by Jo Cox and which made her so popular with the media and our political elite could unwittingly have been the cause of her death.

In all of the news reports covering this story, many of her colleagues, friends and relatives have stepped forward to testify as to her good character, and while they speak about her and the work she did in glowing terms, it is interesting that there is in all the reports no mention of a local issue that she championed, which had a direct bearing upon the welfare of her local constituents.

If Jo Cox ever did campaign for example, against the closure of a manufacturing plant, which would have dire consequences for the employment and prosperity of her constituents, no-one has seen fit to mention this. It is clear from all of the eulogies that the primary focus of Jo Cox’s work was promoting internationalism, overseas aid, caring for ethnic minorities, caring for refugees, fighting ‘racism’ and highlighting women’s issues.

It could be argued that it is the liberal/left-wing brand of politics pursued by Jo Cox and our current political elite, which has led to money that otherwise might have been spent providing care for the poor, disadvantaged and mentally ill in this country being spent on many ‘pro-diversity’ causes and overseas aid causes, leaving people like her killer exposed and vulnerable through ‘care in the community’ to the psychological pressures that would eventually push him over the edge.

One of Jo Cox’s Labour colleagues. Mary Creagh, said of Jo today, “The Jo Cox I knew was a warm, friendly, energetic and principled and passionate woman, who cared deeply about her family. She cared about Batley, the place where she grew up in and who she represented in parliament.

“She cared about her country and she cared about the distressed and dispossessed people, the victims of war and atrocities across the world.

“She stuck up for them, as much as she did for her own constituents”.

Some would argue that she stuck up for them more!

It has been revealed that Jo Cox and a number of other MPs receive large quantities of hate mail from their constituents and that she and they do not receive universal approval. Sadly, I suspect such complainants are routinely and conceitedly dismissed as ‘cranks’, ‘racists’ and ‘bigots’, but MPs should recognise that they have a duty to make the welfare of all their constituents their primary focus, not just the constituents whose interests neatly align with trendy leftist sensibilities.

Jo Cox’s killer is a middle-aged White man with mental health issues, who was distressed and marginalised and in need, but his cause was not fashionable in left-wing circles. The calls for internationalism, the needs of refugees, ethnic minorities and the poor of the Third World were given priority over his, and in the end he made a desperate and tragic cry for help that cannot be ignored.

While her politics were misguided, Jo Cox did not deserve to die, but if something good is to come from her death, let it be a refocusing of politics upon the needs of the poorest and most needy amongst our own people. Let it be a shift of focus and a return to putting the interests of Britain and the British people first.

By Max Musson © 2016

# # # #

JOIN WESTERN SPRING

Western Spring is not just a website. We are a community of people dedicated to achieving the Six Prerequisites and thereby acquiring the wherewithal needed to win political power and through that secure the future survival, proliferation and advancement of the British people and other White peoples of European descent, wherever they may live. Please join us:

[contact-form-7 404 "Not Found"]

# # # #

 

46 thoughts on “The Tragedy of Jo Cox and the need to Put Britain First”

  1. Diane Jones

    - Edit

    This silly nieve girl Jo Cox angered a lot of nationalists,

    1. she personally pushed for Britain to accept 3,000 unacompanied children (young adults up to the age of 21 not kids)

    2. Called Britain First Far right and racist.

    3. Took Part in the counter demonstration on the river Thames in London which leades inevitably to confrontation.

    The killing of MPs is more a symptom of lack of democracy, and I cant help wondering if we had had a system of proportional representation in the UK then she might still be alive. Direct action is what happens when people are frustrated and angry and have no democratic outlet for their frustrations.

    No I’m not trying to justify this murder at all Im trying to understand and consider his possible motives for doing it, of course at this stage it can only be speculation, but remember when people have a grievance and no means to do anything legally about it then they do things like this.

      1. Max Musson

        - Edit

        I don’t think anyone has defended the actions of Mrs Cox’s killer, we have simply discussed what his motivations may have been.

      2. Wolf of the Sun

        - Edit

        Sickening that you cannot understand simple concepts, how many more of you illiterates are out there?!

      3. [email protected]

        - Edit

        I don’t think ANYONE here condones this barbaric act. If you want to look for those who are guilty of the crime, I suggest you have a word in the ear of David Cameron or Theresa May. After all, it is THEY who are in control of Britain’s security services of MI5/Special Branch and the external one of MI6. Let’s face facts here, vast swathes of Britain’s political Establishment AND crucially MI6 fervently believe our membership of the EU is VITAL for Britain’s (as they view it) national interest. I am not as naive as to believe they wouldn’t willingly sacrifice and make a Labour MP ‘take one for the team’ if it helped to defeat Brexit in the referendum. They ARE that desperate, especially when you consider that the referendum is probably going to hinge upon how Labour voters vote. This is the consensus of most of the polling experts. There is a Latin phrase used by legal people called ‘cue bono’ which roughly translated means ‘guilty mind’. Who profits from this crime? I don’t think it is going to be the Brexit campaign somehow.

  2. AAA

    - Edit

    I presume Max has, in referring to “Britain First [capitalised]”, simply cited the quote unfortunately doing the rounds.

    If the attacker had shouted, “Britain First party” then this would warrant the use of capital letters. But he did not. “Britain first [uncapitalised]” is an everyday slogan used by many and in no no way relates to Britain First the organisation –anymore than “apple first” would warrant being capitalised, and if ‘Apple’ was so capitalised the newspapers in question would quickly receive legal papers from the Apple organisation.

    And so, I would advise Britain First to take legal action against the newspapers who, by using Britain First (capitalised) have (purposefully?) drawn attention to, and implicated, the party rather than the slogan “Britain first”.

    A minor point? No. There is pedantry yet there is also the appropriate use, or not, of capital letters to implicate, or not, an organisation. Here we see the importance of correct English. Any editor worth his salt should know this and should have revised accordingly all article headings. That he did not speaks volumes.

    Welcome to the latest witch hunt against true (non-Left) dissidents.

  3. Stefan

    - Edit

    A tragedy for all concerned which will used be used against us while ignoring many other equally horrible deaths caused by liberal policies.
    Only the other day it was said that Labour voters in that sort of area would vote “Leave”, so will the effect of this be another Labour MP in that area & those voters backing “Remain” instead, in honour of her views?

  4. drquartz

    - Edit

    It is a sad affair altogether, and I feel for the family. The fact that this nutter chanted ‘Britain First’ is bound to be picked up by the media, but I feel that had he shouted ‘Millwall for the cup’ they would have found a way to blame those on the Right or Brexit for that!.
    One of the things I find disturbing is that so many in Parliament have expressed their regret – and quite rightly so, but there was just a name read out in Parliament and that was it when a soldier lost his life because he was where a politician had sent him. There are so many things that need addressing once we are out of the EU, and that (as far as I’m concerned) is one of them. LOOK AFTER OUR FORCES – both serving and retired.

  5. Tony L

    - Edit

    As has been noted by Diane Jones, this traitor showed what she thought of our folk when she successfully pressed the government to bring in loads of Syrians. As has been noted by the writer, she doesn’t appear to have done anything for local people in her area.

    The only reason that she is not more reviled than she is, is because she has only been in Parliament for a year and so hasn’t built up her immigrant bona fides. So I, for one, shed no tears for this traitor.

  6. Wolf of the Sun

    - Edit

    All very fishy and predictable. The ‘Leave’ campaign nudges ahead by the day. With only a week to go, and no white horse in sight, the dark forces behind the EU Superstate (Rothschilds, Bilderbergers, whoever) decide to play their joker. Is there a stooge around? Sure there is: a ‘loner’, with ‘mental health issues’, and who once bought something from the National Alliance (amazing – the Southern Poverty Law Centre can pull out the receipt, just like that!) so has ‘Hard Right sympathies’. So, let’s have an “attack on democracy”. Who can we spare? Well, there’s that slightly photogenic one. Yeah, she’ll do. Get our local operatives to sort it out. Job done. And if you vote for Exit, it’s because you’re a mad Hard Right loner too. And you may as well have pulled the trigger and plunged the blade yourself. How could you? Cue a major sympathy vote, so that poor girl didn’t give her life in vain.

    It all makes sense. I was going to get up early next Friday morning to catch the news. Don’t think I’ll bother now.

    1. Max Musson

      - Edit

      I can understand your cynicism Wolfie, it is suspicious that the SPLC claim to have copies of all receipts and also the addresses of people who bought books from, or made donations to, the National Alliance almost 20 years ago. Let us not be deterred by this however and let us still do everything we can to secure a Brexit vote next Thursday. We may be cheated out of the result we all want, but we must make it as hard as possible for the traitors who oppose us.

      1. Wolf of the Sun

        - Edit

        I forgot to mention the last act – he commits suicide in custody or prison, despite being on suicide watch. His secrets follow him to the grave. Handy.

        Agreed Max – cynicism is ultimately useless, as is pessimism; both can be self-defeating. In or Out, there’s a fight to be had.

      2. [email protected]

        - Edit

        It would be funny if this brutal act actually led to the VERY OPPOSITE of what the mostly loony-left supporters of remaining in the EU want. The EU doesn’t always have to be an organisation seemingly devoted towards Europe’s destruction. Marine Le Pen once said the ‘far right’ only needed around 150 or so MEPS to control the European Parliament and if we only narrowly stay-in the EU on Thursday who knows the EU may reform itself to make that parliament more democratic and then what Marine wants may be the future political direction and the lefties in this country would have to implement hard-right anti-migration policies. Sir Oswald Mosley was a ‘pro-European’ and supported us staying-in the then Common Market. Who knows what with rise of populist hard-right parties all over Europe his sort of vision for a ‘united Europe’ may happen?

    2. Byrhtnoth

      - Edit

      The murder may have been predictable for Wolfy but the possibility had not occurred to me until I saw a video on Youtube in which Paul Joseph Watson of Prison Planet said “Charlie Skelton, a Guardian contributor, he predicted at the end of May a big security terror scare right before Brexit (poll) that they would then exploit”. The fact that this murder and it’s timing perfectly serves the interests of that section of the establishment who support further integration with the EU unavoidably leads one to the conclusion that this is the ‘big security terror scare’ predicted by Charlie Skelton. We have good reason to believe that government intelligence agencies are on board for the globalist agenda and support Remain, so their cooperation in a psyop to influence the result of the referendum is a plausible scenario.
      .
      So many of the facts about the case are cannot be independently verified, yet most people trust the authorities not to lie on this issue. For instance witness to the murder Hichen Ben Abdullah did not claim that Mair shouted ‘Britain First’ and denied that he had said it when it was put to him by a journalist. On the other hand witness Clarke Rothwell who did state that Mair said ‘Britain First’, is alleged by some sources to be a BNP member and an MI5 agent. What about the Nazi regalia and the books bought from National Alliance which support the official narrative about a far right nut-job? Can we ever know for certain the truth about these claims?

  7. SerpentSlayer

    - Edit

    A lot of witnesses are denying “Britain first” was said, even the Arab man who said it has took it back. Possibly he was asked to say it but there is no proof of coercion so I am guessing.
    I am sickened by the sentimental tosh about this woman, she was a typical labour mp. Someone who did very well out of the ruin that Labour left this country in in 2010.
    Also she was too small fry to justify a political assassination and its possible she was breaking up a fight and copped for it by mistake. She wasn’t killed for political reasons, nor is she some kind of martyr. Just a silly woman who unfortunately managed to reproduce before her death. I imagine her offspring will be just as uncaring for their own people.
    I reserve my sympathy for the people who suffer under the misrule of the liblabcon troika, whose concerns are ignored by internationalists whose nests are well feathered by debt victims or the public purse, not for wealthy smug traitors like this woman and her hundreds of colleagues in the House of Traitors.

  9. Daniel

    - Edit

    Predictably, the media is now propping up the pathetic, non-existence threat from ‘right wing extremists’ hiding under our beds.

  10. Stefan

    - Edit

    Interestingly all the “Right wing” connections supposedly found are old & foreign, he seems to have no UK links to Nationalists here, especially “Britain First”.
    Strange how the SPLC found an old receipt so quickly & the book is available on Amazon anyway.

    1. Max Musson

      - Edit

      It is all rather convenient that the SPLC just happen by coincidence to have a crude facsimile of a National Alliance packing slip, although nothing on letter headed notepaper I see. What the gullible may not realise is just how easy it is to fabricate such evidence in this age of scanners and computer graphics. Such ‘evidence’ could be fabricated to implicate anyone if so desired.

      2. Jack Mite

        - Edit

        Yes, but if the (((Soap Production and Lampshade Company))) information is correct, how did they come by it?

  11. Tom Rogers

    - Edit

    The second part of this article contains some good observations. You are correct in noting how the late Mrs Cox has not been lauded for any significant local constituency work, a factor that is conspicuous by its absence. It just seems enough for these people that she was vaguely a nice sort of person and once visited a local fish & chip shop, posing for snaps.

    I think the Dickensian archetype of Mrs Jellyby might suit her memory, and perhaps ought to serve as her epitaph. One imagines a literary scene in which scores of indigenous men local to her suffer unemployment, loneliness, mental health issues, and socio-psychological problems, and don’t get the help they need due to lack of resources, while our Mrs Jellyby – for present purposes, we will suppose she is white and a local girl, though I think that must be called into question – is far too busy to bother with such boring and tedious matters. She occupies her time with foreign jaunts and plaintive appeals at Westminster for more money and help for foreign aliens who, in most cases, look back at her her with a mixture of puzzlement, bafflement and contempt.

    Much like the Dickensian character, the real-life Mrs Jellybys are motivated by narcissism rather than any genuine concern for people they have never met.

    But I would take issue with the first part of your article, where you wax lyrical about courage and manliness so on. I think somebody needs to put the counter-argument, a moral defence for Tommy Mair, which I will do here. What you write below is just a lot of blather.

    [quote]”No man, nationalist or otherwise would expect an attack upon a physically small woman to be regarded as an act of courage, least of all an attack in which she was defenceless and he was armed with a large knife and handgun. Furthermore, while we on the so called right may have disagreed with her politics, Jo Cox was not a ‘big wheel’, she was not one of the prime movers in national politics, in the dispossession and ongoing genocide of our people, and accordingly, the attack upon Jo Cox was unjustified and cannot be regarded as anything other than cowardly and shameful.[/quote]

    I think this is sentimental twaddle. Obviously I don’t condone Mr Mair’s actions, but you are wrong to infer that he acted in a cowardly way. He is no coward and his actions were not cowardly. He knew what the end result would be, both for himself and for the late and much-lamented Mrs Jellyby of Birstall.

    And I might also observe that the penalty for treason ought to be death – man or woman, it makes no difference, even if, like Mrs Jellyby, you really, really, really, really, really, really, really, really care and you’re really, really, really, really, nice. If you care that much and if you’re that nice, then go and live there, among them, and help them. Don’t drag this country down with you by bringing their people and culture here.

    In the case of the traitor-at-hand, contrary to what you say, she was a big wheel. She was not just an ordinary man or woman in the street, she was a Member of Parliament and in addition to her poisonous activities in her brief career as an MP, which are well-documented, she had also been active in anti-white politics and Third Sector work for many years before entering Parliament.

    Yes, murder is murder (if that’s what the court finds it was), and cannot be condoned, but she was of a mature age, old enough to know what’s what and how the world works and what the agendas are. She knew what she was doing, and if, as you say, she was ‘intelligent’, then that serves to aggravate her culpability still further. There can be no excuses.

    1. Max Musson

      - Edit

      I’m afraid I disagree with you Tom, although I would refrain from rudely describing your comments as ‘twaddle’.
      .
      Let us suppose for a moment that the assassin is motivated by political principles and a just desire to strike back at a government and a system that is so obviously engrossed in the genocide of our people. In such circumstances it would still be appropriate to choose one’s victim carefully, firstly in order to avoid the risk committing a political ‘own goal’, and secondly in order to strike down an individual who is most deserving, who is as close to the epicentre of the perceived treason as possible.
      .
      The kind of victim that would maximise the danger of an ‘own goal’, is the kind of person that it would be easy for the media to present as harmless, innocent and defenceless. Someone like Jo Cox, and so it behoves our would be ‘righteous executioner’ to choose someone else — someone the media would find it difficult to present in that light.
      .
      Had the assassin chosen as his victim a senior minister or perhaps ex-minister; an individual who had deliberately facilitated mass immigration in order to irreversibly change the racial composition of our people; an individual who had facilitated mass immigration in order to ‘rub our noses’ in diversity; or someone who is widely reviled as the sleazy ‘snake-oil salesman’ who talked us into a series of unjust wars, causing untold human misery; and a man protected by one or more armed close protection officers, then things would have been different.
      .
      Had the assassin stepped in front of such a victim and, risking life and limb, summarily dispatched his victim despite the best efforts of the close protection officers, then there would be no doubting his courage. Such a person might indeed be regarded as a just and courageous deliverer of righteous retribution. Unfortunately that is not what happened last Thursday, the assassin chose a diminutive woman, who was unarmed and without protection, and who despite being an MP with some culpability, was not really a ‘big wheel’, but simply an easy target.
      .
      Lastly, instead of dispatching his victim quickly and efficiently, he rather emulated the sadistic killers of IS, stabbing her multiple times with a large knife before disfiguring her face and head with the blast from a sawn-off shot-gun at point blank range.
      .
      Not only did he choose a victim that was defenceless and who it would be difficult to portray as deserving, he chose to execute her in a way that most people would regard as grotesque and repellent. It was both a cowardly killing and a stupid one, and it is for these reasons that I emphasise the point that this was not the act of a rational patriot, but the act of someone who was mentally deranged.

      1. Tom Rogers

        - Edit

        We’ll have to agree to disagree – but again, I had better emphasise here that I do not condone murder.

        1. Stefan

          - Edit

          I think Tom’s point about Mrs Jellyby has been picked up by others, she cared about strangers/foreigners but her own family life wasn’t perfect, her husband has been criticised for his behaviour while working for a charity.
          Also did she ever say anything about all the White girls being abused by the grooming gangs, which were a lot closer to home?

  13. Folkvar

    - Edit

    Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. John F. Kennedy

    Unfortunately there is no significant outlet for white people in the UK to channel their energies into to save European civilisation. I’m very surprised that it took as long as this before someone finally snapped, sadly someone with mental health problems.

    The communists/Zionist/EU have launched a war against the very existence of white people. They fight this war twenty four hours a day seven days a week, they even give out the Coudenhove Kalergi award each year to the person that does the most to further this goal. Merkel, Blair, Juncker, and Van Rompuy (among others) have all been awarded this prize. I don’t have any sympathy for the death of someone facilitating the death of the entire indigenous European civilization. It’s one thing helping people that need it but it’s entirely another when that help is at the expense of the existence of another people. I do however feel dreadfully sad for her children.

  14. Eddy

    - Edit

    Considering the destructive nature of this woman’s politics I think Nationalists have been very generous in their comments about her, I suspect had it been the other way around then the liberal / left would not have been so kind. The obituaries of JT and Oswald Mosley come to mind, and the nasty comments that were made.
    Of course no sane person wants anyone to be murdered, however, by her actions she caused suffering to our people, and I’m she would have done more so in the years to come had she lived. The left are by their actions destabilising this country, unfortunately this stupid woman didn’t realise there are people out there not stable enough to use legal means to protest against her actions.

    1. Wolf of the Sun

      - Edit

      I suspect, Eddy, that racial nationalists have been generous because they regret the loss of a white life and the tragedy experienced by now-motherless white children. Which places us way above our own enemies in so many ways.

  15. Michael Woodbridge

    - Edit

    With Brexit virtually in the bag, for us to say that under the current circumstances violence and murder are in anyway morally justified is “twaddle”. Thank you for your thoughtful and sensitive article Max.

    1. Frederick Dixon

      - Edit

      I was a happy man on Thursday morning because all the opinion polls were showing Leave in the lead – even those which have always before shown Remain in front. So I thought that at last our country was about to break free and begin its long recovery.Then I glanced at the news in the afternoon and saw that a madman had gravely injured a Labour MP and Remain activist while shouting “Britain First” – and I knew then that our chances of victory had been snatched away. The first opinion polls to come in this morning have confirmed the reversal in public opinion. The madman has gone on to inflict further damage on our country’s cause by giving his name as “Death to Traitors, Freedom for Britain”. Freedom for Britain – who now will vote for what HE wants?

      1. Max Musson

        - Edit

        I don’t think this one incident will irreparably damage the Vote Leave campaign. We must redouble our efforts in the four days left to influence as man people as possible to decide based on our national interests rather than on the basis of an emotional reaction.

  16. [email protected]

    - Edit

    Does anyone else think it is a tad suspicious that her sister who made a short speech in the town where it happened today didn’t appear to be too upset? I find that extraordinary considering her sister was brutally murdered just only on Thursday. I don’t think I would have been up to the job of doing that and even if I had I think I would have burst into tears.

    2. Stefan

      - Edit

      We have seen similar reactions after other atrocities especially in the US.
      The term “Crisis actor” gets used.

  17. Jack Mite

    - Edit

    Sometimes we can learn from our adversaries by taking an idea, and adapting it to our own cultural circumstances.

    One of the most interesting concepts I ever found was the Chinese idea of the “Mandate of Heaven”.

    The Chinese, we would have to say, are among the most conservative races on the planet. The idea of revolting against the established political order has never been attractive to them. No matter how bad the situation, they are usually content to get through it by family or clan consolidation, stoicism, and the relentless pursuit of wealth.

    However, there have been times throughout their long history when revolt was essential. But given their conservative nature, how could revolt and destruction of the legitimate political order be justified?

    They developed the idea that if social and economic stress became intolerable, the Emperor had lost his mandate to reign and govern, i.e. the Mandate of Heaven.

    If the countryside flooded because the Emperor failed to allocate resources to maintaining the canals and spent it on his concubines instead, he had lost the Mandate from Heaven.

    If resources were allocated for building the Emperor’s pleasure palaces, but the peasants suffered from the depredations of the barbarians because the army had no weapons, the Emperor had lost the Mandate of Heaven.

    The inevitable result was revolution and the justified assassination of the Emperor and his court. Hence the Chinese came to understand that the normal rules only applied when things were going well. If you were starving, or being murdered by outsiders, if your social and economic needs were being destroyed or neglected, then revolt and assassination were completely justified.

    Some say that the mad are that way because they understand too well what is going on around them.

    Tommy may or may not be mentally ill, but perhaps, just perhaps, Tommy understood that our Emperor, the elites that hate us so much, had lost the Mandate from Heaven.

  18. diane green

    - Edit

    Whilst the murder of Jo Cox is a terrible act there are other victims here.Not least the murderer.
    Thomas Mair is a victim of the appalling lack of care in the community and the collapse of our social services.Pray tell who is responsible for that?

    1. Byrhtnoth

      - Edit

      It is strange that a terrorist should choose a suitable high profile victim within walking distance of his home.

Comments are closed.