The Curious Double Standards of "Fiscally Responsible" Conservative Governments

in julianassange •  7 months ago

UK Spend.png

One of the more amusing myths of our time is that conservative governments are more fiscally responsible than their left-wing alternative “opponents.”

Actually, it’s not amusing, it’s a cruel lie perpetuated by a system that demands we choose either/or and insists on reinforcing stereotypes.

There’s nothing quite like electing a Tory government to stick the boots into the welfare cheats, bludgers and morally bankrupt that are the scourge of our society. That’s how the story goes and it’s how various elements of the press would have us view the “responsible” decision.

Except it’s a crock of shit.

When it comes to fiscal responsibility there isn’t a major party of any hue anywhere that would pass the pub test. It’s all care and no responsibility. It’s all play money when it’s all said and done. You just print more of it and by the time the piper calls for payment, the current crop of political hacks will be puttering around exclusive retirement homes mumbling the same incoherent nonsense they always have.

The waste is just disgraceful.

It’s your money. They don’t care.

If you haven’t watched Lee Camp’s brilliant monologue about the 21 Trillion dollars that the Pentagon has “misplaced” I urge you to do so. (I’ll put the link at the end of the article)

But the waste is not an American thing, or a Pentagon thing – it permeates throughout Western governments who like nothing more than to spend money that they say they don’t have playing games of power against citizens they don’t particularly like.

And there’s no one that Western governments dislike more than Julian Assange.

That’s the only possible reason I can suggest for the British government spending twenty two million pounds (30 million US dollars) on the surveillance of one man.

He isn’t a terrorist.

He isn’t a human trafficker.

He isn’t a drug smuggler.

He isn’t a paedophile.

He’s a journalist and publisher of inconvenient truths. This is his crime; this apparently justifies the wanton expenditure on watching his every move. It’s not as if he can go anywhere or the stationing of a single bobby across the door from the Ecuadorian embassy wouldn’t prevent him from doing a runner.

To put this in context 22 million pounds would squash a hell of a lot of nasty rotten people. I reckon you could take down a drug cartel, a child sex ring and a bunch of would -be Mujahedeen’s and still have enough change to fund the Royal family’s extravagant lifestyle for at least six months.

But some of those nasty rotten people would almost certainly have some connections that would prevent too much surveillance. Julian Assange has no such connections.

He is fair game.

Still, it’s a helluva lot of money to spend on suppressing one person.

But it’s only money and there’s always plenty of that when bombs need to be dropped, tall tales need to be circulated or honest citizens need to be squashed like the infuriating bugs that the governments see them to be.

I still find myself wondering at the arrogance and sheer bastardry that justifies such an expense. I also find myself wondering what Julian Assange knows that causes the British Government to fear him so much.

And how stupid is the British population for letting them get away with it?

Lee Camp’s excellent video on the missing 21 Trillion can be found here

My name is Mark Hodgetts. I’m a freelance writer, eking out a crust writing
content for businesses. I’d much prefer to write more articles like this.
You can support me to achieve that goal by following me on
Twitter, or here on Steemit or alternatively
funding my independence by supporting my work
by becoming a patron here

I appreciate your support

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

The money always magically appears when it's 'needed'. You know, for the things none of us want!

you're right, double standards abound

Not only do conservative governments tend to be guilty of the sins that they preach against, but often times, they are the worst offenders. Reagan railed against big government, but expanded the military budget astronomically even with an increasingly friendly Soviet Union under Gorbachev as the supposed existential threat. Reagan blew up the debt and deficit to record levels, mostly by cutting taxes for rich people and engaging in the aforementioned military spending. Another aspect of this military spending was supposed to be the "Star Wars" project. Needless to say, that didn't happen. George W. Bush acted identically to Reagan, just on a grander scale with bigger tax cuts and an elective invasion and occupation of Iraq to boot. Trump, following suit in good Republican fashion, is trying to do this on an even more outrageous scale. Sadly, most of the Democrats these days are little more than Republican-light, as exemplified by eight years of feet dragging and inaction under Barack Obama.


It's even worse than that actually. For example, Bush didn't even include the money appropriated for the Iraq war in the budget.

I think the problem is the thinking of money, what it is and how it is used. As "normal" people it is really hard to understand the financial business and work flow behind. That is why we think it is a hell lot of money that is spent to try to controll one person, but if you think about the amount of money britain spends for military for example it is nearly nothing...