There is a rising interest in a cooperation between the right and the left of the aisle on different issues. The main being, if we actually listen to the constituency, the dismantling of the wealthfarestate.
It is not necessarily in the historic interest of the Tories to dismantle the wealthfarestate, there has been a tradition for a certain responsibility from the government towards especially struggling people, after all Mr. Churchill was the one to initiate the wealthfarestate.
It is not up to me to decide, but I can contribute with a theoretical examination of the problems of the current political landscape.
My first impression of National socialism was by talking to one of my heroes in the resistance movement. My good friend Per, Alias Tom had a lot of knowledge about National socialism, since he fought the bastards.
He said that Nation socialism was the strongest political system he knew. The point being, that if you do socialism in a national frame, the stability is extremely strong. You can actually see this in North Korea which in practice is National socialism, since the socialistic system there is extremely closed and concerned with borders.
If you have a look at international socialism, that is the basis of EU, you have a complete different picture. This is not working, and never has.
Because in order to have a communal state, where everybody shares everything, you need a high degree of control, absolute control in fact.
Now, we have returned to a classic socialistic ideology with Mr. Corbyn. he calls for a state that controls certain parts of the intercommunal live. Education, social wealthfare and so on.
The discussion has been a bit superficial, because where does that leave the Brexit discussion. If the Socialists want free movement, then there will be no free education and so on.
The problems, seen from a Socialist perspective is, that Marx defined Communism as international, and therefor most socialist are not that keen on accepting a national socialism.
But however you turn it around, it does work with international socialism, it has been tested and it did not work.
This puts Ms. May at an ideal negotiation position in relation to the wealtfarestate negotiations, because I suppose these have to be initiated, we have to listen and serve the people.
Because May has no problem with a national agenda, on contrary she supports it, and with DUP on board, the patriotic position is strengthened.
She can deliver a wealthfarestate that actually works.
She can do that, by stopping the open borders, stop all the abuse of the wealthfarestate by certain parts of the migrant community, fight for more working jobs and make those jobs British. Mr. Cameron had a lot of succes with that.
It all comes back to the community. I happen to believe, that that community should be based on more than just complete random relations. A community is to me, and perhaps to Theresa May, something more, in fact it is, if it is good, a spiritual thing.
Perhaps this idea could base the community we are talking about, a community where the cooperation is based on more than the simple material needs, and then in a Hegelian way Spirit.
G-d bless the United Kingdom.
