WAP Launches

The centre party relaunched to challenge historically elite political parties

Relaunched and Rebranding the (British) Social Media Party as WAP (World Alliance Party).

The website, that shut down last January, is returning from internet limbo ~but as WAP~ is hoping to reconnect with its users and revive its fortunes.

"We're happy that we've returned under our improved charter," Cyberpunk65, their political leader said yesterday. "Now we need to maximise this opportunity to build our party congress."

The decision to relaunch itself as an open, multi-faith party is more than a challenge, it's a promise to change modern politics completely.

So welcome to the WAP - WORLD, Alliance Party ~ we welcome all.

Check for our constantly updating info.

Thank you

Who's Afraid of A World Government?

"...not so long ago the idea of world government had greater influence in the United States. Amid the enormous destruction unleashed by World Wars I and II, American Presidents successfully championed the establishment of the League of Nations and, later, the United Nations as instruments to curb the narrow nationalism that traditionally had led to war."

- Dr. Lawrence S. Wittner

A Modern Utopia by H.G. Wells

Given the obvious failures of mainstream political figures and the weakness of the United Nations at present, the whole 'One World Government' thing seems decades away. Still, people seem scared by the entire concept.

(Brit) SocialMedia: Brussels plot

SHAMEFUL MEPs are already plotting to torpedo the historic EU budget cut.

The Euro politicians want a secret ballot on the issue so they can vote for a rise anonymously and escape their national leaders’ fury.

Tories warned the sinister plot, unveiled yesterday by the MEPs’ German president Martin Schulz, would “almost certainly” succeed...

« Read the Rest @ The Sun »

History of Global Banking Crisis

Global Banking Crisis, 

A Brief History...

The current global banking crisis began with an escalation in foreclosure rates among homeowners during 2006–2007, leading to a critical juncture in August 2008.

The way that the nation's mortgage markets are structured mean that a decline in the housing market hits other things: home builders, real estate, home supply, retail outlets, money markets, hedge funds (held by large institutional investors), and foreign banks. All of which increase the risk of a nationwide recession.

By 2007-2008 we were in the worst financial emergency since 1930s Great Depression. Large fiscal institutions were threatened by financial breakdown; then bailed out by national governments. Causing a downturn in the world's stock markets.

The backwash resulted in troubles in the housing market - leading to foreclosures and evictions - with lengthened and increased unemployment.

"The crisis played a significant role in the failure of key businesses, declines in consumer wealth estimated in trillions of US dollars, and a downturn in economic activity leading to the 2008–2012 global recession and contributing to the European sovereign-debt crisis."

Financial crisis of 2007–2008 @ Wikipedia »

The global credit crisis nearly destroyed the world's banking systems.

"Could the current financial crisis have been predicted from historians knowledge of past down turns and depressions globally?

Dr David Chambers, University Lecturer in Finance and Deputy Director of the School’s Master of Finance programme, thinks so.

An analysis of what happened in the crash of the 1930s may prove a good way to predict how long it may take us to get out of the current financial difficulties.

Structural problems, Dr Chambers says, need to be faced up to before a recovery is likely, and there could well be a few false dawns along that road to recovery.

Lessons From History by Dr David Chambers

(Brit) SocialMedia: 'U-turn' over scrapping of GCSEs

Planned switch from GCSEs to Baccalaureate in England 'abandoned'

Plans to scrap GCSEs in key subjects in England and replace them with English Baccalaureate Certificates are being abandoned by the government.

The reversal was announced by the education secretary in the Commons, alongside curriculum changes.

Michael Gove said plans for the new exams had been "a bridge too far".

« Read the Rest @ BBC News »

---

See also: « Michael Gove: Labour think poor children should stick to their station »

A Reinvention of British Politics

« Reblogged from: ProjectGetElected »

All I see around me is heartache and pain. Idiots and morons.


Does anyone care?

When I was a lad we cared. We cared about music and girls... we cared about politics and fashion... we cared about life and death... we cared about freedom and justice... we simply cared.

There was a reason why we cared; we had a pride in our nation. We had pride because this was a great nation. Great Britain. Not because we ruled other countries (which Britain was infamous for in the past), but because British citizens were outstanding. We had great politicians, great painters, great photographers, great designers, great entrepreneurs, great industrialists, a great banking system, and a great respect for the monarchy.


Today... No one cares.

We don't care about the environment. (At least, most of us don't.) There are a few overbearing pop stars (like Sting) that bleat on about saving the planet while schlepping from continent to continent in their own private jets (using fossil fuel and emitting CO2 gasses like mad). Other than these wannabees, no one 'really' cares.

We don't care about our over-populated world. We have children younger, and live longer. Teen can't spell condoms (let alone use them). We have the likes of Jeremy Kyle blaring on about sticking 'something on the end of it' and making a living from talking to these horny juveniles - as though they care; they don't. Neither do we. (What's it matter to the average Britain if some snotty-nosed brat is the father, or the other five possibles? I ask you, do you care? Really?)

We don't care about education. The sodding degenerates that pretend to be students don't really care about education either. (They just want to drink cheep larger and loaf about, saying pretentious crap like 'in my opinion' - then quoting some facile entry in an outdated tome, they haven't even bothered to read properly. "In my opinion, Einstein got it right when he said, Go Go!" All Bollocks. Total crap.) They don't have the experience to have an opinion; what does someone know that's just got out of nappies? (Bugger all.)

We don't even care about politics either. (Or the country wouldn't have voted in a load of Tory twits and wet wallies from the Lib Dems. Nick Clegg promised to be better than he's being, and the country swallowed it! If we were fishes we'd be wrapped in paper and smothered in salt and vinegar.


This was once a great nation.

Now we're a third-world nation, with too many children living in poverty and squalor. Half the country's unemployed, most of the rest's under-employed and under-paid.


What's this world coming too?

With all this, its not surprising that Britain is no longer 'Great'. Most people don’t care. Britain isn't a place of tolerance and pluralism, its a hive of prejudice from the head to its underbelly.


The problem is … I care!

I care about human rights, and civil liberties. I care about freedom of speech and the political climate. I care about education and child poverty. I care about immigration, intolerance and prejudice. I care about the unemployed, the unemployable and the under-paid under-employed. I care about businesses, finance, banks and bankruptcy. I even care about British and European politics, and political lies and deception. I care enough to want to change things …


A reinvention of British politics.

It has become time for a reinvention of British politics; a reform of Parliament. I am not a defender of the status quo. Neither am I a rebel, just for the sake of it. (Even though I'm a punk, I'm a Parliamentarian at heart.) The present structure and formation of Parliament is an obstacle to the reform of that Parliament, and its government.


As Nick Clegg stated at the 2009 Lib Dem party conference (in Bournemouth) the "choice before people is the choice between fake, phoney change from David Cameron's Conservatives, and real change..." (He then offered the Lib Dems as that change; but, as hindsight has proved, they are more of the same.) So now it is time for a change - every nook and cranny of the British political system must be reformed.

"I will build a reputation for being honest and straightforward. I am a socialist by upbringing, a mediator by instinct and a realist by temperament."

(British) Social Media Party

The (British) Social Media Party are the true "progressives" in UK politics.

It's time for the people to retake power. We don't want change, we demand it!


This is Project Get Elected. Put A Punk in Parliament and change British politics forever...

(Brit) SocialMedia: MoD Overspends Equipment Budget By £6.5bn

The Ministry of Defence has overspent its equipment budget by £6.5bn and some of its major orders are likely to be delivered 39 years late.

The 16 most costly projects should have taken 159 years to deliver between them and cost a total of £56.5bn ... But the National Audit Office (NAO), in its latest report into the MoD's spending, reveals they are now set to take a total of 195 years and cost £61.1bn.

« Read the Rest @ Sky News »

---

This is typical of how British Government spends. Leaving a deficit which the poorest in society have to fund through benefit cuts.

The Olympics was a drain on resources and now the MoD overspend resources. Leaving us cash-strapped Britain.

Still proud to be British??

See also: « Why The Nuclear Deterrent Has Had Its Day »

Project Get Elected (2)

« Blogged from: ProjectGetElected »

Intro:

The initial decision...

Two weeks before my 47th Birthday I decided I'd like to be an MP. But things are not always as they seem...

Is politics on the decline?

In 1945 72.8% of the electorate voted in the General Election - by 2001 that had dropped to just 59.4% - but in the last General Election, of 2010, only 65.1% of electorate bothered to turn out. (Figures from http://www.ukpolitical.info/ Turnout45.htm and exclude votes deliberately or accidentally spoiled.)

UK Political Info (2012)
Image: ukpolitical info

This general decline in political interest is caused by an apathy in the general electorate of the United Kingdom. The reason is, people are not engaging with political parties any longer. As the Guardian warned in a recent article (of 06/07/2012) British Democracy is in "long-term terminal decline... and disillusioned citizens [have] stop[ped] voting". We feel let down by the sleaze and the lies and want (even expect) more...


A state of mind can't easily be changed

As I said, things are not always as they seem. We all say "I'm too old to change now" or "its too late for me". But it isn't, you know. While ever your alive, it's never too late!

So I made a decision to change things!

The thing is, I'm a punk. I may have blue hair, but I'm no young Conservative. I'm a working man, but Labour isn't my colours either. I'm a socialist and democrat, but I'm no Liberal Democrat. Neither the Greens nor UKIP appeal, and the fanatics (BNP, SNP, etc) don't interest me in the slightest.

So what's a punk supposed to do?


Taking a stand

At first, it was one of those throw-away ideas. You know, the sort that we have from time to time; when we think "Ooh, that seems like a good idea". And that's usually as far as it goes. We make a random decision to do something, that disappears just as quickly as it comes.

But it didn't go. It lingered on, and on, and on.

By morning, the 10th of September 2012, it was clear in my mind - a need, an urge, a must...


When, if not now?

It had to be now ... or never!

So I sat down and decided to form my own party: the (British) Social Media Party was born.

But who sets off on a journey without first deciding where they are going to end up? I had one place in mind, and that was Westminster. I decided I'd become A Punk in Parliament.


Project Get Elected

As I set off down this road to Westminster I decided to document my life experiences here and on several of my blogs:

Project Get Elected is an integral part of that process. If not my actual road map, it shall become my compass - pointing me in the right direction.

Theory of Disproportionate Borrowing

I do believe there would be revolution if the people of this great nation understood our banking and monetary system. Some individuals even believe there is a secret cabal of Banks working against the best interests of people of the world.

« From:- Credit Crisis or Banking Conspiracy? »

---

« Reblogged from: Philosophy page »

Theory of 

Disproportionate 

Borrowing:

The redistribution of consumer wealth increases consumer spending which boosts the economy (often not by manufacturing), causing importation of mass goods -which, in turn, increases the country's debt, thereby causing more inflation; thus, goods rise in price. This price hike means that consumers need to boost earnings or borrow to cover this increase. This cycles on and on until something stops it.


There are two ways to tackle this problem:

A downturns in the country's economy is usually a short-lived problem that stems from a lack of demand. The (John Maynard Keynes - Labour style) solution is a simple but radical one: Involving a short-termed boost in the Government's public spending. (Once the economy returns to a state of buoyancy, the government reclaims its budget deficit by increasing taxes and reducing public spending once more.)

John Maynard Keynes 
(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

This is known as the "demand management policy." It's when the economy slumps and public spending goes up. Then, when trade is booming once again, the government spends little or nothing.

The other method, is to do as the Conservatives have always done (this is the Adam Smith method). Cuts across the board, hitting welfare, unemployment, and the NHS. Hoping this halt in spending balances out the lack of demand enough to kick-start the economy once more.

Profile of Adam Smith 
(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Both in the past have worked well; however, there are also problems with both economic solutions: These only work well in the short-term and create as many problems as they solve.

The main problem though is one of demand. If there is no current demand, surely it stands to reason that a false boost through an increase in public spending is the economic equivalent of putting a plaster on a knife wound.

It won't work.

Cutting spending only makes life harder, putting a further strain on general consumer spending and the economy in in particular.


So what is the solution?

That's the difficulty. Without demand there isn't much that anyone can do. 

Demand is the only real issue here.

Why Do We A Need Global Government?

Many prominent world leaders have called for a one world government.

The published goal of the (British) Social Media Party is a one world government.

The Commission believes that world events, since the creation of the United Nations in 1945, combined with advances in technology, the information revolution, and the now-global awareness of impending environmental catastrophe, create a climate in which the people of the world will recognize the need for, and the benefits of, global governance...

There is no historic model for the system here proposed, nor is there any method by which the governed may decide whether or not they wish to be governed by such a system...
  - The Commission for Global Governance
Our Global Neighborhood »

The State will look after you "for your best interests," as they say.

Why The Nuclear Deterrent Has Had Its Day!!

One year after the expected date of the next election - sometime in 2016 - the UK will be making the decision of to commit about £20 billion to replace the four Vanguard submarines (which will be approaching the termination of their service), each of which carries a Trident D5 missile.

A Trident missile armed Vanguard class ballistic missile submarine leaving its base in the Firth of Clyde. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Since 1994, these four submarines and their nuclear weapons system have provided the UK's main deterrent. The question is, is Trident really a deterrent - or merely a political insurance policy?

If a country like Iran or North Korea should launch a nuclear attack on Britain, then four Triden D5's wouldn't stop the barrage of weapons that would expectedly be thrown at us. So why do we have them?

The answer is a simple one. To strike back and cause damage to any aggressor that might think to wipe us out. Vanguard has the ability to take Trident close enough to hart any aggressor.

They doesn't really protect, they might deter slightly, but that are good for retaliation. "Wipe us out," they threaten, "and you'll regret it!" That's as bad a a dog that barks at a burger after he's robbed your house.

The truth about the nuclear deterrent is: it isn't one at all. No sane person wants to go down in history for pressing the button; and wiping out thousands of innocent individuals. Nuclear isn't like a missile that can take out a specific military target - it burns indiscriminately, men women and children alike. A Trident D5 is powerful enough to destroy a major capital city (like New York). There are no winners in a nuclear strike - not even the aggressor.

During the 1980's, Labour were commitment to unilateral disarmament. However, the 1983 elections put pay to their plans; and from the moment Tony Blair took on leadership of the party, Labour's stance on defence toughened.

English: United States Trident II (D-5) missile underwater launch. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Conservatives stance is to back full Trident replacement. The Liberal Democrats want something else, a policy that is distinct and radical; a less elaborate deterrent might suffice. (Whatever that less-elaborate-deterrent might be is still unclear.) Ed Miliband has not said where he wants to take Labour - concerning the nuclear deterrent.

£20bn in capital expenditure is a cost that Britain can ill afford.

We have a rare opportunity to make a radical change. The (British) Social Media Party was founded to overcome the sovereignty and national independence of singular governments, and form an all-powerful one-world government with the sole aimed of promoting disarmament and guiding peace. (The most powerful clique in history.)

I have but this one objective: to bring about the surrender of the sovereignty and the nationalism of countries. I want to end national boundaries and racial and ethnic loyalties to increase and ensure world peace. What I strive for will inevitably remove the dictatorship of governments and the loss of freedoms the people suffer daily.

The existing order is breaking down at a very rapid rate, and the main uncertainty is whether mankind can exert a positive role in shaping a new one. Or are we doomed to await for the collapse. I believe a new order will be born sooner than later and that the death throes of the old and the birth pangs of the new will be a testing time for the human species.

Outwardly, most governments seem democratic. However, operating within each government or political system is another body - representing another form of government - the bureaucratic elite.

It is possible to fashion unity while cherishing diversity; a common action is possible, despite the variety of races, interests, and beliefs we see amongst socialists. Progress and peace and justice are attainable.

What our intent is, is to create a worldwide economic power superior to the political governments of the nation-states involved. When we attempt to evaluate its promise, we have to bear in mind the distress of a generation or so during its construction by gallant and graceful people.

But before the new world order becomes an efficient and beneficent world system countless people will hate it (the fortune 400), some will even die protesting against it (the malcontents who never have enough). But the stability of the future peace of the world depends upon it.

By reluctant enthusiasm, the world seems to be definitely drifting towards a world social democracy. So I say to all governments and their people: Let's fashion together a new world order of peace in our time.

A World Party - A Revolution

Eventually, the world as we know it will cease to exist. It will become one nation, one singularity. With a single governing body, a single currency, a single agenda. That's the world I can't wait to be in.

Take away political nationalism and you have no need for country embargos. Remove nation-states and there can be no world wars

World War III (film) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

What happens in Europe, Asia, Africa, Australia, or the US should be as important to anyone as what's happening in their own country; it's important to every human being on this planet. What happen in the political area effects economies - and that affects lives in so many ways.

If there's trouble in Russia today, it could spill-over into any other country across the world. This has happened in many of the Muslim countries over the past few years. Riots take on an energy and a life of their own; social media takes the mantle and continues it elsewhere.

Borders have little meaning when peoples in separate continents can converse and plan strategies through Facebook or Twitter or a myriad of other sites. Gamers can become terrorist by using a few choice words to other gamers.

The web has no safe zones. There is no hiding behind a countries lax or hacker-friendly laws.

Hacker Dojo (Photo credit: mightyohm)

There needs to be a focus on the creation of a world of democracy, peace and prosperity for all. For the welfare of the whole world and the new world order. A world financial system dominated by the political system of each country but with a centralized head. Credit controlled by one fund, so everyone has the same chances.

Bankers think they own the earth. Our plan is to take it away from them. The power to create money and control credit should be in the hands of the people; in the hands of a world government run to help the people, not harm them. I want nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in public hands, nothing less than the economy of the whole world.

The power of the internet is so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive, that it encompasses everything. This world conspiracy of social media has been steadily growing. This conspiracy plays a definite recognizable role in most peoples' lives; and it will become the mainspring of every political movement during the 21st Century. At last this extraordinary wellspring from the underworld of the Geek has gripped the world's people by their hair and become the undisputed master of commerce. The growth of social media has made it possible to centralize the world's economic control for the direct benefit of the people (and not all current economic groups).

Project Get Elected (Part 1)

I decided on the 10th of September, twelve days before my 47th Birthday, that I'd like to be an MP.

The thing is, I'm a punk, I'm neither a Labour man nor a Conservative. And the Liberal Democrats have been shown to be a traitor to there own policies; so they are out. I don't have faith in the fringe parties - neither Greens nor UKIP. And the fanatics don't interest me in the slightest (BNP, SNP, etc).

So I sat down and decided to form my own party: the (British) Social Media Party was born.

(Photo credit: CyberPunk65)

Within the first month I created a twitter account (@B_SocialMedia_P), a Facebook Fan Page, a Google+ page, a weblog, a mission statement and spoke about the party on two of my other blogs.

This is where I am now. I'm trying to come up with a philosophy (but it's slow going).

Proportional Representation Makes Sense

• 
• • CyberPunk65
  • 
    Wednesday 3rd October 2012       

"...is a concept in voting systems used to elect an assembly or council. PR means that the number of seats won by a party or group of candidates is proportionate to the number of votes received. For example, under a PR voting system if 30% of voters support a particular party then roughly 30% of seats will be won by that party. PR is an alternative to voting systems based on single member districts or onbloc voting; these non-PR systems tend to produce disproportionate outcomes and to have a bias in favour of larger political groups. PR systems tend to produce a proliferation of political parties, while single member districts encourage a two-party system."
  - Taken from: Wikipeadia

Don't settle for less. Choose PR today. Choose the (British) Social Media Party!!