Why the governing lockdown authorities ( of all political shades) were re-elected in the May 6th Elections

Wake Up UK

Why the governing lockdown authorities ( of all political shades) were re-elected in the May 6th Elections


The results of the many elections across three of the UK Home Countries have basically seen those in authority remaining in control. This is interesting because it does not seem to matter which political party has been in control, whether it be Conservatives in England, SNP in Scotland or Labour in Wales, they have remained in power.

The same applies to the Mayoral Elections in England and largely to the Police and Crime Commissioners elections in England and Wales.


There have been some significant changes in the parties controlling some local Councils, but they are not seen as major sources of political power compared the Mayors and Home Countries’ governments.

What is important to realise is that all those remaining in power have been those who have supported the lockdowns policies of the UK government.

There may have been some political gamesmanship in respect of the different lockdowns policies used by the three Home countries, but that is irrelevant to the fact that they all fully supported the political policy of lockdowns.

How did those who supported draconian lockdowns get re-elected ?

How is it then, that those supporting such draconian and damaging actions across the UK, could so easily be re-elected?

The answer is that there has always been a major other significant party involved in these elections and it is the mainstream media.

This mainstream media has been under government control and direction since the start of the coronavirus crisis well over a year ago.

This may seem not possible when the public believe that we have a free media, but I wrote an article on exactly how this has been achieved in an article in The Conservative Woman a few weeks ago:


In essence, this has been achieved by official censorship guidelines through actions such as “D” type notices, political pressures, the use of intelligence and security agencies, and with the commercial media, with vital advertising expenditure given on the basis of agreeing with supporting lockdown policies.

This is the reality- that we no longer have a free mainstream media

The mainstream media have heavily promoted the government’s lockdowns policy for over a year and part of that has been a psychological policy of fear and control.

(How to manipulate a whole nation through mass propaganda is something governments, normally authoritarian ones, have been doing for decades. Such tactics started well before the propaganda techniques of the Nazi Joseph Geobbels and those of the Soviet communists and many others, including current Red China).

The media propaganda programme in the UK is very subtle and sophisticated and is based on well -practiced theories.

What this means with this election is that the public have essentially been programmed into accepting and obeying everything the authorities say. It is all part of a massive Psyop.

This is not difficult to comprehend when the compliance on wearing face masks and many other restrictions is seen. Even more so with the mass covid-19 vaccinations because over 99% of the population literally do not even need them, but the public is obeying the “guidelines” to have them.

The authorities, especially the leaders have been portrayed by the media as people looking after them, protecting them from a terrible virus, almost like parental figures. This conditioning is relentless and has included daily press conferences from such people, who are presented as leaders to be trusted.

The public have been conditioned to need and obey the government

The public has had over a year of a “need” type relationship with the authorities and they have been conditioned to “need” those they perceive to be in authority.

Thus the public have felt obliged to vote for those in authority, which they have broadly done.

This has been achieved by not allowing anyone to question those who are in authority.

Since the imposition of the first lockdowns on March 23rd 2020 there has only been one “party” line- that of promoting and supporting their imposition.

Those who have tried to question lockdowns and offer viable alternatives, have simply been not allowed to do so, or they have been made out to be “covidiots” or some other derogatory description.

So, there has been a situation across the UK where there are two schools of thought- one supporting lockdowns and the other not. The former has had mass mainstream media attention. The latter has effectively had none.

This entirely explains why in all the elections anyone with freedom from lockdowns views has been marginalised and effectively been no platformed.

The government/mainstream media were not concerned about the “minutiae” of any electoral “contests” between the competing parties, not even that between the SNP and Unionists, as they were solely concerned with ensuring the pro-lockdowns politicians of all parties remain in power.

The daily promotion by the mainstream media of the three key political leaders, Nicola Sturgeon ( SNP) in Scotland, Mark Drakeford ( Labour) and Boris Johnson in England ( Conservative), enhanced their status in the eyes of the public. It has not mattered if all three of them have made horrendous mistakes, these were all skated over because these “leaders” were presented as the saviors of the public ( even though they have themselves been responsible for the totally nonsensical lockdown polices).

However, the alternatives to lockdowns were consistently “no platformed,” so these “leaders” remained safe in their ivory towers.

Hartlepool and Labour

The Labour party suffered at the Hartlepool by-election because victory there would be a defeat for the official pro-lockown authority in England- the Conservative party. The fact that the Labour leader, Keir Starmer, is perceived as someone who would have handled the coronavirus crisis worse, was only a factor in the sense that it made the Labour candidate’s defeat worse. Significantly any freedom from lockdown candidate who stood was as good as ignored by the local and national media. It did not suit their agenda.

The reality is that if Keir Starmer had led a proper opposition party which questioned the reasons for lockdowns and insisted on alternatives being considered, the nation would not have suffered so much.

That would have involved the Labour party going out of line with the globalist agenda of promoting lockdowns and (not needed) mass population covid-19 vaccination programmes, something they alongside the Conservatives, Liberal Democrats and Greens have been supportive of.


London was one area of the country where there were a significant number of candidates who fought on an anti- lockdown policy. Such candidates, and especially their policies, were sidelined by the mainstream media, to convince the public they were of no consequence and a wasted vote.  Sadiq Khan, the Labour Mayor, was re-elected on second preference votes, despite very poor leadership of London. However, he benefited by regular promotion of him personally in the media, like the other key leaders across the nation.

The only such candidate who achieved the most number of anti-lockdown votes was Laurence Fox, and he was the one who managed at least some positive media attention because of his celebrity status.

However, it is worth remembering that the combined total first preference votes of the five freedom from lockdowns candidates ( Laurence Fox, Brian Rose, Piers Corbyn, Peter Gammons and David Kurten) was 114,767 votes, which was more than those achieved by the Liberal Democratic candidate ( 111,716)

What is also noteworthy is that that second preference votes received by all five was 287,227, making a combined total of 401,994 votes ( the Liberal Democrat was a total of 376,628).

Both UKIP and the Reform party did not help themselves by being so late to embrace the “freedom” cause.

The lesson is that there must not be anti-lockdown candidates fighting each other in the future.


The freedom from lockdown parties, such as the Freedom Alliance, The Reform party and UKIP, plus others and many Independents were as good as airbrushed out of existence by the media.

Admittedly there were other factors at work, but such factors were not applied by the mainstream media to the lockdown supporting parties.

How can democracy work without media freedom?

The truly awful fact is that while the media is controlled by the authorities, any democracy will be a pure façade.

To give two of many examples of no platforming the freedom from lockdowns cause, the local and national media were given the results of a lockdowns and covid-19 vaccines questionnaire which was sent to the London and Bristol Mayoral candidates. This was no platformed so the voters never saw how the candidates answered these very important questions.

So like everywhere else nationwide, there was an election involving the issue of lockdowns but alternative viewpoints were not allowed to be mentioned.

The value of elections is diminished if there is not a free media.

If the media can be used to promote politicians and parties who support a particular political standpoint and downplay any opposition, then elections are a sham and not free and fair.

Foreign media, such as TV stations, tend to be more receptive to a broader political expression but have too low viewership in the UK to make a difference on the British electoral scene.

The need for media reform

This set of elections has demonstrated the power the authorities have because they have misused their powers to control the mainstream media.

It is clear by the election results that the small but growing alternative media was only able to minimally help the various freedom from lockdowns electoral alternatives.

The public are too influenced by the mass mainstream media for any alternative media to be effective, unless it increases substantially.

So if true free and fair elections are to come about, then national and local media ownership has to be put in a form of ownership which guarantees their freedom and impartiality. This includes the publicly owned BBC where control needs to be taken back by the people away from the globalists who are currently running it. These people are intent on destroying the UK, and their recent over- promotion of the SNP against their pro-UK political rivals is a scandal. They helped the SNP diminish the dominance of the Scottish Labour party.

The final point to bear in mind is that even in Wales and Scotland, where there has been a limited amount of electoral reform, there is still a system which favours the big parties and disadvantages the newer and smaller ones, and also the Independents. There is an urgent need for proper electoral reform based on the Single Transferable vote system ( voting for candidates in order of preference), as the most viable option for democracy to really work.

Anthony Webber

Independent Political Commentator

[email protected]

07824 444604

This post Why the governing lockdown authorities ( of all political shades) were re-elected in the May 6th Elections first appeared on Wake Up UK and is written by Daniel Mortimer

Click this link for the original source of this article.
Author: Daniel Mortimer

This content is courtesy of, and owned and copyrighted by, https://www.wakeupuk.net and its author. This content is made available by use of the public RSS feed offered by the host site and is used for educational purposes only. If you are the author or represent the host site and would like this content removed now and in the future, please contact USSANews.com using the email address in the Contact page found in the website menu.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

A better search engine: DuckDuckGo.com.
Visit our Discussion Forum at Libertati.com.

Follow us:
WP Twitter Auto Publish Powered By : XYZScripts.com