{"id":1146,"date":"2019-12-13T10:04:39","date_gmt":"2019-12-13T11:04:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/malvinartley.com\/blog.malvinartley.com\/?p=1146"},"modified":"2019-12-13T10:04:39","modified_gmt":"2019-12-13T11:04:39","slug":"overview-and-review-of-the-uk-election","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/malvinartley.com\/blog.malvinartley.com\/2019\/12\/13\/overview-and-review-of-the-uk-election\/","title":{"rendered":"Overview and review of the UK election"},"content":{"rendered":"

The wait is finally over. The British public has decided, at least as to which party will lead the nation over the next years. And as predicted, there was an upset. But, the Tories won? How is that an upset? It was predicted by pundits from the outset they would win by a large enough margin to be able to push Brexit through by the end of January. Now, they may well get their wish. It was an upset because there were also many pundits, polls and insiders saying the election was too close to call and that there would be a hung Parliament. There were astrological precedents for the latter, but there were also wild cards. My prediction of a hung Parliament was based in those precedents. It was also an upset for progressives and remainers who had hoped for a hung Parliament, or even a long shot win by Corbyn. The latter was never in the cards or the stars. To see what happened, read on.<\/span><\/p>\n

To start, here are the numbers as they stand: The Tories gained 66 seats. Labour lost 42 seats, largely from its heartland voter base. That makes a clear statement. More on that later. The SNP gained 13 seats, which also makes a statement. More on that later as well. All the other parties lost, except the Greens, who maintained their one seat.<\/span><\/p>\n

At the start of the campaign last month the pundits were giving Boris Johnson a very comfortable victory. Two weeks ago they were giving him a margin of 68 seats<\/a><\/span>, more than enough to push Brexit, along with many other measures if the Tories desired, through Parliament. They were too optimistic by 30 seats, but the victory was still a big enough majority. Over those two weeks, that lead was cut in half. That was not a good trajectory, but is also not unheard of.<\/span><\/p>\n

Two days out from the election the lead was set to be 339 seats out of 650 in Parliament, with Labour at 231, the SNP at 41 and the Liberal Democrats at 15. 339 seats is a 52% majority. It is not a big margin of error, especially if there are defectors in crucial votes, as there were in recent Parliamentary votes. As of now, though, Labour has suffered its worst defeat since 1935. If that rings an astrological bell, it should \u2013 it is a Uranus cycle of 84 years. That was also at the height of the Great Depression. There are precedents there, too.<\/span><\/p>\n

What happened, then? What was in the astrology that would account for such a dip in the lead the Tories had, and then to the landslide win? The answer lies with Saturn and Uranus. The UK chart with transits is below (bigger<\/a><\/span>):<\/span><\/p>\n

\"\"<\/p>\n

We note that on election day transiting Saturn was within a degree of the exact opposition with the UK Moon. The Moon in the UK chart rules the sitting government, and it is in the 10th<\/sup> house. When no birth time is known, then the Moon represents the general public, because we do not know the angles. But when the angles are known, as in the case of the UK, then no matter which planet rules the 10th<\/sup> house, it becomes a very important factor in determining the general trends of government in a nation. With Saturn opposing the ruler of the 10th<\/sup> house, this election did not look good for the Tories. But, there is another story to that Moon as well.<\/span><\/p>\n

In reality, both readings of the Moon in the case of the UK have to be taken into account, meaning the Moon read as the general public and the Moon read as the ruler of the 10th<\/sup> house and thus the style of government. This has a special meaning for the UK especially, and it was stated in 1949 by Alice Bailey, speaking of the ideologies working out in various nations:<\/span><\/p>\n

There is again the ideology of Socialism which is regarded [Page 747] <\/strong>by some as a basic evil.\u00a0 Socialism can degenerate into another form of totalitarianism, or it can be more democratic than the present expressions of Democracy.\u00a0 These issues will emerge clearly in Great Britain, where<\/strong> the socialist point of view is gaining ground among the masses, <\/strong>[re: post WWII Britain] but which at present is<\/strong> a mixture of nationalisation of the public utilities and of free enterprise\u2014a combination which may have true value, if preserved. <\/strong>(The Rays and the Initiations<\/em>, p. 747)<\/span><\/p>\n

It was stated in another section of the same work (pg. 634):<\/span><\/p>\n

In Great Britain, the problem of socialism is being resolved and the sound judgment of the people will eventually balance the two conditions of a socialist programme and free enterprise; this needs doing, for the extreme position in either case is untenable.\u00a0 This today presents a conflict which all the world is watching\u2026<\/strong> The bridge will be built.<\/em><\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

What we have in the UK now is an extreme of capitalism, and this has been on the ascent since the days of Thatcher. Labour began to lose ground at that point, with only Tony Blair winning an election for Labour since then, and then only by adopting parts of Thatcherite policy. So, what do we really see here, and why have the Tories romped it in? There were several factors, which should serve as billboard-sized signs for the coming US elections:<\/span><\/p>\n