Monthly Archives: November 2007

Moonbattery hyper extreme. EU says British military vehicles must be “GREEN”!

David Davis 

A good site, Moonbattery – go to it when you have finished with us here. it tells you even more than we can in a short time, how stupid and therefore how evil, wicked, pre-meditated and intentional, the enemies of Western liberalism really really are. I delight in the syntactical promiscuity of the English Language sometimes, in that there are so many, many words for “bad”, such as “LOW”. (A certain socialsit “peeeeeer” used this word to describe Margaret Thatcher. “LOW”. Does anybody remember that one?)

There was a repport in yetserday’s Telegraph about this new directive from the increasingly unlibertarian EU. (I like “yetserday” and “repport”, so I will leave them. Perhaps we’ll get googled by socialist-de-educated British schoolkids more. This raises a point; should blogs clear out typographical errors becuase it’s morally right, or should they leave them in in support of the increasingly sub-literate generations under State education? Discuss…..) 

They must emit only the statutory quantities of carbon dioxide etc etc etc mumble groan whinge rhubarb knickers. 

Firstly, I thought our vehicles were…er, green. (Well, sort of a drab shade, for defending the wimpish-euro-communist-Europeans against their fellow-fascists in Russia.)

Secondly, have you SEEN a modern battle?

My dear! The noise! The people! The pollution!

I don’t know what these enarques have been smoking who dreamed up this nonsense, but (1) I bet it does not apply to French/Italian/Austrian/Spanish military vehicle builders, and (2) the last thing on my mind as a Field Commander up against say the Russians (could be) or the Sudano-Iranians (may well be) is how much Carbon Dioxide my APCs are putting out. One enemy shell using modern smokeless stuff of very high detonation velocity (and say a 120mm round of bursting charge 10Kg) will exhale say 500 moles of the stuff conservatively; that’s nearly 2,000 cubic feet or about 60 cubic metres at the lowest possible blast temperature, or what the defending vehicle will exhaust in a day’s hard driving…..hopefully not in Europe but earlier in the war so outside.

Libertarianism is under attack from all sorts of angles that we did not even imagine. Could such an organisation as the LA, or this blog, have arisen if there had not been a defensible island that happened to be the birthplace of modern liberal thought? And which the continental Reiche, used to long land borders and bloody intra-land struggle as a way of living, could not immediately get at?

 Oh and I will put “socialsit” on wikipedia sometime.

Sean in Debate with anti-Semite I don’t propose to keep up this debate, as I have more interesting things to do. However, it won’t do for my own semi-blog to be covered in anti-semitic comments. If anyone would like to have a good laugh at poor Mr O’Farrell, be my guest. Sean

Libertarian World Conference 1991

When I uploaded this the other day, something went wrong. Here it is again – complete with the only extant footage of Chris Tame’s Elvis impersonation:



Various from Sean Gabb

1. I have just uploaded a video file of the “Libertarian World Conference 1991″. This contains rare footage of Chris R. Tame in his prime, before the clouds had gathered that darkened his final years. He is certainly at his best here! The video also shows Hubert and Rita Jongen, Tom Grey, and Alastair James, among other friends. You can view the footage here:


2. I did another BBC radio discussion the day before yesterday on free speech and that Oxford Union debate. You can find the mp3 file here:


3. I have just received the latest issue of “The Individual”, published by the Society for Individual Freedom. The SIF and LA are sister organisations. Though they do not live together, they do share Nigel Meek, who is Editorial Director of the LA and Editor of “The Individual”. This is an excellent issue of the SIF’ quarterly journal, and I hope Nigel will republish some of the articles though the LA.

you can find details of the SIF by going here:

Issues of “The Individual” are located here:


4. Christmas is coming, and I am sure you have friends and relatives who have already have everything that can be bought in places like John Lewis. Therefore, let me recommend two of my books:

Cultural Revolution, Culture War (£9.99)

(buy from Amazon at:

The Column of Phocas (£8.99)

(buy from Amazon at:

You can read reviews of the Cultural Revolution book at


There are new reviews by Gregg Beaman and Kevin Carson.

Though it might not be good marketing, I will suggest that you might know people whose visits or telephone calls you wished to discourage. Giving such people one of my books for Christmas might be helpful.

5. Here is another book. I did not write this, but it is worth bringing to attention:

The Great Reading Disaster: Reclaiming Our Educational Birthright (Paperback) by Alice Coleman (Author), Mona McNee (Author) (£16.99)

(buy from Amazon at

That’s all for now.


Sean Gabb
Director, The Libertarian Alliance
Tel: 07956 472 199

The mouse that “can’t get cancer”. Another example of free-market science success that won’t be available on the NHS in England.

David Davis 

The Daily Mail, in its rather sad “two sensational-health-scares plus two sensational-advances (and all for women mostly) per week per front page” editorial policy, trumpeted today;

“The mouse that can’t get cancer”.

I object to this popularly-journalized demonization of cancer – not because it’s an often painful and sometimes currently incurable condition – but because news about our progess towards its being made nugatory, such as with colds and flu for instance, has fallen into the hands of those who drive popular culture and popular-use-of-popular-media.

Molecular biophysicists have known for some years that there are genes which act, sort of like a “dead-man’s handle”, in cells which become what we call “neoplastic”; that is to say, cancerous. these cells have “lost” the ability to respond to ordinary chemical signals from their host body, telling them all the while “don’t divide”. So? They divide. Then they do it again…..and again, and again, and again, and…… the result is? Cancer. Some genes exist in multicellular organisms exactly to respond to this scenario, and they shut down any such cell line. Sometimes, tragically, these genes can become broken, in the course of many many cell replications in one’s life. (That’s why cancers are often conditions of middle or old age.)

But “The mouse that can’t get cancer” is I think a premature stab for us at some confidence in the future. Let’s not get too excited in England in 2007….for…………

Gordon Brown still wants you to die painfully, for a few decades more, like his political forebears still rationed foods and petrol and clothes (even CLOTHES for f***’s sake?) for years after the War. After all, if such was available on the NHS, then rich-people would queue up for it first, and we can’t have that. 

There is no doubt that Man will beat cancer generally and in detail. It may even happen in our lifetimes. But there is also no doubt that, as soon as such treatment whatever becomes available, it will “not be available on the NHS in England”. Probably in Scotland. Most probably in Poland too.

A freer market in university research in the USA has brought this new insight about. isn’t it interestingly tragic that a thingy called “NICE” (the national institute for clinical excellence) often forbids stuff automatically to England, which is permitted to be “funded” elsewhere. Well, there’s socialism for you.

Strategic policy-making for the new century; the Libertarian Alliance is your one-stop think tank.

Just a usual weekly reminder for policy-makers, movers and shakers, butchers, bakers and candlestick-makers (all of whom will experience “change” – that mantra word of management consultancy – if for example bio-fuels get a throttle-grip on the planet’s food supply.)

The Libertarian Alliance’s main web page has on the left hand sidebar, under “Libertarian Alliance Publications“, about 800 items categorised under almost any social or philosphical heading you can think of over a cup of tea.

John Singleton Rip Van Australia

David Davis

Australia has been in the news, as the latest Anglosphere country to vote to (a) lie back and think of England - by adopting socialism – at a time when the world is about to run out of energy and food owing to other socialists being allowed to play with toys while unsupervised by the police, and (b) to LEAVE THE WAR.

It is not clear to me, historically, that Australia ever left a war before….er, before now….or before its outcome for us and it was sure. This is a unique event, which I could not have forseen. We will of course leave it too, but then we have a shitty socialist gumment that is “avvin’-a-luff”, and knows it – even though for 500 years we have not ordinarily left wars before doing the diplomacy that was needed and that we came to do. Spain left, but it deliberately elected such a bunch of tossers, the day after the enemy blew up some trains.

Talk about “stabs in the back”, and history! What phrase was it that the embryonic NSDAP used, to describe the treatment of its nation and forces after Versailles, to leverage itself out of its dangerously moribund and unknown situation in the early 1920s? Do people really want to revisit this kind of scenario?

But today, just today (and never before) this blog got 7 hits about the title I typed above, about RvA and JS. I wrote something about “Rip Van Australia” in August (see the blog archives) and today it came home.

I have no blinking clue who searched, but I bet it was some worried Australians. Good luck to you poor bastards, you will need it I think now – and we poms are in no position to help you either from now on – just like with (not) Poland in 1939. Kyoto? Global warming as a priority? What possessed you ockers to vote for that lapdancing leftist? Were you scared into repudiating your hard-won comforts, or what?

Eschew the lights of perverted science! Be yourselves, not what the Enemy Class tells you to be! Take a leaf from John Singleton’s life, and read his book Rip van Australia.

Oxford Union Debate disrupted by “People’s Censors”. So what’s new?

David Davis

This sort of thing began to go on in my day. Something happened to the fascist left in the 60s; some say that sex and long hair was invented and that they never looked back,  –  others just say that the buggers were let out of their foul cages without being made to bath first, and that we subsequently lost their collars and leads. Here’s the Daily Telegrapph on last night’s shindig – I guess it was a great hoot and a night out for the hired rage-boys;;jsessionid=WLI52RGTMQZQ5QFIQMFSFFWAVCBQ0IV0;?xml=/news/2007/11/27/noxford227.xml

Perhaps after 20 years by the mid-60s, the rage-boys had forgotten who their role-models were in the Reich and the USSR, and they thought themselves to be normal humans.

But to get to David Irving and Nick Griffin, two characters who seem to attract more than their fair share of spoiled tomatoes and eggs.

David Irving wants to say certain erroneous things about the Nazi holocaust in Europe. Why, I do not know, it seems an odd thing to want to devote your life to doing. Unlike the situation we have with the Global-Warm-mongering-promoters, the Holocaust’s “History is Settled”. There is quite enough evidence for the mass slaughter in general and gas-chambers in particular, including such prosaic items as engineering-design briefs and commercial recipts for the building-costs, Zyklon-B and other materials from the firms concerned; not to mention millions of personal accounts which can’t all be simultaneous fabrications.  In a remotely free society Irving ought to be allowed to say anything he wants; indeed he has already served time in jail for saying the same things in an unfree one, the continental EU. It is probable that he says what he says and writes what he does on account of some personality problems, that make him want to seek attention. Whatever, he is probably a harmless nutter. Ranting and jumping about with placards, and disrupting debates, could make more people give his views more credence than they deserve. The best policy imho would be to ignore the fellow.

Nick Griffin is a Cambridge-educated lawyer. He is the leader of what seems to be a rather left-of-centre, corporatist party, which appeals to the electorally neglected Urban Old White Working Class, on account of its articulating their direct concerns and their externally-repressed sense of lost nationhood. His party has won and regularly now wins the odd local council seat in elections, much to the disgust of the various Nazis in power in Westminster and in the Boroughs, many of which are quite pocket-like and also rotten, specially in the inner-urban areas where he has most support. These facts are clearly what puts him Beyond The Pale for the mediarati and the Enemy Class; his views are not fashionable to hold nor politically correct. There is no evidence that a BNP government would address either the concerns of its franchise-base, or get out of interfering in the economy and civilisation any more effectively than (Ageing) Labour, the “too-New” Tories or the sLip-Dems. Griffin has next to no chance of winning any seats at Westminster in any election soon; all he can hope to do is irritate the powers-that-be by exposing their dangerous lack of support and isolation from reality. Unpalatable as his views are to the UK political establishment, there is no evidence that gagging him, and periodically putting him on trial for saying stuff, reduces his popular support.

Libertarians believe that free speech should mean just that. Not the current setup where an increasing range of views is forbidden in public, and is increasingly criticized or restricted on private premises such as the Oxford Union. Nutters and unpopular prats of all sorts should be allowed to say and write what they please – and that includes Moslem “clerics” who advocate anti-civilisational-violence and “jihad” – whatever that stuff might be. We also should be free to call them whatever names please us – such as fascist imperialists, terrorists, pretentious twats, and the like, and denounce them to the end of our strength and beyond. The laws of Libel and Slander are quite highly-developed, and perfectly capable of coping with any situation that can be imagined. The natural rights of free people in a free nation should not be abated  – either by laws which serve only to inconvenience and bind, or by rentable self-appointed mobs-for-hire of Nazi “demonstrators”.

I hope they dodn’t mess up the Union buildings too much. Though from experience there will be some clearing up of shit and stuff to do today.

POST UPDATE: 19.21 GMT. TWO searches hit us, calling up “coal mining libertarian”, this afternoon. You can’t say we aren’t polymathic in our tastes!

Biofuels will lead Mankind to starvation. What is worse? Starving death for all, or being able to raise “greenazi taxation”?

David Davis 

Good one from Moonbattery here.

Read the thingy and just refer to my title.

SEAN GABB in the media again – on the BBC re Free Speech

Here is Sean Gabb doing his stuff for everyone, again!

Sean Gabb on Beeb again re Free Speech

Sean Gabb and that Labour MP

Free Life Commentary,
A Personal View from
The Director of the
Libertarian Alliance
Issue Number 167
21st November 2007
postCount(‘flc167′);Comments (2)| postCountTB(‘flc167′); Trackback

Notes on a BBC Debate Between
Chris Bryant MP and Sean Gabb
by Sean Gabb

I went on the wireless yesterday morning—the 20th November—to debate freedom of speech with a Labour Member of Parliament. Apparently, the Oxford Union is holding a debate of its own about this matter, and has invited both David Irving and Nick Griffin to speak. Mr Irving, for those who do not know his name, is an historian who has at various times doubted the nature and extent of national socialist holocaust in Germany. Mr Griffin seems to have no particular opinion on the holocaust, but is leader of the main British white nationalist party. I am not sure if the two men have ever met. I do not know what they think about each other. But they have enemies in common, and these tend to place the two men into the same “fascist” category.

Chris Bryant is the Labour Member of Parliament for Rhondda. He believes that the Oxford Union should withdraw its invitation from two such allegedly wicked men. I was called on by the BBC to put the case against him.

I think the idea was that Mr Bryant should attack freedom of speech and I should defend it. But Mr Bryant was too clever to allow the debate to run in this course. He insisted that Messrs Irving and Griffin should have the right to speak their minds in places like Hyde Park, but that the Oxford Union should not pollute itself with their company. On the face of things, then, he was not arguing for censorship—no more than I might be if I advised you not to invite the Seventh Day Adventists into your house. Of course, his argument was only on the face of things. We live in a country where the old boundaries between state and voluntary activity have been so blurred by subsidy and regulation and deals behind the curtain, that advice is fast becoming the same as instruction. And Mr Bryant would not really defend the right of these two men to speak in Hyde Park. Any meeting they called there would be banned under the Public Order Act 1986. If the meeting were allowed to go ahead, all the speeches would be filmed by the police, and the speakers would face criminal charges under the various terrorism and racial hatred laws brought in since 1997. I do not suppose Mr Bryant would hurry forward to criticise any of this.

But he was making a clever point. To answer him would require more time than was available. So, having heard him out, I decided to go on the attack. I thanked him for his “defence” for freedom of speech, then denounced him for criticising men who were not his moral inferiors. Mr Bryant, I told the listeners, had voted for identity cards, for ninety day imprisonment without trial or charge, and for a war with Iraq that had so far killed 650,000 people. He had no right to call anyone a fascist.

It took thirty seconds and was very easily done. I reduced the man to spluttering rage. He spent the rest of the debate trying to defend his voting record, while insisting that some of his best friends had been murdered by Generals Franco and Pinochet. My answer to this one was: “Then you should know better”. That really upset him, and gave the presenter an excuse to deliver a good kicking of her own.

I recorded the debate and have put in on the Multimedia Page of the Libertarian Alliance Website. You can find it here:

But what makes this debate worth noting is not that I was rather witty or cruel. It is notable so far as it shows how easy it has become to reveal the moral bankruptcy of our ruling class.

Mr Bryant is a typical member of this class. At Oxford, he was a member of the Conservative Association. He next took holy orders in the Church of England, becoming first a curate and then a youth chaplain. After this, he joined the Labour Party and got a job at the BBC. In 2001, he was sent into Parliament for the pocket borough of Rhondda—a place where a Labour candidate would be elected even if it were a dead cat. His most public achievement since then has been to put up semi-nude pictures of himself on a website to assist his search for male company.

I am a few years older than Mr Bryant, and I attended not Oxford but York University. Even so, I know his sort. He belongs to a class and generation of people who combine endless moral superiority with bossiness. All through the 1980s and 1990s, they recited their mantra of contempt for anyone who was not one of them. When they came into their own, they said, they would make England into a kinder, gentler country. Their order would be more tolerant, more inclusive, more open and more accountable. Once they had dropped their commitment to socialist economics, they even promised it would be no less economically efficient.

Because their intentions were so pure, no moral failing or evidence of hypocrisy could be held against them. Look at Mr Bryant’s search for male company. When the newspapers showed us a man in ill-preserved middle age posing like a model from an underwear catalogue, his friends put round the word that he was the victim of an “anti-gay” witch hunt. When it was said that, regardless of sexual taste, he should have behaved with more dignity, we were reminded that the 1950s were over and we now lived in “Cool Britannia”. Attacks on his support, and that of his class, for the European Union were thrown back as accusations of “xenophobia” and “extremist tendencies”. Rising evidence of corruption and administrative incompetence were brushed aside.

But there comes a point when the truth is both undeniable and hurtful. After ten years of domination by these people, we have now reached that point. It is useful to rub noses in the daily scandal. At the moment, Mr Bryant and his class are presiding over the negligent loss of 25 million names and identification data. Tomorrow, it will be something else. But there is always some more or less credible excuse to get them out of permanent trouble. The real stick to use against them is three bloody wars and a police state at home. They promised us neither of these things. But that is what they have delivered.

I wish they had been more like the people they always said they were. But one advantage of their not having been so is their plain embarrassment. We do not live in the world that they promised us, and perhaps that they did vaguely want. We live in a world where they are looking and sounding and behaving just like their parodic notion of the old ruling class.

I called Mr Bryant a fascist. He took vast offence at the word. I may yet receive a letter from his solicitor. But after ten years of rule by him and his class, what other political term fits him better?

NB—Sean Gabb’s new book, Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back, can be downloaded free from You can help by contributing to publishing and distribution costs

English Football compared with the English State. Management incompetence and comparative reactions.

David Davis 

England lose to Croatia. I’m not personally surprised, since a small, historically-pushed-about nation will play footy with more warlike ferocity than us, specially against the game’s inventor. And specially now, when the prime raison-d’etre of Premiership players for English sides is to be famous, so as to have enough dosh to serially-shack-up with female slebs, and then cause themselves and the slebs to be photographed while doing aspects of this thing. The public packaging is all; the game is merely a means of collecting the money.

The English bureaucracy “loses” a record of 25 million people’s personal data. Again, the outer packaging of the State is all; the need to retain such data, losing it notwithstanding, is again merely a means of collecting the money, so the State and its class can feel like slebs at our expense, just like the footy-players.

(Data protection? ITEM! The State loses our identities, and yet, yet…..yesterday, I could not legally be handed, for nothing, a non-working but spinnable HARD DISK, by a computer shop that only wanted to be shot of it. I wanted it for dissassembling and teaching purposes….but……the Data Protection Act apparently states that it has to have a nail hammered through it, or similar gross structural damage so it does not spin and the platters are fractured. Did anybody else know that? It surprised me. Perhaps that shopkeeper had just not taken a shine to me?)

But the reaction to the two events is different. Useless wimpish Steve McLaren though it was not (even coupled with his generally lack-lustre effect on our game) a resigning matter, but the Football-Powers-That-Be (I have no clue what they are called) had the grace to show the door to the silly man. However, useless wimpish Alastair Darling is still impersonating a Chancellor of the Exchequer of some place or other, at this time of writing. Perhaps there is no over-arching body that can call time on him?

What happened to “The People”? Has it been dissolved and a more pliable one elected?

Perhaps this is what the Wireless Tele Vision is actually, finally for?

Sean Gabb – Lecture on the Greens

Free Life Commentary,
A Personal View from
The Director of the Libertarian Alliance
Issue Number 166
21st November 2007

postCount(‘flc166′);Comments| postCountTB(‘flc166′); Trackback

My Contractually-Obliged
Lecture on the Environment
by Sean Gabb

At one of the places where I teach, senior members of staff are required to work an environmental theme into every lecture course they give. Here is the lecture I shall give next Monday morning to three hundred undergraduates. I will not read this to the students. That is not my practice. It should instead be seen as a summary given in advance of what I shall say, and as a source of quotations to use against me in the subsequent group discussions.

Our Duty to Save the Planet
Sean Gabb

According to all the newspapers and television stations and all the politicians, we are facing a serious environmental crisis. We are told that global temperatures are rising, and that they are rising because of economic development, and that, unless we make radical changes to the ways in which we live, sea levels will rise and the world in general will become less pleasant.

I am not a scientist, and I am not competent to examine the detailed claims about the nature and extent and causes of global warming. But I believe these claims are all lies. I believe they are the latest attempt by some very nasty people to stop the progress of the human race to unlimited self-improvement.

History and Class Oppression

Until about 250 year ago, the normal situation of humanity was stagnation. There might be ages of improvement, but these hardly ever improved the lives of the poorest, and they were always followed by a decline of economic activity.

This was a world in which society was shaped like a broad pyramid—a very small ruling class enjoying fabulous wealth and status, and a great mass or ordinary people at the bottom living in poverty. It was a world in which more than half of all children born died before they reached the age of five, and in which the great majority of ordinary people died in their thirties.

The libertarian revolutions of the 17th century in England led to a sudden increase in general wealth during the 18th century. By around 1800, it was plain that this was an improvement unlike any other before. For the first time, larger and larger numbers of ordinary people were enjoying cheaper and better food and clothing.

Other European governments looked on this with envy, as greater national wealth meant greater military power. But many, both abroad and in England, were concerned about he social and political impact of these developments. They meant that more and more ordinary people were moving about and improving their lives, and they were thinking for themselves, and beginning to question political arrangements that delivered immense differences of wealth and status.

The Reaction

The first reaction against market liberalism was purely conservative. Churches and landowning interests put much effort into defending the old order of things. Look, for example, at this verse from a Church of England hymn:

The rich man in his castle,
The poor man at his gate,
He made them, high or lowly,
And ordered their estate

The meaning of this is that God had given everyone a certain position in the world, and this position had to be accepted without complaint or attempts at change.

Without massive government force behind it, this sort of reaction was a failure in every place it was tried. Even there, it tended to fail. No dungeons in this world, or threats of hellfire in the next, could stifle the news of freedom and enrichment.

And so the next step in reaction was to disguise conservatism as progress. Ideologies were developed that looked progressive, but the effect of which would be to stop all further progress.

That is the significance of many kinds of socialism and particularly Marxism. These doctrines spoke about equality and freedom and growing wealth, but were obviously about the exact opposite. Even before the first socialist experiments, liberals were analysing the socialist claims and announcing that a socialist society would be a dictatorship in which the great majority of ordinary people would be made poor again.

This was the result of actually existing socialism in the 20th century. Countries like Russia, East Germany and Czechoslovakia had fast economic development among their stated goals. In fact, the only really growth was in the amount of pollution their factories produced.

The only liberty and equality and economic development that have ever been seen have taken place in countries like England and America and Germany and Japan— where people have mostly been left alone to look after themselves and their families.

With the collapse of socialism at the end of the 1980s, it looked for a moment as if all the barriers had been lifted to unlimited improvement for the whole human race. It seemed that we could look forward to a world in which everyone had a motor car and a refrigerator and a telephone.Environmentalism: The Last Communist Refuge

Then the environmental movement grew big. This had been around since the early 1960s. At first, it concentrated on things like chemical pollution and rapid population growth and how the world would soon run out of oil and other minerals. The problem was that its claims were always proved to be wrong.

For example, we were told in the 1960s that population growth would soon lead to mass starvation. In the event, living standards continued to rise faster and faster all over the world.

Again, we were told that the oil would run out before the middle of the 1980s. In the event, more and more oil was found, and we now know that we have enough o last for centuries to come.

Again we were told in the 1970s that industrialisation was leading to global cooling and that there would soon be another ice age. This also did not happen.

But, since the collapse of socialism, the environmental movement has grown bigger and bigger, and is now arguing for regulations and taxes that would soon stop all further economic growth—particularly in Asia, India, Africa and South America. That is the goal of all this endless propaganda in the media, and all the talk about carbon footprints.

Now, it may be that there really is a problem with the environment. Even a broken clock is right twice a day. But I find it historically significant that environmentalism has grown big at the very moment when every other argument against human progress has been disproved.

I therefore believe that the claims of the environmentalists are lies. They are an excuse for returning humanity to a dark age of inequality and stagnation.

An Invitation to Debate

I am circulating this lecture a week in advance, to give you time to read it and to consider the issues raised. I hope this will make the long discussion after lunch even more lively than it would otherwise be.

NB—Sean Gabb’s new book, Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back, can be downloaded free from You can help by contributing to publishing and distribution costs

First; lost “public funds” down the drain in a socialist “bank”. Now, lost personal financial data. If we have to have politicians, then they should be amateurs.

David Davis 

It’s no use just sitting here and dubbing Socialist governments who lack Full-Terror-Police “incompetent tossers”, “wankers“, “can’t run a whelk-stall”, “wouldn’t trust them to mow the lawn”, or anything else the bolgosphere has come up with in the last 20 hours. It won’t make the underlying menace go away any faster.

Despite having no fully-evolved Terror-Police (aka AUBERON WAUGH) they do have an effective monopoly of force, and so there is nothing that can be done to make them behave properly in this scenario and do the right thing, since they “don’t do resignations”, we have no guns, and we can’t get the Queen to call an election as she’s busy. Poor blameless Paul Gray, the head of HMRC, has indeed done the right thing, and hopefully for him and his family he will therefore, not lacking some trace of integrity, get offered another job somewhere in the fullness of time – even though he seemingly coked up over Tax-“Credits” (whatever those may be…..sounds like a tautology to me.)Human nature, deriving from God, is thus of course boundless in its ability to spot thugs and shysters, and Gray is clearly not one of these evil things. (It also explains why nobody votes in the UK any more – if everybody slurping slime at the trough of the State is in it for the dosh and the Mercs-4-Jerks, and you can’t dislodge them, what’s the point?)

This lot has now shown itself for what it really is. First, through destroying or trying to destroy all our institutions that made us a unique and important nation, and secondly through staggering incompetence of intergalactic proportions. Just read the headlines…. (later aditing – ed.)

It is a bunch of people who have never known how to do anything except “career politics”. They are advised by another bunch of people who have never known anything except how to be “career bureaucrats” – the rot started, incidentally, to set in here in the UK in the early-70s when “the brightest” graduates at my University would sit the “Civil Service” (as it was universally known – one was expected simply to know, via the “form”, what this meant, and nod sagely while genuflecting towards the “sitter”) as a matter of course.

Compounding these errors, this bunch has as its friends and “special advisers” and Quangocrats, others who do no really useful work whatever – and who, if they were less successful at self-promotion than they currently are, would be reduced to plugging away in the blogosphere for no money. At least then nobody would listen to them or take them seriously, which would be a blessing!!!!! (The average blog has less than 0.007 reader per day, and that includes GUIDO and other biggies.)

If and when, revolution or no, a “new settlement” can be agreed, then it’s high time that there was thought to be no such thing as a “career” in “politics” or “public service”. Amateurs have driven the world from the Renaissance onwards, which was when it suddenly began to matter to the universe that there was such a place as this Earth. Even the Romans thought you couldn’t be a Senator until you’d become quite old AND done useful stuff besides. this made all Rpman senators effectively amateurs. Later, “Amateur Radio” types, that is to say, geeks; from about 1904 onwards, virtually invented all of the applied forms of all granted-for-taken communications methods that you and I use today. (We “did” satellites-type-stuff, before Rupert Murdoch was a gleam in his OWN eye…..and we were using the Moon! The Moon did not amplify signals, but its reflectivity extablished the principle that satellite comms could be done……Even “wireless  tele-vision” was pioneered in the 40s; that is what hams called it.)

I don’t think a Libertarian Party would allow people to be candidates for selection, until they’d done the Roman bit first either. This is not by any means a full solution to the strategic problem of how you get the right people to serve in a Minimal State, but it could be a start. Get the professionals in, which is to say the amateurs.

The rise of racism in politics and football

UK immigration is higher on the political agenda than at any time I can remember since my childhood.

I grew up in Gravesend in the 1970’s and witnessed National Front marches where supporters were outnumbered by the local Sikh community who turned up on masse to beat down an ignorant minority.

In the 1979 general election my father voted for the National Front. Confused? maybe. A racist? possibly. Let down by the main political parties and swept along with the politics of the day that used immigration as a scapegoat to confront difficult political and economic questions? most definitely.

So in 2007 racism towards Asians has been replaced by eastern Europeans. The prime minister, Gordon Brown, himself has led from the front by demanding “British jobs for British workers.”

The tide has turned. I fear British politics is amidst a sea change and racism is about to hit centre stage, again.

I read an interesting article on the Independent Online today by Stephen King (managing director of economics at HSBC) Football, Migration & the Blame Game.

King quoted Liverpool and England football captain, Steven Gerrard speaking at the England football team press conference last week. Speaking about foreigner players playing in England he said:

“Something has got to happen otherwise there will be more and more foreigners and they will take over.”

More alarming was Reading manager Steve Coppell’s levelled comment: “There is a big danger that we stop producing quality young kids because of the amount of foreigners in the game. If foreigners do take over completely, it will affect the national team even worse than maybe it is now.”

Coppell is an intelligent, level-headed man who I have no doubt is not making a racist statement here. However, my concern is not so much of the comments themselves, as this is football and not politics. But how these simple comments can and will be taken completely out of context to fuel racial hatred.

Foreigners are already being blamed for the England football team’s failures. The influx of foreign players is stopping our white English lads from playing for the top English clubs! Does it not have anything to do with foreign players being more skillful?

Firstly, as a football fan, I want to watch the best players in the world play. I’m not interested in watching white players, black players, English players or Polish players. I simply watch the beautiful game because I love the game of football.

Secondly, to any stupid, ignoramus who you hear using the argument that the England football team is failing to win football games because of the amount of foreign players in the English Premiership, ask them why it was that England failed to qualify for the 1974 and 1978 World Cup!

“THE NAZI DIET” ….. interesting search-engine term. I wonder what it can mean?

David Davis 

I don’t know, do you? I mean, don’t socialists have more or less the same dietary requirements as ordinary people?

Dr Sean Gabb roasts Chris Bryant MP (Lab.) over the upcoming Oxford Union debate-shindig-protest-event featuring the debagging of David Irving and Nick Griffin.

David Davis 

You can listen to the Sound-Wireless spiel here: 

The thing starts well, seemingly. Mr Bryant appears initially to favour total free speech absolutely.

Then……….. hmmmmmmm ……… strangely, he tries to pretend that the Oxford Union is somehow different from other places where these two supposed ne’er-do-wells in the headline could speak about their allegedly “extremist” views.  They should “not be given a platform”, and Luke Tryl the President is seemingly in Bryant’s eyes merely executing a sort of PR stunt.

I have sat in the place in my youth, and even spoken fleetingly in debates. So I can’t personally see the moral-philosophic difference between the Oxford Union, Speaker’s Corner, and the public bar of the Blue Anchor round the corner from here.

Sean Gabb is at his corrosively logical best here. Strangely, even the female radio-presenter seems to lean slightly to his point of view, a phenomenon that Gabb does not often experience in his broadcasting career. Bryant ends up being called a fascist, which is quite amusing in a kind of way, bearing in mind he voted for ID cards to be ultimately compulsory for British People; a curiously and wickedly illiberal idea, redolent of the Third Reich and other fascist states such as the USSR and many in Europe today.

Fascist assaults on Advertising gather pace; now it’s the turn of “junk foods” and “alcohol”.

David Davis 

The Sunday Telegraph carried in its business setcion a thingy saying “new ad curbs would slash TV income.” The gist is that proposed “controls” (it’s “for the children” of course) and a 9pm “watershed” for ads for the next things this gumment disapproves of will lower the share prices of the TV contractors further, and “cost the advertising industry” £250million.

ALL THE BLASTED STUPID MYOPIC BUGGERS, collecting their salaries for the now, HAVE MISSED THE POINT. They are heading for disaster, rather fast.

They will go the way of the cigarette manufacturers in the last century, as they will not make this fight a fight about individual freedom and censorship, which is actually what it is.

In a market-civilisation, advertising is essential to individual liberty. Advertising a good product, or one which people want, ensures its success. Advertising a bad product causes it to be garotted fast and relatively painlessly, except for the maker who chiefly suffers, but that’s freedom for you.

Socialists and other Nazis can’t take this at all. They are so hung up on “planning” and direction of masses of people that they just can’t see that successful advetising means there has to have been a successful and wanted product, which people, er, wanted. If they did not want it, they would not buy it. They even teach my students that “advertising makes people buy things they don’t want or need.” Yes, they do, in England, in 2007. It’s difficult to combat except one-2-one, when you can use logic and reason, but you can do it, slowly. (But that’s not enough.)

Many of you here know the pre-capitalist societies of Central and Eastern Europe pre-1989. There was by then little or no advertising – notwithstanding that there were rather few goods available anyway. This was not the fault of producers, who were not allowed. Totalitarian societies are characterized by the lack of goods and info thereof, and the plethora of State glorification of their leaders and “parties”. We are heading that way rather quickly in England.

In about 1980 I was asked with a good friend, now a succesful London IP lawyer, to draft a case for tobacco advertising, courtesy of Peter Marsh, of Allen Brady and Marsh, for whom I worked at that time. (Rod Allen died recently.) This would be presented to a committee of marketing directors of the major tobacco companies, in support of their opposition to an ad-ban. My friend and I came up with a liberal (I would not go so far as to say Libertarian) defence of any advertising including that for tobacco products, based on the fact that control of information, or its suppression, amounted to censorship. We said that if the product was legal to make and sell and own, then people who made it ought to be allowed to speak well of it. Any encroachment on their ability to do so would amount to suppression of free speech, and oculd not be tolerated in a free Market-Civilisation. Thatcher was young, FOREST was young, and they might just have got away with it while the enemy-class flank was unguarded.

Instead, the report was blown out. They said “we can’t get away with this”. They decided to try and contradict the medical evidence about lung cancer (not possible to do) and also to try to say “advertising is all about getting the consumer to switch brands”…”we can switch them to “lower tar” brands!”

I and my friend said we would recommend this plan if they took it up as they wanted to, as a recipe for utter disaster, and ultimate defeat by the State.

The rest, as they say, is history. (Our recommendations were not adopted, although dear Peter Marsh endorsed every word.)

So, now that smoking is almost outlawed, people, espeically  poor people, drink heavily and eat nice-tasting food from hot-food-joints, to help distance themselves from the eternal hellfire of safety-socialism for a few minutes or hours more. The state-sponsored prevalence of post-Christian atheism means that they can’t expect anything after this life (the gumment says so) and nobody believes all those Moslems about all those virgins anyway, and half of the poor buggers are also non-virgin women and certainly not lesbians as they have children, so where do they go to, then? Hell? 

So there is only tobacco (where still allowed) burgers and chips, and drink.  Gambling will stop when they poor-buggers all run out of money, and as the state is bust there won’t be able to be a “weekly lucky chance benefit payment” scheme (to keep it running) masterminded by that man whose name I can’t remember but who is described as a “Chancellor of an Exchequer”.

There is talk that the “industry” will “work with” the gumment. That, alas, is what happened last time.

Those who do not learn from history will be condemned to repeat it.

That Podcast Again

Here are Brian Micklethwait and Antoine Clarke talking all about my new book:

Here is the book:

“Culture revolution; Culture War. How the conservatives lost England, and how to get it back.”

 And here is a comment on the podcast from David Robert Gibson:

“Well said. I have downloaded the mp3 then listened to it twice. Initially, I thought how civilised it was, and I liked their approval of Sean’s individualistic approach to libertarianism, and of his recent writing about Epicurus – a worthy subject and one of the greatest philosophers. However, I became a tad *alarmed* – Brian and Antoine gave me the impression of
belonging to the cigar and brandy chattering class school of politics. They disagreed with Sean’s notion of the ruling class, what I call The Regime, looking upon our rulers as mere unco-ordinated incompetents floundering around for a way to compensate for the failure of the Communist economic ideals of their youth, to replace them with the social equivalent. They are probably in part correct, but this world is not a university debating society – out in the real world people get hurt, and even those who don’t directly are, I think like me, developing a growing sense of anomie. Our culture is no longer our own, but rather a plaything for the increasingly interventionist Regime to inflict whatever fashionable Leftist, and
lucrative, scheme they choose, and the imported multi-culturalism, which Brian and Antoine appear to welcome, is a *central* part of that deconstruction. The Enemy Class, as Sean rightly calls them, are not a bunch of Hippies, they have vast power and wealth – our power and wealth – and they are *co-ordinated* in their plan to re-engineer this country. They steal from us to fund it, and they will imprison and kill us if we resist. We should not regard them complacently!

“My hatred of modernist culture is not mere idealism but, rather, visceral, and I would love to see a return of much, not all, of traditional English life. That is why I find Sean’s conservative libertarianism both refreshing and comforting. He and I may not agree on everything, but we are not mesmerised by the fashionable notion that if something is new or foreign it
must be better. No! – the way culture is, it is almost certainly worse. Freedom, especially responsible freedom, isn’t something invented in the 1960’s in the LSE, the Sorbonne or a Hippy commune. It existed in the minds of Indian and Chinese mystics and in those of Greek philosophers thousands of years ago. It grew in England during the Protestant Reformation and with the ideas of the Renaissance, given the opportunity to grow during the relatively enlightened reign of Elizabeth I. Its foundations were cemented by the integrity of Pym, Hampden and Cromwell and the victory of Parliament in the English Civil War. Newton, Locke, Hume and Smith (to be fair, these two were Scots, but admirers of English culture), the Mills, Wilberforce and their like helped to develop it, together with the peaceful relinquishing of
some power by the aristocracy to the people. All these are English and British achievements. They all began to be undermined by government intervention during The Great War and World War II, which was continued after 1945, particularly by Socialist governments, little restrained by the Tories, and accelerated by the current one from 1997 – our actions and even our utterances are legally constrained as never before. Consequently, I think a ‘return to the past’ would be a good thing, and I too am nostalgic for it. It would be a vastly sounder foundation for developing liberty rather than the current creeping totalitarianism. Libertarianism focuses upon people, rather than countries, but it is more possible in some
countries, and cultures, than others. I am very pleased that your media contacts despise ‘The Enemy Class’. I have long argued that beating about the bush when criticising, and when possible actively undermining, The Regime only allows them to claim their fraudulent ‘high moral ground’. The Tories have for example, with few notable exceptions, been compromising for decades, to such agree that they are now almost indistinguishable from the Socialists; effectively they are their allies.”

David Robert Gibson

Global Warming Politics ___ added to the blogroll. Go there now.

Here it is if you want it directly:

Time some other people got to cybergrips with the global rentacrowd of murdering, fascist environment-Nazi moochers and whingers, who kill people by denying them (and us) the use of powerful sources of energy. They kill especially poor ones in places like Africa, in countries which have become under-developed and over-Nazified since we left.

(There is “no safe level” of Nazification by socialists that ought to be allowed, unlike DDT or food-additives.)

Industrial loads of concentrated energy will be what liberates human beings, not socialism.

I hope it’s bloody big. Let all Those Who will visit Earth after us, know that Man passed this way too.

Bugatti Veyron Carbon Footprint.” Google it now

1,000 horse-power; more than the first Spitfire.

Libertarian overtakes Marxism on Google. (2nd July 2007, an update of that position.)

The first part is what the title was.

Here are today’s results from about a minute ago:

Libertarian = (about) 11,600,000

Marxist = (about) 8,370,000

Marxism = (about) 6,420,000

And some addons, now, for some effect;

“Right Wing” = 3,350,000

Interestingly, “liberal” = (about) 77,200,000

“left liberal” = 294,000 (really? That little?) (almost-real lefties, sort of holograms of one)

“genuine liberal” (that is to say, REAL lefties who are Stalinists and Castro-worshippers) = 17,100 (WHAT??????)


 “Fascist Bastard” (see Freedom and Whisky for more about this animal) = 713  (yes just 713.) 

Are we on the “right” (I will use the enemy’s terms here, so that their deluded map-readers can tell their Gauleiters where we are sitting, so they can throw stuff at us) all just the victims of a smoke-and-mirrors-game? Will we all wake up in a minute and find it’s just been a bad dream, and the world really is a Market-Civilisation after all?

“SHOULD GOVERNMENT CONTROL FOOD”…interesting serch-engine-term. I wonder if it’s another teacher getting at (her) pupils?

This text-string hit the starboard-hull of the Bolg, in poor visibility, in a heavy following sea, about half an hour ago. You can just picture, can’t you, the turmoil suddenly created in the Enlisted Able-Bolgmen’s Mess (Starboard, Off-Duty-Watch.) Grog-mugs and laptops scattered everywhere. And the poor buggers was writing about something else. 

Can’t have been sent from anyone doing proper work; has to beby direction, to a child, and from a member of the Unter-Kindergauleiterins-Sonderamt, within some British State-childminding-facility. 

“Should Government control food”?

I think we are beginning to see the underlying agenda driving the Fascist-lefty nonces, people-killers, narks and grasses who are behind the “obesity epedemic”.

They failed to overturn individual freedom under the Soviet Empire (although a sinister comeback is in progress there, although they did succeed in murdering tens of millions so they can be proud of limited success.) The Nazi lefties failed in Germany, although the EU is still sadly alive and (almost) well – see my posts of 3rd and 4th February 2008 – and they also managed to murder millions. They failed again when their toy Wall fell in 1989, although it was quite a lethal toy, very appropriate.

Then, capitalism still managing to limp on regardless, they tried “global cooling” in the 1970s/80s. Fortunately, the sad Jimmy Carter and the detached Callaghan wree no more, and Thatcher and Reagan shepherded the world in their strong arms, so nobody was listening.

Thne they tried “global warming”. This time, lefties, busy outflanking us while we fought the Cold War, had marched through the West’s institutions early enough and in sufficient numbers to be in positions to control the terms of discourse.

This successful March was a deeply embarrassing failing on our part, and it ought never to have been allowed. We should have realised that there was a Titanic battle between good and evil going on, against us (the good) using our own free institutions, and we should have fought back in kind. Unfortunately Hollywood  made sure that we could not do a McCarthy on our universities. Hollywood Jews ought to be ashamed of their major creative promotion of an industry, vulnerable to infiltration by lefties and anti-Americans, which set out to criticize, and even undermine, those very societies that did NOT murder them. But “global warming” has captured temporarily (I hope) the terms of debate, since its plausibility rests on the foundations of the falsified  “post-Science” now ordered to be taught as Vulgate by the Marchers. Yes, “global warming” is indeed gaining them some success; they will at least be able to hobble and attenuate the growth of freedom in some countries, those which they have successfuly marched through the institutions of.

But they won’t succeed with Chindia, no. Chindia will make them look silly in the eyes of those successful nations which cmoe after we are gone. So no future ultimately with “global warming, except to destroy our civilisation for us, here. That may be enough for them but I doubt it. They want truly global hegemony, frozen for all time. So they are ultimately doomed yet again if they stay in the gobal-warming-boat.

But wait! In the nick of time, they can bring back a version of “rationing” (does anyone remember that?) MUCH worse after WW2 even than during it, when U-boats were sinking our food as fast as we could buy it. The rationale was that the government had to control access to food, as otherwise “rich people” would buy up all the food, and “everyone else would starve” – I was even told that at kindergarten!

They’re now screaming that everybody is fat – the word “obese” somehow sounds much more like a disease requiring treatment by “experts” – reminds me of what we used to call “Soviet Government Health Farms“. Not only can they apply it directly to us as a torment now, since we are fortunate ot be able to eat enough to be full-size humans most of the time, but they can later threaten Chindia and other places with it as their standard of living increases and they can afford to but more and nicer food.

Have you noticed, how it’s always the foods which taste of anything at all, which are the “culprits”? Fats (specially the tasy ones like animal fats…) Red meats (protein mostly, but healthily leavened with salts and interesting fats.) Salt (it makes tasteless stuff, such as bare protein and starches, taste of something.) Even snails, which we may be reduced to poaching, probably illegally.

Yes I expect that governments would like to “control food”. You could even issue “coupons”; it would be like trying to buy petrol in Czechoslovakia in the 80s, they would love that! Or it would hark back to the Great Days of 1945-56, when food was actually rationed! Favoured individuals, “in” with the dictocrats, could make shagloads – like “Labour” MPs and “golden couples” (do, and would) – Cooperballs, anyone?

It’s a major aspect of individual life that this government does not yet really control effectively, so it’s probably pencilled in somewhere. You know! “No-one is suggesting that individually-focussed access to personal  nutrition requirements be made the subject of discussion-plans for centrally-determined and co-ordinated management!”

Mr No-One usually gets his suggestions adopted in time. Planning regulations….medicines….motor travel….parking….medicines….cigarettes….drugs….alcohol (soon)….cheap air travel….how long before food? 

A Podcast all about Sean Gabb!

Here are Brian Micklethwait and Antoine Clarke talking all about my new book:

Here is the book:

“Culture revolution; Culture War. How the conservatives lost England, and how to get it back.”

As the NHS fragments and declines, it really is the blind leading the blind

Yesterday, I attended an extraordinary event organised by the private medical insurer Western Provident Association.

WPA had not only hired the UK’s top healthcare lawyer, Nigel Giffin QC, but they had commissioned an extensive poll on what members of the public and members of parliament think about various aspects of legal entitlement to the NHS.

Giffin shocked the audience when in contrast to the widespread belief held by most members of the public and MPs, there is “no legal right” to NHS treatment and care. Patients don’t even have a legal right to a second opinion.

During the event it became progressively clear that people living in England are facing ever larger medical bills because they cannot get life-saving drugs on the National Health Service that are now available in Scotland! According to Giffin, patients need only to be “ordinarily resident” in a district there to access full NHS care. The issue arises because cancer patients in Scotland can be prescribed on the NHS one or more of 19 life-saving or life-prolonging drugs that are denied patients south of the border. In addition, two drugs that can prevent blindness in some cases are available free only in Scotland.

Many cancer patients are put on chemotherapy courses lasting less than six weeks or less, followed by a period in which no treatment in given.  This could make a trip to Scotland in some cases a worthwhile consideration for patients denied appropriate therapy in England or Wales. Greater availability of medicines – which can cost up to £100,000 per course – is not the only benefit enjoyed in Scotland.  Scots get free university education and the old get free “personal” care – all subsidised by the English.

Bizarrely, almost a third of the public – 29 per cent – mistakenly believe that they do not have a legal right to use their own money to top up NHS treatment by privately purchasing drugs not available on the NHS.   A slightly greater proportion of MPs – 31 per cent – thought likewise.

Talk about the blind, leading the blind!

New addition to the roll of bolgs and other such items

I have added Horsell’s Farm Enterprises to the bolg-roll. I leave you all the pleasure of finding out what it is.

War, Memory, Noble Aims, Good and Evil. I wonder when Plot-it-icians will read some history books?

Just finished re-reading John Terraine’s excellent “To Win A War”. (Not currently listed on Amazon but keep trying.)

This came up as I have been trying to teach an intelligent teenager that WW1 was about far, far more than cruel mindless bewhiskered Toff-British-Generals sending millions of men to drown and die horribly in “the trenches”; that this aspect – when we inject the (now not taught) truth that the population broadly went along with the prosecution of the war – was a sad effect of it rather than just a political objective.

In the absence of misplaced and misdirected philanthropic impulses from the mid-1800s onwards – already by then becoming unnecessary since Capitalism was very busy making poverty history by showing the world what was being achieved by non-zero-sum wealth creation – a “Labour” political constituency, pandered to by the “Liberals” would not have been forced into being, ultimately giving rise to the Fabian dream of the socialist counter-renaissance-revolution which we all see has come about around us. (We were all asleep while they “marched through the Institutions”, and we, stupid lazy bastards that we were, let them do it, we did. We thought they were harmless long-haired hippie drug-addicts letting off the steam of youth.) Men would have continued voting for conservatism indefinitely, with less baleful results for the world.

Nobody blames the Victorians, motivated by normal Christian charity as is inevitable and right, for wanting to banish suffering, and being able to make a difference at last to the lives of all people here and everywhere, on account of the the riches of capitalism directed by what Churchill called (in another context) the Strong Arms of Science.

It was then a short step from “the State should ameliorate the lot of people in life” to “the State should teach that the State should ameliorate…..”, and then to “the State should teach that WW1 was a deliberate crime against the “people” by (implied) (Conservative-looking) Upper-Class Gits in peaked caps with moustaches“.  Now, (getting back to one of John Terraine’s main theses) the State does not teach about the massive and heated disagreements between the Allies about what ought to have been in the treaty of Versailles. Nothing about the difference between the French desire for massive econo-industrial vengeance plus occupation of territory, versus Haig’s view which was that – some reparations aside – this was an absolute military victory in the Field (read the book!) and that the German armies ought therefore to be treated as if this was so, before being let home.

The existence of Libertarian philosophy  would not be – both at once – such a necessary and such an insufficient condition for the survival of individual liberty in this world today, if plotiticians were now still willing to do what they are supposed to do. That is to say, articulate the views of their electors rather than those who have marched through our institutions (we do have only ourselves to blame here really)  for their own ends. Unfortunately even most liberal (i.e conservative) plotiticians have been infected on their way up through those very institutions. Even David Cameron, for example, pre-supposed not to be a socialist, seems to believe that the State has a role in rescuing “the Lost Generation”, and even – God forbid – in education. Apart from simply buldozing the mess his predecessors have left, lowering the shredded records and smashed hard disks (a sacrilegious act against a stupendously intricate thing, a Wonder of The World!!) into a hundred skips, and quitting the arena, I can’t see what it is.

Terraine’s political point in the book is that the Allies, in giving into mainly French demands for the wrong peace, and not caring about lessons learned from past treating with defeated enemies, laid the foundations for problems to come. Wars are bad for Libertarians as they allow States to accrete more powers, while people are under pressure and have concerns more pressing than hanging onto hard-won rights. It’s therefore easy for Enemy-Class school-teachers of history today, to represent WW1 as a pure exercise in malevolent futility by the “British Officer Class”, and it saddens me, and causes lots of hard work.

I’m often blamed for being pessimistic. Well, I’m an optimist who has collected all the facts.

Guys get at me, for going on about how terrible it all is, and how we are going down into a New Dark Age, and the like. All right, let’s just look at today’s news, or some of it.

The Torygraph leads (2nd or 3rd) with a go about how “binge drinking” has not “been curbed” by relaxing licensing laws. The usual fascist “alliance of suspects” teams up behind “some experts”, to shout about how nasty it is that some people get pissed in public sometimes or more often than that.

Look, it’s bloody cold and wet and windy up here on the Island. This has been for 1,400 years due to Al Gore who you lot gave a Noble Prize to, for talking crap and prostituting scientists. We came here coz’ we couldn’t stand you lot of Romanized pimps wot drank wine and stuff (and ate barbecued mice in fish sauce, and little live birds in brandy, and frogs and snails (garlic-flavoured-rubber, but not entirely unpleasant if the garlic was good enough)), and other unmentionables.

We ‘azz to keep warm somehow. So wee getz drunk, alright? Usually in a “go”, now and then, as we hazz to go and work to grow stuff all year and do the hedges and things like that in the freezing rain so the cows don’t trample all over the food, unlike you lot back in Romanland who izz on benefits and getz paid by us through the CAP to not grow stuff, using our taxes. So we azz to drink gallons at once. The wenches too, it’s their night off as well you see.

It’s more economical to drink like that, as we only needz to get drunk say once or twice a week, unlike your grizzly “sweet old men sitting 3×3 on sunlit steps with moustaches smiling at the tourists’ People-Movers”, and who are probably faintly pissed to a slight haziness the whole time.

While we getz drunk, we all sing tunelessly about about how ‘orrible you lot are and about how we all killed Grendel the EUmonster the other day and we left the bloody frogs. Then we goes and rapes all the wenches afterwards in the barn, on whatever hay izz not too damp and cold and covered with rat-droppings. The wenches oblige by dressing like Big Brother and showing they’s meaningless tattoos on they’s bums (and other places) for us to notice, so we all knowz they izz “up for it” and it’s all right.

More taxation will only turn alcohol into a commodity like drugs, which will be stolen and mugged for. The Police will have more forms, and more different ones, to fill in, and less will be done to mitigate the baleful effects of adding another prohibited substance to the long and increasing list that fuels petty crime.

I wonder how long before we will be forbidden to own ammonium nitrate, or cars, or glue that sticks anything other than paper together?

War, Memory, Noble Aims, Good and Evil. I wonder when “helf-n-safety” will catch up with Remembrance Sunday?

I missed, owing to commitments, the usually moving parade yesterday, of what my doddery old dad used to call “all the other poor old chaps”, down our High Street to the War Memorial. (Queen Victoria’s huge statue has been recently cleaned and remounted by the Soviet, but is now facing away from the Town centre and the grand memorial, which seems illogical until you find the Soviet is hung-Libdem/others. At least they did not melt her down altogether.)

Every year, the number of poor old chaps gets a little smaller. Until a few years ago, lots of them were Poles, but the new generation of Polish immigrants wants nothing to do with history, preferring to cuddle up to Germany, letting Russia near its arse in the process with all the baleful consequences of that sexual position, and votes for Donald Tusk. Those that come here do jobs from MacDonald’s, ranging to teaching-assistants, through to advanced machine-joinery in mega-staircase-firms for hundreds of pounds a week. Good for them, but God help them for their rediscovered political naivety.

The Torygraph does a sterling job with its military obituaries, and we learn a lot of detailed history thereby, but WW1 is now passing truly out of living memory and WW2 can’t be far behind. Already, British State school students find it hard to distinguish the details of either from the other, or even from reality versus legend – perhaps they are right in one especially philosphical sort of way!

Even the Poppy says “HAIG FUND” no more, sporting the post-modern “POPPY APPEAL” logo instead. The deliberate ritual destruction of the market-civilisation that gave life to liberalism, individual rights, and “modern pluralist” “democracy” means that there will come a time, as with Christmas and Easter, when people will sort of give plastic poppies to each other in early November, maybe have parties and barbecues on the nearest Friday or Saturday after “Firework Night” (it’s gobal warm-mongering-time remember!) and exchange presents such as ipods and Prada bags, without knowing quite why they do it.

The vast but moving rhetorical inscriptions on the memorials round these parts will crumble into unreadability, without anyone noting or caring what they once portended for us today.  I posted onw for you a few months ago. The loss of many – mostly young – men (it was not considered suitable for women to fight, and it still ought not to be – this is not a libertarian issue, merely a sociobioligical one – sorry) will pass into legend not as a defence of liberty – which it was an effect of – but as some sort of evil experiment by generals, conducted upon “the People” as unwilling guinea-pigs. “Lions led by Donkeys” is what is now taught. No mention of an objective of either war features anywhere, nor a value-judgement about the desired outcome which ought to be obvious to the proverbial child of six.

The Health Nazis have already got their teeth into aspects of it. You should have seen the crowd-control barriers which were up as early as a week ago; worthy of the stuff you’d put on airports to stop petrol-laden 4x4s getting onto runways. None of that stuff was at the Cenotaph in the early 80s, even when we were at war with the NUM, university lefties, the USSR and the IRA all at once. Perhaps we were stronger people then.

I think sadly that people will from now on drift away, as the generation of grandparents which remembers vaguely the last “big one”, dies off. What it was all for, which is the most important aspect, is by way of being forgotten already. Even Falklands veterans are oldish now; their war will be progressively painted and tainted, and unpopular to the New Enemy Class. They will be forgotten quickly, along with the very public lesson they taught the world about property-rights.

Then there’ll be legislation about “unauthorised public gatherings in public places”, it will be found “difficult” to “authorise” a ceremony unless a bribe is paid (it will be called a “license fee”) and that will be that.

Our 800+++ publications still await your free download of anything you want!

New readers of this blog (and there are many) may not know that they can read the LA’s entire published output, for nothing, on the main Libertarian Alliance website. you can also save off individual files in any categories you are interested in. Most files are pdf’s; I don’t really like pdf’s but most others like them and they are convenient; well, there you are.

Just click on “LIBERTARIAN ALLIANCE PUBLICATIONS” on the LEFT SIDEBAR which scrolls down, and you will find everything your heart desires.  We have even categorised them all, under different topics and discussion-headings!

Why do people do this? Everyone will know who they are; I am worried for them.

More private plate stuff. Seen within 30 minutes of driving time at about 2pm today.

JIII SXE              CL51RE   L                P1  EYE            MI5  DFK            

X8 ORME            GE51 GEE                  S88MY   D 

 And no we don’t live anywhere near Beverley-Hills either.

 I do wonder about these kinds of people. In a society where getting noticed usually means trouble, whether from the guvmint or from shiftless amoral thugs (you may well ask what’s the difference) I wonder why they do it. Perhaps they can afford the repaint jobs after keying? (That’s what would have happened to me when we lived in London) or else they are impervious to their employees’ demands for a rise on the basis of the cost of the plate?

Or perhaps they have run out of things to spend the money on. 

OK, OK, I admit it! I am making value-judgements about what people do with their funds. But I can’t help thinking that a private library, for themselves and their children and their grandchildren, would have been a better purchase.

I would still have “4”, if it was offered.                 

“HOW DO YOU DEFEND TESCO AS A MONOPOLY”…(?)…Interesting search-engine-string which arrived at this blog yesterday!

“How do you defend Tesco as a monopoly?”

Two ways in which this intrigued me were that (1) somebody other than the guvmint (WHY IS THERE ONLY ONE?) and the “Competition Commission” (WHY IS THERE ONLY ONE?) thinks Tesco might be a monopoly, and (2) the poor wretched outfit might be in need of defence.

This betrays a large measure of misunderstanding, possibly fostered deliberately by our Marxist-dominated schools and this state here, about what monopolies actually are and what the word actually ought to mean (this does not surprise me.)

Yes, Tesco DOES need defending. Its directing-staff may think they can survive in an increasingly Marxist/Mooching/maundering/mingeing western world, gone to the dogs through failure to stay awake after the fall of The Wall. But they can’t; the Stalinist Nazi Wraiths of Wickedness just reincarnated themselves as greens, anti-packagers, organic hippies, ferocious followers of 4x4s, and wind-worshippers. And also as haters of successful provision of cheap food (THE PRINCE OF WALES THINKS CHEAP FOOD IS AN OBSESSION) to poor people.

Monopolies cannot exist naturally, in a market civilisation. I will no longer use the term “market economy” ever again in this blog, for one of these cannot exist for long or on a large enough scale to help Humankind, without a “civilisation” being prepared by broad consent to defend it against assaults by various nefarious “idealists”.

They (idealists) should learn a bit of physics. Every schoolboy knows that physicists deduce theories on the basis of “ideal” or theoretical scenarios about the behaviour of the universe. BUT all the while they know full well that actual observed behaviour only approximately approaches ideality, but THAT IS GOOD ENOUGH for today’s imperfect setup (“we see through a glass, darkly”). Utopians don’t understand the Nature of God and thus therefore can’t stand this state of affairs, and therefore can never, tragically for themselves, be scientists. They have to gas on and on in the Guardian instead like poor sad Polly Toynbee or that ghastly other woman whose name I can’t remember, or if all else fails, get jobs teaching politics and English in Universities while the people who pay for them are sleeping or unconscious.

Tesco wants defending, because (a) it is not a monopoly (these collapse naturally anyway in market civilisations), (b) it provides cheap food for the Prince of Wales’s employees not to mention everybody else, and (c) its tough business model exposes brightly the machinations of greenazis and EuroCAP Nazis to real scrutiny, bringing itself into the political spotlight in the process.

I’m sure the farmers who are in the position of growing Charles’s Duchy Originals can’t themselves afford to subsist on the stuff. I mean, have you SEEN the prices? Fine for Waitrose I guess. But they occupy a different market niche.


Seen in a camping type shoppy thingy near here. the allusion is comical in the extreme I think.

“Gay hatred Laws are anti-free-speech” – their headline!

Iain Dale in today’s wobbly-Tory  Graph is good, here

It is interesting that the “hate speech” legislation, and other recent New-Labour-type strictures about what people can and can’t say about certain “minorities”, all seem to relate to groups which are -or have in the past either been – associated with the Left’s assault on “The Establishment” or against “The West” (that is to say, post-enlightenment-Judeo-Christian Civilisation.) The public associations which the jolly toytown Mayor Jim Livingstone goes out of his way to create, between himself and such groups as “Gay Pride” , chav-Latin Dictocrats and Radical Moslems, is rather a giveaway in my opinion.

Iain Dale himself is a proper liberal, as liberals go today (with a small “l”, which is why he is a conservative.) He takes the Libertarian line which is that people ought to be able to say what they think and also to laugh about what pleases them.

It is now but a short step to more “hate speech” statutes, possibly relating to other groups whose votariat-power is important to this administration, such as any “Public Servant” whatsoever. Perhaps attacking your local MP in the letters page of your local rag (providing only that he is not a Tory, in which case it’s a Public Duty to assault him) will attract a visit from the Police, and the hated DNA-swab, if not worse.

While they are about it, why not criminalise anything even vaguely satirical about anybody – except white Bourgeois English Males who are any of the following; married to one wife at a time and living with her; self-employed; in salaried work in private firms? A single Enabling Act would do the trick!

The Libertarian Alliance does not condone any form of limitation of private speech OR thought, subject to existing Libel or Slander laws covering speech or publication, which are perfectly adequate for the task they have to achieve.

And finally, what do the New Thought Police think they can do about what we all know goes on or is said in school playgrounds? They have only to regard the fate of Ozymandias, in their attempts to stamp out smoking, drugs and sex among today’s British schoolchildren, and despair. Not one of these is going to stop telling “gay/lezzo” jokes any time soon, and the telling will merely be encouraged and amplified by restriction. 

Video record of the Libertarian Alliance 2007 Conference; THE LINKS ARE WORKING, I PROMISE!

They were not at first, and then I had to go out. Very sorry!

They are working now. Please see the post below this one for the stuff you want to see, in glorious technicolour…. 

I have stood on each link, and jumped up and down furiously, and nothing broke; well not yet anyway.

Perhaps, having sent the men away after work, I didn’t sweep out all the sawdust from the wooden-computer-thingy-workings first, or maybe I missed the odd rat-dropping between the wooden bits.

Video record of the Libertarian Alliance 2007 Conference; also the 2006 and 2005 events, if you can click stuff!

Here they are. You can click on the date-links to get each conference.



The Libertarian Alliance has held dozens of conferences and seminars during the past thirty years. Most of these are evidenced by nothing more than an old brochure, the occasional publication arising, and a mass of photographs in the Chris R. Tame collection.

In 2005, however, we acquired a video camera, and decided that everything from then should be carefully recorded and made available. Here are the video records of the conferences held since then.

2007 Conference of the Libertarian Alliance and Libertarian International, held in November at the National Liberal Club in London

2006 Conference of the Libertarian Alliance and Libertarian International, held in November at the National Liberal Club in London

2005 Conference of the Libertarian Alliance and Libertarian International, held in October at the National Liberal Club in London 


And no, sorry! I don’t know either, why wordpress has formatted the 2005 conference in a larger pointsize! (Faced with computer-stuff, I sometimes I feel like that semi-funny guy in the movie, the one where the unlikely comedian sits by accident in the cockpit towards the end of the film, pulls levers while wisecracking, in order to try to save the world from the evil Bureautrons, or whatever. Then sometimes he even pulls the right one.)

You know!  “I wonder what this button does??!!”

YET MORE jolly personalised number plates!

Spotted between 08.25 and 09.05, just around the town this morning….

 S4LJY… J2 JUU… 666 DCD… M2O SN…

Then, these three in procession within 50 yards of each other; D8 MOL…D12TTO…M5YOY…

X7MAH…V6NPE…T68ATH (I do wonder about this person…?) DUM 46 (and about this one too.) 

I suppose we as libertarians ought to be pleased that one can have some harmless pleasure while yet labouring under the state-numbering system. But I worry that as socialist hegemonic culture grips ever tighter, the only way people feel they can stand out is status-based.

Personally, I prefer to drive about as anonymously as possible; the state knows too much about our travel habits already.

David Farrer reports on first day of Libertarian Alliance 2007 Conference

My wife and I have now returned from our annual visit to the Libertarian
Alliance Conference. We travelled down from Edinburgh to London on
what’s probably going to be our last round trip on GNER before that
company transfers the franchise to operate the line to National Express.
I do believe that privatisation has been of great benefit to passengers
over the last few years.

Libertarians hold varying views on the immigration question but all of
us agree that getting rid of the welfare state is an essential part of
any solution. On the day before the conference we happened to visit
Brick Lane in East London. It’s an excellent example of how some
immigrants to Britain have created a vibrant small-business culture.

I don’t suppose that the production of the musical Chicago that we saw
on Friday evening was subsidised by the taxpayer. That’s how things
should be. And all that Jazz.

On Saturday morning I headed off early to the National Liberal Club and
met Tim and Helen Evans who were preparing for the Conference.

First off was Leon Louw who had just arrived from South Africa after
successfully manoeuvring his way through the Home Office bureaucracy.

Leon is an excellent speaker whom I’ve heard before on a couple of
occasions. His speech was entitled “The Disaster of Water Socialism: Why
the Sea should be Privatised”.

Leon emphasised that we shouldn’t pay too much attention to technical
questions such as how the sea can be fenced off but more on the
intellectual question of private ownership itself. Let the market decide
on the technology and we can all start to benefit from the vast
resources of the oceans was the message we got.

Next on was Professor Bruce L. Benson speaking on “Private Law
Enforcement: Libertarian Ideas on the Future of Justice”.

Bruce’s book  explains that:

  Benson argues that public dissatisfaction with legal institutions is as
prevalent as public disgust with many public institutions. That’s hardly
surprising. They are funded through taxes, run by bureaucracies, are
famously inefficient, lack the capacity to calculate economically, and
ignore the demands of consumers.

And that’s what we heard about. The inefficiencies of the police and
indeed the whole British justice system are to be found elsewhere. And
the solution says Benson is privatisation. I agree and would prefer to
be a customer of Lothian and Borders Police PLC instead of funding them
through my ever-increasing Council Tax.

After I’d had lunch with LA member David Ellams, there was a talk by Dr.
Syed Kamall MEP. Yes, there is indeed “one of us” in Brussels! It
shouldn’t be the case but it probably helps the libertarian case to have
someone from an ethnic background make the case for free trade. That’s
what Syed does very well. Free trade especially helps the poor.

The final session on Saturday was on the Surveillance Society.
LA members David Carr and Brian Micklethwait spoke, with David being
more pessimistic than Brian. I guess that I tend towards David’s
position on this – perhaps the result of being a libertarian in a
non-libertarian world for so long. But Brian may be right. Technology
enables us to watch them and they don’t like it. Good.

In the evening we attended the annual LA dinner in the excellent NLC
room that overlooks the river. The main speaker was Alex Singleton of
the Globalisation Institute. We heard more of Syed’s message: freedom is
essential for the world’s poor.
Neil Lock won the Chris R Tame memorial essay on “Does Britain Need a
Libertarian Party?” Dr Robert Lefever’s PROMIS Unit of Primary Care
funded the £1,000 prize.

Unfortunately my winter chest infection struck with a vengeance on
Sunday morning and I was unable to attend the second day of the
Conference but I’m sure that it was as successful as day one.

Personalised number plates. More. Why do people do it? Do they want everyone to “know who they are”?


What is it about these people? Do they want to be politicians or slebs or summat? I mean, the stuff isn’t even on very good cars here. You could forgive, I suppose, 26L on your girlfriend’s Bentley convertible, or 41JB on your own Range Rover deluxe; but this stuff? Why?

Only asking coz’ I wants to know. 

I also saw P11KY D, ST03LEN, L10N PE, W16AN M, W16AN W, A BA8Y, A 1oV DR, 100 POO, 13DC……………..

MI5 CYK, B16 ROB, B10 RJD, T3ACH, G4VEG (at least he’s a trader who sells veg)……..

B16 PAM, (she is, very big, too and you know where she lives and works, now!) UR51 DAD, B1111, J111 PYE,  A DO11, and I see X 4 DC X every day after school. Then there’s R1oYDS, also L1OYDS, and the like.

And numerous sets of obvious initials, today, yesterday and last week. Welcome to upper-Scouseland and also the Wigan peneplain.

These are just ordinary people, whom nobody knows except their friends. Why do they do it? In London, their employees would leave in droves in disgust, their customers would publicly demand discounts, and their cars would be keyed. Worse, the Police would always know who they are, and they cannot get off speeding tickets. 

Libertarians of course should rejoice that you can in principle have any car number you want. I would have “4”, for say the Aston, or even “5” let us suppose for the Bugatti Veyron, or “3B” or “ZY57VZD” for the Citroen people-mover – then, nobody on the street would know who I was. But in a socialist “status”-driven society like now, it is merely horrid.

In a contract-driven one, however, a personal plate would be all you would want.

Do we want children to smoke or not? I think of Auberon Waugh here sometimes.

Today, outside the tobacconist/sweetshop near my boy’s secondary school, I observed the usual groups of schoolchildren, lounging about in that studiedly televisual way (you know the attitudes and body-positions) pretending to look at nothing and nobody in particular, which the bored mass of today’s British teenagers adopts when it thinks it is performing something…..coool.

Obviously they were smoking. Currently this activity is still legal. There are no state strictures (yet) on who can smoke at what age in the only place left, which is the “street”. I was sorry for them; I would not smoke you paid me, taking as I do the Chris Tame line that smoking is a disgusting smelly habit that makes you like kissing an old ash-tray, and could make you ill (but it’s your body not mine. you are not my Farm Animal. I cannot, and I may not, do with you as I wish; that is called rape.)

You can legally buy tobacco products. (But since 1st October only if over 18….so how come you can shag or leave school at 16, and drive cars at 17 – all activities which “could cost the taxpayer” shagloads of dosh via the “healthcare budget”?)

You can legally own tobacco products – as much tonnage as you like too – provided you have not gone to the trouble of enriching the State’s coffers even further by buying lots of fuel to get them elsewhere, such as Calais, where the state-take on them is a smaller %.

For all I know, you can even grow plots of Nicotiana variations in your garden and manufacture your own (bet you can’t sell it as spunk or even tobacco though…) the flower-seeds are sold for ornament; ergo it must be possible, in these days of global warm-mongering, and ice ages as of now,  to grow your own. 

However, let is now turn to the GCSE “science” parts of the nationalised Curriculum, in particular the Biology syllabus. Here you can find one example. These days, it is quite interesting in a sociological kind of way, for it bears little resemblance to formal biological science. This is because, as we all have rumbled, the “New Science” GCSEs have been craftily designed so as to be able to be “delivered” by non-science graduates in schools. This in turn is because there are now no Formal Science Graduates, much, in the UK, who want to work as teachers of what now amounts to what my boy labels as Marxism.

The “New” Biology is all about socialising the behaviour of the “kids”. Not content with PSHE (more Marxism) and Citizenship (yet more – I told the youngfella to tell his mates all either tot ext each other or to go to sleep in the sessions, so they do) the DFEE or whatever it’s called this week has injected yet further enlargement of the parts about Smoking and Health; Alcohol and its effects; Drugs and their status/effects/penalties/results for your body and brain. I paraphrase – the language used is just too patronizing and portentious for words.

For instance – you have in one exam question (I bet you 5p it will be set) to classify some “drugs”….Alcohol, Nicotine, Ecstasy, Cannabis, as one of the following; Recreational….Addictive….Illegal….Harmful….there are no marks for ticking the wrong box in each case.

Other questions focus on “obesity”, and “heart rate” before and after “fitness training programmes” (the participants featured in these exam questions are always and invariably “athletes” and “female”……and a “student” is always “she”…… Sometimes they are called “Samina” or “Preethi”.) I don’t object to this at all, for women sometimes are athletes (Poor girls! Whyever?) and also sometimes are called this sort of thing (there may even be more Preethis and Fatimas on the planet than Kerry-Annes and Jades) but then I am not a child living in Slaidburn or Hawes or Benbecula; not all the children of the UK reside in Leicester or Tower Hamlets or Bradford, only a few.

For the scientists reading this, there is almost no Classical Biology at all. Hardly any biochemistry, except for the fine details of hormonal changes and physical structure of the uterus-lining versus days-after-last period, in the female menstrual cycle (which is well-tested, and boys have to know it too) plus stuff about how contraceptive pills can “help a woman to regulate her fertility”. There is also stuff about IVF and hormone-treatment to “facilitate planned pregnancy”. (Yep, if you’re a hard boy, who’s into the footy and yer X-Box, you have to learn this stuff too or you will not do well and you will get a “D”!)

But back to smoking, and why do these poor children do it? I mean, it smells bad, and it means you have to carry baggage about like fags and matches or lighters, and it costs a bomb coz’ of socialism whan it does not even need to, and it’s utterly disgusting – only ameliorated in totally and utterly-disgusting disgustingness by the axiom that Hitler, who brought in the first State anti-smoking laws in the world, was not someone you’d have wanted your daughter to marry. At least the smoking of fags went up every year in the Third Reich until 1945 (probably after it too, the poor sods. wonder where they got the tobacco – and what exactly was it made of by then? I mean, I’d never wish the poor Germans all the deaths they all got, but they imho were morally liable as a nation for what then occurred, having  failed to not vote for Hitler in 1933.)

They do it, I believe, because they are dinned and drummed, every day, in pshe, citizenship, and now in science (and probably in “English” lessons too if the truth be told) that they must not. That’s even worse than “ought not to”. Any child of six with a degree from a jumped-up-socialist up-the-road-Poly in psychology, would tell you that what you are told not to do, you will do. The more? The more.

Ciggies are easy to get. You just either threaten the shopkeeper if you are a big male Y11, or else you get yer-mum to get you some, or else you steal them from her bag hoping she can’t count, or you go out aged 13-dressed-as-19, on Saturday, if yoo izz a chick or a babe. (I know they do; they tell me. They know I won’t grass them up.) Then, you peddle them at 50p (the going rate) a fag.

Mr X—-, the deputy-Head, doing fag-patrol outside the shop at 3.30, can do nothing. they’ll just wait till he’s gone in freezing to death in the rain, and carry on. Their role-models, on the Wireless Tele-Vision every evening, on “Corrie” or “Eastenders“, will continue to tell them how to behave.

Once more, we have a scenario in which the Hegemonic Mediarati prescribe behaviour with one hand – and even enshrine in  the state “Curriculum” as “Science” (I mean, for f***’s sake!) enforcing draconian laws so to do, while yet allowing themselves to make an opinion-forming climate of beliefs that glorifies the very sort of habits that they purport to want to extinguish. In the meantime they collect billions in taxation, mainly from the constituency that’s least able to afford it, and in which smoking represents one of the few pleasures left to the poor. 

This leads me onto foreign aid, a probably-large and gaping orifice of state-resource-swallowing, which Peter Bauer described as wicked and immoral, in that money was hoovered off poor people in rich countries, to be given to rich people (mercs-4-jerks) in poor countries. But I’ll “do” foreign aid another time,  maybe tomorrow, maybe not.

There’s no wikipage for “Mercs for Jerks”. Would anybody like to write one? I think it should be done!

What a bummer! WHIPPED…by Little Man What Now?…Oh dear, we did not react fast enough. Jean Charles de Menezes and his sad (certainly un-necessary) death at the hands of the Met

Oh, shit! 

We find that we in the Libertarian Alliance, have been CASTIGATED on his own bolg, by Little Man What Now. This is over our failure to respond to the sad business of the culpability (obvious) of the Socialist (N***) Police in London over this titled matter. This interests me personally in a sort of academic way, for I did not know that there was a distinction between “Libertarians” and “Vulgar Libertarians”, and would value some instruction so as not to make “Errors”. I’m interested in taxation policy as applied by Nazi guvmints towards poor-people who – being poor –  have therefore to work, as opposed to other people who work for guvimnts and therefore do not have to work, and who thus can pontificate about who shops for what, and where. (See tags like Waitrose, Tesco, 4x4s, etc.) I gather that one gripe agaonst us is to do with that policy position, but I may be wrong.

What exactly is a “Vulgar Libertarian”? I did not know; either a Man (and that is to say also, a Woman) is a Libertarian, or He (and /or She) is not (I thought?)

I apologise for not commenting here about this poor Brazilian, who, it now seems quite clear, was clearly murdered, very bloodily, and probably in totally unauthorised fashion by gun-wielding police, who clearly also thought that they had got someone else, and were clearly briefed to shoot first, very fully, and ask about it afterwards. 

What I would say is that there is a war to the death going on, between two “civilisations”. In this, one side refuses to admit, due to self-imposed and un-necessary multiculti-political-nazi reasons, that it is actually at war with a post-modern tactical coalition of socialism and a pre-capitalist-barbarian-warlord-system, whose priorities are the allocation of women, animals, children and slaves, in lands where there is nothing. Due to un-necesarily-retained hang-up-baggage, largely caused by internal Eageltonization, the one side chooses to attack itself as often as possible, both to show outwardly how “tolerant” it is, and inwardly to show how fierce it is in defence of its supposed real responsibilities, while the other is allowed to say what it wants.

The attacked side is hamstrung by anti-liberal multiculti, but yet it has to be seen from time to time to be “doing something”, otherwise nobody in the masses will buy into the myth that the security services are “protecting us”, and nobody will go along with the progressive erosion of liberties that the Fabian Socialists of the West demand, in order to bring about its demize.

So it was probably inevitable, that a poor Brazilian electrician, who looked  a bit semitic, and who came out of the wrong door in the wrong part of South London (the wrong part of any city on the planet imho, and I can tell you, for I have lived there!) one morning, and who ran onto the tube a bit too fast, would be shot at. Easy target; they probably did not expect the fallout, the Police didn’t. Easy way to “get a result” at a difficult time. Anybody remember “New” “Labour” and “Spin”? they probably thought they could get away with it.

I’m not sure if this answers LittleManWhatNow’s query, but as he said, we are not salaried journalists; we have lives to lead and families to feed; we have not time to scratch our bums (which smart; we ARE fixated by over-taxation by guvmints; and also their depradations against retailers like Tesco who try to feed poor-people for no money at a profit; we do our best.

We do not condone the murder of JC de Menezes by “our” Police, either in error or as a staged stunt – who knows? But there is a lot of other stuff to do, and the nonblog-media have covered it totally already. We blog about what we can, we do not get paid (!) and we do try hard to cover important stuff.

HEGEMONY OBESITY…..God, I just LOVE the smell of human beings in the morning! The unimaginable things their brains come up with! Fat Food Obesity Nazis more.

HEGEMONY OBESITY was a search-engine-string applied to some machine or other, somewhere in the world, yesterday. The seeker reached us.

How wonderful. “Hegemony Obesity”! I just have to say it to myself again, and again.

This person has just GOT to be on our side! 

In two words, the phrase just says it all, about the unimaginably horrific plans certain of our temporal masters in the UK have for us, as their Farm Animals.

First, they frame the terms of discussion.

Then, they tell us what to eat.

Then, they corrupt the life of a popular London Laddie, on the Telly, to tell Soviets what to tell schools to tell children what to eat. (The upper-middle-class-parents all love him, the Single Mums and their children who only understand chip-butties don’t, the poor starved children of all classes rebel, but nobody in Soviets pays any attention…….and then you have the psychological crust, the mental rind, to wonder about knife crime in schools?)

Then the Nazis accuse everyone of being “obese”……I wonder about the non-use of the word “fat”, and think perhaps it’s regarded as “working-class”, so the food-Nazi-dictocrats don’t want to use it. “Obesity” can be made to sound like something……..sub-human, something……..diseased, a failing. Anyway, they’ve already “done” fat, as a term of abuse for “cats”, which is to say in their terms people who make money by working quite hard serving people.

Removal of Christmas. Hmmm. I don’t know – you’re a Libertarian; do YOU want to remove it?

I went round a minute or so ago to Hot Air, a frequent source of satirical comment on the unreality of Socialist nonsense, and found this. Moonbattery. They shall go in the bolg-roll; great stuff, and I am pleased that the planet still contains a few hundred sane people. Let’s keep buggering on!

We learn, as if we did not know, that  some people who disagree with how we interpret the world and the Universe, want to eraze some of the ways in which we do our interpreting.

Fort Collins Removing Christmas from “the Holidays”

November is the time moonbats turn their attention to suppressing Christmas. Yesterday we learned that as part of its overall strategy to eradicate British culture, the Labour Party’s beloved Institute for Public Policy Research wants to downgrade Christmas in favor of holidays from other religions, since they don’t feel they have the leverage yet to “expunge” it from the calendar altogether. On the other side of the world, in Colorado:

Fort Collins has decided to make the holidays less about Christmas, and more about our diversity.

Christmas displays are to be less “Christmas-y,” avoiding “things that scream Christmas at folks.” For example, lights will be blue and white, because red and green lights might remind someone of Christmas, which must never be done at Christmastime, since that might offend those who hate Christmas.

What kind of fiend hates Christmas? Why do the Grinch and Ebenezer Scrooge take precedence over the vast majority of Americans who are decent, normal people? The answer: because moonbats are in charge, and they are anything but decent or normal.

When progressives have succeeded in killing Christmas, it will be a major step toward their goal of replacing our culture with a vacuum that is both sterile and unclean.

Even that we won the World War 1587-1991, and we a single culture, latterly and collectively defeated at least two other evil ones while yet being bust; I want to wonder how we have ended up like this, in the foredays of Armageddon, and up against previously intelligent human beings, from among ourselves, who have become Monsters and Socialists.

Libertarians may sometimes be atheists (I know many who are, although as a scientist I have always found it 100% easy  – rationally –  to acknowledge the existence and benevolent omnipotence of God – that is what Science does – it lets us know what is in God’s Mind) but only non-libertarian Socialist Utopiomaniacs would want to forbid the festivals of one particular religion.

Let these people start to badmouth some revered festivals of a rather-strongly-promoted-and-ultra-Vulgatic-pre-capitalist-desert-survival-guide, for example; 

Or Diwali, which may have some foudation in actual religion, but I am not a 2007-British-schoolchild and do not do “R-E” so I do not know -

- and see what would happen.

If someone does not “like” “Christmas”, or want to “believe” something about it and what it is about, and the “colours that it uses”, which “could offend”…. then all he has to do is go and live somewhere else, where it does not feature in the lives of the other people round him whom he presumably despises? Or have I missed something vital here?

The Chemistry Set; an endangered species.


Just HAD to share this with you – found it quite by accident.

We should be in agreement with the Twelve Angry Men, that depriving children of the power to experiment, especially with interesting and sometimes hazardous stuff, for limp anti-libertarian excuses, will hand all the advantages to Chindia while shuffling the West into the New Dark Age about which I complain so vociferously.

Perhaps there is a hidden agenda here; people who “know about (hard) science” will tend to be critical, thinking individuals; just the sort who are dangerous to guvmints.

SO SHUT UP AND WATCH YOUR TELLY*…..we gave it to you with your UB40, to tell you what to think and say.

THAT’S WHAT IT’S FOR….you Moron.

WE’LL TELL YOU WHAT TO THINK….and we wrote the curriculum (no “science”, coz’ it’s DANGEROUS. Al Gore is YOUR FRIEND, he WANTS TO HELP you. If you don’t listen to us, then you might find out how to think………and then we’ll have to RE-EDUCATE you.) 

AND WHEN TO THINK IT…..when we tell you there’s an “election”.

*Wireless Tele Vision


Time to defend poor persecuted Tesco again (for being cleverer than, and with a better-adapted business model than, its rivals and “little shops”.)

The wobblyTory Graph has, as usual, all you need to know here. The Competition Commission (PRAY TELL!….WHY IS THERE ONLY ONE….???) presumably some junta of quangocrats set up by the same guvmint that permits ONLY ONE (State) POST OFFICE and ONE NATIONAL CURRICULUM, has threatened Tesco that it could be penalised for “investing and taking risks”.

The “Regulator” (???) has “concluded that there is a lack of competition in a number of local markets – although overall the sector delivered “a good deal for consumers”.

The breathtaking hypocrisy of the following barefaced statement, made with the disarming frankness of a Hitler or a Giscard-d’Estaing (thank God there has been only one of each – beware imitators who still live! Do not accept sweets from them in the street or on State Visits!) by an administration which monopolises health care, post, education, defence, money supply, and roads, and cunningly cartelises stuff like rail and broadcasting, defies belief;

As well as forcing supermarkets to sell up to 40 stores and more than 100 sites in towns where they dominate, the commission is also considering giving local authorities the power to bar supermarkets from opening extra stores in towns where they already have a certain number or their market share exceeds a limit.

 Listen up; “Local Authorities” are already vastly over-powered and under-responsible to anyone, and are acting in all respects like little (and not so little) Hitlers already. The bloated one here has armoured black Jags and a “cabinet” – at least it’s hung so it can’t go about being like the neighbouring ones. Give all these sociology “graduates” from jumped-up-techs the power to actually push businesses about even harder than they already do, and I don’t think their blood-pressures and heart-rates could stand the strain on their diet of soya mince, pasta without salt and chicken-manure.

Who is to say what the market share of a free and not-enslaved business in its sector, competing freely and legally against others, “ought” to be? What hubris is this, on the part of these ghastly, arrogant nazis? Not content with that, they’ll be hectoring us, the customers, about what to eat next! And this report presages rationing… just watch this place in ten years’ time.

I think we should all write to Sir Terry Leahy, telling him what self-regarding, jumped-up little whingers his critics are, for daring to pull his ship down for the supposed crime of being successful and expanding through generating happy repeat business.

Honestly, it makes you wonder what it will finally take, for the British to get up from the sodding telly at last, and kick out their fatal fixation on this kind of slightly nasty, faux-state-Nazism that they seem to have wanted to tolerate in their lives for so long.