What ought Western Libertarians to do, when they suspect that their electoral system and its numbers are being man-handled, to produce a particular result? Like a new-Laborg-win, in the next general “election”?
There are no conditions under which (to use a great literary construction by Jeffrey Archer, used by him several times in books by him which I am proud to own) the Laborg can win an election this side of 2012 with the current figures. unless they cheat, lie, do “ppostal voting”, or “sign up” lots of client-votariat.
North Korea and Cuba and Russia – and now the UK - describe themselves as “democracies”. This is not what liberals mean by democracy. (For the benefit of North American readers of this blog, when I say “liberal” on here, and elsewhere, I MEAN liberal – that is to say, one of us who might write here: free-market/libertarian/non-socialist/non-Nazi. When I refer to Hilary Clinton as a “liberal”, I mean that this means “socialist”, which is to say, illiberal.)
There is now going on a rapid and feverish addition to what we call our “electoral rolls” – people who are registered to vote in “elections”. The observed trend is of inclusion of hundreds of thousands of people who might be expected to vote for the continuation of the extisting pork-barrel policies of handing money and facilities to “immigrants”.
I have nothing against immigrants. My mother was one, from Lebanon, a paternal great-great great (etc) grandfather was a Huguenot, and my wife is one. Anglo-Saxons, used a a term of racist abuse by the Brussels/EU and also by Hitler and Stalin frequently (go figure) are immigrants. We ought to be proud that people want to cross water and come here when they could so easily stay the other side.
But using them as a stick with which to not care about what “British” think, in a democracy, is underhand and socialist. Why am I not surprised?
And no, this is not the only paper to notice this shenannigan. I just go there first because I can’t stand the Guardian – and am so pleased that it is about to be sued for unlimited damages by Tesco. Of all people: why are we not humiliated that the fundamental truths about our civilisation ought to be allowed to operate have been reduced to being defended by a supermarket, for Christ’s sake?
We are coming to the point, as I said on Eurorealist today, where we have to decide how much it matters that
(1) letters to the editor of the Much-Binding-in-The-Marsh-Masturbator (probably owned by the Trinity Mirror Group) about the EU and directives, asking for “moderation” and “common sense”,
(2) complaining politely about “political correctness gone mad”
(3) civilised petitions of “more than 11 signatures”
(4) peaceful demos more than 1 kilometre (what’s that?) from the Houses of Parliament
are of no use whatsoever, since this outfit does not care what we think.
if it does not matter, why waste the effort? if it does matter, what are we going to now do?