This blog does not favour a Tory government…..(and WTF does “post-modern” mean? I do not know)


…..but it favours the continuation of a Labour government even less positively than that.

David Davis

What we would like is a LPUK government (despite the fact that the LA takes no party-political position on this matter) or, in default of that, a UKIP one which nasty Libertariano-Gramsistio-inverted-Marxists like me could, slightly possibly, subvert and direct into libertarian paths rather more easily than we could direct the policies of the LPUK or certainly of the Tory party (discuss….I relish the fireworks.)

However, there could be a General Election in 2009: but I doubt it. If there is, Gordon Brown could still win, or at least Guido thinks so. The risk is there.

Guido thinks that there’s a probability of another 3/4/5 (whatever) years of Zanulieborg. What libertarians have to consider, at least who think that the continuing existence of Britain not only as a (now failed but headless-chicken-walking) state but as a home of liberty and the birthplace of libertarian philosophy, er, matters, is whether it’d be better if Labour won?

Are there still enough active and angry liberals (call them Whigs, whatever, who cares) to make a difference the next time round, so that we could conceivably rescue ourselves by some revolutionary means which I cannot right now imagine, from another session of Labour/Nazi tyranny……..?

……..Or, would we prefer even a possibly short spell of “conservatism” – which we of course would view not very differently from full-blown Statism, which it will still resemble – in order to slow the slideage into the political/tyrannist cesspit enough for, say, the Indians or the Chinese to rescue us?

I know that when Chris Tame died, he said that didn’t think there were enough classical liberals left to make a difference any more, and that he was rather pessimistic about the prospects for liberty. I hope he was wrong.

But if the Tories lose, again, in 2009 or 2010, what then will YOU do? What will become of “Jacqui” “Smith” ?

I can’t believe that someone who looks like that and talks like that and says the things which it does, is a real personette. I just can’t. Sorry. It’s a construct; probably “post modern”, whatever that term means. I don’t know. Really. Really. I have not even looked it up, I am so terrified of what I might find.

What is “post-modernism? Please could the commentariat tell me for I do not know?

About these ads

13 responses to “This blog does not favour a Tory government…..(and WTF does “post-modern” mean? I do not know)

  1. Post Modernism you ask?

    This is probably the point at which NuLab abandon all the modernisation programmes that we have been falsely fed with, and replace it with the UK version of the Constitution that they have just forced onto the Falkland Islanders.

    A truly dictatorial document.

    http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si2008/uksi_20082846_en_1

    A quick review can be read here.

    http://landedunderclass.wordpress.com/2008/11/14/falkland-islands-constitution/

    The Libertarian Party totally denounce the UK Government for the imposition of a Dictators Charter on the people of the Falklands Islands, and demand that they withdraw this new Constitution immediately.

  2. David,

    One would hope that you needn’t actually try to direct LPUK: we should be going the same way anyway…

    DK

  3. The Tories are now just the flip side of the same Authoritarianism- The LPUK has a raft of policies that make utter sense, and guide us away from moral and political bankruptcy

    Guthrum

  4. It was a joke, Devil!

  5. Devil, of course you know what to do. I wouldn’t presume…..

  6. And Guthrum just says it better than I can. I do try, though,to be constrictive, I do wish that I knew how to write. (He’s totally correct of course.)

  7. I meant “constructive” … (“constrictive” means something so different that I could have shat myself with horror for it.)

  8. Very possibly a New Labour victory and five more years of Gordon Brown would be preferable to Cameron and “Blue Labour”, because after about 16 years in power, New Labour will be utterly discredited. There would be nobody left to blame.

    Meanwhile the Tories would have binned the election losing David Cameron. As the Tories’ electoral message would then be we are different from New Labour, rather than the current one that we are a nicer New Labour, and the problems they would then face would be gargantuan, they would probably be forced by dire necessity to adopt saner policies and a discourse to justify them.

    On the other hand, if “Blue Labour” wins the next election, they will just continue in the same direction with the same basic assumptions as New Labour, although perhaps a little slower. It may then be that come the point of complete crisis the pendulum will have swung back in New Labour’s favour.

    At least there are some individuals in the Tory party who are sympathetic to Britain, its armed forces, history, culture, free enterprise, private property, etc.. In an overt crisis of over government they might get a sympathetic hearing, because nobody else has any alternative ideas.

    Alternatively, things may just trundle along getting worse and worse until the Eurabian civil war in two or three decades; Then who knows what could happen?

  9. Dave:

    Some of us ARE doing lots of things, without looking backwards all the time to an imagined Lost Golden Age.

    =============================================================================

    From: Tony Hollick, | To: ADM Noel Gayler, USN (Ret.)

    4, Grayling House, | 2111 Mason Hill Drive

    Canford Road, | Alexandria,

    Bristol BS9 3 NU, | Virginia 22306,

    England. | United States of America

    Telephone (0117)-9504914 | Telephone ****************

    =============================================================================

    Mailto:Anduril@STARGATE.uk.net

    Mailto:Tony.Hollick@gmail.com

    ==============================================================================

    Dear Admiral Gayler,

    Again, thank you so much for speaking with me when I’ve telephoned

    you from Bristol, England at your home in Alexandria over the last

    couple of years. I really enjoy our conversations so much — a

    dream come true (for me, anyway!). Magic!!! >:-}

    ——————- * * * * * —————

    A word on methodology: my approach to problem-solving is

    basically that of Karl Popper; and more particularly, Imre

    Lakatos’ proposals in his “The Methodology of Scientific Research

    Programmes” (Cambridge, [1978]). These are among the most

    powerful and effective instruments of intellectual weaponry I

    know of. I sent you Bryan Magee’s wonderful little book “Popper”

    as a gift from me to you; and to ‘repay forward’ the work you’ve

    done already for peace with freedom.

    [ I have to admit to sometimes 'speaking through quotations': if

    others say what I want said, better than I can say it, 'let them fly'! ]

    ——————- * * * * * —————

    I *don’t* start from the problems of the _specific means of

    warfare, important though these are (especially nuclear weapons).

    With Heisenberg, I don’t think these are the basic — or even the

    worst — problem: My primary concern is with ‘The Causes of War’

    (see Geoffrey Blainey’s classic academic text of this name, publ.

    Sun Books, Melbourne). Blainey’s view (following analysis of

    several hundred wars from 1700 to 1971) amounts to the conclusion

    that wars arise as a result of faulty intelligence evaluations of

    one’s own or the other side’s interests, aims, strengths and will

    to fight; wars “usually begin when two [or more] nations disagree

    on their relative strength, and wars usually cease when the

    fighting nations agree on their relative strength.”

    And I think the problems of disarmament can actually be more

    readily resolved long-term by something like the twelve-track

    strategy I outline here, with the tracks running separately yet

    simultaneously, more or less in parallel (an Integrated

    Operational Plan for worldwide peace with freedom, if you like!).

    Such a plan incorporates specific advances to general nuclear

    disarmament, while (hopefully) avoiding the dangers of open-ended

    non-nuclear warfare. Its central focus is upon what we’re

    fighting for — and against — and the means by which we fight;

    and upon the human and material costs.

    Still, there are indeed ‘no final moves’!

    ———– * * * * * ———–

    Prefacing remark: “William Hood on war”

    TEXT: “Like war, spying is a dirty business. Shed of its alleged glory, a

    soldier’s job is to kill. Peel away the claptrap of espionage

    and the spy’s job is to betray trust. The only justification a

    soldier or a spy can have is the moral worth of the cause he represents.”

    William Hood was deputy to James Jesus Angleton, legendary Director

    of CIA counterintelligence; ‘Mole’ p. 11; publ. Weidenfeld’s [1982].

    I’ve discussed various problems with William Hood very recently.

    He’s contactable via the AFIO.

    ———– * * * * * ———–

    [TRACK ONE] ‘Values as the expression of the central order’

    TEXT: ‘The problem of values is nothing but the problems of our acts,

    goals and morals. It concerns the compass by which we must

    steer our ship if we are to set a true course through life. The

    compass itself has been given different names by various

    religions and philosophies … but I have a clear impression

    that all such formulations try to express man’s relatedness to a

    central order. In the final analysis the central order, or the

    ‘One’ as it used to be called with which we commune in the

    language of religion, must win out….

    If we ask Western man what is good, what is worth striving for

    and what has to be rejected, we shall find time and again, that

    his answers reflect the ethical norms of Christianity even when

    he has long since lost all touch with Christian images and

    parables. If the magnetic force which has guided this particular

    compass – and what else was its source but the central order? –

    should ever become extinguished, _terrible_ things may happen to

    mankind, far more terrible even than concentration camps and

    atom bombs.’

    Werner Heisenberg, [1971] ‘Physics and beyond: encounters and

    conversations’, published by George Allen and Unwin, London.

    Thorpe is emphatic in asserting that we must never forget that

    such a conclusion must on no account be attributed solely to the

    Western insights stemming from the Christian revelation; he gives

    the following Admonitions as a further example, drawn from the

    Amerindian tribe of the Shawnees (who were dispossessed of their

    Oklahoma lands in 1839).

    The Shawnee Admonitions:

    ———————–

    TEXT: (A) “Do not kill or injure your neigbour, for it is not him you

    injure, you injure yourself.”

    (B) “Do not wrong or hate your neighbour, for it is not him that you

    wrong, you wrong yourself. Moneto, the Supreme Being.

    loves him also as she loves you.”

    Quoted from W.H. Thorpe, ‘Purpose in a World of Chance: A

    Biologist’s View’ [1978], George, Allen and Unwin.

    This is clearly related via the central order to the (negative)

    Judaic injunction not to do unto one’s neighbour that which one

    would not wish to befall one’s self. My own — perhaps agnostic

    — orientation is nearer Taoism [and Greek mythology]; but these

    ethical principles are capable of reformulation for most spiritual

    — and even humanistic or ‘moral atheistic’ — contexts.

    ———– * * * * * ———–

    [TRACK TWO] “The Role of the Sciences”

    TEXT: I am constantly reminded of the role of the Newtonian

    foundations in Kantian ethics. I do think that the

    near-destruction of ‘Classical Physics’ was a tragedy that broke

    the self-confident — Kantian — foundations of 19th Century

    liberal optimism and rational expectations of a better future,

    and further opened the door to the barbarism of Prussian

    militarism, aggressive racial nationalism, Marxism and National

    Socialism in the 20th Century.

    I’ve spent much of the last 10 years working on a Scientific

    Research Programme which is founded on an extended Classical

    Mechanics, which replaces Special Relativity and General

    Relativity and Quantum Mechanics with an intelligible and accurate

    integrated Scientific Research Programme — Relational Dynamics

    — which can be stated on a sheet or two of A4 paper. Here’s the

    ‘Core Programme’ of Relational Dynamics: There’s an accompanying

    120K file which closely argues for the programme on a positive

    ‘balance-sheet’ heuristic of clarity, simplicity and accuracy in

    description, explanation and prediction. ‘Physics demystified!’

    >:-}

    The latest Revision of ‘Relational Dynamics’ is available from:

    http://www.STARGATE.uk.net/dynamics.txt

    =========================================================================

    TITLE: A Scientific Research Programme of Relational Dynamics — [T3]

    =========================================================================

    TEXT: The basis of Relational Dynamics is the single principle, that

    the laws of physics have the same form in all frames of reference in

    uniform translation, and are the same everywhere. It extends Classical

    Mechanics into the realms presently occupied by Special and General

    Relativity and Quantum Mechanics.

    Dimensional Analysis of Measure Ratios: Mass = M. Length = L. Time = T.

    [1] MATTER IN INFINITE SPACE: Material objects having extension exist

    in a space which is without intrinsic properties, and which exists to

    infinity in every direction.

    [2] UNIFORM TIME WITH UNIVERSAL SIMULTANEITY: The elapsing of time is

    uniform and unidirectionally forward, with an instantaneous present

    time which occurs at the same moment — simultaneously — everywhere.

    Signal intervals can be recalculated to achieve corrected accurate

    predictive and retrodictive data.

    [3] EQUIVALENT GALILEAN RELATIVITY: All forces, material coordinate

    positions and velocities are relational; and all co-ordinate systems

    or frames of reference in uniform motion relative to one another are

    Galileian systems. There is no privileged or “absolute” reference

    frame. There is full addition of velocities across co-ordinate

    systems or reference frames.

    [4] GENERALIZATION OF THE LAWS OF MECHANICS: All the laws of

    mechanics have the same form in every inertial frame of reference or

    coordinate system.

    [5] CLASSICAL MECHANICS: INERTIA: The stasis or movement of anything does not

    change unless and until a force acts upon it.

    [6] CLASSICAL MECHANICS: ACTION: A change in movement of anything is

    proportional to the force acting upon it, and is made in the direction

    of the force which acts upon it. (f = ma = ML/T^2; Force = mass times

    acceleration).

    [7] CLASSICAL MECHANICS: REACTION: For every action, there is an equal

    reaction in the opposite direction. (f1 = -f2).

    [8] RELATIONAL GRAVITATIONAL FORCE: The relational gravitational

    attraction between massy objects is proportional to their

    masses, and is proportional to the inverse square of the distance

    between their centres of mass. If gravitational force should prove

    to be propagated at a finite rate, and objects be moving radially

    relative to each other, then the additional velocity-dependent

    modification for propagated spherical forces, Woldemar

    Voight’s [1887] Doppler equations (later known as “Lorentz

    Transformations”) would be required, as a first approximation to

    non-linear equations for delayed interaction over a distance.

    [9] RELATIONAL ELECTRIC FORCE: The relational electric attraction or

    repulsion between charged objects is inverse-square proportional to

    the distance between them. If electric force proves to be propagated

    at a finite rate, and objects be moving relative to each other, then

    the additional velocity-dependent modification for propagated

    spherical forces, Woldemar Voight’s [1887] Doppler equations (later

    known as “Lorentz Transformations”) is required, as a first

    approximation to non-linear equations for delayed interaction over a

    distance.

    Coulomb’s Law and Voight’s equations yield Maxwell’s equations

    without further assumptions, as proved by Leigh Page, Yale Professor

    of Mathematical Physics [1912] and [1913]. Electrodynamics is fully

    deriveable form electrostatics via Classical Mechanics.

    A. O’Rahilly, “Electromagnetics”, Longmans & U. Cork, [1938] & Dover

    [1965]

    R.A. Waldron, “The Wave and Ballistic Theories of Light”, F. Muller,

    [1977]

    R.A. Waldron, “Electric Forces”, The Radio and Electronic Engineer,

    Vol. 51 No. 11/12, pp. 553 to 560, November/December [1981].

    Leigh Page, Yale University, [1912] and [1913].

    [10] RELATIONAL MAGNETIC FORCE: The relational magnetic attraction or

    repulsion between north and south magnets is inverse-square

    proportional to the distance between them. If magnetic force proves

    to be propagated at a finite rate, and objects be moving radially

    relative to each other, then the additional velocity-dependent

    modification for propagated spherical forces, Woldemar Voight’s [1887]

    equations (later known as “Lorentz Transformations”) would be

    required, as a first approximation to non-linear equations for delayed

    interaction over a distance.

    The [static] lines of magnetic force follow from the force

    interactions described by Poisson’s equations.

    A. O’Rahilly, “Electromagnetics”, Longmans & U. Cork, [1938] Dover [1965]

    R.A. Waldron, “The Wave and Ballistic Theories of Light”, F. Muller [1977]

    R.A. Waldron, “Electric Forces”, The Radio and Electronic Engineer,

    Vol. 51 No. 11/12, pp. 553 to 560, November/December [1981].

    [11] QUANTIZED MASS AND ENERGY VALUE OF ELECTROMAGNETIC RADIATION:

    Electromagnetic structures which are radiated and absorbed

    (‘photons’) have intrinsic mass, and this mass occurs in in multiples

    of a minimum mass. This mass, when in linear translation and with up

    to three axes of classical rotation, (‘spins’) as well as three

    degrees of vibration, gives rise to quantum effects. Such

    electromagnetic structures (‘photons’) are made from the same material

    as other forms of matter – negatively charged microparticles (which we

    can call electrinos); positively-charged microparticles, (which we may

    call positrinos). There are also neutral (perhaps bound pair)

    microparticles, (presently called neutrinos).

    In free space the velocity of emittance of a radiated photon

    _relative to its source_ is constant at L/T = 299,792.485 + or –

    .0012 km/second. ‘c’.

    E = hv, where E is the energy value of the photon; v is its

    frequency; and h is Planck’s constant, which has the measure-ratio of

    ML^2/T, and is presently calculated as 6.6262 x 10^-34 Joules/second.

    There is accordingly a lower as well as an upper limit to photon

    mass. Relevant equations may be found in R.A. Waldron, [1977] and

    [1982].

    These quantized electromagnetic structures, in conjunction with

    Beckmann’s [1987] theory of stable electron orbits, provide the basis for

    developing the quantized dynamics of particle systems, including

    atoms and molecules. (See the Carr-Parrinello method).

    R.A. Waldron, “The Wave and Ballistic Theories of Light”, F. Muller [1977]

    R.A. Waldron, “The Spinning Photon”, Speculations in Science and

    Technology, Elsevier Sequoia S.A., 5 April 1982.

    P. Beckmann, “Einstein plus Two”, Golem Press [1987].

    [12] CONSERVATION LAWS: There is full conservation of mass; full

    conservation of energy over time; and full conservation of momentum.

    Mass is invariant with respect to relative velocities, as are also

    length and time.

    ==========================================================================

    [ Copyright Anthony Hugh Hollick, Bristol, England. February 28 [1995] ]

    ==========================================================================

    It may assist understanding to think about RM like this:

    [A] Take Classical Mechanics: (Start with T.W.B. Kibble’s fine text):

    [B] Add relational electric and magnetic and gravitational forces:

    [C] Add a velocity of force propagation (‘c’), which delays far-action:

    [D] Add a full ballistic (‘particle’ or ‘photon’) theory of EM radiation.

    “Classical Mechanics is everywhere exactly ‘right’ wherever its

    concepts can be applied.” — Werner Heisenberg.

    (That is, everywhere).

    ———– * * * * * ———–

    [TRACK THREE]: “The Role of Philosopy in the Furtherance of Open Societies”

    Popper’s “The Open Society and Its Enemies” is a basic text, as

    is his [1994] “The Myth Of the Framework.” Tarski’s

    Correspondence theory of truth is central; and Lakatos and

    Musgrave [1976] is also ‘essential reading’, as is John Hospers’

    fine book ‘Human Conduct.’ And even David Carradine’s fine book

    ‘The Spirit of Shaolin’ .

    [1997: And Immannuel Kant, 'Was ist Aufklarung?']: “Dare to use

    your own intelligence! This is the maxim of the Enlightenment.”

    ———– * * * * * ———–

    [TRACK FOUR] “The Role of the Arts”

    TEXT: “They were wrong, and they will always be wrong, those prophets

    who say Art will degenerate, will exhaust all conceivable

    forms, will die. It is we who will die; Art will remain. And

    shall we — before we perish — manage to understand all its

    facets and all its purposes?

    Not everything has a name. Some things lead us into a realm

    beyond words. Art thaws even the frozen, darkened soul, opening

    it to lofty spiritual experience. Through Art we are sometimes

    sent — indistinctly, briefly — revelations not to be achieved

    by rational thought.

    It is like that small mirror in the fairy-tales — you glance in

    it, and what you see is not yourself: for an instant, you glimpse

    the Inaccessible, where no horse or magic carpet can take you.

    And the soul cries out for it…”

    From ‘One Word of Truth…’ — The Nobel Speech on Literature; by

    Alexander Solzhenitsyn: BBC External Services Translation, Publ.

    The Bodley Head [1972]

    http://www.STARGATE.uk.net/nobel.txt

    The brilliant American actress Dorothy Jean Seberg, from

    Marshalltown, Iowa — (see her in incomparable performances, in

    Otto Preminger’s ‘St. Joan’, where — as a 17-year-old girl — she

    was chosen from 10 000 to play Joan of Arc; and in Robert Rossen’s

    magnificent film ‘Lilith’) — was hideously and protractedly killed

    as a direct consequence of FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover’s

    malicious actions against her.

    Hoover circulated vicious press stories including one that the

    baby she was expecting was of mixed race, and he imposed

    unbearable pressures on her. She miscarried, and subsequently

    tried to kill herself on each anniversity of her lost baby’s

    death. She was later found dead in Paris, her body stuffed into a

    car trunk by the side of the road).

    David Richards’ biography of Dorothy Jean Seberg is titled ‘Played Out.’

    And radical actress Frances Farmer’s horrifying autobiography,

    “Will There Really Be A Morning?” (filmed as ‘Frances’ with

    Jessica Lange. [1983]) is a truly terrifying public warning of the

    perils and consequences of coercive psychiatry. We _cannot_ allow

    such terrorist acts to be committed against people anymore.

    And Richard C. Sarafian’s magnificent movie “Vanishing Point” [1971].

    “Fasten your safety belts. You’ve never had a trip like this before.”

    ———– * * * * * ———–

    [TRACK FIVE] : “Realizing Human Potential”

    TEXT: I’m working intermittently on a — shareware — personal

    computer multimedia programme which offers some of the benefits

    of the Human Potential methods, inexpensively, on a more

    widespread basis. There is quite a lot of interest in such

    technologies nowadays. The work of LTC Jim Channon’s ‘First

    Earth Battalion Foundation’ is also well worth a look; as is the

    generality of work done on the realization of Human Potential

    described in Pearson & Shaw’s book “Life Extension — A

    Practical Scientific Approach”; and “MegaBrain” by Michael

    Hutchison. And the Silva Mind Control Method.

    ———– * * * * * ———–

    [TRACK SIX] ‘Democratic Agorism’ — a social and political program

    TEXT: Over the years, I’ve developed a straightforward political and

    social programme — ‘Democratic Agorism’ — which aims to

    provide both assessment benchmarks as well as practical measures

    to achieve more fully free and open societies worldwide. And

    Open Societies don’t war with each other…

    Latest revisions of the ‘Democratic Agorism’ program available from:

    http://www.STARGATE.uk.net/agora5.txt

    The essential elements of Demopcratic Agorism are modular _and_ synergistic:

    They include:

    [A] A contractually-based day-by-day electoral system – Vectored Politics

    [B] Full-Liability Personal Indemnity Insurance, enabling full restitution.

    [C] Personal Radio Alarms: for event-driven and customer-driven policing

    [D] A Restitutive Legal System, with online ‘courts’ and arbitration.

    [E] Good Basic Income Provision for all — independent incomes for all.

    [F] Networked information services and library facilities

    [G] National Health Insurance chargecard and online diagnostic facilities

    [H] Online education and skills-development facilities

    [I] Tradenet buy/sell/swap/finance/work transaction services

    [J] Packaged ‘political’ services provided via elected representatives

    When all children (indeed, all of us) have [item C) these

    inexpensive self-activated radio ‘panic’ alarms (like Search and

    Rescue Alarms), they will be greatly more secure from all kinds of

    harm. I have given this idea to Motorola Corporation.

    ———– * * * * * ———–

    [TRACK SEVEN] “Wars of Ideas — Wars on Ideas”

    TEXT: As Popper says (“The Myth Of The Framework”), civilization

    really go going with the invention of swords. Civilized and

    intelligent men and women then saw that fighting with words

    makes better sense, with _bad ideas_ dying instead of _people_.

    So, I support wars of ideas waged on behalf of the ideas of the

    Open Society, backed with:

    Triple-track diplomacy — (positive, negative and covert-action);

    Psychological warfare (viz. Paul Myron Anthony Linebarger’s

    classic text of that name: did you ever meet him?); and Information

    Warfare (‘C4ISR’ — Command, Control, Communications, Countermeasures,

    Intelligence, Surveillance and Reconnaissance).

    Special Forces (viz. “Swords of Lightning: The Changing Face of

    Warfare” by Terry White; publ. Brassey’s, [1992]; ‘Special Forces

    of the World.’ An excellent overview).

    Aircraft Carrier Battle Groups. “Fly Navy!”

    A revamped Air Force flying UAVs with PGMs and .50 Caliber rifles.

    ‘Antiweaponry’ Defences (Precision-Guided Munitions, conventional

    antiballistic missile systems — viz. the _original_ “High

    Frontier” ideas in Dan Graham’s Heritage Foundation Project Book

    of that name [1982], not the hyped-up SDI stuff that squandered

    the money and the political support which could have actually

    _built_ High Frontier’s Layered Defense proposals.

    I would ask you to please consider the “High Frontier” proposals

    independently of your experience of the late Dan Graham: I was

    impressed by the way he welcomed a visiting Soviet journalist to a

    High Frontier presentation in London which I attended, and he

    emphasised how the US and the USSR could work together to block

    nuclear attack. “We want live Americans, not dead Russians.”

    Some of our MoD and conservative people were averse to Strategic

    Defense ideas because they feared the nullification of Britain’s

    ‘independent deterrent': yet our Trident systems rely on

    American know-how for accuracy; and I’ll not soon forget my Royal

    Navy friend Peter McManus — later a ‘Top Gun’ air combat trainer

    ‘on loan’ to the Central Flying School, RAF Valley in the late

    ‘Sixties — telling me of the terse reply they were given at

    their fighter-bomber mission briefing, when someone asked how

    they were supposed to get ‘back home’ again, when the nuclear

    targets were at the fighter-bombers’ limits of range:

    “What the Hell do you think there will be to come ‘home’ to”?

    The aim of the Twelve Track Operational Plan should be

    to fight and win the war of ideas *peacefully* for the Open

    Societies, wherever practicable transforming enemies into friends.

    ———– * * * * * ———–

    [TRACK EIGHT] “Horizontal Spontanous Social Orders”

    TEXT: My preference is for the sorts of damage-resistant, adaptive

    and resilient ‘horizontal’ free and equalitarian social orders

    envisioned by (most of) the Lockean founders of the American

    Republic. (If a quiet patriotism is the love of the _idea_ of a

    country, I’m certainly a North American!).

    ——————- * * * * * —————

    [TRACK NINE] “Globalized Free Communications Networks”

    Lots of Internets, with lots of alternative data-radio and

    telecomms providers! Cheap or free powerful and secure personal

    computers. Spontaneous orders then form from the free choices

    made by the individual telecommunicators. David Andrews’

    excellent book “The IRG Solution: Hierarchical Incompetence and

    How To Overcome It” (Souvenir Press, [1984]) gives good insights

    into these social processes and their internal dynamics.

    ———– * * * * * ———–

    [TRACK TEN] “The Role Of History”.

    TEXT: In 1944, Nash-Kelvinator Corporation ran this magazine

    advertisement, showing a grim pilot, about to take on Zeros at

    twelve o’clock, imagining this staccato message to his partner:-

    “I want to tell you what I’m fighting for.. It’s you and our

    little house and the job I had before… and the chance I had,

    the fighting chance, to go ahead on my own. That’s what all of

    us want out here… to win this war… to get home… To go back

    to living our lives in a land — and a world — where *every* man

    is free to grow as great as he’s a mind to be… where *every*

    man has an *unlimited* opportunity to be useful to himself and

    his fellow men …

    “Tell ‘em we’ll be back… Nothing can stop us… And tell ‘em

    no matter what they say, no matter what they do… to stay

    *free*… To keep America a land of *individual freedom*!

    _That’s_ what we’re fighting for…

    _That’s_ what we’re willing to die for…

    _That’s_ the America we want when we come home.”

    “We had better figure out what happened if we expect _any_ army,

    conscript or volunteer, even to _remember_ what it’s fighting for.”

    – Michael Levin

    ———– * * * * * ———–

    [TRACK ELEVEN] “WildFire Systems”

    TEXT: By “WildFire Systems” I mean self-propagating, decentralized,

    ‘synergistic’ and practical instantiations of free social

    innovations, which replace existing unjust and inefficient

    “verticalist” social practices with better, more mutually advantageous

    “horizontalist” relationships; e.g.

    [a] Offices of Open Network (like Leif Smith’s and Pat Wagner’s in

    Colorado – I have a copy of their interesting 60pp Operating

    Manual).

    http://www.pattern.com

    [b] Information Exchanges

    [c] Credit Unions (like Grameen MicroBank and North American CUs)

    [d] Local Exchange Trading Systems — LETS — (to ‘kickstart’

    economic activity where people have little or no money).

    Start-up books are available.

    [e] WishCraft Centres: Non-injurious ‘wishes’ are described on record

    cards or computer record entries in this simple format:

    TITLE: ;

    WISH: 50 to 100 word comprehensive description;

    CONTACT: preferred contact method or address

    Participants then work to realize the wishes for each other. Fun!

    [f] Mondragon-style Worker Co-Operatives, which show twice the return

    on capital of investor-owned businesses. http://www.mcc.es

    ———– * * * * * ———–

    [TRACK TWELVE] “The Role Of Mythologies”

    TEXT: Science fiction has been aptly described as ‘The Mythology of

    the 20th (and 21st) Century. Foremost among my favourites are

    J.R.R. Tolkien’s ‘Lord of the Rings’ (in which coercion is the

    main evil, and individual free will is the foundation of the

    principal virtues). And Cordwainer Smith’s incomparable stories

    (Dr. Paul Linebarger’s nom de plume);

    And the STAR WARS Trilogy;

    And ‘STAR TREK – The Movie.’ >:-}

    And the wonderful STARGATE series.

    And of course the mythologies of (inter alia) Classical Greece and

    the Celts and China…

    ———– * * * * * ———–

    I hope you find these ideas worthy of your consideration and further

    discussion and development; I’m really looking forward to hearing

    from you! I’m entirely happy for you to discuss all this with

    others if you think it’s worthwhile. I have no secrets from the

    Puzzle Palace!! How could I ??

    All Best Wishes to Kay and yourself,

    We Shall Overcome

    Tony Hollick

    ============

    Anduril@cix.compulink.co.uk

    ——————- * * * * * —————

    | Anduril@STARGATE.uk.net * http://www.STARGATE.uk.net |

    – ————————–* * * *————————– –

    | Rainbow Bridge Foundation * * * Centre for Liberal Studies |

    – ————————–* * * *————————– –

    | 4 Grayling House, Canford Rd: * Bristol BS9 3NU Tel: 9504914 |

    “Freedom means doing whatever you damn well please, without harming others.”

    — Barry M. Goldwater

    ——————- * * * * * —————

    POSTSCRIPT ONE:

    “… seen as the result of human endeavour, of human dreams,

    hopes, passions, and most of all, as the result of the most

    admirable union of creative imagination and rational critical

    thought, I should like to write ‘Science’ with the biggest capital

    ‘S’ to be found in the printer’s upper case.

    Science is not only like art and literature, an adventure of the human

    spirit, but it is among the creative arts perhaps the most human:

    full of human failings and shortsightedness, it shows those

    flashes of insight which open our eyes to the wonders of the world

    and of the human spirit. But this is not all. Science is the

    direct result of that most human of all human endeavours – to

    liberate ourselves. It is part of our endeavour to see more

    clearly, to understand the world and ourselves, and to act as

    adult, responsible and enlightened beings.

    ‘Enlightenment’, Kant wrote, ‘is the emancipation of man from

    self-imposed tutelage . . . from a state of incapacity to use

    his own intelligence without external guidance. Such a state

    of tutelage I call “self-imposed” if it is due not to any lack

    of intelligence but the lack of courage or determination to use

    one’s own intelligence instead of relying upon a leader.

    *Sapere Aude!* Dare to use your own intelligence! This is the

    maxim of the Enlightenment.’ [ref. 6, Immanuel Kant, 'Was ist

    Aufklarung?']

    Kant challenges us to use our intelligence instead of relying upon a

    leader, upon an authority. This should be taken as a challenge to

    reject even the scientific expert as a leader, or even *science

    itself* Science has no authority. It is not the magical product

    of the given, the data, the observations. It is not a gospel of

    truth. It is the result of our own endeavours and mistakes. It is

    you and I who make science, as well as we can. It is you and I who

    are responsible for it…

    The nuclear bomb (and possibly also the so-called ‘peaceful use of

    atomic energy’ whose consequences may be even worse in the long

    run) have, I think, shown us the shallowness of the worship of

    science as an ‘instrument’ of our ‘command over nature’ or the

    ‘control of our physical environment': it has shown us that this

    command, this control, is apt to be self-defeating, and apt to

    enslave us rather than to make us free – if it does not do away

    with us altogether.

    And while knowledge is worth dying for, power is not. (Knowledge

    is one of the few things that are worth dying for, together with

    liberty, love, kindness, and helping those who are in need of help).”

    by Karl R. Popper

    from “Realism and the Aim of Science”

    Volume I of “The Postscript to The Logic of Scientific Discovery”

    Edited by William Warren Bartley, III, Senior Fellow, the Hoover

    Institution on War, Revolution and Peace at Stanford.

    Publ. Hutchinson, 1983, pb. 1985

    Copyright Karl Raimund Popper 1956, 1983

    Sir Karl Popper, F. R. S., held fourteen honorary Doctorates from

    American, British, German, Austrian, New Zealand and Canadian

    universites.

    He was a member (or honorary member) of twelve academies, among them

    the three oldest that still exist.

    Works of his have been translated into over 30 languages.

    But Sir Karl was never impressed by ‘great reputations’, least of

    all his own…

    ——————- * * * * * —————

    POSTSCRIPT TWO:

    Biographical note: Admiral Noel A. M. Gayler, USN (Ret).

    ========================================================

    Born December 25, 1914, in Birmingham, Alabama, United States of America.

    1931-1935 U.S. Naval Academy.

    1935 Commissioned Ensign, USN.

    1940 Flight Training course.

    1940 Naval aviator, assigned to VF-12 Squadron, USS Randolph, flying Grumman

    F-6F Hellcats from Navy carriers.

    Served in the Pacific Theatre during WWII. Asst. to Admiral John M. Cain.

    1957 Aide to Navy Secretary Thomas S. Gates.

    1960 Aug:- Commanding Officer, CV-61 USS Ranger (Aircraft Carrier).

    1960 Rear Admiral.

    1962-1963 Commander, Carrier Division TWENTY, US Atlantic Fleet.

    1963-1965 Director, Development Programmes, Office of Chief Naval Officer.

    1965-1967 Assistant Deputy Chief, Naval Operations (Development).

    1967-1969 Deputy Director, Joint Strategic Planning Staff, Offut AFB.

    (Designer, the Single Integrated Operational Plan — SIOP).

    1969-1972 Director, National Security Agency (DIRNSA).

    1969-1972 Chief, Central Security Agency. (CCSA).

    1972-1976 Commander-in-Chief Pacific Fleet and Armed Forces (CinCPAC).

    * Retired as 4-star Admiral. (Would have been five stars if the US had

    formally declared the Vietnam conflict a war, which in fact it was).

    * Awarded:- Three Navy Crosses; Bronze Star Medal; Distinguished Service

    Medal; Legion of Merit with Gold Star; Sperry Award of the Institute

    of Aeronautical Sciences; other medals and awards.

    * Committee Member (with George Kennan>:

    * American Committee On East-West Accord

    * He has contributed to: “The Choice: Nuclear Weapons versus Security”

    edited by Gwyn Prins, Cambridge, [1984]

    [Ch: 2] “A Commander-in-Chief’s Perspective on Nuclear Weapons.”

    [Ch: 16] “The Way Out: A General Nuclear Settlement.”

    ——————- * * * * * —————

    .

  10. Libertarians should vote Tory for one very simple reason: the alternative is Labour.

    By joining the conservative alliance, libertarian ideas have a far greater chance of being implemented.

    Political reality means this is an urgent necessity. The longer freedom-loving people bicker and in-fight, the more time leftists have to totally destroy our country.

  11. I tend to agree with Cicero on here. This is because, being rather old, I dread the scale of disorder and mayhem that will have to be solved after 16 years of Labour.

    There will not be time in lifetimes to solve and fix it. And we can’t count on the rest of the world to help, not this time, since socialism has scored such great victories against the liberal Banking system recently –

    – not to mention any other reasons, like we don’t kiill people for thinking the wrong things, and they do.

  12. Er, ummmmm, er, Tony,

    Please could you make the comments a bit shorter in future?

    Please?

    You old bastard, you!

  13. And, er, Tony,

    ummm,

    If you post either grand screeds of stuff, or lots of websites, or both, WordPress in its wisdom will think it’s spam, and will hold it and it will irritate me as I have to moderate it. I can’t be arsed to do that and I don’t really want to moderate stuff ‘coz I’m a lazy bastard, so please (and this is for everybody too) keep it (a) short and (b) don’t put too many urls in it.

    Thanks to everyone for that,
    DD