Monthly Archives: February 2009

It ain’t funny, we got no money…


Peter Davis

funny…

No music tonight, just this.


This.

The Night Duty Boy-First-Class Type Writer, commanding his Chimpanzee Shift, might put some music up as it’s Saturday: we shall just have to see.

Hat tip The Landed Underclass. That blog just gets better and better, and he will outlive us in The Line.

Some people are more equal than others now.

The Policeman concerned has found a clever and opaque way of saying he’s not the friend of all people: just those of them that happen to be powerful today.

Well then.

On totally unrelated matters, readers might like this book.

I’d like to apply for the job of government stooge. Then I can get money.


David Davis

The Landed Underclass notes the concatenation of events and incidents related to Robert Peston, aged 4, “described” as “a journalist”, and the collapse both of Northern Rock and the pants-ripping of the Royal Bank of Scotland.

Clearly, there are openings for stooges under this government. I would like a job as one, then I will be rich and famous. theywill of course allow me to keep my (authorised by them) pension, as soon as my usefulness has ended.

Corruption and politicizing of GCSE “science”, in favour of Gramsco-Marxianism.


David Davis

I am obliged to An Englishman’s Castle for bringing to wider notice some ideas I have been banging on about for some time: since the “New” GCSE science syllabuses his the schools in September 2006. The “updated and relevant” “syllabus” consists mostly of repetition of prevailing orthodoxy about issues such as GM foods, global warming, stem cell research, MMR vaccination, the placing of mobile phone masts, and the like.

It’s worth reading the entire thing by the student. preferably before Tomes Online takes it down, as it is wont to do with stuff that gets up the noses of the Enemy Class. In fact I will save it just in case, and it’s here to save time:-

 

February 26, 2009

Can we please have less politics in our GCSE’s: a plea from a 16 year old…..

XXXXXXX is 16. He’s about to do his GCSEs and hopes to study Latin, German, Further Maths and English or History at A Level (so he’s no slouch). After that, he’s thinking of studying Classics and Modern Languages at University. But he’s not happy with the school curriculum, and was inspired to write for School Gate after the Cambridge Primary Review criticised the restrictions for children at a younger age. He thinks that there’s too much politics, that these are pushing out proper learning, and that social issues are being pushed far too hard…

So, over to Joe:

“In recent years, it seems that the school curricula are featuring more and more in public debate. There was considerable press coverage of a study last week which revealed that in primary education, the focus has been steered away from the arts and humanities leaving children “tied to their desks” struggling with the nine times table. The report claims this has “squeezed out” other areas of learning, rendering children’s artistic capacities under-developed and neglected. Furthermore, the report claims not only that the curriculum has been narrowed, but that what remains has become heavily “politicised”.

As a current GCSE student, I can identify with this “politicisation”. It seems to me as if the GCSE curricula, above all for science, no longer focus on understanding the subject. The core biology science curriculum now calls for very little knowledge of the biology that we had studied in the years preceding GCSE, but seems to be a governmental attempt to raise awareness of current social issues. For example, section A of the core biology exam concentrates on contraception, drugs, alcohol, smoking, obesity, anorexia and the MMR vaccines, whilst section B tackles broader issues such as global warming, GM crops, creationism vs Darwinism and alternative energy sources.

Perhaps this is the best solution to the some of the social problems that Britain faces today. Maybe through education, education and education, Labour may finally succeed in reducing teenage pregnancies, child obesity and begin to steer Britain towards a greener way of life. 
Perhaps indeed, learning about the advantages and disadvantages of wind and solar power is vastly more useful to the average sixteen year old than a full understanding of the differences between prokaryotic and eukaryotic cells. In this way, the younger generation may begin to have a much clearer idea of current affairs, enabling us to partake more readily in the critical issues of the day, making us more informed voters and leaders of tomorrow.

An important aspect of the “politicisation” of the curriculum is the use of exams. Not only are the social issues agenda studied in class, but students must take exams on these topics, requiring an in depth analysis of the themes, and also meaning that students’ grades at GCSE depend on their knowledge of the subject in hand, encouraging a much more motivated and engaged learning process.

However, one of the key problems with sitting exams about topics of this nature is that the exam board are required to write mark schemes clearly detailing the answers that they want within a rigid framework. This leaves no room for debate on the part of the student, meaning that instead of producing insightful, perceptive and interesting answers, pupils tend towards putting down what they think the mark scheme is most likely to have as an acceptable response. For example, in a question about embryo screening, the advantage of screening embryos in accordance to the mark scheme was to reduce health care costs for the parents. I found it a little disconcerting, if not positively concerning, to discover that my answer that it would improve the quality of life for the child, did not feature. Is it right to present these issues to pupils in such a way that they are blinkered into one channel of thought? Is it not more productive to allow pupils to debate current affairs in such a way that they are able to access all viewpoints and form their own opinions? Arguably, the government is now more concerned with indoctrination than discussion.

In my view, it must be asked if the science curriculum is really the right place for these social issues to be debated and taught. Indeed, if education is really the process by which someone’s innate intelligence is led out, then perhaps topical issues should be addressed elsewhere. Arguably, in the hours that we spend in full time education, it is more important to develop an understanding of the basics of the world around us; to understand the science behind the issues as opposed to an awareness of the actual issues, and indeed problems, that science can both cause and solve.

Furthermore, those who are employed to teach Biology, Chemistry and Physics may well become frustrated by the deviance of the curriculum from their chosen subject. Thus, their passion for the subject, presumably because of which they chose teaching in the first place, diminishes. Can pupils really find a topic which frustrates their teachers engaging?

For the pupils, this intervention and politicisation can become annoyingly transparent. Having studied global warming in all three sciences, Geography, English, French, German and Spanish, I have found that its initial shock has now ceased to have an impact. The topic has become stale, and my will to change for the better has been weakened.

There is no doubt that there are a number of social issues, concerning young people, which need to be addressed in one way or another. My question is whether GCSE science is really the place for it. Maybe PSHE is a more obvious option, but the problem is that PSHE is not regarded with anywhere near the same level of importance. I think that as young people, we do need to understand the current topics being debated, but it is possibly more beneficial to be invited to participate seriously in balanced discussion, as opposed to having to show we know the effects of smoking in part b) of question nine.”

Read School Gate on:

How secondary schools stop kids from being creative

Should we have academic selection at 14?

Why do so many bright teenagers drop out of education?

POSTED AT 09:03 AM IN EXAMSSECONDARY SCHOOL |PERMALINK

I didn’t know Philip Pullman was this good a writer about liberty


UPDATE2:- Little Man What Now? has also republished it. What this exercise shows is the utter futility of an Enemy Governimg Class trying to supress stuff it does not approve of, until its Terror-Police have effectively removed the publication-tools from us all. They clearly know nothing whatever about the history of England in the 1620s-to-1640s, as the new and revolutionarry technique of “imprinting” was at last getting going on a large scale, and at a difficult time for the battling of ideas which was then going on.

UPDATE:- THE TIMES took this piece down off its site some hours ago, to the original link to the Times OUT OF landed Underclass is broken. ( ARRSE have the full text.) The Cato Institute also quotes some of it. Good job I virally-pasted the whole thing….

David Davis

UPDATE:- Here in full is the big and angry discussion thread about this piece on the Army Rumour Service at http://www.arrse.co.uk/cpgn2/Forums/viewtopic/t=117552/postdays=0/postorder=asc/start=20.html

Hat tip to the Landed Underclass for exposing the true significance of this prescient piece of writing:-

Are such things done on Albion’s shore?

The image of this nation that haunts me most powerfully is that of the sleeping giant Albion in William Blake’s prophetic books. Sleep, profound and inveterate slumber: that is the condition of Britain today.

We do not know what is happening to us. In the world outside, great events take place, great figures move and act, great matters unfold, and this nation of Albion murmurs and stirs while malevolent voices whisper in the darkness – the voices of the new laws that are silently strangling the old freedoms the nation still dreams it enjoys.

We are so fast asleep that we don’t know who we are any more. Are we English? Scottish? Welsh? British? More than one of them? One but not another? Are we a Christian nation – after all we have an Established Church – or are we something post-Christian? Are we a secular state? Are we a multifaith state? Are we anything we can all agree on and feel proud of?

The new laws whisper:

You don’t know who you are

You’re mistaken about yourself

We know better than you do what you consist of, what labels apply to you, which facts about you are important and which are worthless

We do not believe you can be trusted to know these things, so we shall know them for you

And if we take against you, we shall remove from your possession the only proof we shall allow to be recognised

The sleeping nation dreams it has the freedom to speak its mind. It fantasises about making tyrants cringe with the bluff bold vigour of its ancient right to express its opinions in the street. This is what the new laws say about that:

Expressing an opinion is a dangerous activity

Whatever your opinions are, we don’t want to hear them

So if you threaten us or our friends with your opinions we shall treat you like the rabble you are

And we do not want to hear you arguing about it

So hold your tongue and forget about protesting

What we want from you is acquiescence

The nation dreams it is a democratic state where the laws were made by freely elected representatives who were answerable to the people. It used to be such a nation once, it dreams, so it must be that nation still. It is a sweet dream.

You are not to be trusted with laws

So we shall put ourselves out of your reach

We shall put ourselves beyond your amendment or abolition

You do not need to argue about any changes we make, or to debate them, or to send your representatives to vote against them

You do not need to hold us to account

You think you will get what you want from an inquiry?

Who do you think you are?

What sort of fools do you think we are?

The nation’s dreams are troubled, sometimes; dim rumours reach our sleeping ears, rumours that all is not well in the administration of justice; but an ancient spell murmurs through our somnolence, and we remember that the courts are bound to seek the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, and we turn over and sleep soundly again.

And the new laws whisper:

We do not want to hear you talking about truth

Truth is a friend of yours, not a friend of ours

We have a better friend called hearsay, who is a witness we can always rely on

We do not want to hear you talking about innocence

Innocent means guilty of things not yet done

We do not want to hear you talking about the right to silence

You need to be told what silence means: it means guilt

We do not want to hear you talking about justice

Justice is whatever we want to do to you

And nothing else

Are we conscious of being watched, as we sleep? Are we aware of an ever-open eye at the corner of every street, of a watching presence in the very keyboards we type our messages on? The new laws don’t mind if we are. They don’t think we care about it.

We want to watch you day and night

We think you are abject enough to feel safe when we watch you

We can see you have lost all sense of what is proper to a free people

We can see you have abandoned modesty

Some of our friends have seen to that

They have arranged for you to find modesty contemptible

In a thousand ways they have led you to think that whoever does not want to be watched must have something shameful to hide

We want you to feel that solitude is frightening and unnatural

We want you to feel that being watched is the natural state of things

One of the pleasant fantasies that consoles us in our sleep is that we are a sovereign nation, and safe within our borders. This is what the new laws say about that:

We know who our friends are

And when our friends want to have words with one of you

We shall make it easy for them to take you away to a country where you will learn that you have more fingernails than you need

It will be no use bleating that you know of no offence you have committed under British law

It is for us to know what your offence is

Angering our friends is an offence

It is inconceivable to me that a waking nation in the full consciousness of its freedom would have allowed its government to pass such laws as the Protection from Harassment Act (1997), the Crime and Disorder Act (1998), the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (2000), the Terrorism Act (2000), the Criminal Justice and Police Act (2001), the Anti-Terrorism, Crime and Security Act (2001), the Regulation of Investigatory Powers Extension Act (2002), the Criminal Justice Act (2003), the Extradition Act (2003), the Anti-Social Behaviour Act (2003), the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act (2004), the Civil Contingencies Act (2004), the Prevention of Terrorism Act (2005), the Inquiries Act (2005), the Serious Organised Crime and Police Act (2005), not to mention a host of pending legislation such as the Identity Cards Bill, the Coroners and Justice Bill, and the Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill.

Inconceivable.

And those laws say:

Sleep, you stinking cowards

Sweating as you dream of rights and freedoms

Freedom is too hard for you

We shall decide what freedom is

Sleep, you vermin

Sleep, you scum.

fakecharities.org has been noticed by charitable trough-piggers themselves. That was quick….


…..and shows that they must have been waiting, pooing their pants in fright, to get rumbled by someone. God, how slow can bloggers be sometimes? (But    _IF_    you go here, you will see that the Libertarian Alliance’s duty-Chimpanzee-Type-Writing-Shift for 2004 (in the unheated Nissen-hut, not the other one) had indeed spotted ASH already!) (And if you go here, we have a raft of ancient writings about fake-charity and its iniquities, or even real charity, and its role in a liberal civilisation.)

David Davis

The Landed Underclass notes today that Charity Finance (whatever that is for) has logged the existence of fakecharities.org, a site set up by the estimable Devil, to expose and monitor the use of public funds directly by “charities”.  

The “charities” named in fakecharities.org are almost entirely engaged in fake lobbying: lobbying, it may be added, for mainly liberty-restricting ends such as more persecution of smokers, alcohol-likers, drivers, people who enjoy tasty food such as burgers and chips, other kinds of poor people, and suchlike.

Libertarians of all kinds will know that under liberal or what we call “free” societies, history shows the greatest rate of expansion of private charity. This is contrasted with the situation of charities under a Big State, which forcibly confiscates so much of people’s resources that charities actually suffer and attenuate. The only way they can survive is to actually abdicate their caring role in favour of the Big State tkaing it over, and than “caring” on behalf of “the people”. Naturally, the “charities” which then do best out of the pig-trough are those with the most Statist ends themselves. Small charities which actually do charity may survive in odd niches and localities, such as this one: but those which don’t trough-pig mega with the sharpest elbows will eventually go down.

Of course, this is what a Big State wants.

Or you could have a charity like this one, which not only has been doing something supremely useful for many decades, but takes no money from Big States.

Kicking Anthropogenic Global warming downhill before it’s too late


The Devil spots this Japanese report: let’s hope more scientists break ranks.

Alex today


David Davis

Very droll.

God help us if this is not an early April Fool wind-up


David Davis

This madman plans to fire trillions of mirrors into space, to “stop global warming. I really do begin to believe that some of these mountebanks are starting to believe their own witchcraft.

Read the whole thing: it’s eitherw ritten by an imaginative but scientifically-illiterate hobbledy-hoy, or else by some very evil and wicked men.

People who haven’t built a gun before ought not to be allowed anywhere near where extra-powerful ones are to be constructed.

…..so hold your fire!


David Davis

Legiron says don’t riot. Please. Not until there’s been a general election to wipe out ZanuLieBorg.

Hat tip The Landed Underclass.

Facebook Twitter Bebo Myspace children: Susan greenfield is of course quite right, but….


…..people have to grow up in order to use these powerful tools.

David Davis

You wouldn’t just hand a child of, say, 13, a chain-saw, simply because he/she said he could cut down a tree faster with it. You train it (the child, not the saw.) Then, since our homes are now bursting at the seams with computers and networks, you train a child about what’s important: that’s all.

Then, he does not think he needs a Facebook account. His dad’s got one, immature dude that he is.

Frank Field is a liberal! I knew it all along.


Now he admits cryptically as much in this piece.

A bit of a maverick one, to be sure, consorting for so long with fascist lefty Nazi scumbags in ZaluLieBorg – but a liberal all the same.

David Davis

Hat tip Guido Fawkes. Let me guess: he’s the one site that nobody _ever_ confesses to reading…..

Bentleys and “bio Ethanol”: the trouble with all modern cars is that Green-fascism has made them look identical.


David Davis

The new Bentley looks suitably impressive and expensive. But hardly different from any other executive-express. It also can run on “E85″, available at Morrisons, no less! I doubt that buyers of this car shop there much… This stuff is an 85% mixture of bioethanol with petrol. So when using that fuel instead of nice, famine-free fossil fuels, you can be sure you’ve just starved a few more Africans.

 

Ill have it in British Racing Green please

I'll have it in British Racing Green please

The trouble with big modern car firms like VW (yes it owns Bentley I think, so really this is a re-bodied Phaeton or Bugatti Veyron but who cares?) is that they feel bound to emply phalanxes of PR “executives” in various “communications” departments. This makes them vulnerable to assaults by greenazis, with whom the PR chappies and chappesses went to “uni” probably, and may well have shagged each other while students.

If they didn’t bother to employ these useless wastes-of-rations, in “communications”, then they’d be…

(a) functionally deaf to media-assaults about “non-renewable fuels”, and about “polluting the environment” by not using “bio fuels”

(b) able to afford more engineers and guys at draftsmen’s tables, producing even nicer cars,

(c) not make all their cars look like one another, by passing the desings through fascist-filtering wind-tunnel-software,

(d) able to bring the crypto-terrorist inclinations of the greens out in the open: frustrated as the greens would become, they would turn to terrorism and destruction of car plants, and THEN we will see where “governments” stand. Placate the greenazis or the labour unions?

Some engineering education


Wish things like this would be taught now.

I wonder what radio set they used? I will have to find out.

Very nice. And Greek terrorists can write well.


Humans are human after all.

From Mr Eugenides.

I was also amused by what these guys in Greece said….

The group, Sect of Revolutionaries, first appeared earlier this month when it opened fire with a submachine gun on an Athens police station, spraying the precinct with bullets but injuring nobody. [...] On Tuesday, the group carried out a similar attack in the parking lot of the private Alter television station, again causing no injuries.

In a statement published by the daily Ta Nea, the group says its latest attack was a message to journalists that “the time that you were ‘untouchable’ is over.”

“They manipulate our minds daily so that we fill the reserves of our disciplined time with values and functions that feed the system,” the group says, adding: “Let the slugs of media journalism know that apart from the mucus they leave behind them… soon they will also leave blood.”

“Mister journalists, this time we came to your door, but next time you will find us in your homes,” it said.

The assaults culminated on Wednesday with an attempt to detonate a car bomb outside the headquarters of Citibank in Athens. The 60 kilogram device, assembled with ammonium nitrate fuel oil – the explosive used in the Oklahoma City bombing – could have destroyed the four-storey building and killed hundreds.

“From now on, the life of every cop is worth as much as a bullet, while their bodies are the ideal target practice,” the Sect of Revolutionaries declared in its maiden proclamation. “They, like the doughnuts that they eat, are no good without a hole in the middle.”

They may be bloodthirsty lefty lunatics, but those boys can write…(aka Mr Eugenides.)

Sir “David Ormond” knows best. And, the Libertarian Party of the UK tells it to you like it is.


David Davis

Personal Privacy” will have to be sacrificed in order to fight “terrorism” and suchlike.

We already knew that, but now they’re saying it out loud. And the LPUK has a much better-argued and fuller rendition (ha ha ha ha ha! Rendition! is this another word for the lefties to lynch or have they merely invented it to sound like clever-clogs?) of the matter.

You’d all better get your knickers down for him now, democrat girlies and war-haters that you are.


David Davis

A couple of hours ago, we posted this stuff here, ripping as it does the public-trousers (if you can call them that) off the bugger Kim Jong-Il.  He shot a woman on the Wireless Tele Vision. Hillary Clinton can’t want that, even though Monica Lewinski was also a woman.

Now, we learn that “North” Korea can point a missile at the continental USA. Personally I doubt that, but we have to be sure either way. It also means that he can point it at China, India, Japan, Russia, Pakistan (he won’t, it’s where he probably got it from at a Bootle-type-boot-fair) Persia, Arabia, Australia and New Zealand (better watch out just in case) Indonesia (he won’t) and so on.

Israel….NOW you’re talking! Everybody of course hates the Jews because they are so clever and thus they have to be killed in culls all the time, or they’ll rumble you and cause you to lose your tenured-university-job-teaching-Gramsco-Marxianism-to-those-who-have-been-Big-Brothered. He’ll get away with that one.

He can’t quite reach South Africa, but it’s gone Nazi so he will leave it.

I’ve never seen any Interior Minister behaving so shallowly…..


…..in my entire life, and I have lived past a quite a few now. (Interior Ministers are now always younger than I am.)

David Davis

Interesting pic on An Englishman’s Castle. Don’t know what you make of it, nor do I, but it says some things that she wants you to know. Here’s the thing:-

 

Good, I cna go for a pizza, now!

Good, I can go for a pizza, safely now!

Let’s give some tyrant or other another tiny kick downhill


It is not suitable to shoot women. Only communists, Gramsco-Marxians and the Prussian general Staff (as a tactic to be used in the terrorising into passivity of occupied regions) sanctioned it. Stalin learned it, rather quickly.

Sorry. It’s just that our strategic-focus-video-incorporation-outreach-Chimpanzee-Typewriter-Group-deputy-chief-assistant-activities-co-ordinator, er, pointed out that, we had not thrown rotting cabbages at Kim Jong-Il for some time, and it was high time we did. At least 9% of the duty-Chimps on this shift found themselves involuntarily typing about him, even without pre-briefing.  

Just so he knows we have not forgotten him, and all his works.

Tornado: here we are again


That’s much, much better: that’s the real thing. There’s quite enough energy in the Universe for trains to be just like that all the time. Much more intresting.

Interesting


Tony Blair is a very clever guy….


…and I expect this sort of thing would be allowed under a libertarian constitution. Except that he’d not have got all the know-how in the first place, since the machinery which you needed to instruct people on how to corrupt for your ends, (in return for shagloads of dosh) would not exist.

David Davis

So, I guess the bugger would be nowhere, and begging on the Streets of Liverpool, with his “wife” lashing him, if we were in charge.

Very bad NASA satellite launch failure…..why?


…because we will not now get the truth in time.

David Davis

The global-climate-change-Gramsco-MarxiaNazi-buggers, and their   _very_   close friends who are the starvation-driving-mass-people-slaughterers, will not now be faced with the evidence – which is that Man is   _not_   causing “global warming”. Thye have cleverly scuppered the satellite – and can simultaneously discredit what ordinary people call “rocket-science”….so that it’s for them a “one-stone-solution to a two-bird problem”.

As regards rocket-science, they will be able to sya how inept we all are, and should stay here and subsistence-farm with chicken manure and stuff.

As regards “global warming”, they will be able to say that “the Science” is “still settled”, for there is still “no” evidence for their hypothesis being proved not to be true.

See?

Simple really.

You just do the insurance-equivalent of setting your car on fire, to claim the dosh and pretend it was all right anyway.

The Devil will try to corrupt everything, even toy aeroplanes…


UPDATE an hour later…

I have worked out how to say what it is that makes me sad about this particular matter. It’s that, in its ever-tightening screwhold on individuals’ liberties, this current British State takes even toys, that boys and men (and even some girls) have once liked to play with, harmlessly, and turns them into weapons of constriction.

if one was a psychiatrist, then one would, after all this is done, like to take some of these State people, put them on the couch, and try to find out, really find out, what made them do what they did? Why did a  man who sold teledrones to the Army (understandable) agree to sell them to the State Police….why did he not send the bastards packing out of his office waving a cricket bat, even, when they came to ask to buy them from him…to spy on British householders late on….?

Why did the couchee-subjects I have referred to, see the world not as other people, but as controllers of it? or as salesmen to controllers?  As controllers of other, unknown individuals’ lives, or worse, as accessories after the fact of that imposed control?

Is it just simple nasty error-ridden Gramsco-Marxianism, or is it something…..deeper? What actually motivated them to consciously err?

Can’t they understand that individuals have Free Will? That the reason for opposition to State control is that it ought not to exist?

In the end, what is it that makes someone want to be, say, a traffic warden, or a concentration-camp-guard, or a “modern”  interior-ministry-policeman?

Have we as libertarians failed in some way, to explain how this mind-set cannot be normal, and the owner of it must have suffered in some way, to get like that?

Or, does evil really exist, existentially?…..here’s the post you signed on for……..

David Davis

Now we are to be faced with this. The Law will need to be clarified on the following points:-

(1) What measures will householders be able to take to prevent overflight of their property by these robots, if they decide they simply don’t like them and don’t actually want them around, or they are a nuisance, or they keep us awake in the night, or they scare the racing-pigeons? (The helicopters are bad enough.)

(2) To what extent will _Radio Amateurs_ be prevented from  _examining_   and then  _analysing_  the frequencies and transmission-modes used? (I never said we would try to transmit on these bands or even interfere with them…we are strictly licensed to operate on certain bands, and in particular modes only. But “nobody suggests” that we can’t listen to any public transmission or signal whatsoever….)

(3) What are the “sunset” clauses inherent in the use of these extraordinary bits of machinery, considering thatw e are supposed to be living in what even this government calls a “Free Society”?

Where must the Queen’s subjects stand up, and actually draw the line in the sand?

What, for example, if you wanted to do Practical Coal Mining, in your garden? Would this stuff be used against you?

Home education: I was going to do it, ‘cozz it matters…. in a week or so, but….


Bishop Hill got there first. I was tipped to it however by Landed Underclass, who declines to visit the David Semple thingy, but anyway Bishop does it well enough.

David Davis

The point about home education is that

(a) you can teach a child what matters, like all the proper history and suff that “They” don’t want you to know, and

(2) also real facts, sort of, er, about reality, like Darwinian evolution and Christianity which are not mutually-exclusive, and

(3) the Nazis scumbag-school Gramsco-Marxian State-buggers can’t re-indoctrinate it (the child-object)  for you while it is away from you.

I have home-schooled children in the past. One boy got a maths GCSE aged 13. Another one may go to Wellbeck coll and do an RAF thingy.

Libertarians ought to be in favour of home education, I would have thought. Am I right?

UPDATE:- The Devil also quotes David Semple (who has had the benefit of the finest education that money can – or even can’t – buy, and therefore ought to know better) saying this:

“Collectively, as a society, we have a responsibility to our children – who are not the property of their parents and shouldn’t be treated as such.”

I have nothing constructive to say about that, sorry.

Is this YET _another_ anti-English smear, or do we actually torture people?


I have to say that I don’t know. But torture is “institutionally” non-English, and does not originate here. Asia, and other places, are where the Europeans learned it, from having undergone it by defending against invasive incursion in things such as Crusades (I am not allowed to say against what we were defending, for then my son would get suspended from his history course.) And to   _not_   torture while investigating, is essentially an English practise. Read your Paul Johnson: “The Offshore islanders” – chapter ref: “this Realm is an Empire”.

David Davis

This article here is full of implications and non-sequiturs. You lazy indolent buggers out there had better read the entire thing. The  (shifty-looking)  [allegedly] “up for it” guy ( = dude) walked off the plane, in the UK, to his family and to his “law_yers” (if you wozz a state, wott  seriously, regularly, “did” people, in the basement of the “Ministry” for a living, really, like Nazi Gramsco-Marxian scumbags habitually do) then would you let a torturee do that? Walk off the plane in front of camerae? No, I would not either) but the text implies he was tortured at the command of the British “security services”.

There is, as my old co-director used to say about bailiffs, Health-and-Safety-Gestapo, and other fascistically-motivated non-marketeering State-predator-scumbags who used to be paid, out of our taxation, to psychologically-torment us and functionally-impede us in the course of our business, “MORE TO COME ON THIS ONE, SON”. I take great exception to the entire thing, but I will report back tomorrow when it has all got cooked a bit more and I can smell the rats floating in the air.

The Devil re-savages Monty Don, and the New-Britain-Fascist State, equally and beautifully


Here. Read the thing in full, you need to follow the argument and I have work to do!

Good old piece by Sean Gabb, about the vulnerable connections between advertising and liberty


Here.

Nice Canadian comments on Sean Gabb’s speech to Conservative-Future


David Davis

Here. This chap is a Canadian conservative: I have always hoped that there would be some of these.

Troughpiggers


David Davis

I want this new English common-noun to be internetized, and to end up in the Oxford Dictionary next year. Please help. Hat tip Guido Fawkes for showing us what it means in primary form.

It has the advantage that it does not directly denigrate pigs, noble animals that they are, and entirely without the taint of socialism, so far as they may be aware.

The two Ronnies: awfully funny, well one of them anyway…


Jade Goody, “Jack Tweed”, cancer and slebs. What has become of us as a civilisation?


David Davis

I swore not to write about Jade Goody. Honestly, I did – whether she was dead or alive.

For foreign readers – of whom there may now be many, I cannot count – Jade Goody is a person who appeared, a few (I can’t remember how many) years ago, on a thing called “Big Brother” (I don’t expect you people in proper countries have that on your Wireless Tele Visions: only we do, as this is ZanuLieBorgLand and the thing is designed as a deliberate neo-Utopian-de-educator.) She insulted, racially, it is said, a person called Shilpa Shetty, a “Bollywood” actress, calling her “Shilpa Poppadom” – my reaction on being told this by a scandalised student was “so what”? since the actress said at the time that she did not mind either way. But Jade Goody became, er, famous for being famous.

Now, the world has learned that Jade Goody is dying of metastatised cervical cancer. Of course, this is a very sad position for anybody to be in. The issues as regards the Libertarian Alliance, and what I decide to blog about for it, are as follows:-

(1) Societies that are in decline, in terms of their philosophical stature, start to worship false gods. That is to say, they are like the Incas and Mayans and other failed-projects, and all that lot which elevate a human being for a week or so, then tear its heart out, while it is living, in front of everyone. Socialism encourages this of course as I have always said, as the public purging of pity and terror takes the watchers’ minds off their own problems with the enemy-class (be it priests or rulers) for a few minutes or days. Jade Goody’s TV travails and  tele-tormentings of others and herself were just another ingenious device: used by people like Peter Bazalgette, to help narcotize the British People into keeping ZanuLieBorg in power for longer.

(2) Jade Goody herself has focussed on what is important in the time left to her, which shows that All Men are capable of redemption and forgiveness. This is the ultimate Libertarian message, as I keep saying, which destroys both at one moment the entire pseudo-science of “criminology”, and also ampplifies the truth which All Men know, which is that God gave Men Free Will – to choose either Good, or Evil. The choice it ours. She has, in her last weeks, chosen Good. She apparently got married yesterday, to somebody called Jack Tweed, and although huge sums of money have been arranged for the “rights” to the pictures etc, the money will be used to help educate her little sons. I think this is a bloody good show. Good for her, and it shows that underneath perhaps, just perhaps, she was not really like the others.

If she is sincere, this sad story then shows the power of repentance and redemption. I object to the auto-insertion into the narrative of the odious cockroach-of-faux-celebrity-Max-Clifford, from whom I would be reluctant to accept a whisky, in case there were media-rights-conditions attached, but if he helps her to save the lives and futures of her poor boys, I will be satisfied. (I’m sure his software will find this blog entry.)

Oh, and Jack Straw has after all some glimmerings of humanity and kindness in his institutionalo-socialistically-warped soul (like all the others who are potentially-lost souls.) He allowed Jack Tweed’s curfew (the fellow has what is known as a “tag”, whatever that might be) to be lifted for one night.  of course, he is the “Justice Minister”, so he can do anything he likes I guess. But it was kind and it ought to be noted. I am quite sure that The Recording-Angel has already filed this matter.

I don’t think that ultimately Jack Straw is an innately bad man, even though a socialist, and potentially unforgiveable, for the wrongness of this policy-position is patent. He too is potentially capable of redemption – even though he did this deed for socialist-ZanuLieBorg publicity reasons.

While we yet slave, the trough-pigs still hoover in the money


David Davis

Perhaps it would matter less that Members of the European Parliament scoop £200,000 per year in “expenses” and “allowances” (that’s about USD  $  300,000) if what they did was essentially harmless and unimportant to the rest of us.

I’m not sure that President Barack Obama even earns quite that total amount (with his ordinary pay of course) and you oculd argue that he deserves it more in return for the augmented stress of his own job.

We at the Libertarian Alliance often say that being engulfed in the EU is “a” problem, but it is not “the main” problem, for Britain and in particular England (which not only does the nett paying for the EU boondoggle, but against which and against whose traditions, customs and commercial practises “EU directives” are often specifically “directed”.

But the EU is certainly an expensive problem, aside from the legislative implications. if we could leave, we could abolish VAT.

An Englishman’s castle: how does one post comments?


David Davis

I can’t do it, because every time I try, I get told this:-

“Your comment posting failed because you have submitted too many comments in too short a time. Please try again in a short while.”

If he’s reading this, can he tell us what to do?

Alphainventions


David Davis

Traffic seemed curiously to be coming from this site, a while ago, so I discovered what it was, took advantage of the proposal, and Alphainventions does really add about 10% – 30%  to our daily views. We are already a biggish blog as absolute page views go I think, but a few hundred more won’t hurt: we need to get the message out, to broadcast, even if people don’t stay! (And I’m grateful.)

No idea how it works, but we’re happy about it. For those of you who have come in through this portal, here is an important post about the right direction for conservative political philosophy and strategy for a possible incoming Tory administration, at the next British General Election.

And here’s a follow-up to it. With more comments.

Oh, for f*** ‘ s sake…..


David Davis

Biohazard, envirocrime, HP sauce. What the hell are these people thinking they are doing?

Monty Don, a rich BBC-Tele-Gardner, savaged by Bella Gerens


David Davis

I’ve commented about this poor, sad, unhistorically-educated Monty Don chappie on The Landed Underclass, earlier, but Bella Gerens does a better academic demolition job on him and his hypotheses.

Yes it’s nice to play at growing a few veg – even keeping a few chickens, if you can stand the slimy shit, are prepared to shoot, gas or snare the inevitable foxes and hawks (beware of the RSPB Gestapo*** on that one!) and stuff their corpses in your wheelie-bin, and if you can bear, as a metropolitan dweller, to kill, pluck, draw and then cook and eat the poor bastards when the time comes.

I don’t object to play-growing. But it won’t feed a nation of 60 million, no way Monty. You can afford to, but we can’t.

***Hawks are of course quite OK, and ought to be allowed to predate your stuff all they want, but your food-birds are of no interest ot them whatsoever.

Free Download of Sean’s Culture War Book


 

The Hampden Press

More on Sean Gabb speech to Conservative-Future: trenchant comment


David Davis

I take the liberty of using this comment (freely available on the thread for this post) as a new post:-

And here’s me been trying to impose a commenting moratorium on myself. Oh well, here I go again.

Sean’s prescription for what to do when power is gained, while perhaps or perhaps not perfect in the detail, is a good one, and is the kind of thought experiment which may bring one temporary cheer. However it does not (nor, one must absolutely acknowledge attempt to) answer the question of how such a position may be gained. As such it is much like discussing which stars to visit in a starship, while ignoring the hard problem, which is how to build a warp drive.

The problem is that by not discussing in the same breath the gaining of that position, we overlook the fundamentally recursive nature of the discussion. If a government of libertarians, or of “the right” (I dispute that label, but let us let it pass for now) or of “real conservatives” (I dispute that even more as I said before) has gained office in our thought experiment, then the war is already won. That which should be done by such government then becomes a trifle, as it will have the authority to do whatever it wishes.

Unless it has gained power by subterfuge, rather than gained office by honest campaigning, this imaginary government has already told the populace that it will slash government to ribbons, immediately leave the EU, abolish the BBC, hound the enemy out of local government, strangle all the quangos and so on. It can only thus gain office if it has the support of the majority of those citizens who care. To achieve that, it must have gained a cultural hegemony and, more significantly a moral hegemony.

It will have become moral to support small government and immoral to support big government. It will have become moral to support tax cuts, to despise the enemy class, and so on.

To achieve the initial conditions for such a libertian cultural revolution, the public morality must have already become libertarian, rather than the current secular evangelical statism.

This is the Hard Problem, and it would seem at this juncture to be entirely intractable, since altering the moral hegemony requires cultural hegemony, while the cultural hegemony is driven by the moral hegemony.

What is oft mistakenly believed is that the statists/Left/whatever invaded the institutions- government, education etc, from outside. This is not true. There were always socialists inside the elite; indeed it is an elite project and always was. We, on the other hand, have no insiders; and the defenders against whom we wish to move are entirely alert to the possibility of any counterhegemonic entryism and are thus able to nullify it before it gains purchase. The Hard Problem is thus profoundly hard. 

Sean Gabb Gets It Right, And Oh So Wrong. | I am Keith Neilson


Comment from Blogmaster:- I should have said that this is the post which Keith Neilson comments on below. The original post was a stormer, which has mightily upset certain Tories in the UK.

Sean Gabb Gets It Right, And Oh So Wrong. | I am Keith Neilson

Organ music to rival all other organ music, HAHAHAHAHA…


Peter Davis

Thursday night is (organ) music night…


The Art of Fugue cont. IX :-

Some good footwork:-

More footwork (how does his brain know what to do all the time?):-

And just a boy, on such a powerful machine (Liverpool, down-t’road):-

Some lesser-known Widor:-

And from Poland, at the second-most-revered pilgimage site in the country:-

And now some music and humour…


Peter Davis

This one gets realy nice at about 1:03:

Here is the humour to brighten up a boring, uneventful Thursday night:

Someone tried to put part of an episode of Top Gear (My favourite show, Jeremy Clarkson is GOD)  into a game, wich is quite fun:

Why can’t the Queen do stuff like this?


Vaclav Klaus scragged by walk-outer-MEPs, while a guest in “his” own EU “parliament”


…amd a good plug for Sean Gabb’s speech to Conservative Future, from these good people over there.

There are no videos of Klaus himself being shouted at and with grasping, totalitarian, trough-pigging-socialist-scumbags walking out, but we’ll put them on as soon as possible if they appear.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/daniel_hannan/blog/2009/02/19/meps_walk_out_when_vaclav_klaus_questions_european_integration

Urgent message to Pope: DON’T COME!! – Gordon Brown’s imprimatur is the kiss of death!


Update:- Sensible Pope….heeded the Libertarian Alliance’s advice!

David Davis

Gordon Brown has apparently invited poor unwitting Joseph Ratzinger/Benedict XVI to Britain. Since everything that Brown touches turns to dust and ashes, including the UK economy, the Libertarian Alliance urges the Pope NOT TO ACCEPT the invitation to come to Britain. It is not any more a Christian country in any regular sense anyway, so why bother?

Despite him being the Vicar of Christ, the Pope turning up here can’t save us from the ZanuLieborg Hell we are now in: only we can.

OI !!!! Pope!

Can you hear us?

Please don’t come: save yourself for Brazil or Zimbabwe where you’ll be safer or somewhere, that needs you more. Something bad will happen to the Catholic Church, or you might die of MRSA (don’t kiss the “health” “secretary” at all) or “Jacqui” “Smith” might want to scan you on video at the airport.

The Volokh Conspiracy – Sean Gabb’s Advice to the Tories:


 

The Volokh Conspiracy – Sean Gabb’s Advice to the Tories:

Sean Gabb at the Oxford Union, 26th February 2009


Thursday, 26th February 2009…a date to watch, for some fireworks…..

At The Oxford Union,

Dr Sean Gabb of the Libertarian Alliance

shall oppose the following  motion:-

“This House Would Restrict The Free Speech of Extremists”.

John Sentamu is right in his observations but wrong in his analysis


David Davis

Christians are indeed regarded as “mad“. But that’s just a enemy-class-tactic. The Enemy Class knows full well – and would if pressed be mildly pleased on TV to admit – that it is evil and wicked, as does Satan. (Just look at the up-yours-junk in Tate Modern.) The point is to marginalise first, and then destroy – once they have become sufficiently unpopular –  your enemies. If Christians persist in behaving like enemies of amorality, then they will just get swept away with the rest of the reactionary trash.

Poor Dr John Sentamu thinks that droids like “Fabians”, “the Cabinet”, the makers of mass-hypnosis-TV-programmes, the upper echelons of the BBC, and the denizens of quangos, are not innately and institutionally evil beings. he is sadly mistaken, for these do evil because it’s er, umm, what they do, it’s their, er, job and objective in life.

From the way in which the Universe seems to behave in reality, as manifested by Gramsco-Marxians, it is reasonable to suppose the existence of absolute Evil.

Sean Gabb: Speech to Conservative Future


Groan:- I don’t know what that smiley is doing there, but I can’t remove it. It’s none of my doing.

UPDATE3:-Please read this response-post, and _in particular_ the comment posted thereupon by an informed member of the blogateriat.

UPDATE2:- Here’s Sean Gabb’s thoughts earlier this year on holocaust denial, a hot subject.

Earlier comment from Blogmaster just after main post filed:-

(1) A direct link from the young Conservatives, who were kind enough to report the event charitably, is here.

(2)  This post by Sean is not for the faint-hearted: that is to say, those who may quail when the real assaults finally come. The prognosis for liberty in the UK is not currently good, and may not get better.

I have just read this on another forum, and would have published it unilaterally had not Sean Gabb done so already. You will find, on reading down, that the floor-response to Sean’s address was not as positive as a rational person would have hoped from today’s Tories, in Britain, embattled as they seem not to realise – or else prefer not to know, and pretend that all will be well if only they take power.

I think we can expect that, on ZanuNewLieborg being thrown out, as they will be, but not decisively (as we fear) then the British Conservative Party will remain a less certain but still definite enemy of individual liberty. this was not always the case as Sean points out. But it is now.

Free Life Commentary,
A Personal View from
The Director of the Libertarian Alliance
Issue Number 181
16th February 2009
Linking url: http://www.seangabb.co.uk/flcomm/flc181.htm

Text of a Speech to Conservative Future,
Given in The Old Star Public House, Westminster,
Monday the 16th February 2009
by Sean Gabb

I’d like to begin by praising your courage in having me here tonight to speak to you. I am the Director of an organisation that tried hard during the 1980s to take over the youth movement of the Conservative Party. The Libertarian Alliance provided a home and other support for Marc-Henri Glendenning, David Hoile and Douglas Smith, among others, when it looked as if libertarians might do the same to the Conservative Party as the Trotskyites nearly did to the Labour Party. Sadly, our efforts failed. Since then, the Conservative Party has become more watchful of people like us. It has also, I must say, made itself progressively less worth trying to take over.

I did say that I would come here and be rude to you. But that would be a poor thanks for your hospitality. Besides, while your party leadership has consistently ignored my advice during the past twelve years – and has, in consequence, been out of office during this time – there is no point in dwelling on what might have been. We are where we are, and I think it would be useful for me very briefly to outline my advice to a future Conservative Government.

Now, this is not advice to the Government that looks set to be formed within the next year or so my David Cameron. I may be wrong. It is possible that Mr Cameron is a much cleverer and more Machiavellian man that I have ever thought him, and that he plans to make radical changes once in office. But I do not think he is. I think what little he is promising to do is the very most that he will do. In any event, he is doing nothing to acquire the mandate without which radical change would lack legitimacy. And so this is advice that I offer to some future government of conservatives, rather than to any prospective Conservative Government. It may even be a government formed by the people in this room.

My first piece of advice is to understand the nature of your enemy. If you come into government, you will be in at least the same position as Ramsay MacDonald, when he formed the first Labour Government in the 1920s. He faced an Establishment that was broadly conservative. The administration, the media, the universities, big business – all were hostile to what it was believed he wanted to do. The first Labour Governments were in office, but not fully in power, as they were not accepted by the people with whom and through whom they had to rule the country. To a lesser degree, Clement Attlee and Harold Wilson faced the same constraints. A future Conservative Government will find much the same.

Over the past few generations, a new Establishment or ruling class has emerged in this country. It is a loose coalition of politicians, bureaucrats, educators, media people and associated business interests. These are people who derive income and status from an enlarged and activist state. They have been turning this country into a soft-totalitarian police state. They are not always friendly to a Labour Government. But their natural political home is the Labour Party. They will accept a Conservative Government on sufferance – but only so long as it works within a system that robs ordinary people of their wealth and their freedom. They will never consent to what should be the Conservative strategy of bringing about an irreversible transfer of power from the State back into the hands or ordinary people.

A Cameron Government, as I have said, seems willing to try coexistence with the Establishment. The Thatcher Government set out to fight and defeat an earlier and less confident version of the Establishment – but only on those fronts where its policies were most resisted. It won numerous battles, but, we can now see, it lost the war. For example, I well remember the battle over abolition of the Greater London Council. This appeared at the time a success. But I am not aware of one bureaucrat who lost his job at the GLC who was not at once re-employed by one of the London Boroughs or by some other agency of the State. And we know that Ken Livingstone was eventually restored to power in London.

If you want to win the battle for this country, you need to take advice from the Marxists. These are people whose ends were evil where not impossible. But they were experts in the means to their ends. They knew more than we have ever thought about the seizure and retention of power. I therefore say this to you. If you ever do come to power, and if you want to bring about the irreversible transfer of power to ordinary people, you should take to heart what Marx said in 1871, after the failure of the Paris Commune: �the next attempt of the French Revolution will be no longer, as before, to transfer the bureaucratic-military machine from one hand to another, but to smash it, and this is the precondition for every real people�s revolution�.�

The meaning of this is that you should not try to work with the Establishment. You should not try to jolly it along. You should not try fighting it on narrow fronts. You must regard it as the enemy, and you must smash it.

On the first day of your government, you should close down the BBC. You should take it off air. You should disclaim its copyrights. You should throw all its staff into the street. You should not try to privatise the BBC. This would simply be to transfer the voice of your enemy from the public to the private sector, where it might be more effective in its opposition. You must shut it down – and shut it down at once. You should do the same with much of the administration. The Foreign Office, much of the Home Office, the Commission for Racial Equality, anything to do with health and safety and planning and child protection – I mean much of the public sector – these should be shut down. If at the end of your first month in power, you have not shut down half of the State, you are failing. If you have shut down half the State, you have made a step in the right direction, and are ready for still further cuts.

Let me emphasise that the purpose of these cuts would not be to save money for the taxpayers or lift an immense weight of bureaucracy from their backs – though they would do this. The purpose is to destroy the Establishment before it can destroy you. You must tear up the web of power and personal connections that make these people effective as an opposition to radical change. If you do this, you will face no more clamour than if you moved slowly and half-heartedly. Again, I remember to campaign against the Thatcher “cuts”. There were no cuts, except in the rate of growth of state spending. You would never have thought this from the the torrent of protests that rolled in from the Establishment and its clients. And so my advice is to go ahead and make real cuts – and be prepared to set the police on anyone who dares riot against you.

I fail to see how you would face any electoral problems with this approach. Most Conservative voters would welcome tax cuts and a return to freedom. As for those who lost their jobs, they do not, nor ever will, vote Conservative.

Following from this, however, I advise you to leave large areas of the welfare state alone. It is regrettable, but most people in this country do like the idea of healthcare free at the point of use, and of free education, and of pensions and unemployment benefit. These must go in the long term. But they must be retained in the short term to maintain electoral support. Their cost and methods of provision should be examined. But cutting welfare provision would be politically unwise in the early days of our revolution.

I have already spoken longer than I intended. But one more point is worth making. This is that we need to look again at our constitutional arrangements. The British Constitution has always been a fancy dress ball at which ordinary people were not really welcome, but which served to protect the life, liberty and property of ordinary people. Some parts of this fancy dress ball continue, but they no longer serve their old purpose. They are a fig leaf for an increasingly grim administrative despotism. I was, until recently, a committed monarchist. I now have to admit that the Queen has spent the past half century breaking her Coronation Oath at every opportunity. The only documents she has ever seemed reluctant to sign are personal cheques. Conservatives need to remember that our tradition extends not only through Edmund Burke to the Cavaliers, but also through Tom Paine to Oliver Cromwell. We live in an age where it is necessary to be radical to be conservative.

But I have now spoken quite long enough, and I am sure you have much to say in response. I therefore thank you again for your indulgence in having invited me and the politeness with which you have heard me.

[A combination of silence and faint applause]

Comment 1: You accuse the Conservatives of having ignored you for twelve years. From what you have just said, it is a good thing you were ignored. Under David Cameron’s leadership, we have a Conservative Party that is now positively desired by the people. Your advice is and would have been a recipe for permanent opposition.

Response: I disagree. There is no positive desire for a Conservative Government. If there were, the polls would be showing a consistent fifty point lead or something. What we have is a Labour Government that is so dreadful that I have trouble thinking what could be worse.

[In a private conversation before my speech, I said that the Labour Party had turned out to be about as bad in government as the Green Party or the British National Party or Sinn Fein.]

There are two ways of doing politics. One is to listen to focus groups and opinion polls, and offer the people what they claim to want. The other is to stand up and tell them what they ought to want, and to keep arguing until the people agree that they want it, or until it is shown not to be worth wanting. I think I know what sort of politicians will run the next Conservative Government. What sort of politicians do you want to be?

Comment 2 [from an Irishman]: What you are saying means that the country would be without protection against obvious evils. With no child protection services, children would be abused and murdered. Without planning controls, the countryside would soon be covered with concrete. Without planning controls, cities like Manchester would be far less attractive places.

I will also say, as an Irishman, that I am offended by your reference to Oliver Cromwell, who was a murderer and tyrant. You cannot approve of this man.

Response: You have been taken in by the Establishment’s propaganda. This is to insist that we live with vast structures of oppression, or that we must accept the evils they are alleged to curb. I say that that these structures do not curb any evils, but instead create evils of their own. We have, for example, seventy thousand social workers in this country. They appear to have done a consistently rotten job at protecting the few children who need protecting. instead, they are taking children away from grandparents to give to strangers, and are setting the police onto dissenting ministers who allow their children to climb onto the roof. None of this should be surprising. The Children Act and other laws have created a bureaucratic sausage machine that must somehow be filled. I say let it be destroyed along with all else that is evil in our system of government.

[What I might have said, but was too polite to say: As for Oliver Cromwell, he was one of the greatest Englishmen who ever lived. It is partly thanks to him that we have just had around three centuries of freedom and political stability. When you refer to his actions in Ireland, you are repeating Fenian propaganda. What he did in Ireland has been exaggerated by the enemies of England, and in any event was in keeping with the customs of war universally admitted in his own time. If you want to throw an offended fit every time an Englishman in London praises an English hero to other Englishmen, you should consider moving to Dublin where all the letter boxes have been painted a reassuring green, and your own national sensitivities never need be offended again.]

Comment 3: All you speak about is winning and the destruction of enemies. Yet you are willing to consider keeping the welfare state. You are nothing but an unprincipled trouble maker. Thank God the Conservative Party no longer has any place for people like you.

Response: If we were facing the sort of Labour Government we had under Clement Attlee and Harold Wilson, you would be right. However, we have an Establishment that has already given us the beginnings of a totalitarian police state. Today, for example, the authorities will start collecting details of every telephone call, text and e-mail sent in this country. Children are about to have their details stuffed into a giant database that will enable them to be monitored by the authorities until they are adults – and probably through their entire lives. We live in a country were privacy is being abolished. Speech is increasingly unfree. The police are out of control. Everything is getting rapidly worse, and it is easy to see the end state that is desired, or total control.

If a government of radical conservatives ever does take power, it will have one attempt at saving this country. That means radical and focussed actions from day one. Anything less than this, and it will fail. I am suggesting a revolution – but this is really a counter-revolution against what has already been proceeding for at least one generation. If we are to beat the heirs of Marx, we must learn from Marx himself.

Comment 4: You are wasting our time with all this radical preaching. People do not want to hear about how they are oppressed by the Establishment, and how this must be destroyed. What they want to hear is that taxes are too high, that the money is being wasted, and that there are ways to protect essential public services with lower taxes. That is why the Taxpayers’ Alliance has been so much more prominent than the Libertarian Alliance. We must have nothing to do with the ranting lunatics of the Libertarian Alliance.

Response: You may have a desire for electoral success that I do not share. But I am the better politician. All debate is perceived as taking place on a spectrum that has a centre and two extremes. If the Libertarian Alliance did not exist, the relevant spectrum would simply reconfigure itself with the Taxpayers’ Alliance at one extreme, and the centre would be still less attractive than it now is. Since most people consciously take centrist positions, it is in your interest – regardless of whether I am right – to say what I do. It makes you and your friends moderate in relation to me.

[At this point, some unfortunate woman began screeching that I was a fascist, and the debate came to an end.]

[I normally like to comment on these events once I have described them. I think, however, the above stands by itself.]

NB—Sean Gabb’s book, Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back, can be downloaded for free from http://tinyurl.com/34e2o3