Not hard to see that the Enemy Class is setting itself up in a hereditary manner from now on.
“I’m all right, Jack, I’ll just pull up the ladder and never mind you!”
Not hard to see that the Enemy Class is setting itself up in a hereditary manner from now on.
“I’m all right, Jack, I’ll just pull up the ladder and never mind you!”
Many thanks to WhOops who has very kindly explained to me how to sort and categorise our blogroll. It will take some time at this rate, so please bear with me while I combine the gradual sortout of it with my other formal duties.
…by people like the suppliers of the stuff below….
The following parts were bought a little while ago by me in a cheapo 50-Kg job lot of RAF-surplus electronics bits and pieces. On idly peeling off the pricesticker covers to see what the MOD customarily pays for stuff, I was astonished.
The following part is a VHF/UHF coax to socket connector, probably about £3 from Farnell in Leeds:-
And this…this is a 0.001 μF polystyrene capacitor, of the sort you can get from China at about 2p a part. Even Maplin, expensive for this sort of thing, charges about 10p:-
Not only is this government viscerally and institutionally anti-forces, but “big business” in the form of Defence Contractors is “avvin-a-luff” at the taxpayer’s expense. You could almost believe that there is a cosy conspiracy between suppliers and the MOD buyers, and that said buyers are getting a private kickback in some form…after all, it’s happened many times before.
And the only sufferers are the poor soldiers who don’t get enough of the right kit as it “costs too much”….
Libertarians would have to be concerned at this, because as and when we come to power, we shall have to be alert for this sort of scam. You all know that I have often trumpeted the need for a Libertarian or fully-minimal-statist government here or anywhere to ensire it has very very powerful Armed Forces, at least for the dangerous years while other more statist nations try to undermine, or even directly assault it: it will highlight their dangerous isolation in pre-capitalist barbarism, and their lack of popular support.
…is to tell your employer that he can give you a free wireless-broadband to your house, with streaming video, downsize his office and move out of Nottingham, sack all staff who’d be needed if you were physically present, like cleaners, cooks, filing clerks etc, and cut his costs while avoiding the driving tax meantime.
Go and see her, she needs cheering up. And f*** the anti-fat-F***tards while you are at it.
…so you’d better keep watching.
Someone else might post, a better writer than me, and you’d kick yourself for missing them and being able to hotlink and pinch their stuff while it’s newsworthy – that’s what we want you to do, and fast, for it matters for the survival of liberty.
We do have a lot of expanding young writers…and I don’t know when they are in or out of bed etc….in the meantime, go and have some fun at Old Holborn….let’s get the Tories educated in advance, if possible, to our ire against them if they so much as deviate a MICRON from the path of liberty…
…for these poor old chaps who are now gone.
I just want you to see this:- (link)
about these chaps.
I am not pretending that Henry Allingham, or any of his friends who fought and died alongside him, were libertarians. He’d probably be appalled now to be bracketed with us. But the lesson of history from him and his, is that you have to be
(a) aware of what the Enemy Class (such as the Kaiser and other European Monarchies and proto-totalitarians such as Lenin) is, and shall be even now up to, and
(b) you have to be prepared to shaft them, er, before they shaft you.
In a world of endarkening, here’s some fun. Why is it that European pop-singers are so much more musical and also better-looking that ours?
The guitar-instrumental part, half way through, is totally wasted. Peter Davis, one of my expanding young writers, would be able to construst two more interesting Cello parts, for each of the two useless dudes is the middleground. they would need to be electrically-amplified, but that is not a problem. An pair of electrically-amplified Cello parts would synchronise better with her movements.
Get on it, boy.
Those who want can go here for an alternative youtube version.
When the Enemy Class has taken everything else, which is can and will, all that’s left really is sex. that’s the only pleasure they will leave us, but at their behest.
So perhaps we’d better kill them all now?
But, like Moslems ought to be (another group that is used and abused by the Enemy for now) the hoodlums and ne’er-do-wells ought to be bloody careful, and look to their own protection, when their usefulness to the Enemy-Class is expired….
It would be sad and funny at the same time, if the Enemy-Class was not being very “serious” about the rest of us.
I do not care any more if we are called “racist”: for the people I shall now describe are not of a different race from us on this blog or any blog or any continent. The people known to us through the media-outlets of our slavemasters as “Travellers” are yet another fascistically-defined-grouping, and are specially created and set up to undermine and destroy liberal classical individual civilisation, as it is commonly understood. The Enemy-Class act of differentiating “Travellers” as being worthy of special status and stolen money is itself divisive and factionalist and _/sectarian/_.
(Remember that word, anybody?)
If these “travellers” have guns,, and the “Police” have done nothing, then there truly is one set of laws for the Enemy Class and its catspaws, and another for everyone else.
The “Conservatives” had better watch out, in the (likely but not fully probable) event that they win the next election. People are angry and will not put up with GramscoFabiaNazi spun-half-measures and “initiatives”, designed to deflect their attention from real problems. Bloggers, commonly referred to these days as “right wing”, will be found to be assaulting the “Conservatives” more ferociously and implacably than they did the ZanuLieBorg GramscoFabiaNazis – for the “Conservatives”, having positioned themselves as virtuous and liberal, will have no excuse for not demolishing the entire wicked and iniquitous edifice of GramscoStatism.
It can be done!
Just _/press the buttons/_ on day one! Simply abolish all those departments which destroy and do not aid or augment, such as “Education and Skills”, Culture media and Sport”, the “Home Office”, “Children”, “Women and Equality” or whatever it’s last called, and the like, and put the erstwhile-staff on the street. (I’m a bit doubtful even about the Foreigners’-Office, the Treasury, and Defence too.) Oh and _all_ the hard disks will have to be malleted, and the remote-servers bulldozed too: all of them, all. In the street, and a receipt for every one, the buildings to be forcibly checked for backups…first thing. No records. They can take nothing out from there. It will be as if those departments will have gone into “Night and Fog”…like the Jews and other proscribed groups in another Gramscian paradise not so far removed in time and space from us.
Why do I only spot stuff years after everyone else? Don’t I spend _/enough/_ time already in front of the confuser, or something? Does everything worthwhile on a confuser have to be done in the dead of night for hour after hour after hour, over endless coffee and Dr-Pepper? (That can’t be how Bill Gates succeeded….or was it?)
Incidentally, if anyone knows how to, and would like to volunteer to help me to, pretty-up the sidebar of this blog (as I can’t find the controls in WordPress for how to do it) I would be grateful. I want for example to categorise the blogroll in the fancy nifty way everybody else seems to be able to do, and I can’t find how to “edit the template” or “use CSS” or stuff like that.
I haven’t the time to learn it from first principles as I have a wife and young family (wife demands to be socialised with, by me, with calculated randomness specifically at times when I am wanting to compute deeply, and this causes violent ructions.) And I also have to perform duties and imposts with some regularity.
So any help from readers about doing interesting stuff with the appearance of this blog would be welcome. (I can’t even find how to import and place things called “widgets”. I can “get widget” – that’s easy, but what’s next baffles me utterly…)
….because “Organic” food has failed as a way to hobble and attenuate the population, and as a way to bring about food-rationing in the UK.
Actually, it’s lovely. One lot of GramscoFabiaNazis, the “Food Standards” “Agency”, is badmouthing another lot of the same buggers, which is to say the growers, the metroNazi opinion-formers-about, and then also the wannabe-eaters of, “organic” food. It’s true that the nastiest catfights occur between one socialist and another one who does not quite agree with him 100%.
The word “organic” means a couple of things, in the main. If something is “organic” within a system, it means that the something is “of or within” that system. Furthermore, “organic” chemistry simply means the chemistry of carbon compounds, which mainly occur ( at _standard temperature and pressure_ ) within living objects. It is immensely complex and intricate, and is hardly affected, if at all, by the addition of things like small amounts of Potassium Nitrate, or pesticides.
“Organic” is one of those lynched and stolen words, which have a meaning that implies good or at least philosophical neutrality. Other stolen words, hijacked and used for evil and corrupt purposes by the Enemy Class, are “capitalism”, “democracy”, “liberalism”, “inflation”, “safety”, “health”, “going forward”, “moving on”, “working with”, and the like.
I invite submissions for others that we have to get back.
I doubt very much if any Mosques have actually _/asked/_ for this….but “Avon and Somerset”*** Police have volunteered it.
It just makes the job of eradicating GramscoFabiaNazism even harder, since these buggers clearly really do believe the West is NOT Best.
If we believe that one civilisation is objectively better than others, then it would behove us to force our State-NGOs and other public-sector outfits, however Gramscian their leanings, to behave as if we believed it. Insofar as we have to tolerate the bastards for the time being.
Moslems themselves, whether “Fundamentalist” of not, are not actually the problem or even part of it. The Koran is manifestly and quite frankly not a book about a peaceful religion, but that can be fixed by a dialogue in which we will deploy the Asse-Hatt, to add the right notes of non-committment and ennui to its entire decontamination-proceedings:-
They are being used as a catspaw by the GramscoFabians, and will find themselves being eradicated later as inconvenient objectors, along with all other whole categories of persons who displease the Gramscoids’ idea of Future-World Order.
***Part of the wicked and evil 1970s-“Heatho-Walkerian-boundary-erasure-retrogressions”.
How does the bugger do it? Wish I’d had the secret years ago…
….but the Enemy Class that creates unsocialised knife-wielders is.
Now, Marks and Spencer – and earlier, Tesco – join the ranks of the wannabe-State-Nannies.
Setting up an education system which de-civilises from an early age, coupled with continuing to treat adults like children, produces these conditions and events.
The nursery where my sainted wife works has a “policy” of not only not having “war toys” (a pejorative for guns) but not even allowing the word to be mentioned. Welocme to the Endarkenment.
Some of us have always known that, in the event of a ZanuLieBorg defeat, they not having rigged the results sufficiently or stuffed enough !”postal votes”! in their Rotten Boroughs , a Tory win would not mean the start of a Long March Towards Liberalism.
For those who are confused, I, in here, use the word “liberalism” with a _/small L/_ to mean free-market non-socialist/minimal statism: this word belongs to us and not to the Enemy Class or people like US “democrats”, who have twisted and corrupted it, and who deliberately and purposefully and with conviction lean towards big-statist Nazism. Watch Obama morph as he finds his feet, more’s the pity – and we did warn you nearly two years ago about what he would get like.
So now we are being softened up with “no tax cuts,” and “possible increases”, and a delay in the “pledge to abolish IHT”, and even “road tolls”. The upside is there won’t be any money to build many “new roads” for some time.
Tories in the UK think that once the election is “won” – (will it be? Better be quite serious about the guys you face, for they hate you and us and they won’t stop now) – they will get an easy ride from “right wing bl0ggers”, whatever those are. Well, we shall have to see, but the signs are not enouraging.
Cameron thinks that we’ll all have to dig into our pockets to right the wrongs of this administration: but he did have other alternatives as follows:-
(1) Formally repudiate ALL UK sovereign debt taken out by _this_ administration after a date he could have set. That would stop the borrowing in short order…
(2) Announce that instead of tax rises, or non-removal of most existing imposts, very very large areas of the State would simply be closed down… He could simply publicly nominate huge departments and fiefdoms for absolute closure and which are not populated by Tory voters, which is most of it, without any electoral penalty….The fact that Sterling would rise on that revelation would not benefit Brown as cameron would already have said that he’s not going to pay any more new debts incurred by the said Gorgon…
(3) He could then announce the prospect of actual tax cuts, seeing as he’d save at least £300 billion in wages bills straight away. Conservatively [bad pun, sorry] we could have £150 billion of tax cuts per year, plus an extra £150 billion earmarked for debt servicing, and we might get out of debt in as little as ten years. Moreover, the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of desperate ex-public-employees, starving on the streets and many even without housing – it having been repossessed and the Banks unable to sell or let it, would drive wages and real rents down to a right market-clearing level, which will benefit the private sector which could then recover a modicum of tax-paying-ability in time.
But the Tories won’t do it, will they.
They are _/not really serious at all/_.
Time to attack them, now, before it’s too late.
A while ago, we explained about this plant. Just as an update for those who were interested the last time around, it’s resting right now, but hopes to be back with more flowers nest April and May.
He can’t be sued for libel on the grounds of truth.
Harry Patch has died. I will be honoured to be one of his pall-bearers, although I am sure I will not be asked.
Yep, we can all play games about which war is inside which section of the Ongoing World War….but I think that 1914-1919 is the third bit of the main modern section of it. The fourth bit started in about 1935, and the fifth bit on 1st Sept 1939. Other bits have been intermittently conflagrating on, here and there, for decades since then. 1950, 1956, 1967, 1973, Lebanon, 1991, 2003 and so on.
The point about Harry Patch is not that he represented War-Statism, even though people like Prince Charles tried to take him over as an icon. What we as libertarians ought to celebrate is that individuals can go through this torment, made for them by States, come out the other side, and survive.
In a world in which there is a Libertarian Civilisation, and also some others that are not this thing, there will be wars, for a time. They will be defensive wars waged by the libertarian polity: sorry, I know it, this is what will be. The other States will not want to allow such a thing to be, for it will expose traumatically their dangerous isolation and total lack of underlying strategic support from their own slaves peoples.
I could not begin to tell you authoritatively what Harry Patch thought he was fighting for. For I did not know him, and I would also have been reticent about asking him that question since he was (a) very old, and (b) probably quite sensitive about what he’d give as an answer. But we can probably agree that what he thought he was fighting for was something not very akin to big-statism, which is to say, fascism as practised by the government today in the UK.
And so the Great War now passes into true history as defined by there being nobody who remembered it. We ought to be careful that libertarianism does not go the same way, as there are actually now too few proper ideological libertarians to do what Chris Tame said “make a difference”.
Here. Do go read all his stuff, it will scare you even more than what I write here.
…of whether these objects are the product of minds which are innately evil and wicked, and are thus specifically designed to destroy liberal institutions or the means to run them, reduce populations to subsistence-farming, attenuate industrial and economic growth, and enslave, or whether they merely have “visual impact on the landscape”…
…and the education issues are worse – my older boy complains at school, over /why/ they have to “study” __global warming__ as an anthropogenic effect, __every year__ …
Ed Milibugger is a GramscoFabiaNazi. He is clever (didn’t he go to Oxford, blast him? Must have got three “A”s at least or even four – what a bloody waste of an intellect which he could have used in retailing or mining or space research.) Therefore, if he was not a GramscoFabiaNazi, then he would be doing a proper job in The Royal Bank Of Scotland or a factory in Leeds. Or perhaps he’d be running a small chain of successful pound-shops in East London. Brick Lane would do for a first one, then he could go into Hackney, Bethnal Green, Stoke Newington and Shoreditch and Limehouse, selling cheap goods to people who want to buy them. Then, he could set up a few in Nottingham, Leicester (better be careful there, old fella!) Derby, Sheffield, Bradford (later maybe!) Bootle (let’s have a punt on that one eh?) and so on. He’s Jewish, so he could have done anything, and thus so he ought to understand why retailing is an intensely moral and good calling, inside the Canon of Western Philosophy.
But he’s a politician: what is it that comes over very, very clever people, whose minds could match up to the scale of the Universe and try to comprehend it, and so easily corrupts them to do evil with such deeply-held conviction?
(What went wrong with the bugger? Where did we fail? Were we asleep?)
The battle about Wind Turbines (which is to say, big-corporatist-statist nationalised plans to build many thousands of vast and useless ones on other people’s land, for no valuable result) ought to be brought back to whether we are to be persuaded that “global warming” is all our fault, or whether – as we /do/ require more and more energy, the obvious solution – nuclear – is the correct one.
As a libertarian, I am not at all against individual householders and, say, people such as farmers, setting up their own wind turbine with their own money…if they decide they want one. I am sure that the same companies that fall over themselves to lick the arses of ZanuLieBorg will make “small” turbine systems, say about 10-50Kw, for anyone who wants them. If those who say that power companies will buy “surplus power” from such private producers are honest, then we have a win-win-situation. the GreeNazis have to say they are satisfied, and those who have “small” turbines can then try to get back into the money after installing the things, if it’s possible: if not, then they do have some “free” power (Nothing of course is totally free.) Factories can produce more alternators and more spiral-wound-pipe (I expect that’s what the steel-type is that holds the things up) and everyone is happy….
….except Ed Milibanana. I wonder why?
But if the CPRE want to be a player in the ideological battle for the landscape, then they ought to stick to whether the things are any use at all, and then – knowing the facts – oppose the things on mathematical and physical grounds of truth. “Visual Impact” considerations will not turn the faces of committed political enemies of The West – like Ed Milibanana – away from installing the turbines and using our money to do it. The CPRE has to face the facts about what these things are really for, and why they are being dumped all over us.
The Landscape of the British Isles is almost 100% manufactured and managed anyway: it got to look like that through centuries of adjustment by Man. The fact the the GramscoFabiaNazis pretend to like it as it is [for "Ramblers"], while looking as though they fail to understand how it got to be what it is through the Hand of Men for generations, is neither here nor there.
Libertarians would say that the property-owners should decide what is set up. if the State-Wind-Power-Installation-Bribery-Service [SWPIBS] was removed (as we will, when we Come To Power) then I doubt if we will see any more of these monstrosities.
It is nothing to do with “green energy”: it is to do with trying to reduce what they believe is an enemy-civilisation (us) to the Prison Of The Endarkenment.
I am pleased to see the return of The Landed Underclass, after various unproductive and confusing encounters with the denizens of the NHS.
A particular passag of his concerning what is an intrinsically harmless machine – in just the same way as a gun – is worth resyndicating:-
My firm and established belief is that the evil from which it is most important that the people be liberated is that of television (not the technology itself, which apart from its well-known hypnotic quality is relatively harmless, but its application by the forces of darkness).
I have become increasingly challenging and confrontational about this. People always agree with me that television is moronic, manipulative and pernicious, but then they say “Ah, but it’s the kids, you see.”
To which I habitually reply “Ah, yes. Were you even to suggest ‘deprivation-of-television abuse’ they’d report you to Esther Rantzen on the spot, wouldn’t they?”
One would expect any decent parent to react quite firmly to this sort of thing, but in fact they usually just shrug their shoulders and say “You’re not wrong there, mate.”
The problem is that a certain kind of droid has purposefully taken over the control of “programme content”, at the same time as other similar droids have fabricated an education system in which people learn that the delivered TV content is the correct kind: thus the terms of discourse are tectonically shifted in favour of GramscoFabiaNazism.
More later maybe.
…and we didn’t exactly disgrace ourselves in front of several teams of highly clever people.
I’ll let you all know when it’s going to be aired. We got through two rounds. Could have been worse, could have been knocked out first time.
“Is school-syllabus-and-broadcast-imposed-popular-culture a deliberate Enemy-Class “initiative” to help stamp out individual critical thought and thus also liberty?”
Panis et Circenses, anybody?
As I will be away from my computer for about 48 hours [and no, I am not being "detained" for anything, at least not yet] i leave you people with this interrogative to toss about like a dogbone.
Simon Heffer has a suggested antidote for one part of the fightback.
This is because I and a local friend here from Lancs, also a crusty, cynical oldie like me, have been invited by the BBC, no less, to go to London and film one or more “rounds” – depending on how we last the course against pairs from “other regions” – of a /NEW/ TV quiz show. The terms of acceptance to go on the show forbid me from telling you the format (I do know it) or the prize structure [nugatory, that's all I will say] as it will not be broadcast until October, we are told.
A post-mortem, about how terribly badly I did, will be delivered to you all, possibly on Tuesday – provided that I do not feel so completely humiliated by my failure to comprehend the more “contemporary” departmens of knowledge which ordinary graduates of scumbag*** schools find so easy to acquire.
***Not their fault that their schools gave them classes in “modern media”, instead of the Western Canon. They’ll just do better than me in all the questions about football, all other sports, celebs, global-mega-TV shows, soaps, actroids and actressoids, Harry Potter, novels in the Booker Prize in the 1980s, specific bars in Magaluf, and the like.
Yep, you heard right, i did say Nazi Gnomes, they’ve been in the centre of a investigation in Germany. The Gnomes which were part of a art display in Nurenberg are being investigated because they could be breaking the law by performing the hitler salute, which is illegal in Germany.
But on the other hand, a spokesman from the prosecuters office said:
“It is also a question of art a bit, it will also depend on what the artist and the owners of the gallery have to say for themselves about the whole thing.”
I would normally say something humerous at this point, but i can’t really come up with anything good enough to top Nazi saluting gnomes.
…that is, unless one of out vast team of expanding young writers hits his keyboard.
To keep everybody amused, here’s some fun stuff about camping, from White Sun of the Desert, whoever he might be. Here’s some of his pictures to get you intrigued:-
…do the pronouncements from one Harriet Harman get….banning discrimination against “Northerners and people of other regions”…? [listen to the BBC any old day and you'd be hard put to encounter a single sentence in "The Queen's English" - except from the Queen herself.]
I know it’s merely about “staffing the boards of publicly funded bodies“, so in reality it does not matter at all, except in principle.
Where will Harman draw the line, I wonder? Let’s find out:-
Not long ago, three of your team of expanding youn g writers got together for a barbecue here in Lancs, and we burned some stuff. The whole video is about 2Gb and won’t load to wordpress, but these exerpts are a bit funny:-
Ex-MPs, especially GramscoFabiaNazi women, upset about nasty scumbag journos like Quentin Letts “bringing Parliament into disrepute”.
Really, life imitates art. You couldn’t make up this stuff if you tried.
A pity they are __all__ Enemy-Class Scunbags: some of them night even have made good in proper jobs.
Word fail James Delingpole too.
Because he’d get told what people really think of his attitude towards the Armed Forces (whom he hates and despises and fears and won’t give money to, all at once.) And so he’s quite afraid his appearance there might start a riot, quickly turning into a revolution.
Green custard would be nowhere: it would be something worse.
Don’t expect any members of the Government ZanuLieBorg gramscoFabiaNazi Enemy Class there any time soon.
Libertarians – at least some of us – are not against prosecuting foreign wars in the absence of a “vital national interest”. It’s just that we perhaps differ about what the boundaries of a vital national interest are.
I happen these days to believe that, under the threat of extinction by new Labour, the borders of a Libertarian Polity actually encompass the entire globe. Like the Saxons and Vikings saw the Sea as a Road and not a fence, and like our borders once ran along the coasts of all other nations at once, the destruction of extremely “serious” and cheerfully-frankly-unlibertarian chaps in the mountains of Northern Pakistan, who have sincerely vowed, on television, to destroy us and what we stand for, can be seen merely as the protection of an English national interest.
So Gordon won’t be going to Wiltshire quite yet, then. (People seeing the coffins, and him, in the same moment, will trip them over the edge.)
But if there was an election, he’d get to Swindon in about 9 minutes.
Surely, though, the Minister of Defence could go? Not even incognito? Nobody knows who he is anyway…He’d probably get egged – nothing worse, even if discovered…..
Free Life Commentary,
A Personal View from
The Director of the Libertarian Alliance
Issue Number 168
19th February 2008
Are the non-Domiciled Rich and the City
Good for England?
by Sean Gabb
On my way out of the house this morning, I was called by a BBC researcher to discuss my opinion of non-domiciled tax status. As my opinions were not the ones expected, our conversation did not lead to any broadcast. But I was rather pleased with what I said, and I might as well spend the rest of my railway journey writing it down.
For my readers who live abroad, I should explain that resident foreigners in this country enjoy significant tax privileges. I, as a British citizen resident in the United Kingdom, pay tax on my income earned here and elsewhere in the world. A foreigner living here, who can persuade the authorities that his permanent residence is outside the United Kingdom, pays tax only on what income he earns in this country and on what income he brings in from abroad. Whatever he earns abroad and leaves abroad attracts no tax. That is why so many rich people have moved to London.
This privilege is now under attack. During the past eleven years, the British State has almost doubled in size. The Ministers have justified this by an endless chant of “investment in essential public services”. In truth—whether to a few white proles, or to Shopping Coordinators for Bearded Men with HIV, or to the various Tarquins and Jaspers who get the contracts to redesign logos and headed paper every time a Ministry name is changed—our tax money has gone on raising up an army of Labour voters. So far, most of us have not paid attention to the systematic looting required for this. Some of it was cleverly disguised. Much of it was enabled by an expansion of the world economy that brought in more revenue without increases in the rates of tax.
This may now change. If we go into recession, the amount of tax paid will fall at current rates. At the same time, there is no room left for imposing taxes that will not be noticed and felt. Therefore, if the payroll vote is to be kept on, let alone expanded, the Government must now openly increase taxes or inflate or both.
That is why the non-domiciled are to be hit with a poll tax of £30,000 per year. This will not put off the fiscal crisis. At £800 million, the sum projected is barely a fifth of one per cent of total government spending. Nor will it last very long. The non-domiciled are already threatening to leave. That means a farewell to Madonna and to Roman Abramovich. More importantly, it means a farewell to some of the most dynamic people in the City of London. To raise barely enough cash to run the National Health Service for a week, the Government is prepared to lose people who contribute billions in employment and indirect tax, and to damage a vast financial machine that generates more than a third of the national income.
But when a state is hungry, every little extra can look tasty. That it may not last beyond the next election is not something at all likely to worry our present set of politicians.
I think the lady from the BBC expected me to run out of breath as I denounced the scheme. She had me listed on her database as Director of the Libertarian Alliance, and took it for granted that I opposed taxes and supported the rich in general and the City of London in particular.
Well, I did denounce the taxes. They were bad, I said, because they stole the produce of a man’s labour: taxing is enslaving. They were bad, I added, because they enabled government spending that, even when not obviously wasteful or oppressive, tended to corrupt both direct and indirect recipients.
Her problem started when I moved to the rich and all those City people. Good riddance to the lot of them, I said. If it needed a tax to get them out of England, I might almost find something nice to say about taxes.
That was the end of our conversation. The BBC lady made her excuses and rang off. I imagine she then did a search in her database for Tory Boy Intellectual, and was soon hearing a lecture about London as “the Jewel in the Crown of the British Economy”.
I suppose I should explain myself. There are those who think libertarianism involves a defence of riches and of the rich. Some libertarians seem to agree. I do not. A libertarian is someone who wants to be left alone, and who wants to leave others alone, and who wants others to be left alone. People must be taken as the owners of their bodies and of what they create in or appropriate from the external world.
Given that all exchange and other association needs therefore to be voluntary, we move to an endorsement of what is called the free market. If some people do better in life in others, so much the better for them. If they contrive to pass on some part of their success to their children, so much the better again.
This is not, however, an endorsement of actually existing capitalism. A free society is not Tesco minus the State. It is a place of small craftsmen and farmers and traders, of artists and of unlicensed doctors and lawyers, and of others needed if individuals and free associations of individuals are to live well. We cannot say much more than this about the arrangements of a free society. But we can be sure it would have no place for big business as it now is found.
Big business corporatism, I would never seek to deny, is the best economic model humanity has known in over a century. It does generate vast amounts of wealth, and does ensure that much of this is distributed with some approximation of justice. Give me a choice between what we have and any of the state socialisms tried or recommended since Plato, and there is no doubt what I should choose. Nor is there any doubt, though, that the civilised nations made a big collective mistake around the middle of the 19th century. A system of scientific and industrial progress that might have grown into an unmixed blessing was partly hobbled and made into a new instrument of class domination by laws that allowed firms to incorporate and that gave shareholders limited liability for the debts of firms.
The result was a channelling of investment into firms that would never have been trusted had investors continued to face the risk of joint and several liability for debt. As these firms grew to enormous size, they monopolised or cartellised whole markets. They accepted and often quietly called for schemes of tax and regulation that harmed them, but harmed them less than their smaller competitors. In Britain and America, they demanded the underwriting by the State of their foreign expansions.
To ask whether big business bought or were colonised by the political class is irrelevant. All that matters is that we live in a world where political power and corporate wealth are possessed by different wings of the same ruling class. It is a ruling class that presides over whole nations of people transformed by brainwashing and mild but continuous discipline from human beings to human resources.
More than any other financial centre, the City of London stands as the heart and mind of the global corporate system. Every statistic the BBC lady was hoping I might drool on air—that there are more American banks in London than in New York, that German banks employ more people in London than in Frankfurt, that over a third of all currency conversions take place in London, and so on and so forth—is further condemnation for me.
Anyone who regards the City as identical with free market liberalism is deceived or trying to deceive. It is a place where markets clear, and where profit comes from working out returns in fractions of one per cent. It is one of the few places where reality and the textbook world of perfect competition nearly merge. It is, however, a place maintained in being by the scheme of state-granted privilege that is limited liability. At the very best, its activities are useful to protect us from high taxes. But in a world of free societies, there would be no City of London or anything like it.
A further evil of the City brings me back to the non-domiciled rich. Whatever their immunity from income tax, these are people who pay large amounts of indirect tax. They hand this over without much resistance or complaint, and they hand over large amounts. Political quietism plus great wealth is always dangerous to freedom. When the quiet rich are also foreigners, or at least highly mobile, is still worse. They will not protest at any use of their tax money to oppress other people than themselves. The moment their own freedom is infringed, they will retreat to somewhere more congenial.
For all the airs and graces they try to assume, this is what makes the non-domiciled rich different from the old landed aristocracy. Though tiresome in their defence of legal privilege and unearned wealth, these latter were incidentally useful in slowing the rise of big business corporatism. Like the rest of us, they had nowhere to run to, and were by training and inclination the natural leaders of resistance. Roman Abramovich and Madonna are none of these things. They live among us, but are in no sense with us. The same is true for the more anonymous bankers and fund managers who have for the past generation found this country useful as a trading platform. The same is true of the rich in general. Unlike the workers, who may have little else, the rich have no country.
Just about the only very rich foreigner possessed of any public spirit is Mohammed al-Fayed. He expresses that spirit in what may seem an eccentric cause. But he certainly cares something about this country. He is also domiciled here and is subject to the same taxes as the rest of us. Not surprisingly, he is hated and reviled by the establishment media, and has failed to obtain a British passport in an age when these are handed out to any parasite who can hold his place on the underside of a lorry.
In closing, Gordon Brown and his Ministers do not intend to do well by us. They are traitors to us in their external policies, and rapacious tyrants in all their internal dealings. But their desire for short term gain may set us on the path to a better world. And if they are not to be thanked for this, I am not inclined to join in the chorus of disapproval.
NB—Sean Gabb’s book, Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back, can be downloaded free from http://tinyurl.com/34e2o3. You can help by contributing to publishing and distribution costs
Here’s your booking form! Book early as places have started to get filled…
[It seems that The Ranting Penguin already agrees with what I'm about to say.]
I don’t think I know what a “Taleban” is. Is it some kind of yoghurt? If so, why are we dying? Or is some “friendly power” secretly arming these buggers? We need to be told.
[In Lebanon, "Laban" is Greek yoghurt, and "Lebni" is a sort of slightly tart soft cheese (it's very nice, on a hot day, on a cheese-biscuit or something. With a biggish glass of Chateau Musar from the Bek'aa Valley vineyards.)]
A “Taleban” ought to be easy to eliminate in theory, faced with the theoretically-sufficiently-armed and armoured specialists of a First-World military power…..
(That’s not in Wootton Bassett, it’s here.)
It is beginning to dawn on me, after years, that I am a curious sort of libertarian. I am in fact a Marxist-Leninist turned upside down. This is getting quite comfortable for me these days, and I will develop my ire further in this regard.
Thus for now: I do not object to foreign wars at all, if fought by a minimalist State based on Classical liberalism, which knows it has an obligated, indeed actually a divine, mission to supress wickednesses elsewhere, such as Statism, fabian-subverted-pre-capitalist-barbarian-survival-guide-warlordism-masquerading-as-religion, general slavery of all kinds (still going on in countries about 3,681 miles from you), “communism” (getting to be old hat now as Chè, Castro, that Sendero-Luminoso-droid, Kim-Jong-Il and Hugo Chavez, Jimmy Carter, and the fascist-pig Mitterand all died physically years ago) and the like.
Indeed, an emergent British – or more possibly English, “state” having withdrawn from both the UK and the EU – libertarian government, may find itself with a variety of post-Bandung kleptocracies arrayed against it, with erstwhile “friends”, such as “France”, and perhaps even “Belgium”, eagerly selling modern armaments to our new potential enemies, speciifically to threaten us.
But in these wars which we now seem ot be fighting, I believe that we do //not// have to have what Sean Gabb calls a “vital national interest”, in my opinion. The very fact that terrible evils and unfathomable wickednesses are being done to humans in the name of “unity”, in the name of “progress”, and in the name of “people’s democracy”, is the justification to act to stop this nonsense and blood, if we have the power. We are in favour of Natural Rights, which human beings all possess by definition. If we do not have the power to act in these situations, then it is //our problem, and our failing//, and thus I am moving rapidly to the belief that it is [imho] our obligation to acquire the needed power – and to use it in such fashion. Sean knows quite well that he and I disagree in general terms although not necessarily specific ones on this matter and it is quite friendly: we argue about it from time to time in his sojourns up here, and thus reports of the death of the Libertarian Alliance are very premature.
The problem for GramscoFabiaNazis such as Gordon Brown, who like all socialists wants to be seen as “hard” and “warfighting” [it's in their genes sadly] while also crooning pacifistically to the post-modern British neo-CND left, is that he can’t sit on two toilets at once, like John Prescott that unexpectedly clever fellow, can. He can’t both shit and get off the pot simultaneously in two places. He wants to be seen as an important chappie in three ways: “supressing the supply of heroine and cocaine”, fighting the “War On Terror” [a contradiction in terms] and also cosying up to people like ShootinPutin187 whose gas and oil he thinks he needs and who got bloodied in Afghanistan 20-odd years ago. And yet at the same time he has also to appease his Enemy-Class-Paymasters who hate all things British (especially English) and who especially hate the Armed Forces, who of course /won’t/ cosy up to the ZanuLieBorg “Project”, and consist mostly of people either disregarded or despised and hated by the “New Labour Project”.
So where does poor little Wootton Bassett come into this terrible story? You will already all know how very, very deeply I despise and excoriate synchronised public grieving. I have never failed to bore you, year after year, with my hatred of the emotional incontinence which overtook this strong and gripped nation, at the death of the horrible Diana.
But this is different. [If the lefties can say such things, so can I.] Nobody told these poor people, sad at what was happening, to turn out. Not like the mafia-instructions to close all our shops [or else] on the day of Diana’s funeral. They just turned out.
A casualty list of eight chaps in a day, in 2009, is a disaster in today’s terms. This is not 1916, when we were locked in an insoluble battle against an equally-technologically-advanced set of enemies – this is 2009 and we are again fighting what used to pass for [pre-1914] small colonial wars against people that we called “towelheads”, in which we expected to take small but ongoing casualties while yet assuring victory. But our priorities and our perception of the deaths of soldiers in wars today has changed, while our supposed ability to deal with modern battlefields has increased.
This sort of misfortune ought not to be happening to a First-World-Economy’s armed forces, against pre-medieval barbarians [OK they are individual humans, but they "chose poorly" , as the old mailed knight said in the end-scene of "Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade".]
Gordon Brown clearly wants and needs a war in Afghanistan. That’s why he has both flagged an increase in the number of our solders there (currently about four brigades) and also a decrease at the same time. He wants to please all his paymasters at once, and thinks we don’t listen. Either he wants “victory”, to destroy all the cocaine and heroin, please ShootinPutin187 and look hard, or else he does not, through not giving our chaps any kit at all that works, so that he puts them all off from joining the Army [a GramscoFabiaNazi medium-term-objective] and thus pleasing the neo-Harold-Pinters of this planet.
But the people of Wootton Bassett are trying to tell him something. I can’t think it will be to his advantage as a Prime-Mentalist.
The Backlash Campaign: Defending S&M is Defending Individual Freedom
Cultural Notes No. 53
ISSN 0267-677X ISBN 1 85637 647 8
An occasional publication of the Libertarian Alliance,
Suite 35, 2 Lansdowne Row, Mayfair, London W1J 6HL.
© 2007: Libertarian Alliance; Nigel Meek
Nigel Meek is the Editorial and Membership Director of the Libertarian Alliance and the Society for Individual Freedom and the Editor of the Campaign Against Censorship. This essay first appeared in the February 2006 issue of The Individual, the journal of the Society for Individual Freedom. Thanks to Ted Goodman (CAC) and Christian Michel (LA) for their comments on a draft of that essay..
The views expressed in this publication are those of its author, and not necessarily those of the Libertarian Alliance, its Committee,
Advisory Council or subscribers.
FOR LIFE, LIBERTY AND PROPERTY
An Introduction to Backlash
On behalf of a number of organisations—the Society for Individual Freedom (SIF), the Libertarian Alliance (LA) and the Campaign Against Censorship (CAC)—in the latter half of 2005 I became involved in the Backlash campaign. This was formed in response to a joint Home Office and Scottish Executive consultation document On the possession of extreme pornographic material (to quote from the document) “proposing to strengthen the criminal law in respect of possession of a limited category of extreme material featuring adults.” Primarily, if not exclusively, “extreme material” refers to pornographic images of a sado-masochistic (S&M) nature.
Nominally at least, these proposals came as a result of a campaign led by the mother of a woman who had been murdered by a man who had visited websites featuring asphyxiation. This was an appalling crime. However, what we have seen is a knee-jerk reaction of “something must be done” allied with the mistaken beliefs that (a) people are not and cannot be personally responsible for their actions and (b) if only we have enough laws we can legislate away the wickedness of this world.
S&M is not my cup of tea, although I am sufficiently worldly-wise to have a genuine knowledge of what is sometimes involved. In any case, as a libertarian I utterly condemn any restrictions on the creation, distribution and possession by willing adults for willing adults of “extreme pornographic material”. What consenting adult men and women, in any combination of sex, sexuality and numbers, get up to in private is none of my business. And it is none of yours. And it is certainly none of the state’s. Furthermore, if we accept this, then logically there cannot be anything wrong in photographing or videoing such activities and then passing them on to other consenting adults whether free or commercially.
As the Backlash mission statement says, “Law enforcement agencies around the world already have powers to prevent and punish actual crimes… We condemn any acts where the participants did not give their consent. Viewers should not be penalised for looking at… images of consenting actors.” Quite.
Formal responses to the consultation document such as the one prepared by the CAC were constrained by the document itself. However, going into a little more detail, there are numerous reasons why I support the Backlash campaign and why I believe that other members of the SIF should do so too. Here are some of them.
The Ongoing Assault on Freedom of Speech
I would support the Backlash campaign even if it stood alone. But it does not. 2005 witnessed a frenzy of censoriousness from the Labour government. Even before the proposals that sparked off Backlash there was the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill. Whatever its alleged aims, in reality it was a transparent attempt by Labour to recapture “the Moslem vote” that may have been lost due to aspects of the government’s foreign policy. However, it also means the prospect of individuals being convicted—or cowed into silence by the risk of being convicted—for pointing out that some religious beliefs and practices are vile and wholly incompatible with the mores of Western society. Ask Theo van Gogh, the Dutch film-maker who was murdered in November 2004 after his film Submission highlighted the abuse of women in Islamic society.
We also had the Terrorism Bill which has, as but one of its proposals, the ludicrous aim of outlawing “glorifying terrorism”. This could mean that almost any strongly expressed ideological view would be illegal if anyone else anywhere in the world uses violence in support on that ideology: democracy in Zimbabwe, for example.
But we should not be surprised. After all, “New” Labour is the party that made the fascistic claim in its 1997 general election manifesto that it was “the political arm of none other than the British people as a whole”. Having won on such a terrifying platform, nearly a decade down the line we live in a country where “insulting” the Prime Minister by wearing an admittedly childish “Bollocks to Blair” t-shirt can get you arrested.
Having mentioned the relevant provisions of the Racial and Religious Hatred Bill and the Terrorism Bill, there is the obvious point about consistency. It is intellectually and tactically right and more persuasive to oppose
I quote a passage from the RM text:-
Why is it then that this vicious, self interested and, might I suggest inherently socially violent group are allowed to make this sort of contribution – as they do all over so many blogs where those with real concern for society, from across the mainstream political spectrum, seek to discuss issues in an open, rational and respectful fashion?
I would love, for example, to see far-right libertarians thrown off the Guardian bogs [sic] as a matter of course – which might improve their appeal to many others as a result.
[I wouldn't shit in a Guardian bog if you paid me.]
It is time we named these people for what they are – as being amongst the enemies of civilised society.
I am happy to do that. It would be good if others would do the same – and fight them as we do racists.
NB: Comments from known libertarian abusers will not be allowed on this blog entry, or any other on this site.
He is referring to libertarians, whom he dubs also “callous, self-interested“, and says:- They think that all tax is theft; all government activity is bad and those who win a mandate for government spending from democratic electorates are ‘statists’.
He is of course half-right about taxation and theft.
He is one to watch, in the coming ideological war as it gets properly serious.