It is very interesting


Michael Winning

Baroness Scotland, who is a Baroness for exactly what reasons I can’t really quite fathom, is in some trouble. Devil’s Kitchen has been discussing her, a good blog I have justt found. She has employed an “illegal immigrant” while pretending not to know what this meant but also pretending it wasn’t against laws she had commanded to be drafted. I’m not so discussing the immigration bit here but the concept of “illegally working” which I find strange and unintelligible.

The other thing which bothers me is that there are people who willingly take jobs where they are paid to go after such “illegal workers”. My colleague Davis sometimes gets at people who he says ought to know better morally, than to work for socialists, and for socialist ends. When we Come To Power, something will have to be done about people who work for “The Border Agency” and who did willingly take jobs with it. I think that a sinister title: anybody else agree?

Really the problem is people who want to work for people who want to enslave people. I think about 22,000 Austrians were found to have actively applied for jobs in death camps and this was a high % of all those thus employed. Is this so and what does it say about Austrians? What ought we to say abotu British people whjo actively are employed by oppressors?

About these ads

2 responses to “It is very interesting

  1. Forgive me, I go off at a tangent.
    The concept: “when we come to power” is not one that we should entertain. We are falling into the trap. We should simply wither that power. The problem is the power. Like this piece around income tax, it’s not what we would do with the tax, but just get rid of it.

    http://mises.org/story/3711

  2. What I think Michael must have meant, John, was a figure of speech. I hope so anyway for you are of course right. We all agree, that the entirety of the shiny machinery, on which statists like to pull levers frantically, has to go.

    Reading Michael’s piece more carefully, I think he was agreeing with me that, in the beginning of a llibertarian ascendancy of any imaginable sort where revolution (ie a “return” to liberalism) took place, “we would have to” prevent statist-(ically)-inclined people from getting anywhere near anything like insyitutions which they could corrupt due to their clear personallity-disorders.

    That’s what I think anyway.