Category Archives: Media Appearances

Should Voting be Compulsory? (Sky News), Sean Gabb


On Monday the 26th May 2014, Sean Gabb, Director of the Libertarian Alliance, took part in a Sky News debate on compulsory voting. Chaired by Kay Burley, he was opposing a proposal put by Suzy Boniface.
Sean made these points:
  • We live in a Potemkin democracy. However we vote, we still live in a police state ruled by parasites and traitors. Not voting is effectively a vote against the system. Let the turnout drop far enough, and it brings on a crisis of legitimacy. That is its function. Also, if it does drop far enough, those of us who still vote give a big push to parties like UKIP. That changes nothing, but is very embarrassing to the ruling class.
  • Compulsory voting papers over the cracks. Indeed, add it to state-licensing and state-funding of political parties, and the lie is restored that we live in a functioning multi-party democracy with high levels of support. Sooner or later, we may turn from grumbling to counting the lamp posts in Westminster. But that will be for another generation of parasites and traitors to worry about.

Miss Boniface responded to these points with a spray of insults and alleged facts cribbed from Wikipedia.

The Stark Truth: Robert Stark Interviews Keith Preston


by Keith Preston
http://attackthesystem.com/2014/03/20/the-stark-truth-robert-stark-interviews-keith-preston/

The Stark Truth: Robert Stark Interviews Keith Preston Listen to the interview at Counter-Currents.Com Robert Stark welcomes back Keith Preston of Attack the System. Topics include: Keith’s article “Who am I? Left, Right, or Center”: http://attackthesystem.com/2014/02/21/who-am-i-left-right-or-center/ How his anti imperialist views on foreign policy overlap with the far Left as well as Paleoconservative and New Right thinkers How he finds his critique of capitalism often overlaps with both those of the far Left but also those of Catholic distributists and social nationalists on the far Right How he shares some views on social issues with the Left, but swings back to the Right on decentralist, anti-statist or civil More…

Carson on C-Realm


by Kevin Carson
http://c4ss.org/content/25584
Carson on C-Realm

Kevin Carson, Senior Fellow and Karl Hess Chair of Social Theory at C4SS, was recently interviewed by KMO on the C-Realm podcast.

KMO talks with Kevin Carson, author of The Homebrew Industrial Revolution about the technologies that seem poised to end the dominance of capital-intensive production methodologies and break the stranglehold that capitalists and the government minions hold over our lives.

You can listen to the podcast here.

flattr this!

Sean Gabb on The Moral Maze, 19th March 2014


http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2014-03-19-moralmaze-sig.mp3 Flash Animation

Sean Gabb, Director of the Libertarian Alliance, contributing to BBC Radio 4 programme, The Moral Maze, the 19th March 2014.

The Panel were:

Claire Fox
Michael Portillo
Giles Fraser
Anne McElvoy

The Witnesses were:

Ian Driver - Green Party Councillor for Thanet District Council Dr Sean Gabb - Director of the Libertarian Alliance. Writer, broadcaster and academic Kathy Gyngell - Editor of the newly-launched ‘Conservative Woman’ website Dr Finn Mackay - The Centre for Gender & Violence Research at the University of Bristol

Answering questions from the Panel, Sean Gabb made these points: Continue reading

Should the Police be Fitted with Body Cameras? (2014), by Sean Gabb


http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2014-03-04-policevideo-sig.mp3

Sean Gabb, Director of the Libertarian Alliance, speaking on Winchester Live on-Line, on Tuesday the 4th March 2014.

The background to this discussion is a proposal, somewhere in the West Country, for the Police to be fitted with body cameras.

Sean argues these points: Continue reading

Libertarian Alliance in The Guardian (again)


http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2013/aug/26/hugh-muir-diary-syria-inbox

 

• Howls of pain from the Libertarian Alliance, which struggles to understand the predicament now suffered by the controversial Suffolk theologian Dr Alan Clifford. He’s awaiting a decision from the Crown Prosecution Service as to whether he committed a hate crime. All he did, they say, was circulate an emailed leaflet with the heading “Christ Can Cure – Good News for Gays”. This came to the attention of the chair of Norwich gay pride, who reported it to the police. Inexplicable really. And unfortunate that Dr Clifford should be the target, for it is continually said that lightning doesn’t strike twice. Last year he was banned from preaching his gospel on council premises when it came to light that he was the author of such pieces as “Muslims need rescuing from Islam”, and “Why the West Must Shun Islam”. An unlucky fellow, obviously. Seeking only to help.

Should Page 3 Nudes be Banned?


http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2012-11-05-porn-sig.mp3
Flash Animation

Sean Gabb, Director of the Libertarian Alliance, speaking on BBC Radio Leeds on the 5th November 2012.

The question was whether newspapers should be banned from showing pictures of naked women for the tittilation of their readers – ie, “Page Three Girls” in The Sun.

Sean argues these points: Continue reading

Should British Citizens ever be Extradited?


http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2012-09-25-extradition-sig.mp3 Flash Animation

Sean Gabb, Director of the Libertarian Alliance, debating with Alex Carlile on BBC Radio 5 on the 25th September 2012.

Also, in the same hour, Sean on BBC Radio London, arguing alone:

http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2012-09-25-extradition-2-sig.mp3

Also on BBC Radio Wales:

http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2012-09-25-extradition-3-sig.mp3

The question was whether British citizens should ever be extradited to face trial in other countries. This was prompted by the decision of the European Court of Human Rights not to block the extradition of several men, including Abu Hamza and Babu Ahmad, to the United States for alleged terrorism offences.

Sean argues these points: Continue reading

Should there be Video Cameras in School Toilets?


Note: This is not one of my most sparkling performances. I was got out of bed by the BBC to argue against a proposal so bizarrely evil that I was almost lost for words. SIG Continue reading

The Immorality of Foreign Aid


http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2012-09-18-sig-aid.mp3

Sean Gabb, speaking on BBC West Midlands Radio on the 18th September 2012. He makes these points against foreign aid: Continue reading

Should the British State should do more to regulate drinking?


http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2012-07-19-drink-sig.mp3

Sean Gabb on BBC Radio Bristol, on Thursday the 19th July 2012, to discuss whether the British State should do more to regulate drinking.

Sean says no for these reasons:

  • The ruling class and its mainstream media specialise in fabricating “problems” which always require a bigger and more empowered state to solve them. We have seen this with the global warming scam and the campaign against “passive smoking.” There is no reason to believe any of the statistics put out over “alcohol abuse.”
  • Even assuming there is a problem, this is an effect of earlier state intervention. When public drinking in England was in small, local pubs, the generations would drink together. This allowed the young to absorb the cultural restraints of their elders. If there was disorder, it was on a small scale. Now, measures like the smoking ban, which has closed thousands of small pubs across England, and the systematic privilege given to big chains have transformed public drinking. Thousands of young men come together in big, anonymous drinking barns in city centres. The licensing laws mean they are relased all at the same time onto the streets. It is not suprising there is trouble.
  • So far as one exists, this is a problem caused by the State. The best response is for the State to stand back and let individuals and voluntary collectives of individuals sort it out.

 

Big Brother State UK: Sean Gabb v Alex Carlile


Libertarian Alliance News Release
Contact Details: Dr Sean Gabb
07956 472 199, sean
Monday 2nd April 2012
Immediate release

On Sunday the 1st April 2012, it was revealed that the British Government wanted to pass an Act to let it to monitor the calls, emails, texts and website visits of everyone in the United Kingdom. On Monday the 2nd April 2012, Sean Gabb, Director of the Libertarian Alliance, debated on the BBC with “Lord” Carlile, the British State’s security oversight figleaf.

Dr Gabb made the following points: Continue reading

Should Alcohol Have a Minimum Price? Radio Appearance


2012-03-23-sig-drink.mp3

Sean Gabb on LBC with Iain Dale, on Friday the 23rd March . They discussed whether the British Government should set minimum prices for alcohol.

Sean says no for these reasons:

  1. The drunks who make a nuisance of themselves in public have not been drinking cheap alcohol. They have been drinking at some very expensive establishments. Sticking a pound on the price of each drink they consume will have no effect on the trouble they make.
  2. The real purpose of this measure is to increase what David Webb has called fiscal embezzlement by the ruling class. This is a tax by any other name.
  3. It is a tax that will hurt the poor. A few pounds of a bottle of shiraz will have no observable effect on the middle classes. No taxing or regulation of alcohol will have any effect on the Members of Parliament – they can drink subsidised alcohol all round the clock in the Palace of Westminster. But minimum pricing will hurt the poor. These are people who, more than anyone else, need the break from stress that alcohol provides. But any increase in prices will force them to choose between going without their drink or cutting down on some other necessary.

Interview with Sean Gabb


Attack the System: Interview with Sean Gabb

February 9, 2012

Keith Preston interviews Dr. Sean Gabb.Topics include: Continue reading

Sean Gabb in BBC Radio 5 Debate on Whether Police Officers Should be Allowed to Use Facebook


http://static.addtoany.com/menu/sm7.html#type=page&event=load&url=http%3A%2F%2Flibertarianalliance.wordpress.com%2Fwp-admin%2Fpost-new.php%3Fpost_type%3Dpost&referrer=

BBC Radio 5 Debate on Whether Police Officers Should be Allowed to Use Facebook: http://www.libertarian.co.uk/?q=node/682

Sean Gabb, speaking on BBC Radio 5 on the 30th December 2011. Continue reading

Sean Gabb in BBC Radio 5 Debate on Disabled Parking


http://static.addtoany.com/menu/sm7.html#type=page&event=load&url=http%3A%2F%2Flibertarianalliance.wordpress.com%2Fwp-admin%2Fpost-new.php%3Fpost_type%3Dpost&referrer=

by Sean Gabb

BBC Radio 5 Debate on Disabled Parking: http://www.libertarian.co.uk/?q=node/683

Sean Gabb, speaking on BBC Radio 5 on the 29th December 2011. Continue reading

Guardian Readers Snarling through Bars of Their Intellectual Cage


The Guardian home

Taking liberties with the concept of freedom guardian.co.uk, Friday 23 December 2011

It was amusing to read Sean Gabb of the so-called Libertarian Alliance proclaim the need for “exposing your readers to genuine libertarian positions” (Letters, 21 December). If that were done, they would discover that libertarian was originally coined by a French communist-anarchist in 1857, over one hundred years before the propertarian right in America appropriated it for their hierarchical ideology. To quote leading propertarian Murray Rothbard: “we … had captured a crucial word from the enemy … ‘Libertarians’ … had long been simply a polite word for … anti-private property anarchists … But now we had taken it over.” Continue reading

Sean Gabb in The Guardian – “Free Yourselves from the Lefty Ghetto!”



Free yourselves from the lefty ghetto

Letter from Sean Gabb, Director of the Libertarian Alliance Continue reading

Libertarian Alliance in The Seoul Times


by Sean Gabb

Our reach is truly global. I suspect we’ve had dozens of hits this year in the local and foreign media. Sadly, I lack the time and search tools to find the details.

http://theseoultimes.com/ST/?url=/ST/db/read.php?idx=10899

Richard Blake and Roman Inflation


By Andy Duncan
http://thegodthatfailed.org/2011/07/15/richard-blake-lives/

If anyone is a regular listener to ‘Cobden Centre Radio’, they may have been surprised last week when its latest radio show, which starred Mr Richard Blake the best-selling author, was deleted from the site, after two days of being happily aired.

The reasons for this are far too dull and complicated to go into here, but fortunately, like the ghost of Vlad the Impaler revived by a single drop of blood, Mr Richard Blake is back, alive and well, and able to tell us about monetary inflation in the Roman empire.

If you’d like to listen to my interview with Richard Blake, just click here.

I would like to thank Michael J. McKay for this necessary drop of blood.

Sean Gabb v Sunny Hundal on BBC Radio 5


http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b0128kc5/Stephen_Nolan_03_07_2011/

I did this on Sunday the 3rd July. It is in response to a Guardian-writing journalist called Kia Abdullah, who claimed on Twitter to have smiled at the death of three white, middle-class youths. I went on against Sunny Hundal, an Indian lefty, who tried to defend Miss Abdullah.

My points were -

  1. If Miss Abdullah were being done over by the authorities for her remarks, she could count on the immediate and uncompromising support of the Libertarian Alliance. Since she is not being done over, I can ignore her right to freedom of speech in the abstract and comment on her use of that right.
  2. Her comments, as reported, show a most unusual degeneracy of character. No normal person would ever laugh over the accidental deaths of these young men, or seek to increase the private grief of their parents. I hope that Miss Abdullah will be shunned for the rest of her life as a moral leper.
  3. There is a further consideration. If a white journalist had made similar comments about the death of young men with names like Leroy Jones and Jesmond Akimbo, he would have been crucified at once. There are people in this country capable of finding racism in a bus queue. How will these people treat Miss Abdullah?

I obviously caught Sunny Hundal by surprise. He was reduced to feeble irrelevance. A question I could have asked, but chose not to, was whether he would have been so eager to go on air to defend a white journalist who had laughed at the death of black people. His presence in this debate, and his general conduct, could be seen as one of those acts of ethnic solidarity he and his friends have made virtually impossible for whites.

Even if there was no racial aspect in his defence – even if he were simply defending a fellow lefty – he deserved the good kicking I gave him. Since time out of mind, these people have been telling us how much better they are than everyone else. Well, here is one of those occasions when the mask has slipped, and what these people really think is not pleasant to look at.

FLC210, Should the State Decide What Clothes Children Are Allowed to Wear? 6th June 2011, by Sean Gabb


In the past few days, I have made six appearances in the British media. Each one has been to argue against a proposal by the British Government to make an Act of Parliament to control the alleged sexualisationof children. This will involve trying to regulate the type of clothes worn by children, and trying to stop them from watching possibly indecent music videos.

via FLC210, Should the State Decide What Clothes Children Are Allowed to Wear? 6th June 2011, by Sean Gabb.

Sean Gabb v Esther Rantzen – Tonight on BBC Radio 5


by Sean Gabb

I do intend to write a Director’s Bulletin in the next day or so. This will tell you about all our broadcasting and publishing and general  outreach of the past fortnight – and it has been a lot.

For the moment, though, I’m writing to say that I’m on BBC  Radio 5 his evening – Saturday 4th June at 22:00 BST – to discuss whether  there should be laws to stop children from dressing in provocative ways and  from watching certain kinds of music video. I’ll be up against Esther Rantzen and some Tory MP whose name is still unknown.

It will be a phone-in programme, with the ability to receive  text messages and e-mails. It’s also broadcast on the Web, so it can be heard  all over the world. I’d be most grateful if you could find the time to support  me tonight. If you call in, you will probably not get on air. But the weight of  texts and e-mails can be  impressive – especially if they come from abroad.

Here are the details:

Steve Nolan Show
10pm-Midnight BST, Saturday 4th June 2011
BBC Radio 5
909/693 AM
http://www.bbc.co.uk/5live/
Call 0500 909 693
Text 85058
Email 606@bbc.co.uk

Kevin Carson in Forbes Magazine


 

As Kevin Carson has noted in the past, the IMF’s “actual purpose was to subsidize the disposal of surplus American goods and capital in foreign markets. The World Bank and IMF were created as an adjunct of William Appleman Williams’ “Open Door Imperialism,” a safety valve for the chronic overproduction and overaccumulation under state capitalism.”

Should We Abolish the IMF? – E.D. Kain – American Times – Forbes

In Defence of the British Empire, BBC Broadcast 2011, by Sean Gabb


In Defence of the British Empire, BBC Broadcast 2011, by Sean Gabb.

Sean Gabb on the BBC again to defend smokers


This is an interview, not a debate, and is much more sedate than the previous evening’s enjoyment.

http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2010-09-14-fags-sig.mp3

Cameron Year-Zero caption competition


David Davis

Sean Gabb – BBC Interview on Compulsory Voting


http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2010-05-07-compulsoryvoting-sig.mp3

Libertarian Alliance Bulletin


Director’s Bulletin
26th March 2010

Greetings to all. Here are some of the latest doings of the Libertarian Alliance:

1. The third Annual Chris R. Tame Memorial Lecture and Drinks Reception

Date: Monday 10th May 2010 between 6.30pm and 9.00pm at the National Liberal Club, One Whitehall Place, London SW1 (nearest tube Embankment).
Subject: Public Goods and Private Action: How Voluntary Action Can Provide Law, Welfare and Infrastructure – and Build a Good Society
Speaker: Dr. Stephen Davies

The dress code for this event is lounge suit or smart casual.
To confirm your attendance please RSVP Dr. Helen Evans at hsevans@btinternet.com

Dr. Stephen Davies is Program Officer for the Institute of Humane Studies. He joined HIS from the UK where he was Senior Lecturer in the Department of History and Economic History at Manchester Metropolitan University. He has worked at IHS before, in 1991 and in 1992-93, as well as teaching at many Summer Seminars and events over the years. He has also been a Visiting Scholar at the Social Philosophy and Policy Center at Bowling Green. A historian, he graduated from St. Andrews University in Scotland in 1976 and grained his PhD from the same institution in 1984. He was co-editor with Dr. Nigel Ashford of The Dictionary of Conservative and Libertarian Thought (Routledge, 1991) and wrote several entries for The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism edited by Ronald Hamowy (Sage, 2008), including the general introduction. He is also the author of Empiricism and History (Palgrave Macmillan, 2003) and of several articles and essays on topics including the private provision of public goods and the history of crime and criminal justice. He has recently completed a book on the history of the world since 1250 and the origins of modernity. Among his other interests are science fiction and the fortunes of Manchester City. Dr. Davies works on many of the Institute’s educational programs, teaches at summer seminars, liaises with the HIS faculty network, and provides academic career advice and support to graduate students.

2.  Public CIB Meeting – Free Admission, Saturday 17th April 2010, 2.30pm to 4.30pm

CARRS LANE CHURCH CENTRE, Carrs Lane, Birmingham B4 7SX (10 minutes walk from city centre New Street station) See website www.carrslane.co.uk for directions

TIME FOR TRUTH: Who Speaks for the People of Britain?

In the Chair: GEORGE WEST – Chairman, Campaign for an Independent Britain

Speakers

Dr. SEAN GABB, Director The Libertarian Alliance
FIONA McEVOY, The Taxpayers Alliance, West Midlands
STUART NOTHOLT, Vice-Chairman Campaign for an Independent Britain & organiser of General Election “Candidate 2010”

Published by The Campaign for an Independent Britain www.eurosceptic.org.uk For 35 years, CIB has led efforts to safeguard our nation’s sovereignty. We are a democratic, independent and strictly remaining a non-party political pressure group, supported by membership subscriptions and donations from members of the public. Our objective is Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union whilst maintaining trading and friendly relations with other countries. Enquiries 07092 857684

3. Sean Gabb in The Daily Express

The front page headline in today’s issue of The Daily Express is “New EU Gestapo spies on Britons” (http://tinyurl.com/y85av9r). This is all about the latest outrage from the European Union, and carries a long quotation from the Thoughts of Director Gabb. He says: “It doesn’t surprise me that Europol has been handed these rather frightening powers,… We now live in a pan-European state so it was to be expected that it would have a federal police force with powers over us….There is a real danger that opposition to EU policies could make an individual liable to arrest…. For example, if Brussels adopts a hard-line stance on climate change, it’s conceivable that someone who broadcasts their scepticism of climate change may be accused of committing an environmental crime because they have undermined the EU’s efforts to save mankind.”

4. Sean Gabb in Vdare

I have written two articles this year for Peter Brimelow’s on-line journal VDare (http://vdare.com/gabb/index.htm). These are both about the persecution by the British State of the British National Party. I have had a few displeased comments on these. However, what is now being done to the BNP provides a good summary of how totalitarian England has become in the past few decades. It would all have been unthinkable back in the days when I used to amuse my friends with predictions of a police state. Another point worth making is that libertarians are allowed to defend the BNP, but only in this way: “I hate and deplore these evil men. I am myself Jewish/gay/transgendered/one-third-Tibetan. But, purely from a (possibly misguided) commitment to old-fashioned liberalism, I do beg you not to put them in prison.” To take this line is to concede moral hegemony to the left. You probably get away with defending the rights of the BNP in much the same way as camp entertainers like Liberace and Larry Grayson were seldom denounced as homosexuals. You do nothing to defend freedom of speech. A better defence is as follows: “Nick Griffin and his friends should have an absolute right to speak as they please on public issues. This was an unquestioned right in England before 1965. So far as it is no longer a right, we no longer live in a free country.”

5.Sean Gabb on Television

On the 7th March 2010, I went on the BBC1 television programme “The Big Questions”. My subject was whether voting should be made compulsory. The assumption behind the debate was that: voting is good, people are not voting in the right numbers, and so what should be done to raise the turnout? I disrupted proceedings by pointing out that people are not voting because the politicians are all scum. You can view my contribution here: http://www.vimeo.com/10010978

6. Speech on Libertarianism

On the 17th March 2010, I gave a speech to the Politics Society of The Haberdashers’ Aske’s Boys’ School on libertarianism. I only had twenty minutes for may own speech, followed by twenty of questions, and this had to be a basic introduction. But I think I covered the main points. You can find the speech here: http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2010-03-17-hbaske-sig.mp3

7. Libertarian Alliance Meetings

Our friends over at the other Libertarian Alliance continue with their monthly meetings. I can hardly ever get up to London to attend these. But they always look very interesting, and I receive endless reports of how interesting they have been. For details of the next meeting, contact David McDonagh for details: mcdonagh_d@yahoo.co.uk

8. Richard Blake Activities

Just before Christmas, my dear friend Mr Blake put the finishing touches to his masterpiece “Blood of Alexandria”. This is a sensitive account of land reform and mass-murder in late Byzantine Egypt. It will be published by Hodder & Stoughton in June 2010. You can pre-order copies from Amazon: http://tinyurl.com/yb4qvms He is now putting the last touches to his “Sword of Damascus”, which is a novel about Greek Fire and how the Arabs never laid hands on the secret. This will not be available until June 2011. But Mr Blake believes in having a long pipeline. Once “Sword of Damascus” is completed – probably in the next fortnight – he will settle properly to work on an as yet untitled thriller. It is set in the July of 2014. This is a world in which neither world wars happened. The map is still impressively red. The pound is worth a pound. The Triple Monarchy rules Central Europe with benign inefficiency. America, following the Second Civil War (1923-8), has become a nightmarish tyranny where a man can be shot on the spot for smoking. There is a serial sex killer on the prowl in London and Prague….

9. Sean Gabb on Facebook

I was nagged into joining this a few weeks ago. Unlike Linkedin, that was a complete waste of time, this has been most interesting. http://www.facebook.com/sean.gabb 

Best wishes to all.

Sean on Telly Yesterday


by Sean Gabb

Dear All,

I made a brief appearance yesterday on BBC1′s “The Big Question”, where I
argued that voting should not be made compulsory. Here is the relevant
footage: http://www.vimeo.com/10010978

On Saturday the 6th March 2010, I recorded a long interview with Al Gore’s
television station all about the decriminalisation of incest. Stand by for
news about where to find this.

Tomorrow morning, I shall be interviewed by BBC Radio Bristol about CCTV
cameras. I will upload the recording of this shortly after.

On the 17th March 2010, I shall be talking to Haberdashers’ Aske’s school
for boys all about libertarianism.

On the 24th April 2010, I shall be speaking at this event:

PUBLIC MEETING
FREE ADMISSION
Saturday 17th April 2010
2.30pm to 4.30pm

CARRS LANE CHURCH CENTRE
Carrs Lane, Birmingham B4 7SX
10 minutes walk from city centre New Street station.
See website http://www.carrslane.co.uk for directions

TIME FOR TRUTH
Who Speaks for the People of Britain?

In the Chair
GEORGE WEST
Chairman, Campaign for an Independent Britain

Speakers

Dr. SEAN GABB
Director The Libertarian Alliance

FIONA McEVOY
The Taxpayers Alliance, West Midlands

STUART NOTHOLT
Vice-Chairman Campaign for an Independent Britain & organiser of General
Election “Candidate 2010″

Published by The Campaign for an Independent Britain
http://www.eurosceptic.org.uk. For 35 years,CIB has led efforts to safeguard our
nation’s sovereignty. We are a democratic, independent and strictly
remaining a non-party political pressure group, supported by membership
subscriptions and donations from members of the public. Our objective is
Britain’s withdrawal from the European Union whilst maintaining trading
and friendly relations with other countries

. Enquiries 07092 857684

Aaaaaaah…..that’s so sweeeeet


Michael Winning

The Dark Lord is going to join an oil company….

What further prtoof do we all need, of the iniquitous connection at social levels, between Enemy-Classpersons and otherwise normal persons in things such as oil firms?

THere’s nothing wrong with being an oil co or working for it. Just that these outfits seem to play into the hands of people who’d demolish them, such as greens and peope who throw green stuff at people like Mandelson.

CCTV Britain Documentary script


 

CCTV Britain Documentary script

Can anyone tell me how to e-mail the students who made this video? I’d like a copy for our records, and I’d like to congratulate them on what looks a job well done. Sean

LA New Video Postings


Sean Gabb

Just added. Keep a watch on here – many new videos added every week:
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/multimedia.htm

18/04/2008 The First Chris R. Tame Memorial Lecture Slimming Down
Government David Myddelton A good lecture. One day I shall get the
spelling of the speaker’s name right!
http://vimeo.com/7465438

10/05/2007 18 Doughty Street The Resignation of Tony Blair Sean Gabb On
a day when everyone else fills the airwaves with solemn tributes to “a
remarkable if flawed leader”, Sean glories in the political death of
“our worst peacetime Prime Minister in the past hundred years”, and
sprays the two Conservative activists present with scornful insults.
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2007-05-10-blair-resign–sig.mp3

23/10/2006 Sky News A DNA Database Sean Gabb, Tony Blair! Sean puts the
standard libertarian case against.
http://vimeo.com/7513680

20/02/2006 Sky News Free Speech for David Irving Sean Gabb One of many
appearances that day.
http://vimeo.com/7511027

04/10/2005 Speech to the Society for Individual Freedom The British
Cultural Revolution Sean Gabb Sean goes on and on about his favourite
subject. This was also the last time Chris R. Tame spoke in public
http://vimeo.com/7510343

23/08/2005 ITV Central Extra Alcohol Licensing Sean Gabb Sean does
well. The bereaved parents are unintentionally funny. They were brought
on because it was supposed their daughter had died from drinking
alcohol. in fact, she merely collapsed while drunk. It was on the way to
hospital that the ambulance doors swung open and her trolley fell out
under the wheels of a vehicle following close behind. Yes – no one would
wish this on anyone, and it must have been an awful loss. But we all had
to struggle like mad to keep straight faces….
http://vimeo.com/7509796

03/07/2005 BBC TV Heaven and Earth Show African Poverty Sean Gabb Sean
does well.
http://vimeo.com/7508979

05/05/2005 Speech at the Institute of Contemporary Arts in London
Comments on the General Election (video file) Sean Gabb Sean displays a
singular capacity to reach out to people of other ideological
persuasions and befriend and influence them….
http://vimeo.com/7507620

15/02/2005 Debate at the Institute of Contemporary Arts in London
“What’s Wrong with British Conservatism?” Sean Gabb Sean on very good
form – on against Boris Johnson, among others
http://vimeo.com/7507017

03/02/2005 BBC TV Newsnight Drug Legalisation Sean Gabb A good
performance.
http://vimeo.com/7507428

13/08/02 BBC TV Newsnight The Influence of Ayn Rand Chris R. Tame This
item was prompted by a whispering campaign within the Conservative
Party. Dr Tame comes into the discussion at 2’41″ and is worth hearing.
http://vimeo.com/7534942

15/03/1989 BBC 1, Wogan Show Health Fascism and Freedom Chris R. Tame
This is one of the very earliest television appearances involving Chris
Tame.
http://vimeo.com/7519962

15/02/1998 BBC1 Heart of the Matter Should Prostitution be legal? Chris
R. Tame This is a media appearance involving Chris R. Tame (1949-2006),
Founder-Director-President of the Libertarian Alliance.

15/03/89 BBC TV, The Wogan Show Tobacco Taxes Chris R. Tame Dr Tame’s
first big appearance on television, and a very fine performance. He
makes the health fascist against him look nasty, and even admit to being
a “fascist”. Also of note is Terry Wogan’s “hair”.
http://vimeo.com/7542549

Griffin and the BBC – The Alf Garnett factor


Robert Henderson

In the 1960s one of the most celebrated British sit-coms Till Death Us Do Part appeared. Its central character was an elderly working class Londoner Alf Garnett (For American readers his character inspired that of Archie Bunker).

Garnett’s most noted characteristic was what we would call these days being non-PC, especially about race and immigration. The author Johnny Speight swore blind that he had no sympathy with the character’s views and he had created him only to show how bigoted and unpalatable they were. (The suspicion grew as the character of Garnett became more and more dominant in the sit-com and ever more outrageous in his words that Speight was actually peddling his own secret views. Speight vehemently denied this but the accusation followed him to his grave.)

The effect of the Garnett character was the exact opposite of Speight’s stated intention because he became a character who, far from being treated universally as a figure of fun or despicable, was taken by many people as a conduit for their opinions, opinions which otherwise were even in those days severely censored by a liberal media and a political class (with the exception of Enoch Powell) which had already fallen under the liberal Omerta on honest discussion of race and immigration. (The first British Race Relations Act was passed in 1965).

Something similar to the Alf Garnett effect has taken place with the BNP. It did not really matter how well or badly Griffin did on Question Time. What counted was the fact he was on it saying, amongst a good deal of confused nonsense, what large numbers of Britons felt about mass immigration and the multi-cultural reign of terror which prevents people in any normal circumstances saying what they feel about its consequences. That Griffin was crude in his claims, lacking in examples to back up his claims even where examples were readily available, for example he failed to quote one of the many Churchill statements on race which would be considered unequivocally racist today by the liberal bigot definition, and palpably nervous was of little account. What mattered was that he was saying things which had not been said in such a forum for many a long year.

The BBC, hermetically wrapped in their liberal bigot cocoon, played into his hands. There was never going to be a detailed discussion of the issues and the choice of a panel which was not only universally hostile to Griffin and to any honest discussion of immigration, but also emblematic in its make up of the grip that politically correctness has got on this country with three members of ethnic minorities out of the five panel members – Jack Straw (Jewish), Sayeeda Warsi (Asian Muslim), Bonnie Greer (black American) – ensured that the viewer would see the programme as an exercise in liberal elite control. (Had I been Griffin, before I said anything else I would have pointed out the unrepresentative nature of the panel. Coincidentally, Greer is the woman I crossed swords with over Obama’s Nobel Prize on BBC Radio 5 a couple of weeks ago. List members will be delighted to hear that for Ms Greer the panel far from being an unrepresentative travesty “celebrated a racial mix. Sayeeda Wasi was amazing and I was very moved to hear about Jack Straw’s Jewish background. I had no idea. (Telegraph 24/9/2009″. Exactly how someone supposedly very well attuned to British politics could not know Straw is Jewish is a mystery only Ms Greer, a UK resident for 23 years, can explain. Equally difficult to explain is why the BBC think she, someone who has never been elected to public office in her life, deserves to be wheeled out to give her political opinions so often.)

Add in the chairman David Dimbleby’s grossly biased questioning of Griffin – “Is it fair that the BNP has hijacked Churchill as its own?” – and the choice of questioners (disproportionately ethnic) and universally hostile questions from the audience and none but the most dishonest liberal bigot could see the programme as anything other than hideously unbalanced and unfair.

The other mistakes Griffin made were:

(1) trying to ingratiate himself with other panel members especially Greer.

(2) Smiling too much.

(3) Getting into ridiculous discussions about whether the indigenous population had been in the islands 17,000 years or not – they haven’t and even if they had it would be irrelevant.

(4) Absurdly playing the pc game by claiming that the colour of skin does not matter, the determining factor of acceptability being how long a people have been in a country, absurd because the BNP’s position has been unequivocally that race matters right up to the present, including the banning of non-whites from membership.

The most interesting single response came from Straw when Griffin was being questioned by Dimbleby on the subject of the Holocaust. Griffin said that he could not explain his original position on the Holocaust because that would put him at risk of being extradited to places such as Germany on an European Arrest Warrant. Straw immediately jumped in and stated categorically that it could not happen. This is nonsense as Holocaust Denial is one of the categories of crimes extraditable under the warrant. As a one time Foreign Secretary, a lawyer and now Justice Minister, Straw must have known that what he said was untrue. (BTW his real name is John Straw. Whilst at university he changed it to Jack Straw, in imitation of the Peasant’s Revolt leader).

It wasn’t only Griffin who was nervous on that programme, it was also Jack Straw and Chris Huhne, both of whom were utterly terrified and incoherent when the question of immigration over the past 12 years was discussed. That is why they mainstream politicians fear the BNP: they force discussion on the ultimate treason which is mass immigration. – Griffin has given so many hostages to fortune in the past with the Holocaust denial and dalliance with the likes of the Klu Klux Klan that it tells you all you need to know about the utter failure of mainstream British parties to deal with immigration that they have had the success that they have had. Griffin and the BNP are catalysts to drive the major parties towards a more reasonable position of immigration. They are doing that regardless of the quality of the membership or leader.

Some idea of the extent to which the British people feel betrayed by their political elite can be seen from the facts that 8 million tuned in – a phenomenally high number for a UK politics programme – and over 500k of hits were made to the BNP website in the next 24 hours.

The Question Time programme is on the BBC IPlayer for another 4 days. Just go to the BBC website and type in Question time and the link will come up near the top of the page. RH

Sean Gabb on the Telly


Sean Gabb, “The Big Question”, 4th October 2009 from Sean Gabb on Vimeo.

Sean Gabb, “The Big Question”, 4th October 2009 from Sean Gabb on Vimeo.

I rant on about education, and so does…


Boris Johnson, today.

Show me the money.


Mummylonglegs

Nicky Fisher is an up and coming celebrity. She has been all over the MSM and Blogosphere lately. In fact she is now soooooo famous she has gotten herself an agent. Yep, the well respected and highly esteemed Max Clifford no less. And Max is, as we speak, negotiating a £50,000 for her story after a video of was posted on YouTube.

No she’s not the geezer bird with the voice of an angel that featured on Britains Haven’ t Got Talent, she’s the lass that got a slap in the trap from a copper at the goad a copper and take his photo when he slaps you cos it will make you famous meeting Ian Tomlinson Memorial March.

The Mail has a ‘read all about it’ on Ms Fisher which is quite amusing. Normally the Mail is pretty crap but in this little nugget, you get the feeling that this is one paper that won’t be coughing up 50g’s for Ms Fishers story. In fact I get the feeling they are not impressed with her at all. Mind you, if you are going to sell a story, best not to give it away before the money is in the bank. After all, we have all seen the footage and in the Mail, Ms Fisher tells us exactly what happened. So there isn’t really anything left to sell, but if anyone can sell nothing for something, it’s Max.

The woman struck by a policeman at the G20 protests demanded compensation last night  -  saying she had been left ‘black and blue’. ‘There wasn’t any bruising or marks on my face. He was wearing a glove. – Hmmmm, not that black and blue then.

Yesterday Miss Fisher, who has faced shoplifting allegations in the past , said: ‘I had gone to protest about climate change. That’s my main thing. I really love animals and that’s what I’m worried about. – What have fluffy little bunnies got to do with Ian Tomlinson?

‘The climate change protest seem to have been cancelled or we couldn’t get there. I’m not sure. When I got hit I was trying to get to the vigil for the dead protester. I wanted to pay my respects. – Ah, how sweet, shame you don’t really understand the concept of respect, but it’s the thought that counts.

Dramatic photographs show Miss Fisher shouting and swearing at the sergeant as she attended a vigil in the City.- See, maybe if you had shown the Police Officer some respect, he wouldn’t have had to slap you, but there you go. You got your photo, and now you is famous.

Miss Fisher lives with her dog Poppy and her boyfriend in a rundown basement flat of a Victorian house facing a council estate in Brighton. Neighbours said Miss Fisher had lived in the flat for around ten years, and did not appear to have a full-time job. Miss Fisher and her boyfriend  -  an overweight young man in an England football shirt who refused to give his name  -  were unwilling to discuss the case at length. - Now is it me, or does it sound like The Mail don’t actually like this couple very much.

Ms Fisher has had her 5 mins of fame, but in all honesty, if Max can get 50 grand for this story it will be a miracle. I know he is famous for turning a pigs ear into a well dressed famous pigs ear but surely if The Mail have just printed the story in it’s entirety there is nothing more to add. It’s not exactly a scoop is it, being as we have seen, heard and read all about it already.

I would rather read the Coppers story. You know, about how much he enjoyed providing the ‘customer’ with the exact service she was after, that is what we expect of our police force isn’t it?, a prompt, swift solution to our demands. This copper should be up for ‘Service Provider of the Year’ award. He gave a shouty, screamy, in your face, pushy, goading, trouble making feminazi exactly what she went there for – a photo of herself getting smacked in the trap. Now that is customer service.

Oh look, it’s that nice man again.


Fred Bloggs

I would like to start this article with a word of thanks. Thank you New Labour!.

Now you are most likely wondering why i thanked New Labour, well, i was having a read of Labourlist.org (I needed a laugh) and i found a new video of that lovely man, Daniel Hannan. Now, i would have never found this video without labourlist, so again, thank you.

One other thing, ajoining the video of Daniel was a another video, this time John Prescott replying to Daniel’s vid. To briefly summerise John’s rant, the video consisted entirely of John saying “Daniel’s wrong, ‘cos, er,er,he’s wrong.” 

Ok, here’s the vids:

The comment that John said about America wanting something like our health care system, genuinly shocked me, as i thought that the Americans were against compulsory euthenasia

*sigh*


MummyLongLegs

Financial Fools Day.

Fools pretending to be protestors. Terrorists pretending to be protestors. Vandals pretending to be protestors. Greenies, Beardies, Trots, Commies, Scroungers, Losers and Wasters all pretending to be protestors. They are not protestors, they are f***wits.

What were they protesting for…………they weren’t. They were protesting against. Against everything that most people want in life.

These f***wits state that they speak for the population of Britain. No they don’t, they speak only for the idiots that support their cause. They are not interested in anyone else. They are happy to use violence and vandalism to get their message across. They are thugs, idiots and hypocrites.

Much beefing up of the Police in the blogosphere (I am guilty of this too). The only Coppers interested in starting a riot are the PoliticoPolice, those that stand to gain reward from Labour. The types that belong to Acpo. The ones at the very top. The ones have spent today, sat in ‘Head-Quarters’ , staring at CCTV monitors fed by 3000 cameras, watching the ‘real Coppers’ out on the street.

The Copper on the ground doesn’t want a riot. The regular Copper has been set up by his master (and he/she knows it). If they suppress trouble, those as the top will take all the glory. If they are seen to be inflaming it, they will be hung out to dry. Like the rest of us, the average Copper can’t win. He is just a pawn in the big Political Game.

I have watched the footage this afternoon, and I don’t care what anyone says, the Coppers on the ground have conducted themselves with great skill. And they should be applauded. It is very easy to see them as a group that ply the wares of this Labour Government and it is easy to forget that all those Coppers are just people like you and me. I myself, in the last couple of weeks have been swept up by the whole ‘Plod is out to get us’ way of thinking.

It is easy to forget that whilst I, as a member of the public, hate the restrictions this Government sees fit to put upon me. What I can drink, what I can eat, where I can smoke, what I can think etc… the average Copper also has to put up with this, and then when he/she goes to work there are more restrictions, targets, rules etc to follow. The average Copper isn’t the stooge of this Government, it is the fall guy. And I have only just realised this (another Mummy learning curve).

All those Coppers, on the ground, in London today, are real, down to earth people. They are members of the Public. They have families, mortgages, bills and commitments. Just like the rest of us. They are involved in the protests today. But not by choice. They have to be there. The thugs, idiots and terrorists (check your dictionary) get to cover their faces whilst they vandalise property and assault the Coppers. The Coppers don’t get this privilage. They are there for all to see. If they have to use a sheild, a baton, a taser, CS Gas or just their hands to protect THEMSELVES, they will be scrutinised. They could be punished. They could lose everything. They are the fall guys. Just like our Soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan. These Coppers can’t say no. They have to attend these protests.

But in the real world, they are just like you and me.

member-of-public-1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A member of the public.

not-the-answer

 

 

 

 

 

 

Members of the public.

member-of-public-2

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

A member of the public.

I am going to post this at my place aswell. I have learnt something today. Something important.

Exams=Toilet Paper


Fred Bloggs

I have just been looking on the AQA site and i found the grade boundaries for januarys GCSE’s, and needless to say they symbolize perfectly how our education system is Stuka diving into oblivion.

To see how horrific the grade boundaries are click Here.

The Kevin Dowd lecture on free banking | Samizdata.net


Sean Gabb

The Kevin Dowd lecture on free banking | Samizdata.net

The Kevin Dowd lecture on free banking

Johnathan Pearce (London) Globalization/economics

As promised, I have some thoughts following on from the talk given by Kevin Dowd, a professor at the Nottingham University Business School and a noted advocate of what is called “free banking”. He gave his talk at the annual Chris R. Tame Memorial Lecture as hosted by the Libertarian Alliance. (The LA was founded by Mr Tame, who died three years ago at a distressingly young age after losing a battle against cancer.)

Professor Dowd covered some territory that is already pretty well-trodden ground for Samizdata’s regular readers, so I will skim over the part of the lecture that focused on the damage done by unwisely loose monetary policy of state organisations such as central banks, or the moral-hazard engines of tax bailouts for banks.

Instead, I want to focus on those aspects of Professor Dowd’s talk in which he tried to sketch out what a laissez faire, free market banking system would actually look like. This is essential; a great deal of commentary so far – while it is very good – has mainly focused on how we got into this fix and why the fixes being attempted by Western governments are proving so stupid. As PJ Rourke said recently, the attempt by the Obama administration to flood the market with cheap money as a “solution” is a bit like the case of when your Dad has burned the dinner, so you ask the dog to cook it instead. No, what Professor Dowd did this week was lay out three broad areas for reform.

Firstly, he says we should remove many of the existing regulations, government-mandated deposit protection schemes, bank capital adequacy rules and other restrictions on what banks can do and how they work. For example, government support for depositors – who are also effectively creditors to their banks – means that there is a moral hazard problem; the banks have less incentive than they would otherwise have to act prudently if there is always the government, acting like a sort of 7th Cavalry, able to ride to the rescue. That has to go. Professor Dowd also wants to hack away at the morass of rules and regulations that violate client/banker confidentiality, or those rules that force banks to lend to people, as is the case in the US, where banks are forced to lend to certain groups or else violate laws about racial discrimination, etc.

Secondly, Professor Dowd addresses the issue of letting banks fail. At the present, policymakers adopt a sort of “too big to fail” doctrine; this doctrine, while not explicitly laid down in any form of statute or operating manual – as far as I know – is a rule that says that some institutions are so large, and the attendant systemic risks posed by their failure so catastrophic, that they should not be allowed to go out of business. The problem of course is that this rule of thumb is often arbitrary and subject to political horse-trading. To wit: the US government’s decision to let Lehman Brothers go down last September, followed shortly by the $85 billion bailout for AIG, showed a total lack of clear message to the markets, and to bankers, one way or the other.

Professor Dowd believes that banks should be allowed to fail and furthermore, if modern limited liability laws were weakened or abolished completely, then such massive conglomerates would be economically and legally unsustainable in the first place.

As a result, banks would probably be smaller, and there would be a lot more of them, so the failure of any individual bank, while unpleasant for some, would not wreck the system as could happen if a mega-bank goes wrong. Also, instead of wide-ranging and hideously expensive bailouts, Professor Dowd favours putting banks into administration, writing down, in full, the value of their loan books, and getting depositors to exchange their status as creditors for that of an equity holder.

This “debt for equity swap” arrangement, while it would anger depositors who lose money, would come with the promise, and hopefully the reality, of a rise in the capital value of their equity stake in a bank if confidence returns to a more robust banking sector, as the debt/equity swap recapitalisation is designed to achieve. And of course banks are entirely free, as are their clients, to take out deposit insurance in a commercial market.

The third leg of his solution is broader, and more long-term, although there are some immediate measures that could be taken. Professor Dowd is against fiat money – money not backed by actual commodities or real assets of any kind – and in moving to a commodity-based/asset-based system. He is not, by the way, necessarily arguing for the gold standard or some gold-based system, although he points out that in the 200 years up to the First World War, the UK enjoyed a remarkable period of stable prices, with the odd blip. What he is arguing, however, is that the message on a banknote that says “I promise to pay the bearer on demand the sum of X” should be an enforceable legal contract, not what amounts to the jeering joke that it now is.

In the subsequent Q&A session afterwards, one person made the excellent point that a simple reform would be to ban legal tender laws. Such laws currently require a person to accept as legal tender a currency that the state has mandated for a particular region. Instead, if a person wants to refuse to accept sterling and only wants to accept dollars, euros or Swiss francs instead, he can do so. He can also choose to trade in whatever medium of exchange he wants, and with whoever wants to accept it.

Inevitable questions arise. First of all, in thinking about free banking, private monetary systems and the like, the first objection will be is that this will be very messy; there has been no real experience of such monetary systems in the past, etc.

But this is incorrect. Free banking, as defined by Professor Dowd, in fact operated in Scotland, for example, up until legal changes in 1845. South of the River Tweed, the English system had operated under what amounted to state-controlled banking under the Bank of England, set up in 1692. In the 18th and 19th centuries, England saw a number of booms and recessions, such as the 1840s railway boom and the downturn of 1870s. One should remember that the BoE was established by the-then post-Glorious Revolution government as a way to raise money for wars without having to keep asking a fractious public for taxes, and without having to borrow at expensive rates in the money markets. N.A.M. Roger has explained this issue of financing for naval warfare brilliantly. Indeed, it reminds us that state monopoly money systems typically arose in order to finance wars, while the welfarist aspects came later.

There are also current, not just old, examples of banks that operate with unlimited liability partnership structures – Pictet, the Swiss bank, and Lombard Odier, are just two examples. There are dozens of such banks using these structures in Switzerland and by no coincidence; they have avoided the worst of the credit crunch. These banks are typically for the rich but it seems to me that there is no logical reason why such an approach could not be used more widely. So there are different ways of doing banking right now. And do not forget the humble UK mutual building society: they have their limitations, but as a business model they had a lot to recommend them.

Another objection might be that the debt-for-equity swap way of restructuring failed banks under bankruptcy protection laws would be politically unfeasible, since depositors would be hit. I understand that, but Professor Dowd is not trying to imagine what sort of reforms would appeal to David Cameron, say, but what sort of reforms would be workable. That is a rather massive difference, as I am sure readers will agree.

Another objection is that “real money”, as opposed to the state-arranged fiction that we have now, cannot work for as long as governments take such a large slice of GDP. That is probably correct. One of the reasons why so many advocates of Big Government regard “gold bugs” or free bankers as dangerous nutters is that they realise their welfare states would be unworkable under such monetary arrangements. The Ponzi schemes of most welfare states would not be able to function. Even so, as long as governments retain the ability to tax, they have the ability to raise debt in the financial markets in the knowledge that their collateral can be collected at the point of a gun. But a real-money system still hampers such activity considerably.

In the longest run, the best hope of avoiding such financial disasters in the future is to wean the public and policymakers off the seductive delusion that one can create wealth by turning on a printing press. Sooner or later, if you try to fake reality, it bites you hard in the arse. Of course, it is a mark of the kind of man Professor Dowd is that he is too polite to put it as bluntly as that.

I await comments!

Comments

It sounds all very interesting and I really wish now I had been there as the other event I was at did not afford me the opportunity I had hoped to grab my local Oxfordshire MPs and try and sell them my idea for a “Bank of Oxfordshire” using, believe it or not, partnerships and asset based scrip.

I particularly like his ideas about what to do now, practically speaking, because I guess I always focus on the “hereafter” policies of competitive currencies and so on which are probably still a bit far up the Overton window for most peoples’ comfort.

There was an interesting piece about C Hoare & Co in one of yesterday’s newspapers just so people recall that there is at least one UK based bank on an unlimited liability model.

Was any mention made of Gesell, WIR Bank and similar alternative structures that often started up in the Depression and some of which, such as WIR, are still going from strength to strength?

Posted by Jock at March 19, 2009 02:05 PM

Firstly thank you for organising an enjoyable evening and thought provoking talk.

One additional area that will be critical to moving in the direction of free banking is reform of the insolvency laws and procedures. However desirable it may be to put a bank into an enforced reconstruction the law, particularly in England, makes it impossible to complete in a realistic time scale. The timescale for advertising ceditor claims, the lack of sufficient powers of an administrator to cut a deal amongst creditors and make it stick without protracted legal action, and the absence of any legal recognition (in statute or precedence) of priority for the counterparties of many of the new financial instruments mean that any administration process under current law would take months or probably years to resolve. A bank will go under if the uncertainty lasts more than a few days.

Sorting out the legislation and enforcing the current competiton rule to break up the major banks into more managable units will be preconditions of Prof Dowd’s approach.

A further and slightly off topic thought. The Sarbanes-Oxley laws in the US require CEO’s and CFO’s of companies, including banks and other financial institutions, to sign declarations that their organisation has fully effective internal controls, the records are complete and accurate, and that the financial statements can be relied upon. Clearly these representation for AIG, Citibank and other were patently false. Why are there no CEOs and CFOs in handcuffs awaiting trial??

Posted by RobertD at March 19, 2009 02:16 PM

It certainly appears to have been an excellent talk; I look forward to seeing a video of it.

Johnathan’s summary mentions two points which I think could be implemented fairly quickly and do much to improve on the current system: repeal of “legal tender” laws and elimination of deposit insurance. The former is fairly straightforward and explained in the article. The second bears more discussion.

Deposit insurance (in the US, anyway) is an artifact of the Great Depression, installed to prevent catastrophic “runs” on banks, sometimes sparked by mere rumor. It was (and is) a legitimate concern, and while the problem is exacerbated by a fractional reserve system (as I’m sure Paul will interject here at some point), it would also be a problem even without fractional reserve lending. The US’s solution was to create a new federal agency (the FDIC) to run the insurance fund, and (not coincidentally) directly regulate most banks. Therein lies the flaw.

The FDIC is staffed by government bureaucrats with no personal economic stake in the game. They are, by and large, decent and well-meaning people, but they aren’t the “best and brightest” (such people don’t work for bureaucracies) and they are hampered by hidebound rules and a lumbering, ineffecient and inflexible system. Insurance “premiums” are not established on any actuarial basis, but are essentially identical for all banks, however well or badly managed [1], and setting the rate is quite politicized. The proper response should be to use private deposit insurance.

With private deposit insurance, banks could shop around for insurance companies with the best rates and service. The insurance companies themselves would more accurately and carefully assess “risk” than it would ever be possible for the government to do, and would price accordingly. They would set capital levels which make sense given the specific nature of the bank’s business (rather than one-size-fits-all rules), assess the true value of its assets and liabilities (including, where appropriate, off-balance-sheet contingent liabilities), and in general do a better job of assessing the because it is their (and their shareholders’) money which is at risk. If the FDIC misprices, the insurance fund gets depleted and they go to the government for more money. If a private insurance company misprices, its capital gets depleted and shareholders replace the management. Competition among insurance companies would keep any from becoming unduly risk-averse in their regulations or expensive in their pricing. It’s a true free-market solution, and would work.

[1] There has been a move in recent years to incorporate some sort of “risk-adjusted” element to the premiums, but if this has actually been implemented (I’m not sure about that) the differential was essentially nominal.

Posted by Laird at March 19, 2009 04:28 PM

RobertD, you make a good point about the speed of administration process under existing English law. Prof. Dowd made the point that the debt-for-equity swap and recapitalisation of a bank would have to be done very fast, over a weekend. A long delay would be a disaster, in particular, because of the need for businesses etc to make payments and handle invoices, etc.

Laird, thanks for the detail on the insurance angle.

Posted by Johnathan Pearce at March 19, 2009 05:01 PM

I am delighted to see articles like this posted on Samizdata Jonathan – excellent, more in this vein as and when you can please.

Posted by mike at March 19, 2009 05:19 PM

This is the problem I see with insurance: How can an actuarial table be constructed?

Do bank failures follow a known statistical pattern? Clearly not.

I wouldn’t believe any private agency offering deposit insurance. Gold reserves are all that can be believed. At least until an actuarial table can be constructed.

Posted by Current at March 19, 2009 05:23 PM

Two questions:

1. As Laird pointed out above, the bank guarantees were specifically made to avoid panics, wouldn’t the removal of these guarantees necessarily cause panics? With the advent of instantaneous communication available to even the stupidest among us, wouldn’t ‘runs on the bank’ become a regular event?

2. Fiat money v. asset backed currency -
With fiat money there is a good deal of leverage that is not possible with the asset backed. This seems to imply that under a asset backed regime the economy would be significantly less dynamic one, and growth could be curtailed. Yes, a blessing in the possible smoother booms and busts, but it would seem a curse in reducing growth, productivity.

Looking at the historical rates of inflation / deflation it really appears that prior to the 1930′s, this cycle was much more dynamic than after: (UK) Consumer Price Inflation Since 1750(Link)
I realize this study is a reconstruction and I have no way of evaluating the methodologies but it seems relevant.

Posted by Will Anjin at March 19, 2009 07:26 PM

This isn’t life insurance; there are no “actuarial tables”. That doesn’t mean that the risks can’t be rationally assessed. How do you think an insurance company insures any one-time event? Lloyd’s has known how to do this for centuries (even if they’ve fallen off course a bit lately). [I need help here from someone with better knowledge than mine about probability; is this a Bayesian analysis?]

Moreover, the real point isn’t whether there is going to be deposit insurance; that’s a given, after the experiences of the Great Depression. The only question is who provides it, and at what cost? I submit that government is the least qualified entity to do so, for a variety of reasons (some noted in my previous post). In a truly free market each bank would decide whether to offer it or not and the market would reward or punish that decision, but even in a regulated environment the government could simply mandate that banks carry some minimal level of deposit insurance as a condition to maintaining their charter. Banks could choose to carry more than the minimum amount, and again the market would determine whether or not that was a wise decision, but it’s still a market solution. (Probably a market would develop for banks with different insurance levels: minimal for those with relatively small balances wanting cheap banking services, higher for those with more money who are willing to pay a bit more for peace of mind. Let the market sort it out.)

Posted by Laird at March 19, 2009 07:36 PM

Obama Dollar Sterling money banking crisis credit crunch: Kevin Dowd gives Chris Tame memorial lecture 17th Mar 09: Libertarian View of the Financial Collapse


Sean Gabb

This is the Second Chris R. Tame  Memorial Lecture. It was given at the National Liberal Club in London on the 17th March 2009, and sets out a libertarian response to the financial crises of the past year. A full text of the speech will be published in the next week or so. In the meantime, here is the video. A better quality video file on DVD is available  on request from Sean Gabb <sean@libertarian.co.uk>for £5.

Libertarian Alliance Bulletin


Director’s Bulletin
14th February 2009
Introduction
Libertarian Alliance Publications
Media Appearances
Speaking Engagements
Libertarian Alliance Events
Libertarian Alliance Book Recommendation
Libertarian Alliance Conference
Negative Scanner Needed

It is cold. I am working hard to finish a book before April. My Baby Bear is now running about the house with more hands than the average Indian goddess. The other Officers of the Libertarian Alliance are also busy. Even so, there is something to report.

Our first publication of 2009 is Anthony Flood, Is Anarchy a Cause of War? Some Questions for David Ray Griffin, Philosophical Notes, No 81
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/philn/philn081.htm
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/lapubs/philn/philn081.pdf

Our Editorial Director is working on several other publications at the moment, and we expect to bring out at least as much in 2009 as in the past few years.

While on the subject of publications, I will take the opportunity here to announce to the whole world what I have been telling people for several years in e-mails of response. If there is anything published by us that you want to republish, on the Internet or in hard copy, please feel free to do so. We do not ask for payment. We do not require to be asked in advance, or to be sent copies of republished material. In return for this general licence, we ask the following:

  • That the Author and the Libertarian Alliance should receive full attribution in any republication;
  • That the Author’s words should not be edited to bring him or the Libertarian Alliance into hatred, ridicule or contempt;
  • That if a work is republished by any organisation that normally pays for material, the Author should receive fair payment.

I am on the radio sometimes three times a week. Sadly, I am usually too disorganised to record the event. Here are details of the only two recordings I have been able to make this year:

4th February 2009, BBC Radio, “Was the BBC right to suspend Carol Thatcher for racist language?”
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2009-02-04-sig-thatcher.mp3

I wrote at some length on this issue in my essay “On Golliwogs, One-Eyed Scottish Idiots and Sending Poo Through the Post“, available at:
http://www.seangabb.co.uk/flcomm/flc180.htm

12th February 2009, BBC Radio, “Was it right for the British Government not to admit Geert Wilders to show his anti-Islam film?”
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2009-02-12-sig-islam.mp3

This one needs a little explaining. Geert Wilders is a Dutch politician who has made a film that claims Islam to be an intolerant religion. He was supposed to come to England last week to introduce a showing of his film in the House of Lords. However, after protests and threats of mass protests by various Moslems, the Home Office told Mr Wilders he would not be allowed into the country.

The BBC is a pro-ruling class propaganda organisation that masquerades as a public service broadcaster. This usually means that it will support the Labour Party on any issue. When it thinks it can get away with it – for example, in claims about “climate change” – the BBC will openly lie and then refuse to give airtime to dissenters. In other cases, it will set up token debates that can be waved at anyone who complains later about bias, but that do not allow opposing points of view to be fairly put. My 12th February debate was of this second kind. A lawyer who is also a Moslem and a woman was allowed to speak about three times longer than I was. She was able to claim without any pretence of hard questioning that Islam was a religion of love and peace and that this was evidenced in The Koran. She insisted that the Gert Wilders denial of this was deeply offensive to Moslems and that his film should be banned.

I was finally allowed to make my response, knowing that I might be cut off at any moment. I made two rapid points: first, that modern public order laws are a blank cheque to anyone able to put a mob on the streets; second, that if this woman wanted to live in an Islamic state, she should consider moving to Iran or Pakistan. I added that, as a woman lawyer, she might get the occasional bucket of acid thrown in her face, but would never have to feel upset about her faith.

Why do I take part in these Potemkin debates? I do so first because they sometimes turn out to be real debates. The BBC is an increasingly totalitarian organisation, but not every minute of airtime is yet controlled. I do so second because, however compressed or bluntly, it is possible to utter truths that the listeners might not otherwise hear. The listeners, of course, already know the truth. But it can brighten their day to hear it put from within the lie machine itself.

Sadly, while I am in continual demand for programmes like Drive Time Cumberland, I am never allowed on Question Time and hardly ever on Newsnight. Such, however, is the nature of the BBC.

I have agreed to speak at the following meetings:

Monday, 16th February 2009, 7:30pm – Conservative Future meeting, Westminster. I will probably denounce the Conservative Party. If I do, I shall certainly receive a polite hearing. The difference between the two main parties in this country is that Labour is evil in root and branch, while the Conservatives are just too stupid to understand what has been done to us since 1997. I think this is a closed meeting. If not and you wish to attend, you should contact Lauren Mc Evatt <lmmce86@hotmail.com>

Sunday, 22nd February 2009, 2pm – Marlborough Group meeting, The Town Hall, Marlborough, Wiltshire SN8 1AL. I will speak about the need for conservatives to bear in mind that all the things they have defended for the past hundred years have now been destroyed or co-opted, and that conservatives must start to think how conservative values in the future can be embodied in what may have to be a revolutionary settlement. If you are interested in attending this meeting, please contact Robert Francis <remfrancis@googlemail.com>

Thursday, 26th February 2009, The Oxford Union. I shall oppose the motion “This House Would Restrict The Free Speech of Extremists”.I think these meetings are restricted to members of the Union, and I do not know if they are recorded. But I am to speak at one.

Tuesday 17th March 2009 between 6.30pm and 8.30pm – The Second Annual Chris R. Tame Memorial Lecture and Drinks Reception, at the National Liberal Club, One Whitehall Place, London SW1 (nearest tube Embankment). Professor Kevin Dowd: Lessons from the Financial Crisis: A Libertarian Perspective. Full details at:
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/conferences/crtmemlec09.htm

Society for Individual Freedom

I often refer to the Society for Individual Freedom as a “sister organisation” of the Libertarian Alliance. Since the LA is actually a breakaway organisation from SIF, it is more correctly our mother organisation. Whatever the case, its quarterly magazine, The Individual is now out. You can find SIF at:
http://www.individualist.org.uk/index.htm

My very dear friend, Richard Blake, has now had his second novel published by Hodder & Stoughton. The Terror of Constantinople has been received with universal applause. You can buy copies from Amazon at http://tinyurl.com/bgx5a2. You really should buy a copy – preferably two or three dozen copies.

I also recommend the following from Civitas: Nick Cowan, Total Recall: How Direct Democracy Can Improve Britain, Civitas, London, 2008. This is one of the few Civitas publications that I can wholeheartedly recommend. It suggests radical democracy as a cure for the New Labour dictatorship. You can order it from Amazon at http://tinyurl.com/c93jr6

This has been set for the last weekend in October 2009 at the National Liberal Club in London. As yet, we are unable to make any announcement regarding speakers or subjects. However, bearing in mind the continuing economic collapse, we have decided for a second year to keep the conference fee at the old rate of �85. So many of our friends have now lost their jobs and are facing hard times in the year ahead, that we feel obliged to dip further into our reserves to subsidise the conference. Do stand by for more detailed announcements.

I have several thousand negatives from the Chris R. Tame collection of photographs. I want to have these scanned in for upload to the Internet. Is there anyone out there able and willing to lend me a good negative scanner?


Sean Gabb
Director, The Libertarian Alliance
sean@libertarian.co.uk
Tel: 07956 472 199

http://www.libertarian.co.uk
http://www.seangabb.co.uk
http://www.hampdenpress.co.uk
http://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com

FREE download of my book – Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back
Wikipedia Entry

Libertarian Alliance home

Sean Gabb on the BBC re Carol Thatcher


http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2009-02-04-sig-thatcher.mp3

Should the BBC have sacked Carol Thatcher because she said in a private conversation that someone looked like a golliwog? No, says Sean Gabb, Director of the Libertarian Alliance.  Jo Brand was investigated by the police for allegedly inciting violence on BBC 1 against her political opponents. Carol Thatcher used a word. One gets the sack, the other the BBC’s unconditional support. But, then, Jo Brand is part of the New Labour Establishment. Carol Thatcher is the daughter of a Prime Minister who still makes the ruling class shudder.

Is this true?


David Davis

From The Remittance Man we learn this: householders will be visited by bureaucrats dispensing advice (here’s the original source) about cooking with leftovers…..

Sometimes we here, on whichever of the duty-typwriting squadrons is on “watch”, are tempted to emulate the language of Obnoxio The Clown, or the Devil himself. (He’s uncovered a previously unstudied State-Bogus-Charity in that one…Obnoxio’s latest just refers to some bureucrat or other as a c*** . )

But this is a family blog, so, apart from saying shit and crap which is rather weak playground stuff now, we only go so far as to merely write f*** (sometimes even c*** these days.) And also we only show pictures of Keeley Hazell wearing bras (until we get bored with her and we go and get someone else. Possibly Lucy Pinder – anybody got any preferences? See poll below. If in doubt, go here and select someone else.)

To get back to the point, the government is bust, the main world’s private banks have feverishly bought themselves into virtual bankruptcy by queuing for 15 years to buy each others “securitised” pigs-in-pokes, Gordon Brown is printing money….and then they all go and spend it on what? Food-police. Here’s an exerpt:-

Home cooks will also be told what size portions to prepare, taught to understand “best before” dates and urged to make more use of their freezers.

The door-to-door campaign, which starts tomorrow, will be funded by the Waste and Resources Action Programme (WRAP), a Government agency charged with reducing household waste.

The officials will be called “food champions”. However, they were dismissed last night as “food police” by critics who called the scheme an example of “excessive government nannying”.

WE MUST ALSO BEAR IN MIND THAT THIS IS ! “ALL ABOUT PROPERTY RIGHTS” !  People who have purchased food are entitled to dispose of it how it pleases them. The bought food DOES NOT become State Property: it belongs to the householder.

No bureaucrats yet come round to tell you not to throw a brick at your Wireless Tele Vision, thus rendering it at least partially if not fully unserviceable, whenever Jonathan Ross come on screen: why should they come and tell you what to do with food whiche displeases you?

It’s all very sad: it’s as if the poor government buggers just can’t kick the gravy-train (sorry) habit, even when there’s really no money, as opposed to just the appearance of no money.


Getting at Prince Harry: the new lefty bloodsport (allowed of course)


David Davis

Prince Harry has been publicly lynched (again.) About three hundred years ago, he jocularly referred to one of his soldier mates as a “Paki” – which is what he was, and still is I think – in good humour, in an airport departure lounge in front of the other young soldiers. I don’t recall any complaints or Daily Marxist Mirror headlines at the time, do you?

Worse follows! Apparently he’s “offended” all “British Asians” – has anybody asked the Chinese, the Japanese, the Iranians, the Iraqis, the Indians, the Nepalese, the Khazakhstanis for that matter, and all the others, if they have been “offended”? Or the Siberian Esquimos…or have I offended these by failing to class them as “Inuit”?

As Auberon Waugh would have said, “I’m not suggesting that it’s yet time to summarily shoot all people who own phones with video-cameras in them”….but do you get the impression that there are some people about who, on purpose, use liberating Western technology to bring back the Endarkenment?

Perhaps I should be offended to be called a “Brit”. I happen to think it’s chav, low, horrid and insulting, and far far far worse than “Pom” or “Rosbif”.  “Brit”  of course ought to offend all English Englishmen, or even British British-people (so of course the BBC uses the awfully repellent word “Brit” all the time as often as it can – just as “Paki” is supposed to offend all Pakistani Pakistanis, is it not?

Oh, and I DON’T think Harry was wrong to go to a party four years ago wearing a swastika armband.

(1) It was a party, you wear silly stuff, and get drink while satirising bad-people.

(2) They were all young. This is their job.

(3) WE can’t aribrush nazis socialists who killed people more scientifically and industrially than other socialists did or still do, out of history, out of a desire to be “nice”, by pretending they didn’t exist. Further to this matter, look as this assinine piece of supplication by bureaucrats.

But I thought we need to elect Police Chiefs BECAUSE they ARE being politicised?


LATE UPDATE: Philip Johnston in the Daily Quislingraph gets to it better regarding Police Authorities here. Although what we really want, as an early interim step in getting the State out of policing at all, is directly elected Sherriffs who run “their” Police according to the wishes of their local electors…..or they are fired and we will elect someone else.

David Davis

“Jacqui” “Smith” has it all arse about face (again.)

The Spectator has it the right way up, here. It’s precisely because the Police now think they can act in anticipation of the wishes of the Government that we have actually a Police State, and we need to start dismantling it by electing the chief-finger-men.

Sean Gabb, Director’s Bulletin, December 2008


Director’s Bulletin
9th December 2008
Introduction
Book Recommendations 1
Book Recommendations 2
Libertarian Alliance Conference
Eton College
Media Appearances
Negative Scanner Wanted

Introduction

I will begin by wishing a Happy Christmas to everyone who celebrates these things, and a Happy Holiday Season to those who don’t. You can see my personal card here: http://www.seangabb.co.uk/christmas.htm

Book Recommendation 1

Richard Blake, who is a very dear friend of mine, has now published his first novel in Italian. La Cospirazione Papale. This has already received a most flattering review by Marian Halcombe. I urge all my Italian readers to go out and buy copies of this novel. It will make an excellent Christmas present for any Italian interested in how an Englishman sees his country in the seventh century. And Mr Blake promises that, unlike certain other popular novelists, he will never give a million pounds to the Labour Party. You can order your copies here: http://tinyurl.com/567q47

Book Recommendation 2

I have discovered another box of my own first novel, The Column of Phocas. This means that after a year of being unavailable, it can now be offered again to the public. Again, it will make an excellent Christmas present for people who already have everything else. You can order copies from me directly at http://www.candidlist.demon.co.uk/hampden/phocas.htm All orders received will be sent out the same day. Again, I can promise that not a penny of the proceeds will go to the Labour Party – assuming, that is, the British State is not nowadays simply the executive wing of the Labour Party.

Libertarian Alliance Conference

This has been set for the last weekend in October 2009 at the National Liberal Club in London. As yet, we are unable to make any announcement regarding speakers or subjects. However, bearing in mind the continuing economic collapse, we have decided for a second year to keep the conference fee at the old rate of �85. So many of our friends have now lost their jobs and are facing hard times in the year ahead, that we feel obliged to dip further into our reserves to subsidise the conference. Do stand by for more detailed announcements.

Eton College

On the 19th November 2008, I spoke about libertarianism to the Shelley Society at Eton College. I had always thought of Eton as a place where the boys were stuffed at night into cold and filthy dormitories and flogged all day into learning how to write Greek iambics. It is actually a most impressive place of learning. The boys were all polite, and they asked me some very interesting questions. How so many members of our ruling class emerged from here as thick as they are is a mystery.

Media Appearances

I have done about a dozen media appearances in the past month. Sadly, I have only bothered to record two of them. This is most remiss of me, I accept – indeed, which writing this, I was called by a Christian radio station and asked to comment on the Government’s further steps towards banning tobacco. I made my comments without recording them. The recorded appearances are:

My debate with Lord Levy on the 19th November 2008. This went out on BBC Radio 4′s PM programme and was heard by millions of people.
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2008-11-19-sig-lester.mp3

A comment on the Queen’s Speech on Talk Sport Radio from the 3rd December 2008.
http://www.libertarian.co.uk/multimedia/2008-12-03-qe2speech-sig.mp3

Negative Scanner Wanted

I have several thousand negatives from the Chris R. Tame collection of photographs. I want to have these scanned in for upload to the Internet. Is there anyone out there able and willing to lend me a good negative scanner?


Sean Gabb
Director, The Libertarian Alliance
sean@libertarian.co.uk
Tel: 07956 472 199

http://www.libertarian.co.uk
http://www.seangabb.co.uk
http://www.hampdenpress.co.uk
http://libertarianalliance.wordpress.com

FREE download of my book – Cultural Revolution, Culture War: How Conservatives Lost England, and How to Get It Back
Wikipedia Entry

Libertarian Alliance home

Sean Gabb on the DNA Database


file:///C:/user/Sean/Writings/Sean%20Gabb%20Website/flcomm/flc155.htm

Free Life Commentary,
A Personal View from
The Director of the
Libertarian Alliance
Issue Number 155
26th October 2006
14th June 2006
|

On Opposing the DNA Database
by Sean Gabb

(Update by blogmeister: this subject is topical and we spoke on this blog about it earlier today, at this link. )

Last Monday evening—the 23rd October 2006—I was called into the London studio of Sky News to put a case against constructing a database of DNA samples from the whole British population. Tony Blair had been on his hind legs again, braying for the final abolition of freedom in this country. Watched by about a million people, I am told I did rather well in opposing him and his kind. So now, revising an article I wrote back in 2000, I will put my case in writing.

The main problem whenever this sort of proposal is made, is that debate is constructed in terms of either consenting to exactly whatever is proposed, or doing nothing at all about crime. Within this structure of argument, opponents can be presented as indifferent to crime, or even as more interested in the rights of criminals than of their victims.

The secret of winning such debates lies in persuading enough people to reject the assumptions that underlie the structure of debate.

Let us briefly examine these assumptions.

First, it is assumed that a DNA database is essential if crime is to be reduced. This is not so. It would be better to legalise drugs. Millions of consenting acts that are presently illegal would then drop out of the crime figures. At the same time, competition from legitimate suppliers would bankrupt the criminal gangs that have turned parts of London and Manchester into low-intensity war zones; and lowered prices would reduce the vast number of burglaries and street crimes now committed by drug users.

For those acts still criminal we could have much stronger punishments. The notion that serious threats to lock criminals away for very long periods, or to flog or mutilate them, or to hang them, will have no deterrent effect is so laughable, that only someone with a Sociology degree could propose it; and only a fool could really believe it.

Then the laws regarding self-defence could be changed. It is a scandal that respectable people in this country are not allowed to use whatever force they think necessary to defend their lives and property. Tony Martin was put in prison for the bizarre crime of “murdering” a burglar. If he was to blame for anything, it was for his moderation in not going after the other two thieves who broke into his house, and executing them as well.

Each by itself, these reforms would take us back to the crime figures of about 1970. Combined, we might find ourselves back in the 1950s. Of course, the authorities affect horror and even incredulity at the thought of doing these things. They would rather have their DNA database.

Second, it is assumed that a DNA database would reduce crime. Undoubtedly, it would have some effect, but this would be mostly against those criminals likely to be caught and punished in any event. There might at best be a small drop in the cost of policing.  But anyone aware of the optimistic claims made when finger printing was first introduced must know that the more intelligent criminals will simply take more care to hide their identity. That will need more this time than wearing gloves. But I doubt if it will need anything very hard or expensive.

It is, of course, true that some crimes would be solved by having a DNA database. In his comments the other day, Mr Blair mentioned various rapes and murders that were only solved decades afterwards by accidental matches of DNA samples. But something still more effective in the fight against crime would be making everyone in the country go about with a bar code tattooed on his forehead. This would reduce any number of petty frauds. Given the right sort of scanning machines in public, it would allow lost children to be found in minutes, and allow the authorities to keep an eye on known criminals. I can easily multiply the number of alleged benefits a salesman for the big computer companies might make to the Home Office. But I ask instead—would you willingly present your face for the tattooist’s needle?

This brings us to the third assumption of the debate—that a DNA database would be used only for crime control. Even granting that our present rulers are entirely to be trusted—at the very least a dubious assumption—we cannot be sure what they will be like a generation from now. But we can be sure that a database set up now to cover those who are arrested will, without any positive extension, soon cover most of the population. It would a useful tool for any government wanting to exercise the tyrannical powers it now has only in theory.

As Albert J. Nock once observed, every time we give a government power to do things for us, we also give it the power to do things to us. I cannot think of a better illustration of this truth than a DNA database.

You may huff and puff and insist you have nothing to fear from a database of your DNA. After all, the authorities keep promising how much safer it will make you. But do you want your children to go on that database? Can you be sure that some demented government scientist two decades from now will not decide that the surest way to heaven on earth is to stop certain people from breeding? Can you be sure that your children will not show up negative on a DNA database that will have enabled an old authoritarian fantasy to be made into bureaucratic reality?

Are there no criminal tendencies somewhere in your family background? No racial or sexual characteristics that may one day be again be as unfashionable as they have been in other times and places? No bad eyes or flat feet? No predisposition to obesity or illnesses that it will for the foreseeable future be expensive to treat on the National Health Service?

Bear in mind that, with a certainty not known since the 1940s, the relevant scientists are proclaiming that your destiny is in your genes. This may be true. Whatever the case, it is and will remain the consensus. Can you believe it will never be attractive to politicians ignorant of the science, but struggling with the problems of crime control and ballooning health budgets?

Do you want grandchildren? Or do you want to risk seeing your genes scientifically combed from the general pool?

Or do you want your DNA samples handed over to foreign governments? I imagine data will soon be shared between the various governments of the European Union, which will certainly include Rumania and Bulgaria and possibly Turkey as well.

Or do you want your DNA samples at risk of theft from thieves? I cannot imagine what use it might be to them. But who can say what things will be useful in the future?

Or do you want the police to use your DNA samples to get you falsely convicted of a criminal offence? This has been happening with fingerprinting as long as it has been around. With finger prints, it is a matter of using sellotape to copy prints from one object to another. I imagine the police will soon find ways to do this with DNA samples. And the courts will be just as willing as with finger prints to take DNA evidence as effectively conclusive proof of guilt.

If your answer is what it ought to be, let us turn back to an investigation of what other measures may be available for the fight against crime.

This is the framework within which debate on the DNA database should proceed So long as the present framework of assumptions continues unchallenged, there can be no effective opposition.

I am pleased with how well I put my case last Monday evening. But I am sure that others can and will do better.

Damian Green and Christopher Galley: let’s suppose DG “groomed” CG. What then?


David Davis

The Daily Quislingraph carries a “report” that Damian Green, arrested (and then bailed, why only that? What’s wrong with “release without charge” – as he has done freedom a service?) for allegedly being in possession of “leaked documents”, obtained them by “grooming” (ummm, what’s that?) a “civil servant”, allegedly the eponymous Christopher Galley, who is of course, still “disappeared” as of now.

If so, and if “leaking” is OK if the New Labour Government Stalinists do it (as they have been for years if not longer) then, under the principles of a level playing field in liberal pluralist democracy, it’s OK for the opposition to take advantage of “leaks”.

The problem arises when one side tries to upend the playing field , or do the equivalent of “rocking the table” in Billiards and Snooker. This of course is transparently what ZanuLieBorg is doing to our constitutional settlement, and what it has set out to do at least since 1997.

An administration which:-

(1) Creates one new crime a day, by arbitrary definition,

(2) Wants to bring in ID cards by force or stealth,

(3) Forcibly nationalises Banks for spurious reasons based on new and arbitrary definitions of solvency,

(4) Wants to not have its rotten and pocket boroughs in inner cities merged into fewer bigger ones,

(4) Fills the nation with CCTV camerae,

(5) Is creating a very very large and immortal DNA database by stealth, (mostly of young whilte males now, but you just watch what will happen in a couple of years)

(6) Has deliberately decimated and downsized the Farming Communities really quite early on (cunning move that was, before any of us really noticed!) (they are Kulaks and thus conservatives by and large) by burning their animals at the point of a gun, trampling their fields with “ramblers” (who are clearly mostly lefties or they would have better things to do), closing their shops and Post Offices, and allowing the EU to dictate what produce of theirs could be sold to whom at what price,

(7) Has removed the intellectual basis of anti-Stalinist opposition to wickedness, in the Lords, by gerrymandering it by force,

(8) Has passed what amounts to an Enabling Act, for ministers of this Junta,

(shall I go on? That’s all I could type in a minute flat.)

An administration which does all this, is Nazi. Plain and simple. Now, it bcoemes the DUTY, first of opposition MPs, and then the rest of us, to oppose it. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to share the fate of the poor miserable German people in 1945. As I keep on saying, it could be argued that they did bring a terrible retribution and fate upon themselves, by failing to reject what were ostensibly and frankly portrayed socialist/ultranationalist policies, clearly outlined to them in successive elections and publlications – not to mention violent events.

Any Conservative MP who thinks that he ought to suborn the Civil Service, directly or otherwise, to find out more about the nefarious things going on under the surface of this government, ought to do so – it’s now his duty. This is war. In the pursuit of truth, particularly in what passes for “government” and the things it tries to cover up, and if socialist (as this outfit is), then it is always and invariably a lot – bad laws should be broken. Publicly and often. While the “media” are still nominally free, this strategy will weaken the masses’ belief, in time – and it will take time – in the cases for their retention.