Libertarians will like this car. If a true libertarian state was to come about, then i expect they, and the petrol, would also beocme far cheaper, and we could all enjoy one.
Libertarians will like this car. If a true libertarian state was to come about, then i expect they, and the petrol, would also beocme far cheaper, and we could all enjoy one.
Excellent exposé by Bishop Hill, about the carefully-diguised but fraudulent manipulation of data and preocessing, used to convince gullible people or those with little free time and a lot to do. Lots of useful embedded links to primary sources. Hat tip Samizdata, courtesy of Brian Mickelthwait, and I think the Englishman’s got his teeth into its ankle also. (Useful but slightly irrelevant, although amusing, links to all about Richard Dawkins included free if you see him.) You’ll all be pleased to see that The Devil has picked it up, too, and is somewhat less amused by the scale of the fraud even than I am!
And for some real dunking in proper coloured graphs and all that stuff, go to John Daly, here.
Honestly! The sheer bloodyminded brass neck the blasted man has! One recalls the Scottish jokes we use to be allowed to tell, that hinted at a certain parsimoniousness in their national character….like the one about how you can tell you are flying over Scotland….(I’m sure the Scots are not like that really; only the leftist politicians among them.)
Here we have a government, riding around in armoured Jaguars, pilfering the public purse to the extent of an extra £50,000-odd per head per year, for “expenses” and “home improvements”, then having the immortal crust to vote themselves a large pay rise, and then….lecturing us to stop wasting food?
Perhaps this is a form of transferred admonition: I’m sure the psychologists and head-bashers would have a word for it. He wants, really, to berate the bloddy foreigners for something or other, but can’t get away with that ‘coz that funny little man at the Foreigners Office would “brief against” him.
Firstly, about food in the modern world of a first-world-industrial nation:-
(1) We have never had it so good – or at least until recently. In the 60s, I learned with pride that Britain “IS THE MOST EFFICIENT MECHANISED FARM IN THE WORLD”, with wheat yields in tons per acre that were double those of North America (held up as a model continent too); also with livestock densities and tonnages of shipped butchered meat higher than anywhere except the USA (and much of it “local!) OK so the Greens have made this go out of the window while our back was turned, along with their murdering Pol-pot-ist chums peddling destructive education syllabuses containing Gramsco-Marxian-Sartre-ist nonsense and other falsehoods, but since capitalism does survive here, just, despite efforts to the contrary, we are still able to spend only about 9% of our net income on food and live, indeed fairly well.
(2) The madness of “sell-by” and “eat-by” dates, coupled with the Gramsco-Marxian effect on public understanding of science (see above) has made today’s UK population hypersensitive to the most innocuous Daily Mail headline about the latest “food scare”. Otherwise sane people routinely throw away stuff which could easily keep another day (soft fruit), a week (cheeses, meats – some of which taste even better if a bit high), a month even (most frozen foods) – and I’m being rather conservative here. The mere mention of “E Coli” (99% of Daily Mail readers probably don’t know what it is or where it lives.) No wonder they throw away so much food: they have not been given the information with which to trust their common sense, and they listen to false gods in the absence of real ones, which are the facts and the people’s subsequent ability to decide what to do for the best, when faced with the “Fridge That Time Forgot”.
(3) A few days ago, local (that is to say, a British) Stalinist EU bureaucrats, ordered a market trader to destroy (or send back to the supplier) 50,000 Kiwi Fruit that were “undersized”, in the interests of “consumer protection. He was NOT even allowed to GIVE them away to schools, hospices or even poor-people who could not pay, on pain of a criminal conviction. Gordon Brown should look to the beam in his own eye first, before taking out the mote in our eye.
(4) In 2000 and 2001, Brown’s august predecessor had nearly 9 million healthy animals, in England mostly, slaughtered and burnt. This was on account of the slight risk that some of them had contracted foot-and-mouth disease, for which vaccination in the UK was forbidden by the very same government’s DEFRA (the Department for Ending Farming and Rural Affairs). Yes, foot-and-mouth would cause a fall in animal tonnage yield, and probably make a prodicer miss his delivery-date of cuts of known wieght to a supermarket, but why not let the Market sort it all out?
So Gordon is going to the G8, then? Here’s what he could berate the others for:-
(a) Russia: for being an authoritarian one-party state dressed up as a liberal pluralist democracy, which tyrannises secessionist ethnic minorities, and uses its vicelike grip on Europe’s energy-windpipe to make smaller nations comply with its foreign policy.
(b) The USA: for going soft on the war on terror the war against Western civilisation, and for even thinking of entertaining the possibility of electing one of a pair of democratic Marxist Presidents, rather than someone else.
(c) Germany, for trying to pretend that the EU unitary state constitution Lisbon Treaty is still a goer.
(d) France, which is to say, West Germany, likewise.
(e) Canada, for even thinking of allowing the rise of Show-Trials in Stalinist Courts “Human Rights Commissions”, one of which recently tried to ruin Mark Steyn, Ezra Levant and McLeans, for simply saying something in a publication.
He ought to have a go at the other ones too, about something, but I can’t think what right now. I’ll email him while he’s on the plane.
Finally, he ought to have a go at the UN, for continuing, via the hegemony of its Bandung generation, the generation of oceans of blood, mountains ranges of sorrow, and millions of corpses, which we of the West still try to clear up today. this is caused by its fanatical and continual espousal of monarching pre-humanist tyranny, at the expense of the lives and prospects of billions of people.
Finally, he should say that the Green Terror is over, that Al Gore will be pensioned off to a mud hut in Nigeria, where his carbon footprint can be low, and that all the money we were going to spend ratifying Kyoto will be diverted to providing clean drinking water for all people on the planet, for ever.
But he won’t, will he.
Fellow Europeans! Do not go there! Do NOT take on the Irish!
Even we, the English, can’t subdue them although we foolishly tried, so we have honourably let them go. They are our brothers and sisters, after all. (You could be, too: get rid of your political elites and we will interview you….)
Do the same!
For your lives!
|[eurorealist] Fw: When Irish eyes stop smiling – -|
|Date:||01/07/2008 21:29:14 GMT Daylight Time|
|Sent from the Internet (Details)|
I have to confess something: I have just had to have it explained to me what a “Starbucks” is, and what a “Latte” is also. (I thought it was pronouced “LATT” and was slang for a lavatory…as in “They never use the lats, they do it in our hats, thank God we’re not the P.B.I*…!!!)
Whatever is happening to Starbucks, the point is that:-
(1) The USA, through the benign influence of the Anglosphere and freedom of communication and trade (mostly) has been the father of mass cultural and brand identities which give happiness and daily solace to chiefly poor-people who have no time for, or have been deprived of (through the deliberate devices of Fabians, vulgar-leftists and other Nazis) otherwise available opportunities to learn about such things as ”high culture and high art”.
Here are some examples:-
Ford cars. Western pop-music (whatever you say about the Beatles/Stones/Shadows/all other Brits etc, the USA invented it. Coca-Cola (and Pepsi). MacDonald’s. Burger King. KFC. Hollywood movies (without the new-lefty-slant, from now on, please!) Jazz. Colour television (HOW long did it take the Booby-See and ITV to get it going here?) We could all name more.
(2) By contrast, the rest of the world with the chief exception of Britain, plus a few laggard European hangers-on, has contributed close to f***-all. What mass-popular, mass-cultural, all-uniting concept, that is freely-available via the market, has been exported from …. Saudi-Arabia? Or …. Russia?
Never mind about Starbucks: I didn’t even know what one was. But when we see MacDonald’s outlets closing, it truly will be a cultural bad sign.
*”Poor Bloody Infantry”
Here. Good new commentary about stuff form the Observer; that is to say, a “News Paper”, mostly read by pseudo-intellectual British lefties, with names such as Deidre Dutt-Pauker. These are a declining breed happily, but sadly with an ability to “punch above their weight”. we shall have to see about that when we set up “Libertarian re-reducation camp sites”; These might be called “free markets”, in stuff such as “journ-al-ism”.
Not only do these people not care what human beings think or how they actually behave: they also conform to the dictum of :-
“If the only tool you have is a hammer, the solution to every problem has got to be a nail.”
I can see corner-shops and off-licences being broken-into or held up not just for cigarettes, but now for beer and alcopops too. Great move, Zanu-Laborg!
“Fourth-higest rate of binge-drinking among under-15s in Europe…” yeah, that’s a real real problem, to be solved by some more draconian measures. Yeh. How about building a couple of frigates, or some anti-missile defences instead? (But no, that would have some positive results…)
The Last Ditch says it here, and he got it from here. Al Gore can shit oil: this shall be for Mankind to live and breed and go forth and multiply in the Universe (where we shall find even more, as Titan has oceans of it the size of the Black Sea and almost inevitably more undiscovered since Titan is bigger than the Moon or Mercury.) The Wahabists can return to their roots, and their (respected) culture, which we have so rudely and impolitely disturbed, for them, being inferior to them in all ways possible, as we of course are.
Apologies for that sentence (above) being so long in the first draft. I was thinking and not writing. I have broken it up a bit now.
Attending the third conference of the Property and Freedom Society in Bodrum (Halicarnassus). All speeches on video, ready for upload on my return to England.
My speech is here: http://www.seangabb.co.uk/market.htm
In today’s Torygraph here.
Affordable housing… is this what the fascist pigs who concrete the South or Britain over fully, mean? Don’t think so somehow!
I don’t think I’d like to live in one, but for billions of people the world over, it could be an improvement. I am of course a very fortunate man…for now.
They can now buy PCs….but they still can’t get on-line (it’s all George W Bush’s fault as is natural.)
Libertarian Alliance quote of the day….from our good and right friends at Delaware Libertarian…
Peg, at A Secondhand Conjecture
Every fill of the tank with ethanol uses the same amount of corn a child would eat in a year, and let’s not even talk about the amount of potable water used to grow the corn in the first place.
Sort of makes fossil fuels seem more rational, huh?
Good paper by Joe Peacott, in 2006, now in the Libertarian Alliance archives of free publications.
A number of years ago I wrote a couple of pamphlets
about the politics of AIDS.
At the time there was a (read more at the above link)
There’s another good one here:
This is called Global Warming: Inventing An Apocalypse, 1994, 4pp by Kevin McFarlane.
There is some quite remarkably frank and plangent stuff in here about green-ness and global jet travel (on a tip from Moonbattery) even from the mouth of a “pop” “star’s” wife.
Hat tips from Free Market Fairy Tales, and Kathy Shaidle.
David Bullard was fired from the Times for saying the following:
So David Bullard the ‘controversial’ Sunday Times columnist has been given the boot. Turns out the bad boy of South African writing ruffled a few feathers with his column “Out To Lunch” on Sunday. In his last offering of Out to Lunch, Bullard graphically detailed how Africa had “benefited” from colonialism, an argument that drew criticism from readers and social commentators. “He wrote a racist column on Sunday. I had a conversation with him on Tuesday, I told him that what he wrote was unacceptable,” Sunday Times editor Mondli Makhanya said last night. “It went against the values of this newspaper. “He told me he believed what he had written. I took a decision as editor to discontinue his contract.”
Business Day Friday 11/04/2008
& here is the piece in question
Imagine for a moment what life would be like in South Africa if the evil white man hadn’t come to disturb the rustic idyll of the early black settlers. Ignored by the Portuguese and Dutch, except as a convenient resting point en route to India. Shunned by the British, who had decided that their empire was already large enough and didn’t need to include bits of Africa.
The vast mineral wealth lying undisturbed below the Highveld soil as simple tribesmen graze their cattle blissfully unaware that beneath them lies one of the richest gold seams in the world. But what would they want with gold?
There are no roads because no roads are needed because there are no cars. It’s 2008 and no one has taken the slightest interest in South Africa, apart from a handful of botanists and zoologists who reckon that the country’s flora and fauna rank as one of the largest unspoilt areas in a polluted world. Because they have never been exposed to the sinful ways of the West, the various tribes of South Africa live healthy and peaceful lives, only occasionally indulging in a bit of ethnic cleansing.
Their children don’t watch television because there is no television to watch. Instead they listen to their grandparents telling stories around a fire. They live in single-storey huts arranged to catch most of the day’s sunshine and their animals are kept nearby.
Nobody has any more animals than his family needs and nobody grows more crops than he requires to feed his family and swap for other crops. Ostentation is unknown because what is the point of trying to impress your fellow citizens when they are not impressible?
The dreaded Internet doesn’t exist in South Africa and cellphone companies have laughed off any hope of interesting the inhabitants in talking expensively into a piece of black plastic. There are no unsightly shopping malls selling expensive goods made by Asian slave workers and consequently there are no newspapers or magazines carrying articles comparing the relative merits of ladies’ handbags.
Whisky, the curse of the white man, isn’t known in this undeveloped land and neither are cigars. The locals brew a sort of beer out of vegetables and drink it out of shallow wooden bowls. Five-litre paint cans have yet to arrive in South Africa.
Every so often a child goes missing from the village, eaten either by a hungry lion or a crocodile. The family mourn for a week or so and then have another child. Life is, on the whole, pretty good but there is something vital missing. Being unaware of the temptations of the outside world, nobody knows what it is. Fire has been discovered and the development of the wheel is coming on nicely but the tribal elders are still aware of some essential happiness ingredient they still need to discover. Praying to the ancestors is no help because they are just as clueless.
Then something happens that will change this undisturbed South Africa forever. Huge metal ships land on the coast and big metal flying birds are sent to explore the sparsely populated hinterland. They are full of men from a place called China and they are looking for coal, metal, oil, platinum, farmland, fresh water and cheap labour and lots of it. Suddenly the indigenous population realise what they have been missing all along: someone to blame. At last their prayers have been answered
Published: Sunday Times Apr 07, 2008
For having the nerve to actually say it…
“Columnist David Bullard made a good point, and one
we have made here in the past: compared to the
stone age – or to anything else, Western civilization
is a gift.”
Well, there you go. I finally, finally work out how to upload video to this blasted blog, and Youtube take the video down….my apologies; “Normal Service will be resumed as soon as p-p-p-possible.” In the meantime, it was on Youtube as “biofuels, backlash” or something like that. You guys may be able to locate it again, or find it elsewhere and tell me?
Everybody ought to read Samizdata every day. “That’s how it’s done, that is the real thing” (as an Israeli General said while regarding British squaddies quelling unrest in somewhere-or-other by simply looking smart, well-turned out, polished and armed, very businesslike, and nice to the locals – and no poncy sun-specs!) That red stuff’s not a link by the way – I could not find one in time, I just wanted to say it loud.
Jonathan Pearce does what is needed for dealing with the “what about the poor starving in the streets” obstacle, which lefties – and even those good-hearted people who you could never describe as “left”, just “worried by inherent uncertainty” – will always begin with whe they encounter you, and find you are some disgusting cold-and-bright freemarketeer capitalist toad.
Good for you. Quote of the day coming up:
As history has shown, mutual aid and philanthropic societies typically thrive because of, not in spite of, a powerful pro-freedom, pro-free enterprise culture. The belief that we are entitled to pursue our self-interest (so long as it does not involve aggression, theft or fraud) does not clash with the idea that it is good to be generous and helpful to those who have been dealt a crap hand in the cardgame of life.
As we in the Alternative Bookshop used to say: “Liberty is the mother, and not the daughter, of order.”
How does a person elect a Prime minsister called Kevin?
How does that stand up, presentation-wise, in say Russia or North Korea or ….. Indonesia, where certain people take their opposition to Australia and Australian men and women rather more seriously…..? What were you Okkers thinking, for f***’s sake?
They have to be “John”….. (what you lot dun wivv’ ‘im by the way?)
…….. or ”Margaret” or “Winston” or I would even buy a “Harold” or a “James” but the trouble is these two were socialists, so it won’t do either. “Benjamin” or “Willliam” or “Robert” perhaps? Or “Boris”? Certainly not a “Gordon”, not “Ed”, not “David the milliperson” or a “Nick”, all utterly wrong for the role. Another “David” might just cut it, or else the other “David” (no not me….)
Sorry, I’m talking as if we were but one country, not two….
Here it is in original.
Here’s an exerpt from Moonbattery:
In Australia, Big Brother has begun to equip trash cans with radio frequency identification tags, to determine whether citizens are recycling sufficiently. [This is called "RFID", and I thought it was only us in the UK who were suffereing. Is it the whole Anglosphere then, and if so, then what has gone wrong? Why are our own firms selling this technology in order for it to tyrannise, against our own people? What is in it for them, except money, which I could forgive? Why do they take a wrong moral position just for money? Or do they believe it is right to profit from tyrannisation, and they do not then care? - Ed.]
The bizarre and frightening phenomenon into which environmentalism has deteriorated really does create economic opportunities. Soon we will have businesses that deliver recyclable garbage to your bin in time for the government to pick it up. That way, you won’t get in trouble for not recycling when you go on vacation.
On a tip from Oiao.
I was worried enough by the rubbish-spies here in the UK, but I thought that our Children-across-the-World were still free. Maybe not.
Does Britain Need a Libertarian Party?
Tactical Notes, No. 31
ISSN 0268-2923 ISBN 9781856376112
An occasional publication of the Libertarian Alliance,
Suite 35, 2 Landsdowne Row, Mayfair, London W1J 6HL.
© 2008: Libertarian Alliance; Marek Kleinwald.
Marek Kleinwald is a European political writer and activist.
This essay was entered for the 2007 Chris R. Tame Memorial Prize sponsored by the PROMIS Unit of Primary Care and announced at the Libertarian Alliance/Libertarian International conference held in London on the 27th and 28th October 2007.
The views expressed in this publication are those of its author, and
not necessarily those of the Libertarian Alliance, its Committee,
Advisory Council or subscribers.
FOR LIFE, LIBERTY AND PROPERTY
Libertarianism is in retreat. Or perhaps—given that libertarianism has never been anywhere remotely close to being in the ascendancy in recent decades—it is fairer to say that libertarianism has made no significant advance from its contemporary position in the political bunker. The three major political parties have coalesced around an irritatingly vague—but deeply pernicious—brand of social democracy, ancient liberties have been incinerated in the name of the war on terror, government expenditure and waste continue unchecked and the state’s intrusion into trivial aspects of people’s lives—such as whether they smoke cigarettes in their local pub—has reached maniacal proportions.
All of this has happened with barely a murmur of public resistance, and often with the civilian population’s enthusiastic support.
I suppose the prospects for libertarianism could be worse—indeed they seem to keep getting worse with each passing year—but it would require a truly heroic level of optimism to believe that this long dark night is about to be broken by a bright new dawn. An even stronger dose of the happy pills would be needed to believe that a Libertarian Party would be likely to meet with any major electoral success in the short term.
But despite this bleak outlook, there are three very good reasons for libertarians to seriously consider forming their own political party and start electioneering forthwith. The two serious arguments against such a move merit analysis, but can be rebutted. Finally, there is an important question over timing. Our country may need us, but that does not mean we are obliged to answer that calling. At least not yet.
THREE GOOD REASONS FOR FORMING A LIBERTARIAN PARTY
Libertarian Alliance strategy has not met with success
Despite the noble and often brilliant efforts of the Libertarian Alliance’s leading lights, the strategy of seeking to influence intellectuals and opinion formers1 has not brought the libertarian movement anywhere close to the levers of power. None of the three major political parties have embraced libertarianism since the LA’s formation in 1979, and a good case can be made that the Conservative Party has moved further away from it. The number of libertarian Members of Parliament can be counted on the fingers of one hand—and probably on the fingers of one thumb.2
Of course, supporters of the existing strategy can raise a number of objections to this analysis. They may claim that although the strategy has not propelled libertarians into high office, it was still the optimal course of action to follow. They can point to the enormous amount of media coverage—surely tens of millions of pounds worth in advertising equivalent terms—secured by LA spokespeople on a shoestring budget. They could say—as Mao Tse-Tung did of the French revolution—that it’s still “too early to tell”. Nevertheless, the brutal truth is that if the last three decades of effort constitute relative success, it doesn’t bear thinking about what failure might look like.
In such circumstances, alternative political strategies—including the formation of an electoral vehicle for libertarianism—merit serious consideration. The prima facie case for a Libertarian Party is that engaging in and winning the argument is simply not enough and that libertarianism—or even concessions in a libertarian direction—requires an identifiable and measurable electoral force.
Political radicalism is “in” and there is no other libertarian option on the ballot paper
A detailed analysis of the breadth and depth of libertarian support amongst the wider electorate is beyond the remit of such a short essay.3 It could be relatively large—or fairly tiny. It could be growing, diminishing or remaining static. But we can say with confidence that whatever the size of the libertarian vote, it is homeless.4 Of course, it is no one’s duty to provide libertarian voters with a box they can cross, in good conscience, on a ballot paper. A hard-headed—and potentially expensive—assessment would need to be made by the putative founders of the Libertarian Party about whether there were enough potential crosses to be collected to make the considerable time and effort of marshalling them in one box worthwhile.
I’m neither a pollster nor a statistician, but I believe there are reasons to be cheerful. Minority parties5 representing a plethora of different ideologies and causes have experienced sustained and significant growth in recent years. This appears to be a long-term trend—perhaps fuelled by an increasing disillusionment with “mainstream” politics in general. Nearly half a century ago, in the 1959 General Election, 1% of the electorate6 voted for minor parties. In the 2005 General Election, this had risen to 10.3%, the highest proportion in modern times.7 In 1959, the share of the vote for the Conservative and Labour parties was 93.2%. In 2005, it was just 67.6%.
In other major elections, the rise of minority parties has been even more dramatic and—because of the increasing use of proportional representation—more profitable in terms of winning seats. In the 1994 UK elections for the European Parliament, 11% voted for minority parties. In 1999—the first such elections held under a proportional voting system—this had risen to 23.5%. In the last European elections in 2004, the proportion had increased further still to 34.8%. An interesting aside is that those elections also saw the two largest parties score less than 50% of the nationwide vote between them,8 the first time this has happened since the advent of universal suffrage.
The elections for the Greater London Assembly tell a similar story. In 2004, both the Respect Party and the British National Party came within a whisker of securing elected representation.9 In the 2000 elections, the obscure Christian Peoples Alliance polled 3.3% of the vote—falling just 1.7% short of securing an assembly seat. According to their latest submission to the Electoral Commission, the Christian People’s Alliance is hardly a mass movement—it has less than 400 members.10
Of course, this sort of number crunching doesn’t conclusively prove that a newly founded Libertarian Party would have a good chance of electoral success. Perhaps the various ideologies and interests represented by these relatively successful minor parties have a firmer, more committed base of support than libertarians could presently hope for.
It is also fair to say that even if a Libertarian Party did secure, for sake of argument, a seat in the European Parliament and the Greater London Assembly in 2009, this would not constitute a quantum leap towards control of either the executive or the legislature. Nevertheless, the gains in political credibility, and media impact, could be considerable. The arena of British electoral politics is clearly one in which small, poorly funded groups of determined and motivated individuals are starting to meet with modest forms of success. The mounting evidence is that libertarian absenteeism from this arena shouldn’t be taken lightly.
The electoral cycle can inspire libertarians to become advocates
Brian Micklethwait is one of my favourite libertarian writers. His writing usually makes me smile and always makes me think. I am rarely entertained or educated in the same way, or to the same extent, by any other political commentator. I don’t know Brian at all well—I have met him perhaps half a dozen times—so I’m particularly loath to criticise him personally. But, duty demands it Brian is one of those highly effective libertarians who seem to produce a highly engaging product, but laments—or perhaps even celebrates—his lack of self-discipline. He readily concedes that LA mailings he oversaw often went out late and/or haphazardly, and on his blog11 he casually refers to how he hasn’t got round to writing very much recently.
I think Brian proves my counter-intuitive assertion that libertarians need more collective discipline in order to increase our political influence. In his touching—almost pained—defenestration of the Independent Libertarian Party in 1999,12 Brian rails against the perpetual, externally-enforced, tedious administrative deadlines which require those seeking to garner electoral votes to act in certain (slightly odd) ways at certain (largely arbitrary) times.
But, I may well have been a more effective libertarian crusader over the past ten years if—rather than being kindly asked to commit to paper some of my ill-considered thoughts about Rawls’ veil of ignorance13 at a time of my choosing—I’d been encouraged to assist in a Libertarian electoral effort that was strictly time-limited. I can’t write as well as Brian Micklethwait. I’m not nearly as witty. But I’m pretty good at persuading ordinary folk in the pub or on the doorstep that libertarianism is a pretty good thing and that they should back it. I’m just guessing that there are a lot of libertarians like me. Why haven’t I set up the Libertarian Party myself? Well, I think I can confidently say that my own lack of self-discipline dwarves even Brian’s.
The truth is that the electoral cycle—with its clear deadlines and potential dramas—could act as a real incentive for those who don’t have the skills, knowledge, self-discipline or dedication of the LA’s leading lights. We might well see more libertarians talking face-to-face to more “undecided” people than seems imaginable at present. This is only a potential prize, but is a valuable one.
THE TWO PROBLEMS WITH A BRITISH LIBERTARIAN PARTY
The essential case against a libertarian electoral vehicle is that (a) the skills and talents of libertarian activists will become internally focused on trivial matters such as the need to raise substantial funds to meet the administrative criteria for participating in the electoral process and (b) contentious, obscure, ideological conflicts which have been satisfactorily—even productively—contained within the LA, would rip apart a formal political party.
Neither of these are real barriers to the formation of a Libertarian Party. Firstly, the idea that time and effort spent on tactical questions about how best to communicate the libertarian message to the wider public is necessarily less productive than an open-ended discussion between libertarian objectivists and libertarian utilitarians is misguided to the point of self-indulgence. The question (asked here) is not which activity is more intellectually fulfilling or better fun—but which is more productive. Shoving leaflets through doors, trying to explain your case on the doorstep, filing papers with the Electoral Commission to get a Libertarian onto the ballot paper—these are tedious and often tiresome pursuits. But they may well be what are needed to more successfully prosecute the Libertarian case.
Amongst those libertarians interested in acquiring political power before this century is out, ideological differences will—at some point—have to be resolved, or put aside. There is little reason to believe that continual discussion of our philosophical distinctions will create unity on these matters. One person might change his mind at one seminar. Another may hone their ideas at another conference. Such gatherings perform a genuinely valuable and fulfilling function. But they are not barriers to the formation of a political party. Libertarianism contains many strands—but for electoral and organisational purposes, we are considerably less divided than the bile and hatred that exists amongst our opponents.
We may be needed, but we might not be ready
For all the reasons stated above, I believe the case for creating—and supporting—a new Libertarian Party is strong. But it is not overwhelming. The British Libertarian movement could suffer real damage if there was a serious split along tactical lines.14 Those who favour the formation of a new party need not rush. There are—thankfully—no formal voting mechanisms to press for such a strategy, but therefore also no way to measure exactly “when to go for it”. I suspect that the Brian Micklethwaits might change their mind in the next few years. Britain does need a Libertarian Party. But we should take our time in forming it.
(1) Libertarian Alliance Executive Committee, Purpose and Strategy of the Libertarian Alliance, Tactical Notes No. 1, London, Libertarian Alliance, 1981.
(2) Numerous Conservative MPs are described in as being “closet” libertarians. Richard Shepherd MP seems to be the closest to being a publicly declared libertarian.
(3) Nigel Meek (The Libertarian Party of Great Britain: An Idea Whose Time Has NOT Come, Tactical Notes No. 22, London, Libertarian Alliance, 1998) and Antoine Clarke (The Independent Libertarian Party: An Idea Whose Time Has Come (Being Among Other Things, A Reply to Nigel Meek), Tactical Notes No. 25, London, Libertarian Alliance 1999) explored—and disagreed about—these issues in depth. Clarke relies on IEA research suggesting that 19% of the population might be classified as libertarian. Brian Micklethwait, What Is Wrong With a Libertarian Political Party, Tactical Notes No. 26, London, Libertarian Alliance, 1998.
(4) The United Kingdom Independence Party appears to have pretensions to claiming the libertarian mantle, but at its last conference, it debated the imposition of tariffs and the re-introduction of national service, http://www.ukip.org/ukip/images/stories/pdf/conference%20programme.pdf.
(5) I use the term “minority party” or “minor party” to mean a political party other than Conservative, Labour or Liberal Democrat (or the Lib Dems’ predecessor parties). A fair case can probably be made that the Liberal Democrats are—or have been in the past—a minority party. But I use the term consistently to mean political parties other than these three.
(6) I use this term loosely—all stated percentages are of votes cast, not of all those eligible to vote.
(7) It is difficult to make comparisons with post-war elections prior to 1959, as the National Liberal vote is listed separately but should probably be considered a subset of the Conservative vote.
(8) The Conservatives scored 26.7% and Labour 22.6%.
(9) Respect polled 4.57% on the party list vote and the BNP 4.71%—the “threshold” is 5%.
(10) CPA Statement of Accounts, 31st Dec 2006, http://www.electoralcommission.org.uk/files/dms/ChristianPeoplesAlliance_25539-18978__E__N__S__W__.PDF.
(11) The excellent http://www.brianmicklethwait.com.
(13) John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, Oxford, Clarendon Press, 1972. It’s still as ridiculous now as when I first read it.
(14) The split in the LA in 1982 is still only discussed in hushed tones, if at all.
On 4th April we said this. £100 billion. Now, 5,370 Imperial Tons will, we find, using a little £5-calculating-apparatus, take up about 270 cubic metres, or a cube of about 6.53 metres-a-side, which is 21 feet 5.5-inches-a-side, more or less. This will comfortable fit into an “AFFORDABLE HOUSE”, if you don’t want to be able to enter it, if you employ any available attic-space too, and if you also stack the left-over bullion-bars in the garden shed…..
I don’t think the crappy joists of the first floor, let alone the attic-space, will hold for long.
And if the price moves, what’s a couple of cubic metres of gold between friends, eh? The earth’s crust contains incalculably more gold, and other “strategic metals”, than we can imagine. Cue “unobtainium”.
I don’t know anything about this idea, but it sounds interestingly plausible. Would any bloggeeks who inhabit this place like to give it “peer review”?
The Government are taking advice from a section of the medical profession who (as Prof. Mann’s review has determined) has a 99% failure rate. We had an obesity incidence in, say, 1960 that occurred in ‘NOCTURNAL HUNTER PHENOTYPES’ who inadvertently overate when eating in daylight.
With the diet of 1960, the ‘DIURNAL HUNTER PHENOTYPE’ eating in daylight did NOT overeat and become obese.
NOW there has been a significant (for the HUNTER PHENOTYPE) change in the British diet.
On an exponential curve (I think he’s being a bit hyperbolic here – no pun intended! – Ed.) over the last 40 years or so, the SOURCE of the fat content has switched from FAUNA to FLORA. The metabolism of the HUNTER PHENOTYPE does NOT recognise FLORA fats when swallowed (at any time of day) and therefore nowadays the DIURNAL version (still eating at the correct time – daylight) are inadvertantly overeating FLORA fat and gaining weight increasing the INCIDENCE of obesity.
REVERSE the fat source switch and not only do the DIURNAL stop overeating and therefore gain no more weight, the position could not be better. Any weight gained through inadvertant overeating which is designated by the body as ’surplus to requirements, is AUTONOMICALLY REMOVED via thermogenesis in Brown Adipose Tissue. This is the theoretical explanation of the Atkins weight loss but it is NOT necessary to avoid the carbohydrates.
The HUNTER PHENOTYPE perceive FAUNA fats to ‘taste nicer’ than FLORA fats. Until the medical profession decided to ‘demonise’ animal fat, this taste prefernce was enough to keep the HUNTERS shunning the FLORA fat as it began to arrive and take its place in the British diet.
The ONLY thing that is needed is to tell the food industry that they must use a ‘Hunter friendly logo’ that guarantees the food has a fat content that is entirely from a FAUNA source with NO FLORA fat content. The STORK TASTE TEST of about 40 years ago (6 out of 10 ‘can’t tell Stork from butter) gives a ‘ballpark’ figure of approx. 40% of the British population being HUNTERS. The food industry SHOULD be willing to produce this food when they are informed that the GPs are about to tell 40% of the population to only buy food with this logo.
When the CORRECT advice is to tell people to eat food that they will find ‘TASTES NICER’ than what they are currently eating (once this food becomes available) that is advice THEY WILL GLADLY FOLLOW.
They do not need to take any exercise unless they want to. The ONLY other thing they need to do to let the weight loss occur AUTONOMICALLY is to wean themselves slowly (to avoid withdrawal symptoms) off caffeine.
The DIURNAL HUNTERS, as a generalisation will ignore all this current advice anyway but will continue to get fatter (some dangerously so) due to the omnipresence of the FLORA fats and the ever diminishing FAUNA fats in the current diet.
The full theory is available on serious request.
I learn from a little birdle that flew in here that the “RMT”, whatever that may be (it is “the Restraint of Mobile Transport“?) is trying to not drive Under “Ground Trains” in London and other places which have these strange things. (Great logo, guys! Really keep things moving, don’t you. Dynaimic logo, mobile! “Serving…”, “Working towards…”, Fascism, swastikas, roundels, movement, Wolfe-Olins, corporate-ID, Olympics, etc.)
Here is some stuff about how individuals could help out. I don’t know anything about this lot but if people are prepared to fight nationalised bastards who think they control stuff that people pay for, and think they can with-hold stuff agreed on contract, say via season-tickets or Oyster cards, then this sort of fightback ought to be promoted and publicised.
Subject: Keep London Moving campaign
London has been spared a pointless Underground strike this weekend by the RMT, however we can be sure that the threat of another strike is inevitable.
We have had enough of these incessant threats of strikes and have decided it is time it is time to do something about it.
Today, we are launching our Keep London Moving campaign seeking volunteers to step in to help run the Underground in the event of a future strike. We believe that if we can provide enough volunteers wishing to keep the Tube operating during the next strike, Transport for London and the unions will not be able to ignore us.
We believe that a few thousand volunteers could – in theory – be enough to maintain a service on the Underground if the unions went on strike. We hope that the volunteers will never be needed and hope that extreme left-wing unions will be deterred by the presence of such a citizens’ campaign.
This is an opportunity for Londoners to demonstrate their annoyance with the unions, TfL and appeasing politicians. I hope you personally will join our campaign and encourage your readers to do so. You can sign up at www.keeplondonmoving.org. If you wish to display your support you can use this logo:
It goes without saying that this is an independent campaign, funded by private donations and has no association with TfL, London Underground or any mayoral candidate.
I hope you will join us.
I could not drive a Tube train if you paid me (well, i could but H&SE-Nazis would not let me I am sure) but this is in itself interesting: people are beginning to think about the possibility of not relying on the Stalino-Unionist-Laborg-Salariat to run things in their lives for them. Shades of 1979? I hope so but I don’t think so. Not yet. The British have to sink much, much further down into the noisome cesspool of socialism, before they will realise what a shower it is.
I calculated it at 5,370 Imperial Tons. Any better offers? Northern Rock, eat your heart out.
Seriously, ecforster who commented in the major Gold Post below, is right. We would not need that much – let alone the 60,000-odd-tons theoretically required to back a rough £1-trillion of M1/M2/M3. There is not even 250,000 tons harvested in the history of the world. Read the story of Kadmiel the Jewish moneylender, “The Treasure and the Law”, in Puck of Pook’s Hill. (Better read “Old Men at Pevensey” first, so you know what the Treasure was and whence it came.)
Also, legislation to allow the issue of private Monies might also help. Hayek said it all a while ago. Those which are underwritten by a marketable security in the event of devaluation will rise, and those which are not will fry.
Look, I still can’t paste in bloody videos. Don’t know what to do, had a good one for you here. Any ideas?
The glib perversion of real science (the truth of which is not immune to distortion by useful fools and spin-hucksters in the thrall of the enemy) hurts me.
At least, that’s what I think. I could be wrong. But everything I know, and teach, about radioactivity, in physics, screams contradiction of this stuff on the link.
This above-string came from two directions at once, only today, and hit the port-quarter of the blog, above the waterline, in a heavy following sea.
I think libertarians ought all to pretend publicly to smoke, even if they do not in reality. This would also be a grand gesture in memory of Chris Tame, who thought it was a nasty and disgusting, smelly, antisocial habit, would not allow it in his flat, and battled mercilessly against the health-nazis all his working life, especially while working for FOREST for the rights of smokers. Dear old chap, gold-pieces be upon him in Paradise.
A cigarette “display ban” is being considered. A particular and identifiable droid, known in certain circles by other droids as a “Dawn-Primarolo” , is “concerned” “for the children”.
How could any living being give any job whatsoever, to someone called “Dawn” and “Primarolo” in the same line? It would have to be a wind-up by students on a rag-day. There are no people called that. The droid referred to must therefore be a real droid, and so legally therefore can’t exist as a person or a corporate person. Therefore it can’t discuss stuff known as “draft legislation” or “consultation” “papers”, “white papers”, green papers”. (We were given “green paper” at school in the 1960s when we had failed some task and had to redo it)
This stuff is for Nazis to discuss and not droids, so I don’t know what an early-mark Primdroid is doing being switched on here and running.
Moreover, as this blog’s historian readers will know, smoking was first linked with lung cancer by “scientists” in the Third Reich. Of course, they were quite correct. But that’s not the point: if people tell you to not do something for your own good, you become their FARM ANIMAL.
You are a human being. Either you want to be that animal, or you do not.
Your body is either yours, or theirs (think of the implications, if you are a woman or girl – a much more dangerous thing to be under post-60s-post-western-deconstructionistic-femi-nazism, than was the case in the British Empire and Commonwealth, which functioned according to the
Ten Commandments (sorry, I meant the Gospels! spotted by the comentariat..) and the Mosaic Decalogue, and also, er, Magna Carta and other stuff that is very very scary to socialists and Kingists……)
Will you allow yourself, as a woman, to be raped, because a bureaucrat says she(he) wants to “do” you? if S(he) brings the right forms, duly signed and countersigned, to your house?
Will you forbear from smoking because a bureaucrat says you must not?
YOU have to decide.
I think Rowan Williams has missed the salient point…“What’s our oil doing under their sand?”
Posted by Cliff on March 24, 2008 4:46 PMThis is taken out of the comment thread from the Telegraph, on his “sermon” yesterday. How is it that the religious chappies who claim to be on our side, always shoot US in the foot, and not the enemy?Apologies, I have no blinking clue why it’s formatted itself like that. Not the usual small stuff. It’s not even that important that it needs to be so ultra-typoe’d in 196-point.
Wish i could learn how to blog.
The poor confused old Marxist-leaning Archbishop has apparently delivered a sermon, preaching about how “….. modern “comforts and luxuries” were unsustainable and would one day bring about the collapse of civilisation. He added that Christians must prepare by striving constantly to let go of “selfish, controlling, greedy habits”……”
So here’s a more constructive Christian Message for Easter, which the sad old wierdie-beardie would do well to read out in his (agreeably wonderful) Cathedral sometime.
”Western Greed” is a theoretical construction, reflecting the mindset of those anti-Western philosphers who live in a fictitious neopastoral idyll, which is unobtainable and not desirable for humans to be in.
The “resources” often referred to in such discussions would neither be discovered nor invented if not for the liberal post-Renaissance “Western” attitude to life and the purpose of existence. the purpose of existence is not simply to exist and just die, but to better the lot of humans everywhere. This cannot be done by forcing those whose societies have the power for betterment, to live as if they were locally-chained-subsistence-farmers.
Capitalism is NOT a zero-sum game; the doing of it benefits all, especially those “outside” initially, and makes poverty and deprivation hideous (where it was never hideous before!) because it shows the world what shall be achieved instead. It has been the West, and in especial particular the British Empire and Commonwealth, which has done most to spread worldwide the ability to deploy great amounts of energy and resource, and the benefits of this to humankind – and not any other “civilisation”. We glibly allow ourselves to marvel at the seeming longevity of “ancient” civilisations, but we forget that dozens of generations of humans lived in these, in substantially unchanged primitive conditions, without any improvement whatsoever, from one millenium to the next. Instead of flagellating ourslevs, we should aggressively ask all the other societies what it was that stopped them from developing and improving the lot of their people in any way at all?
A precapitalist society’s “rulers” are to blame for their people being stuck – not ours for showing the whole world how to unstick.
Marxist lefties stuck with a wrong analysis of human relationships, and “liberal” Anglican “Archbishops”, simply have never got this connection.
And those were just the 13 I could stump up with in as many minutes of typing. You ‘orrible lot will want to add more – so, comments please!
Today, we have this splashed all over the Daily Mail. The Dear Leader, Gordon Brown, has “thrown his weight” behind the Daily Mail’s landmark campaign to “banish the bags”, with an “impassioned plea” to retailers.
Here are some extracts;
Gordon Brown gives supermarkets one year to start charging for plastic bags … or else…..
The Prime Minister is lending his voice to the Daily Mail’s campaign against the blight of “plastic poison”.
Supermarkets will be forced to charge their customers for disposable carrier bags under plans for a new green levy drawn up by Gordon Brown. They will be given a year to end their reliance on single-use plastic bags or face a legal requirement to introduce a charge and reveal how much it raises.
Gordon Brown: Plan for action in war on plastic
The Prime Minister will introduce legislation next month to impose a charge of 5p or even more on all giveaway bags next year if they fail to comply.
And today he throws his weight behind the Daily Mail’s landmark “Banish the Bags” campaign with an impassioned plea to retailers.
Writing exclusively for the Mail, he urges them to follow the example of Marks & Spencer by calling time on the wasteful culture of free single-use carrier bags that is fouling the planet.
And he reveals that like millions of families each week, he and his wife Sarah are left with a “binful of plastic bags” from their supermarket delivery to remind them of the scale of the problem.
The Mail campaign, and its shocking image of a majestic giant turtle swathed in deadly plastic, has triggered an unprecedented response from readers clamouring for action to end “plastic pollution” caused by 13billion bags handed out by shops each year.
Film stars, environmental groups, academics and politicians have rallied to the campaign.
Last night, Tesco and Sainsbury’s responded to public pressure by confirming that they are drawing up plans to reduce the amount of plastic bags they give away.
And yesterday, the trade body which represents 33,000 convenience stores said they are ready to accept a plastic bag tax in a bid to reduce the number handed out.
There are suspicions that many major chains have been dragging their feet on the issue.
Threats of force if non-compliance ensues do not, to me, sound like an “impassioned plea”. This is, in semantic terms, what is called ”ruling by decree”.
Furthermore, if Film stars, environmental groups, academics and politicians have all “rallied” to this cause, then, like Margaret Thatcher used to do with each morning’s Guardian newspaper (she read it and decided to do exacty the opposite of what it recommended) we ought to run a mile from these people.
And…..John Band of bantitry has also just ripped the pants off the greenazis here. (Hat Tip from the Devil.)
And not, here are MY thirteen reasons to use and praise the polythene carrier bag:
(1) it uses less than one cc of cheap, burnable hydrocarbons – it is the singel most efficient and cheapest method of bulk carriage on the planet, or ever.
(2) it requires little energy resources to make, per unit bag, and can be burnt afterwards, to release its carbon back to the air where it correctly belongs.
(3) you can clear up child-vomit into it and bin it for no money.
(4) you can carry stuff home on the bus easily in it.
(5) making it gives employment to thousands of people, here and in LDCs.
(6) you can recycle bulk amounts of them, if you really really must, into low-grade plastic goods.
(7) it sets man apart from the “animals”, who have foolishly, and to their eternal mortal peril, not studied chemistry and so not developed means of moving bulk goods; so they go extinct, or starve in the dark when food is scarce (and then greenazis make us run along and jump about and get them out of their mess.)
(8) you can wrap stuff in it for storage for long periods, and unlike paper or “natural” products, it stays waterproof, does not go mouldy, and does not degrade.
(9) you can hurl in-car-rubbish wrapped in one, into a passing litter-bin, without getting out of the car. You have only to wind down the window, park within 5 feet of the bin, and aim well.
(10) you can line the inside of the roof of your thatched caveman’s hut with lots of them (laid like slates, start at the BOTTOM, overlap triple in thirds just like slate (as used to be) row by row, and work UP!) when the greenazis stop you from building proper houses that you can live in. The handles even act like hooks and can be hung over the projecting twig-ends, so you don’t even have to use the nails that they won’t allow you to anyway (too much “carbon”.) Then, when you can’t replace the rotting thatch as the greenazis won’t let you cut any more reeds from the new wetlands where Cambridge used to stand, the water still won’t get inside.
(11) Gordon Brown, the dear leader, and Sarah, the Mother of the People, have decreed that those with whom you would voluntarily do business, may not offer you, of their own volition, a convenient way to carry away your just goods, for nothing. This last alone is good and sufficient reason for at last standing up to the Nazi leftist control-freakish moonbattery of our Dear Leaders and their unconscionably wicked (they KNOW they are doing it, it is deliberate) film-star friends.
(12) you can put ot over your head in bed while shagging the slightly rough bird you picked up in the disco after the students’ uni-meeting; or you can do the “double-bag-job” – she wears one too in case yours falls off.
(13) you can vomit into it on those long bus-journeys the greenazis will make you take everywhere, using your “internal passport” (see MEG HILLIER MP (Lab.) ) after cars are banned. Then, stow it surreptitiously between the broken and parting plastic wall-plates of the bus, just before you queue off.
If the grocers cave in, we are truly lost. Not just this, everything.
This evening I went with my boy (year 9) to discuss “options” for his GCSE years. below is some exerpts of what the school’s batty-chatty moonbattery leaflet says about this grand and formerly rigorous subject, in which we learned where everything was, how to use (proper) maps, how to draft same, and how the surface of the planet got like it did.
….. Geography tackles the big issues ; (1) Environmental responsibility, (2) Our global interdependence, (3) Cultural understanding and tolerance, (4) Commerce, trade and industry (but not in the way you think, people…)
…. Geographers can ;
Make a consice (SIC) report; Handle data; Ask questions and find the answers; make decisions about an issue; analyse material; manage themselves; solve problems; independent thinkers (what does this mean here? sic, again). The results show (source: AGCAS):
* 40.6% “management and administration”
* 24.8% “further training” (inc PCgE/teaching)
* 11.4% “financial sector”
* 10.4% “retail”
* 10% “other professional inc “media” “
I leave you all to decide what part of the Public Sector socialist salariat each of these percentages corresponds to!
In fact very little “classical” Geography is now taught at all. There is a token amount of “map reading”, in which you find the 100-m OS reference for the wind-turbine, and you still have to know what an oxbow lake is. You’ll never visit one (you might fall in, “Health and Safety!”) You may even do a project about “How effective are the new (expensive!) flood defences in York” (but you don’t know where York is, because you were just bussed there) or “How effective are the congestion control measures round Beatrix Potter’s house?”, or “Is Kirkby Stephen a “honeypot destination?” (you don’t know where that is either nor care what its “CBD” is, for you were just bussed there too…I’m sure its august residents would not agree, and I’d support them – it’s very nice – but your lot just think it’s a boring little hole coz’ you are 15-y-o-cool-dudes.)
You also learn about “TNCs” and how they exploit “local labour, often women and children” for “low wages” in “LDCs”, where “social legislation is not strong”, making stuff like “NIKE trainers” (whatever those might be) for sale for “profit” in “MDCs”.
It’s very droll. Here.
Reading the text, positively dripping with honeyed lamentation (by real humans apparently) for this poor dog, and the daily-heard, formulaic regrets by the head-Honcho of Scottish Hydro (or whatever) I at first wondered whether it was an “April Fool” journo-spoof (they have been known!) which had got out too early and was written by a good libertarian journo in the act of satirising the nazi safety lefties.
But no, it is apparently true.
His thoughts are “with the family of the dog”.
NEWS RELEASE FROM THE LIBERTARIAN ALLIANCE
In Association with the Libertarian InternationalRelease Date: Saturday 23rd February 2008
Release Time: Immediate
Dr Sean Gabb on 07956 472 199 or via firstname.lastname@example.org
For other contact and link details, see the foot of this message
Release url: http://www.libertarian.co.uk/news/nr063.htm
“Close Down the DNA Database” Says Libertarian Alliance
The Libertarian Alliance, the radical free market and civil liberties pressure group, today calls on the British Government to close down its DNA database and wipe the records.
The murder convictions of Steve Wright and Mark Dixie within the past few days – both allegedly as a result of DNA evidence – have led to calls for all British adults to be forcibly included in the DNA database.
Libertarian Alliance Director, Sean Gabb, says:
“These calls are not prompted by the recent convictions. The convictions are being made an excuse for rolling out plans that have long existed in the Home Office.
“We do not need a database state to fight crime. That needs real punishments for real crimes and efficient policing. These things alone could take crime back to the levels of the 1950s.
“We are told these two murders were only solved by using DNA matching. This may be true – though the police are notorious liars. Even so, catching two murderers, though important, is not worth a database state.
“Give the Government samples of our DNA and it will have potentially tyrannical powers over us. You may 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?”
The Libertarian Alliance calls on the British Government to reject all proposals to expand the existing DNA database, and to wipe all records so far gathered.
END OF COPY
I can’t think of anything worthwhile to add to the title above, so I won’t.
It says everything about the neo-Stalinist control-freaks with which we are currently plagued here in the home and birthplace of liberalism.
They’ll be categorising foods next, for content of “prohibited” stuff such as “fats” and “salt” – everything that makes it taste of anything at all…..
See our earlier post on this one. Chris says he is pleased, while the opportunity lasts legally, to supply large quantities of any still-available tungsten light bulb. He does all sorts of funnies, pygmies, oddities and the like.
Bugger the darkness-droids, for a start. As one commenter on the past one said “the light bulb is an icon of civilisation.” it is sheer moonbattery to suppose that a free man can live not only freezing, but in the dark. And think of the carbon footprint required for all that Indium/Gallium Nitride for those high-bright LEDs that are the only reasonable alternative in the long term!
Chris Taylor Electrical, Shakespeare Street, Southport, Lancashire, tel 01704-544047
The Green-Nazis have now decreed that not only are we to freeze due to “global” “warming”, but that this must now take place in the dark. Tungsten-filament bulbs available for sale are to have their available power reduced rpogresssively until banning utterly.
However, non-moonbats will be PLEASED TO KNOW that you can still buy large quantities of 200-watt Tungsten bulbs, from Chris Taylor Electrical, of Shakespeare Street, Southport, Lancashire, tel 01704-544047. I don’t know if he can get any more, so buy them while you can, for about £1.49 a shot. The specific bulbs he has right now are made in Slovakia which means they are probably perfectly good for the usual 1,000 hours+ .
Tomorrow I am going to lay in a case of them, for the Long Dark Age ahead.
In today’s TIMES, we have this;
Here is a summary if the link breaks;
Greater powers for official ‘snoopers’
Jill Sherman, Whitehall Editor
More than a dozen Bills going through Parliament extend
the powers of state inspectors to enter
people’s homes, the Government has admitted.
Despite a pledge by Gordon Brown last October
that he would limit powers and introduce a liberty
test, he has extended the right to enter property in
planning, crime, environmental, education and
A parliamentary answer obtained by the
Conservatives shows that nine Bills and one draft Bill contain
new powers of entry, with three others entrenching
“The fact that Gordon Brown is entrenching and
extending powers of state bureaucrats to enter
people’s homes makes a mockery of his so-called
review into powers of entry,” Eric Pickles, the
Shadow Communities Secretary, said.
The Counter-terrorism Bill and the Criminal Justice
and Immigration Bill, for example, allow entrance to
properties to enforce “social disorder” and
anti-terrorist laws. The Education and Skills Bill
allows the State to inspect private schools and the
Climate Change Bill allows officials to enter homes
to enforce black bin charges and to monitor
Mr Pickles, who said that there was a need for
measures to tackle crime and terrorism, added:
”Yet this uncontrolled extension contradicts Gordon
Brown’s empty promises on liberty and is another
worrying sign of the surveillance state.”
A survey of state powers to enter people’s homes
by the Centre for Policy Studies last April highlighted
a significant expansion of entry powers under Labour.
The spokesman from the Home Office said that all the
Bills would be included in the review of powers
of entry. The spokesman added that it was inevitable
that some new powers had to be included in the Bills
to ensure the laws were enforceable.
[This is a typical response from a person stripping you of your
liberties, and a somewhat lazy and casual one at that -Christina Speight] (see her blog)
There comes a point where, if we consider what property rights are, the line dividing them from the “rights” (temporal) delegated by consent to a “state” becomes stepped-over, and not by us but by the “state”.
We have to begin putting the word “state” in parantheses, to indicate our further and further sundering from it and its now avowed objectives. This is despite however in favour we were formally, even slightly, of a minimal “state”, as minimal-statist libertarians (there really are such people!)
We ought to consider what remedies can be taken, against this increasing tide of forced entry and (inevitable) turning-over of our private possessions, including our rubbish (which ought also to be private, for quite sound reasons.) So you green-nazis you can go stuff this new stuff up your jacksis – look it up if you don’t know what a “jacksi” is (and I bet you won’t find it on any wiki either.)
Suppose I wanted to dig a coal mine in my back garden, here? I will have to go quite deep, at least 11,000 feet as the “Wigan-Nine” – that great and renowned seam which drove the Battle of the Atlantic in WW1, and which probably does still yet underlie me here, had its shafts about 20 miles east, and tilts west at a gradient of about 1 in 11. Apart from the problem of disposing of the spoil (a simple matter of property rights and contract) why can’t I do it?
The boundary of property rights between the individual and the “state” stops at the individual’s fence. If we allow “states” to tax fixed property (and there are reasonably sound minimal-statist arguments for allowing a limited measure of this, as opposed to “direct taxation of income” which can be corrupted and get out of hand as is now the case) then in return we must have rights of limitation of allowing Nazi bureauphilia-crazed loons to trample unannounced all over our property. If there is no private sphere (the Englishman’s Castle) then we live in Cuba or North Korea and we might as well go there.
There is a major (2 hours-plus) interview with Chris Tame (don’t worry, we don’t do boring fascist lefty Castro ranting-stuff here about “the people” and “the future”, for we want you all to be interested and involved - ed.) plus sessions with Tim Evans; Brian Micklethwait; prof Roger Scruton; Ralph, Lord Harris; Patrick Minford: Raymond Plant; Dr Robert Lefever; Kevin McFarlane; Ian Anderson; Norman Barry; Phillip Loades; and many others.
Let knowledge drive out your fear, as will always be the case, here and for ever.
We’re working on it.