Tag Archives: fascism

Libertarian Alliance quote of the day…a rave from the grave…blast from the past…now and for ever.

From our own comment thread on here.

David Davis

Stuff was in red, because at the time when the Nissen-Hut-chimps lifted stuff bodily from what people other than they themselves had typed, the supervisor-chimpanzee insisted that it ought to be highlighted. Chimps, while being ever so politically-savvy, are not – by socialit-Nazi-standards very intelligent: and so it was merelydecided that the colour of the text would be altered to show external authorship – a rather simple solution. All the chimps agreed, and gyrated about in return for bananas, so it just sort of, er, happened.

Ian B // 7 April, 2010 at 2:42 am (edit)

Sean, I don’t think voting makes much difference at this stage, but as I said before, better to vote counter-hegemonic (UKIP, LPUK, even BNP) than pro-hegemonic. Cameron’s entirely a creature of the Enemy- indeed his plan for 5000 state activists, funded via the Proggie Network, will just broaden and deepen their power. A Tory government certainly won’t help us a single jot. A Tory lose however may throw that useless bunch of quislings into terminal disarray.

I also don’t think Chris Tame’s worthy plan- of influencing the ideological hegemony- is going to ever work. It simply isn’t in their class interest to listen to us, even if the occasional maverick does. The reality is that the Gramscian methodoloy works for people seeking to expand state power, in their own interests. We need a better political strategy that will work for people trying to abolish the ruling class.

So one way of looking at it is, we have to achieve what the Marxists failed to achieve, which is the mobilisation of the proleteriat- in our case, our proleteriat being everyone outside the government, rich or poor. The big problem is that over the past century the state has expanded into every area of life. It’s not going to be easy.

One thing in particular libertarians have to stop doing is attacking weak people. You mentioned in your book the political error of banging on about welfare recipients, and I entirely agree. The Enemy succeed because they always, always, ally themselves with some perceived weak group (the poor, blacks, gays, etc) so that even when they’re doing something ghastly, it’s “in a good cause”. Attacking poor people etc is equivalent to being seen kicking a cripple in the head. Even when you explain he stole your wallet, people will still think you’re a bastard. No wonder the “right”, or the non-left, or whatnot, have consistently lost with such dunderheaded ignorance of human nature.

We may need to rebrand ourselves. We certainly need to start working under non-libertarian banners. Greenpeace may be a socialist group, but they don’t call themselves that. We need to pump out philosophy and propaganda, we need to make whatever alliances we can, and we need to pull together realistic programmes that show how a society can transfer from state dependence to liberty without millions collapsing into poverty, rather than the libertarian habit of arguing constantly about what the Glorious End State will be after some miraculous transformation. We’re in the position of wanting to free some poor desperate population from a ghastly Victorian institution. But the fact is, they’ve lived there their whole lives. They don’t know how to cook, or get a home, or go to the shops. If we threaten to fling the doors open and turf them out onto the streets, we’ll just get terror, not gratitude.

Five more years of Labour, or five of the Tories, it makes no real difference. Whichever we get, things will be more desperate and ghastly in 2015 than they are now. But, things are better for us than they were five or ten years ago. The message is getting out. The Methodist State is reaching its apotheosis, the political class become more transparently fascist and disconnected with every day.

And, we must always remember that the State we’re in is not the inevitable consequence of government. It has the form it has because of specific politicking by specific groups that stretch back a century and a half or even two- kicked into gear by evangelists from nutty sects (Methodists, Quakers etc here, Yankees in the USA (Rothbard wrote a lot on this without quite following it through)). They are our enemies, and they have to be rooted out of the nests they’ve built. The dumb politicians who do their bidding are barely of consequence. Their grotesque schemes nearly fell to bits in the twentieth century, and it was only the marxists who saved them. Well, the marxists are gone now. Once people have lived a while under the new progressive puritanism, that’ll start collapsing too (it’s cracking in places already) and this time there are no marxists left. This time, it must be us who are waiting to take the opportunity.

We can win this thing.

The Queen cares more about being “Head of a Church” than…

…looking after her Subjects’ sovereignty.

David Davis

This actually upset me as well as making me realise that the Queen must have deliberately given assent to things like ROME, the SEA, Maastricht, Nice and Lisbon.

If a “Senior Adviser” to the Queen has asked for a meeting with the Asse-Hatte “Rowan” Williams”, then it must mean that the Queen asked for it to take place.

The Pope is perfectly entitled to try and “poach” “Anglicans” from England into the Universal Church, if he can. He’s a classic aggressive campaigning battling Christian Pope of the Old School, and good luck to him: he’s also fun to watch, and smiles often, which makes you want to like him as a person.You can imagine him on a destrier, in full armour, wielding his flanged mace (so as not to shed blood while killing) in the middle of the Battle of Hastings.

Equally, by sovereign constitutional precedent and settlement, the Queen as the Anglican Boss is entitled to try and hold on to her “farm animals”. She might also care to think about defending our liberties sometimes. But what she’s clearly doing right now is a harmless game that has no bearing on how we real individuals live our lives, which are our own: this is one of the few real comforts available to us in a darkening and less free world.

But the Queen – rather than get exercised about playing harmless games – ought to have spent most of the last 50 years resisting far far more dangerous and important threats, both to our status and hers: such as the encroachment of the fascist EU upon especially and in particular British Sovereignty – no?

Climate Change, and what people really think

Update:- Good physics-based demolition of the CO2 myth over at Counting Cats….h/t the Devil

David Davis

I was intrigued just now by something Bishop Hill has done, in placing different strands of opinion about AGW and climate change generally, on a sort of Johari Window.

Here it is, but do read his piece.

Watch out: here come the GramscoFabiaNazi eugenicists

David Davis

This is just the beginning, and they won’t stop now.

They’ll be “taking children into Care” next.

London Underground strikers are…..

….not necessarily c***s, or not all of them anyway. Officially as individual workers, they have every right to go on strike, subject to whatever the law says at present, but which right is usually usurped by their “Trade Union(s)” and invoked unilaterally. This is of course where the problem lies.

David Davis

But this, spotted via the Devil, is really funny:-

Personally, if it is illegal for “producers” to “combine”, as I believe it is, then it makes sense for it to be illegal for employees to combine also.

Mr Eugenides on Madeleine Bunting (who she?) is a must-read, now.


David Davis

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

David Davis

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


Ill have it in British Racing Green please

I'll have it in British Racing Green please

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Oh, for f*** ‘ s sake…..

David Davis

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

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

David Davis

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


Sean Gabb: Speech to Conservative Future

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

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

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

Earlier comment from Blogmaster just after main post filed:-

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[A combination of silence and faint applause]

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Terrorism and a Police State: now Dame Stella Rimington speaks out…

….but not here – in Spain.

David Davis

As we say often, “Sean Gabb has often said that….”

Libertarian Alliance Bulletin

Director’s Bulletin
14th February 2009
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

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?”

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:

12th February 2009, BBC Radio, “Was it right for the British Government not to admit Geert Wilders to show his anti-Islam film?”

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:

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:

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
Tel: 07956 472 199


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

Libertarian Alliance home


David Davis

His head has been photoshopped into here. He’s with the President of a nation, so he must be dead: this sort of thing is a great honour, so he must be dead….at last.

Let’s all offer a Prayer to God (who is all-merciful and all-powerful) that the murdering mountebank Castro should rot inthe outer-void outside Hell, along with his friends Ernesto Guevara, Adolf Hitler, Joseph Vissarionovich Dugashvili, Mao ze Tung, and V I Ulianov – oh and Jean Monnet, I almost forgot.

Hell is too full for these buggers already. they’d take up too many “policing resources”.

Remember: you read it here first.

Geert Wilders speaks on Fox News about his film “Fitna”

It is sad, and a bit unfortunate, that there are now fewer and fewer people who either believe, or want to say, that there is such a thing as an absolute scale of goodness or evil.

It is not shameful to believe, and to believe it strongly enough to defend the same, that the values and achievements and liberal civilisation of the Classical liberal West indeed  _are_ better than all other competitors for the honour of showing The World How To Live.

It is distressing that there are not more chaps like this strange-looking Dutchman, who reminds me of one of my maths teachers in the 1960s.


David Davis

Added here.

Cuba and showing the world how to live: a window, or a wind-up?

David Davis

Here it is. I can’t tell. You decide. “Particularcuba”…weird. I spotted it using a thingy called alphainventions, which shows you loads of weird blogs about all sorts of inconsequential stuff which does not matter a monkey’s toss, but some gems also, now and then.

Like mining, really.

Eurovision “song” “contest”: there will be no reason to be forced to watch it at all (at-all-at-all-at-all) now that Sir Terry Wogan is not performing.

David Davis

I have always wondered what the point of the Eurovision “Song” “Contest” was.

In the 1970s and 1980s, there were some fairly good Beat Groups, such as ABBA, and even some soloists, such as Cliff Richard, who sang fairly musical stuff, which was kind of about something or other that people cared about. (I count ABBA as honourary British since they could (a) sing, (b) write music, (c) they were Swedish, kind of,  and (d) they sounded quite good most of the time.) The times were pre-the-rise-of-the-EUSSR-supersoviet, and so people tended to vote for the best song, and never mind whow their awful neighbours were whom they had to be seen to publicly-placate-on-EUSSR_wide-TV, so that they would not get into trouble with the authorities Gestapo afterwards and have their benefits EU handouts withdrawn.

Then, we were dragged more firmly into the EUSSR EU, and we started to stop winning. This in itself didn’t totally matter, as we had Sir Terry Wogan to compère it and be suitably cynical about everybody on there, in his charming way, the good Englishman that he is, so he is, to be sure, to be sure.

Now, there is no point in being on. Not only do we not win, or even come next-to-bottom as opposed to absolutely totally and utterly bottom, but we absolutely tank. This is because nobody feels they have to pretend to like us any more, as we are Maritime-liberals with no land borders and they are Euro-authoritarians with very very long borders with other scratchy neighbours.

But the worst thing culturally speaking, about it, is that nobody even pretends to vote for the best music any more. They vote for whoever is the most powerful neighbour, or the one with most “clout of the day” in the corridors of Eurofascism power.

Furthermore, dear old cynical, funny Sir Terry is going. What’s the point of the thing? Why don’t we just read some books instead, while the blasted thing is on?

I don’t think that Libertarians would object in any way if the European subject-peoples of the EUSSR want to self-flagellate publicly to “music”, on the Wireless Tele Vision once a year, while pretending to sing songs which they think will be “for” “Europe”. But I guess that most liberals, being somewhat puritanical (unlike socialists) about time and resources wasted on pointless acts such as flag-waving, parading and collectively performing – especially acts which are only designed to get the “act-or” into the Public Prints, will think twice about this fascist smugfest in future.

Goobye and good riddance (I hope!) Let’s hope against hope that we get “invited” to “not participate”.

Simon Heffer can see through Barack Obama too…

David Davis

It is good to find that I am not the only one who thinks the Obama Presidency will crumble into the usual dust, to the great unweal of all the rest of us fighting the coming of the New Dark Age.

I am enraged (increasingly common): Libertarian Alliance Remembrance Week post 2

David Davis

I might be accused by purists for appearing to dilute this blog’s objectives, which are arguably to disseminate Libertarian Ideas. In reply, (1) The Libertarian Alliance maintains a vast and growing archive which all of you know about at this address, and (2) I try to link posts to strands of applied libertarian involvement. I do this either because the nazis and other Leftists such as socialists, fascists and similar Gramsco-Marxians are carrying on their usual activity of eroding and destroying free will and the rest of what makes Men human, or because I think Libertarians ought to have moral positions on certain things, such as this……..

This story fairly got my back up just now. Chris Tame, I believe, was the first man to coin the term “safety-Nazis”, and it’s apposite here. The fact that Peter Miller, the RAMC veteran in the piece, who wanted to bear his parade’s Standard for perhaps the last time, is 88 is actually the whole point.

He wants to, coz he must...

He wants to, 'coz he must...

Not content with re-writing actual history to suit their world-view, the above groups of nasty, evil people want to cite excuses for degrading the meaning of symbolic historical acts performed by the still-living.

It makes you wonder if perhaps these people would be happier if all humans were actually dead. Hang on, I think one of them has even said that…..here’s an apparently sane man talking about the desirability of global gigadeaths: I wonder how he and his would select the “deathees” for the one-way, unitary and presumably involuntary task of “saving the planet”? Truly, there are some bastards and arseholes around today: here’s another one….I spoke too soon.

All these people whose names live on those little wooden crosses in the pic below, didn’t think they were fighting for the right of fascist and Gramscian bullies to remove both all risk and all meaning from history and existence – let alone the objective of removing all, er, humans beings:-

The tyranny of ideas.

The tyranny of "ideas".

Libertarian Alliance showcase publication 20: Affirmative action, social terorism and trade Union freedom…

David Davis


Dr Jean-Louis Caccomo, Affirmative Action, Social Terrorism, and Trades Union Freedom: The Failures of the Fallacious Concept Of ‘Social Justice’, 2003

Affirmative Action, Social Terrorism, and Trades Union Freedom: The Failures of the Fallacious Concept Of ‘Social Justice’
Dr Jean-Louis Caccomo

Economic Notes No. 99

ISSN 0267-7164                   ISBN 1 85637 570 6

An occasional publication of the Libertarian Alliance,
Suite 35, 2 Lansdowne Row, Mayfair, London W1J 6HL.

© 2003: Libertarian Alliance; Jean-Louis Caccomo.

Jean-Louis Caccomo is a lecturer in the Département des Sciences Économiques et de Gestion at the University of Perpignan, France. His speciality is economic dynamics and he wrote his thesis on the economic analysis of technological change.

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.


The tendency to confuse the rhetoric of racism and exclusion with the functioning of the market economy is a disturbing sign of deep intellectual regression and mental manipulation. The moral and philosophical foundation of market individualism is not a smug cult of blind egoism, but rather a commitment to judge individuals without regard to attributes such as skin colour, ethnic origin, religion, socio-economic status, or sex. An individualistic society refuses to consider people on the basis of such attributes, insisting that before one is a man or a woman, a peasant or a professor, black or white, blue or white collar, one is an individual.

As long as we hold supreme the value of the individual – a value which can neither be dissolved in a group nor reduced to the sum of specific attributes – a just society can only be founded on a respect for individual choice. Only a State of Rights can guarantee Continue reading

I don’t believe this for a moment: if there was any possibility, we would have known about it.

David Davis

We would have known about it. The thought that Stalin, a fascist murderer, would have combined with us to stop another one, is humorous in the extreme. Specially as he would have forgone the chance ot carve up Poland, which we would not have let him do.

No. Sorry. This is a belated attempt to whitewash Putin, who is not our friend, and cannot ever be, unless he experiences a St-Pauline conversion

If asked, we are against blog regulation.

David Davis

When the time comes to stand up for freedom of speech on the internet, and elsewhere, it will be about as much use I think to say the above headline, as pissing in the wind, or what the possibly apcryphal bishop, asked once what was his opinion of sin, replied: “I’m against it”, he is reputed to have said…..

Today Guido throws down the gauntlet to the State, but sadly his graphic metaphor may be what actually happens.

But I have an idea, triggered by something in one of our earlier posts of today. It ought to be possible to steganograph the real message that a bolgpost carries, inside some other perfectly unexceptionable and state-approved text, such as an article by Polly Toynbee which we happen to be praising to the rooftops that day for its insightful solutions to the problems of the poor. I certainly don’t think we’d want to hide the stuff in kiddie-porn, not after the state thinks that “militant Islamists” or “extremists” (whatever those two guys might be) might be doing the same thing.

Perhaps “extreme right wing” bolgs ought to start carrying more pictures of slebs, racing cars, aeroplanes, common garden plants, valve amplifiers and other such nerdy stuff. Then, when Elizabeth Hurley turns up in a dress or something similar, our intended recipients can marquee-zoom onto the forth safety-pin on the right, copy a 400×200 selection, and de-steg that to get the post.

Fourth pin down, C U in loo...

Fourth pin down, C U in loo...

Oh, and we’ve said something about Eddy Bollocks that’s not quite as fully-positive and supportive of his policies as he would have liked, and it’s stegged in the above image…..

Interesting idea…libel insurance for bloggers?

David Davis

But if the stalinists, whom we blog about, are actually such astonishingly wicked people (they are) who deserve to be exposed and have rotting stuff thrown at their faces while they are in the Pillory, why then might we need to insure ourselves against their (unjustified) retaliation?

Why can’t socialists and other fascist abusers of other human beings just

(a) go home,

(b) shut up (you’ve lost)

(c) quietly contemplate your cow-bladder-gasbag lovinly sewn (slowly) by candle-light by your drugged hippy partneretta, filling (slowly) with chicken-shit-methane (and hydrogen sulphide while your back is turned) on your subsistence-farm in Wales,

(d) keep the hell out of discussions about how the world’s poor are going to better themselves?

Did Christianity sort of “let them in”? Is it our fault? Where did we go wrong? In the midst of all this plenitude of scientific, technological and liberal philosphical richness, how did the bastards get a foothold?

If what we say about them is true, can’t they just square up and duel with us on-line, just as any self-respecting ordinary petty-criminals, thugs and murderers would do so to our faces?

Or do they NEED the “law”, as their case is vulnerable to their own dangerous isolation from reality and their pan-global lack of support?

One of the unseen benefits of the internet is that truth cannot be quickly suppressed. this surely is an advantage – our enemies are for ever going on about “truth” – let them eat it.

Worth noting

David Davis


Libertarians will have to fight, bloody hard, for their first nation, the first one to survive against Big States like ZIMBABWE and RUSSIA and CUBA and the EU, and great and powerful places like Somalia, Algeria, Burma and Sudan, and also many many others which sit high in the “UN”: of which all you can be sure will hate us, and which will want us dead. The thing is, to survive, and to therefore afterwards turn all the others to our bent, which is what matters in the end. Let’s get used to it now.

Another reason why you should choose to smoke.

David Davis

Irate Robot is understandably irritated by the fascist jackbooted hegelian nannying increasingly persecuting smokers, who choose to enjoy a still (limitedly) legal habit. Only tolerated of course because the Soviet government would probably be nust without the tobacco Excise revenue.

The “graphic images” on packs, as proposed, should be cut out and mailed to, or stuck on, the doors of all State offices nearby. This will soon close down places full of “public employees” owing to “workplace stress”, and we will all benefit.

OK so he’s lost it … Well, Ferrari need to be helped, and they are in the EU after all, and we are not, and hey! Hamilton is even black!

David Davis

Brian Mickelthwait, libertarian blogger, talks about cricket the whole time, so I guess that lets me bore you abour Formula-1.

I would have bet £500,000 on this appeal result, if I had had the moolah to hand. I’d have guessed 1000:1 that McClaren win and 1:11-on that Ferrari get what they want (which they did.)

Am I the only person who thinks that the FIA have it in for British teams right now – and – worse – that the “Europeans” (especially dyed-in-the-wool Savoyards like Ferrari) can’t stand being shown up by a “black” driver (who’s British, which makes it even worse!)

Whats that thing on his head?

What's that thing on his head?

I no longer visit (modernised) English Libraries (whatever for?) and therefore I didn’t know about this…

David Davis

Seen by Edward Vallance, at the “British” “Library”. I bet they have “full internet access” (is there any other sort, pray?) and shelves only about 4 feet high. And ramps everywhere.

And lots of high plain walls. Dat ain’t no library. Coulda-been, once, if built before Stalinism came. Not now.

THIS is a Library……

And this……

7th Anniversary of 9/11 … a bad day to bury good news

David Davis

Via Guido, marvellous chap, we have this stunningly droll photo of some sort of armoured fascist HM Treasury tart-limmo, probably made by “Rover” (described as an “automotive manufacturer”) with a couple of Stalinist bollards rammed up its arse. Brilliant.












As it was a funny, and I’ve already ripped the trousers off the anti Large-Hadron-Collider-treehuggers, plus had yet another poke at the Dear Leader, I would have saved it for the next day, but that will be all about sad stuff I am afraid.

The “Dear Leader” is so ronery: humorous video which will get you into hot water with him

David Davis

See our earlier strategic appraisal, of the wrong way to wear a Sam Brown while grinning inanely at the awful cruelty of a clown, and what the meaning of this opaque statement is.

Of course the “Dear Leader” is dead. There is a long tradition of deathness-in-life, in Communist Juntas.

David Davis

I thought later that I would do all you buggers a favour and just get the photo here for you too, to which the article refers……

The Torygraph has this funny, jovial piece today, which, as with all pieces about the suffering and death which must inevitably come to murdering wicked lefty fascist bastards like the “Dear leader” and others I have often named and shamed, filled me with some momentary delight. Then I needed a beer to recover.

I have only one gripe about it:-

By what authority are the inanely-grinning fascist tin-soldier-zombies (on left of picture) wearing “Sam Browns“? I bet you an organic potato that they looted them from dead Yanks in 1952 or something, the bastards.

I was not aware that the temporary death-camp known as North Korea had cavalry regiments, unless we have seriously over-estimated its military capabilities.

The item as worn in this picture, not quite correctly, and at the wrong belt-height for their build, and over service-dress-material which is simply much, much too thin and also the wrong colour (typical socialist failure to do anything right, even run a bath) makes them look even more-irremediably-stupid gits than they actually are in reality. (Neither S-B is correctly positioned over either right shoulder.  It’s a “252″ offence in each case (“conduct prejudicial to good order and military discipline, in that he…”)). They should have done their research before releasing such saddo pix to the world.

And there’s no visible panty-line on any of the faggots. Either their trousers are too loose, or they have forgotten to say goodbye properly to their tarts. Eat your heart out, Mark!

Of course Kim-Jong-Il is dead. Fascist lefty leaders do indeed often die months. or even years, before the end of their “tenure”. Krzhchzev only managed it by days, but Brzezhniev managed weeks, or months. The wicked pig Castro is currently in the lead, and may manage even more than one year. This merely accentuates their superiority over ordinary mortals, since they are still able to “guide and lead” their “adoring people”, after corporeal death…..

…just like gods, in fact.

Poor wicked deluded Yasser Arafat, possibly the worst thing ever to have been inflicted on a people who don’t exist, except for socialist-world-ordering-purposes, but who are real individuals nevertheless, and have to come to sensible lliberal agreements about how to live somewhere, nearly made it into immortal-government. But the BBC spent so much money on British-broadcasting-women crying all over the film, that we shall never know. he probably did really die a few hours before the silly grassing-up-media said he did. the crying women would have done better to pretend he was alive and to keep quiet.

Learn something from your more serious masters, like Stalin and Castro, you wet western wimpish Fabians. You might do better against us.

Perhaps the fascist left system is superior in one way, for “Western” “leaders” have ot yet mastered this technique of government-after-death….but I bet you another organic potato that they are working on it.

DEFRA garden-terror-police now planned

David Davis

Via Obnoxio the Clown, we may now face being ordered to grow or not grow certain stuff.

I wonder if RUNNER BEANS qualify as fast-growing, and will be banned?

People sound off about fascist lefties “talking crap” and things like “political correctness gone mad”, and “the nanny state”. But we must never never think of these people as merely unhinged and detached from reality, for they are not. They are subduing human beings according to a very carefully worked out plan, wicked in its monumental intricacy.

They are intellectuals, after all, and have had therefore all the time in the world, not ever having had to do real work.

Georgia can fall, and then the rest. A moral case for going to war against Russia

David Davis

What appears below is the substance of a riposte that I have just placed on an anti-EU newsgroups called “eurorealist”. This was in response to a slightly shallowly-thought-out question about what quarrel we have with somethng called the “Russian People”. The point I try, inexpertly, to make, is that there is no such quarrel: the problem lies within the institutionalised Russian State – and there is no solution except revolution…what I think we in the Anglosphere call euphemistically, “Regime Change”. Here goes…

First. we should make the DISTINCTION between the People of (poor, oppressed) Russia, and its GOVERNMENT. Russia, wretched, ground-down country, has no tradition of secular liberal political democracy. None. None whatever – not even folk-memory of it.

The Russian Administration (and I said this in the Torygraph comments on the article (front page) yesterday) behaves no differently from its medieval, Czarist and Communist forebears. Why ought it to? What advantage is there for it? The Russian people are there for it as a “human resource”, often turned by it into “human remains”, but as Stalin said, “one death does not matter very much”. As the unspeakable pig Yezhov said in 1938, “if we shoot 1,000 people too many in any monthly plan, it’s no big deal”. (I’m not making this up, by the way.)

WE are fighting Russia, because we want a world in which such tyrannical, pre-capitalist/barbarian/sub-human attitudes to other people and their wishes, have no place. Russia’s present governmental structures are savage and pre-capitalist/barbarian, and they have NO place in the world that we and Ahmet want.

Russia’s regime will HAVE TO GO. Just that, very simple. The Russian Foreign Monster said in today’s torygraph that “Regime Change is a Western concept that we do not use…..” I bet you mean that, mate, but not in the way you thought.

If we do not do, in the West, at least some warlike things, over Georgia, the following things will happen:- (i don’t care about the oil or gas anyway – we should not buy oil from tyrants, nor give them money for theyr services. we invented nuclear power, let’s just Do The Right Thing and USE IT.)

(1) Georgia will disappear, rent apart piece by piece, just like Czechoslovakia in 1938. This incident is a virtual re-run of the Hitler-Henlein-Sudetenland script.

(2) Putin will then go after the other Caucasian republics which are “faraway counteis of which we know little”. these have less firepower than georgia could even muster.

(3) Putin will then dismember Ukraine by hoovering up the Trans-Dniester.

Of course we will do nothing – what do you think we now are? We are the modern West, trained by home-grown, wicked and ingrate internal Gramsco-Marxians to take weak relativist positions on everything that reflects well on our past absolute moral greatness and rightness: these days, we now must glorify and salute the betrayal of our friends, by our masters who arrived while we slept, and betrayal of those who see right and would emulate us, but for now need our strong arms against evil ones who would expunge them.

It always has been, is now, and will be, the job and duty of Anglosphere nations to go to war not for their own interests, but for simple principles of right and wrong. For example, Britain had no possible or conceivable foreign policy interest in defendingeither of the following:-

(1) Belgium’s neutrality (we only undertook to because we signed a 19th century treaty that said we would – the Imperial General Staff excuse that we could not allow the French Coast to fall into German hands is more plausible, I admit)

(2) Poland’s territorial integrity in 1939. Again, we had merely given our word (is not that something?) that we would do so. I am publicly on record, seven times in 19 years, as saying that we could no more defend Poland by force that land soldiers on mars, but that’s not the point. The point is to Do The Right Thing, as described by example in the Gospels (specific and empirical) and positively enjoined (as generalities for modelling) in the Mosaic decalogue.

Of course we will blink first if it comes to a standoff with Russia. Don’t worry, You can sleep easy in your beds for a few….months?….years? What difference does it make? So yes it WILL get worse, because we did not react correctly (for the defence of Good against the machinations of the Wicked) before it was too late. It was too late before this South ossetian nonsense.

Why do you all think Bismarck sprayed Imperial German passports all over Schleswig-Holstein, before marching in and chopping it off Denmark? Look at what the Russian State (not the Russian people!) did all over South Ossetia.

It’s too late to do anything but “declare solidarity with Georgia”. That’s honourable, but insufficent to save it. By not preparing for war, you will all now get it. not now, but when it’s almost too late and you’ll have to hope to survive by the skin of your teeth.

Much, much more should have been done, by the West, INSIDE RUSSIA, in 1991. That was the time, and we could do no wrong in the eyes of the world. The moment was lost, and we let all the vile fascist left spiders and their friends crawl surreptitiously out of the woodwork, and slime back into almost their original positions.

Yep, the moment was lost. We were so drunk with rejoicing over the Berlin Wall and Gorbachev and Yeltsin, that we forgot to look under the flagstones in the cellar, and shoot anything that moved, before moving in with the bulldozers.

Look, WE KNOW how to build libral pluralist civilisations with Free Institutions. Having taken 15 centuries to learn it the hard way, we ought now to be able to do it the easy way. What we propound accords with Human Nature: socialism does not – it is the specific and major difference, which is why its experiments always and invariably fail bloodily, with colateral damage. WE SHOULD have “done” Russia while we could do it for no cost in either blood or treasure…..but we didn’t, and so you will all pay now.

Well, there you are. Who’s next after Abkhazia, Armenia, Ukraine….The Baltinc States? Or…Poland again, anyone?




In a message dated 11/08/2008 13:26:42 GMT Daylight Time, ukfizwit@yahoo.co.uk writes:


[eurorealist] Re: [Fwd: WAR ALERT!!!]

Date:11/08/2008 13:26:42 GMT Daylight Time




Sent from the Internet




Given that they aren’t commies any more, why are we still fighting Russia?

Of course this sums up the whole problem.

When Russia abandoned the Warsaw Pact, it was on the understanding that

NATO would not move in. Why should it? It had always claimed that

Communism was the threat; not the Russian people.

What happened next? The German Wall came down as requested by the US.

Then NATO moved into East Germany. “Well why not”? “It’s all one

country now” they said. After that it was Poland et al.

No bloody wonder Russia’s worried.


— In eurorealist@yahoogroups.com, “vtam370″ <vtam370@…> wrote:


> Even if Georgia WERE a Nato member, I am sure their

> European allies would find many excuses for not going

> to its rescue. Remember what happened in the Falklands

> war?


> The Russians appear to think that the Georgians were

> egged by America and Turkey because those two countries

> had been training Georgia’s army and supplying weapons.

> They issued some paranoic-sounding warnings in the past

> few days. They don’t want either Georgia or Ukraine to

> be considered for Nato membership. Frankly, I have

> greater respect for Russia than our former allies in

> Europe. Given that they aren’t commies any more, why

are we still fighting Russia?


Good stuff


Meanwhile, the fascist slobberpigs at the United Nations (global-warmists, foul murderers, child-abusers, thieves and shysters) have nothing better to do than to ask Britain to become a Republic.

David Davis (the other one)

I mean to say. How low can you get? (Not that republics are low, just the present lot of UN villains and other diabolical subhumans, a newly-hatched-clutch of which are telling us here how to order our affairs.)


My late mother, who was a Lebanese “French Presbyterian” (I have to say I never discovered what one of those might believe in detail, as she was only forthcoming about how “GAWD” “will smite you” for not wanting to go to church (every Sunday) and anyway I’m an “English Catholic” so there’s no point in discussion) used to trumpet regularly to me over the dinner-table, when I was a young boy:- “WHEN YOU ARE A MAN, YOU WILL WORK FOR THE UNITED NATIONS!!! YOU WILL HAVE A TAX-FREE-SALARY, AND YOU CUNNUT (sic) BE SUCKED!!! ( sic)

it can’t but remind me of the famous Jewish-Momma-Joke… Old momma on beach sees son in water in trouble…”HELP HELP!!!!   MY SON THE LAWYER IS DROWNING!!!!” 

(I think she thought she meant that I could not be fired. Well, perhaps I ought to have listened. I would not be having to write these things about this evil organisation on this blog, if I’d taken her advice.)

Who knows? I could even have been the chappie ordering the UK to dissolve its Monarchy and constitution, and form a Republic!

VOTE OR EAT … Ahhhhhhhhhh….. BISTO !!!! … That’s the way to do it!

David Davis

Vote or eat. Zimbabwe (that is to say, Southern Rhodesia.)

Stalinist bastard, that Myooogaaayb person.,,…. He won’t be allowed into hell, you know.

Know why?  He’s, er, too bad.

Lucifer (MORGOTH) won’t let him in, he’s er, rather bad.

He’ll be handed a brazier, a fag-lighter, and some paraffin, in a thingy, and he’ll be, er, set adrift, into the outer Void. He’ll have to join Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, Castro (who is dead too) Bin Laden (who will continue to remain dead this year too as well and also next year) the Sendery-Luminosy-man-whose-name-I-can’t-remember-coz-he’s-a-saddo-who-chopped-off-living-people’s-faces-while-alive, Kim-Il-Sung, and the others.

How absolutely stupid and myopic of us all here, not to notice, about the connection between voting and eating, if there is a “government”.

He who does not work, neither shall he eat. For “work”, read “agreement”. Marxist Gramsco-Eagletonians, all. Again. As ever.

Tony, my dear chap, you can ask me again about these sub-human droids, and about a diagnostic test to distinguish what kind of machine they appear to be when going about in the world, and how to characterise this machine so as to eliminate it, but you yourself ought to know what I point to.

Libertarian Alliance Showcase Publication No 8. “Not 20 million, not Russians, not war dead.” Norman Davies.

David Davis

Here’s Prof. Norman Davies talking about soviet socialist lies. Lies is normal for these Soviet-governmental-type-people, such as UK leftist “Councillors”, and other bureauNazis, for that’s what all socialists do. There is no other reason for their existence which can be explained logically.

It’s therefore their job and their reason for existing – to Show Humanity What Evil Is, In Living Form, In Our World, in the vain hope that the rest of us will learn by example not to follow, and thus to turn away from them and to turn towards capitalism and thus therefore towards morality and good. I think we are losing at the moment.

We MUST MUST MUST get back our WORDS, from the LYNCHERS. Or we will have to kill them (the lynchers.)

I still can’t get myself to believe that the 2008 Russian Government (under the pig Putin as it still is, despite the end of his term of office) is our friend. Naturally, I did NOT speak for the “people”, who, being human beings as opposed to Dugashvili-droids, might wish to be (our friends, that is.)


Oh and by the way, Norman Davies also wrote “God’s Playground”, a seminal book about Poland and its history.


New Libertarian Novel to be launched at 2008 Hay-on-Wye book festival, England, 2008: very much, much more important than the Olympics which are a smugfest for saddo fascist athletes who have become thick and can’t comprehend the …

… reality of fascism.

David Davis


This was supposed to be about a new Libertarian Novel. There have also been others, and the one linked is now a best-seller. But as I thought this sort of thing is so very much more relevant to the Human condition than the terribly-damaging-Nazi smugfest-of-sport coming up in Peking, I therefore decided that I’d get my pocket-knife out, to enjoy a good little twist-dig into the upper-chest of the ” wireless  tele  vision  olymp  ics ”  while I am about it, as they are so so important. The 1936 ones come to mind too.

(Er, don’t worry ‘coz-  it’s only a short blade now, about 70 years old, they didn’t take it off me in the passport (and identity) office as it was still “legal”, they only confiscated it temporarily … Two functioning inches left of the Steel, if that. I do try to sharpen it on my oilstone from time to time, but it’s been neglected for a few weeks and has been used for medium gardening in the meantime, so it is a bit blunt.)

God only knows what we will do after we have to pay for the London smugfest in , is it, 2012? Where the f*** will the money come from for all the dictocrats and their Mercs transporting Jerks? I do hope that Mayor Boris cancels this pan-galactic-disaster in time, but as Brian Micklethwait said a while ago, that is too much to hope for.

Anyway …

Hay-on-Wye is a marvellously fun town in the Anglo-Welsh borderlands, or what Tolkien would call “The Debatable Lands”. Go there soon, please do, it’s nice! But not on Sunday mornings, for Wales is then “closed” – as I find rather a lot. Hay has a world-famous book festival, and is said to have more bookshops per head of population than any other place in the world. About two per person, I would guess. Richard Booth is the King of Hay.

OK OK OK, then, here’s the stuff about the novel!



Nicholas Dykes’s new (and first) novel ~Old Nick’s Guide to Happiness~ is
due for publication on July 15.  However, Nicholas is taking advantage of
the nearby Hay Festival to hold a trial launch at Richard Booth’s famous
bookshop in Lion Street on Saturday May 24, 2008.

If any Libertarians or Objectivists happen to be attending the Festival, or
are located anywhere nearby, Nicholas would be delighted to see them.  He
will be there to sign copies, and there will also be drinks and nibbles on
offer between 12.30 and 6.30pm.  There will also be a special price for the
day of £10.00 (RRP £12.95).

If you are able to attend, please do introduce yourself to Nicholas.

~Old Nick’s Guide to Happiness~ presents an Objectivism-based, radical
libertarianism set in a mystery-cum-adventure novel.  It tells the story of
Jacques, an eighteen-year-old Anglo-French student, who goes on a hiking
holiday to the Highlands of Scotland while waiting to take up an English
Literature scholarship at Oxford University.  He becomes lost in fog in the
most remote part of the north-west coast and nearly kills himself climbing
down a cliff.  He is rescued by a mysterious couple, Nikolai and Catriona,
who live hidden away in an old mine, secretly, but very comfortably.
Learning that Jacques aspires to be a writer, Nikolai persuades him to take
a year off to write down Nikolai’s philosophy, a literary task Nikolai has
found himself unable to accomplish.  The philosophy – covering the axioms,
ethics and political principles required to achieve a completely free market
in a completely free society – is presented clearly and non-technically in a
series of conversations between Nikolai and Jacques, during which Jacques
often puts up a spirited defense of opposing points of view.  The story,
involving mystery, occasional high adventure, and Jacques falling in love
with the couple’s niece, Eila, unfolds alongside the philosophy.  The
narrative concludes with a dramatic escape to America when Nikolai and
Catriona’s secret life comes suddenly under threat.

Nicholas has been encouraged by some very good reactions from reviewers in
the United States, which country he believes could be a major market for the
book.  One reviewer, a Professor of Economics from Texas named Larry
Sechrest, wrote:  “This is a very good book indeed.  A major accomplishment
… The plot and characters are engrossing.  These are real people, not
cardboard cutouts, not flawless robots, but people.  There is adventure and
danger as well as warm affection and gentle eroticism.. The
manuscript abounds with lively descriptions that transport the reader to the
“The philosophical dialogues are a most entertaining way to present such
radical ideas. very persuasive.  Positively splendid commentary on both Marx
and Popper, absolutely on target!”

Another reviewer, Peter Saint-Andre, a literary editor from Colorado, wrote:
“Bravo!  Quite delightful.  ~Old Nick’s Guide to Happiness~ is an engaging
adventure on many levels:  it captures the mind most of all, but weaves in
suspense, diverse characters and humor as well.  I enjoyed it immensely.”

http://www.nicedoggie.net … good dog!

David Davis

Yup. Nice Gorebone…here!

The point is, anybody who says he/she is “green”, is a murderer. Of humans. Forget “animals” and plants; they are for us. I am so, so sorry, but someone has to say it first. You are thus on a level with Che Guevara (and your T-shirt is even less cool now than when I lambasted you before, no, I will NOT let you into my Club) Mao, Stalin, Pol Pot, Castro, Chavez, Ceaucescu and Hitler, to name but some socialists.


LONDON Olympics … in a Libertarian world, olympics might still even exist, but I hope not as fascist Smugfests

David Davis

It was both amusing and faintly embarrassing to view, in this morning’s Public Prints, the scenes of Monty-Pythonesque farce in London yesterday. And why was a “Blue Peter” “presenter” of Children’s TV “programmes” involved at all? She should be making telephones out of Squezy bottles, string and sellotape, not prancing about in Downing Street trying to mix it with the Police. 

One is left with some impressions:

(1) China’s “human rights” “record” is not quite as shiny as ours or that of the USA or the Old White Commonwealth, whether one considers Tibet or even ordinary Chinese people. The non-British World, with very few exceptions, is not even out of the starting gates when it comes to showing others how to respect your fellow-man and his humanity (and they bloody know it, and they are “Avvin’-a-Luff” (at us), which makes their abject pre-animal barbarism worse.)

(2) Judging from the visible banners and placards, the protesters are mostly unfortunately the usual rentacrowd lefties. Some even probably think Mao had the right idea but followed the wrong brand of marxo-trotkism….

As to the Olympics themselves, I still hope to see the day before 2012 when we either f*** up completely in East London, fail to get the Mosque Stadia built in time or working properly, thus making sure we are never asked to pitch again; or else the “Games” are taken away from us beforehand, and handed to some other tyranny country more devoutly socialist than England, before poor Londoners have to fork out even more taxation to pay for them.

Perhaps we cyberbloggeeks ought to set up an alternative one, more intellectual, as I estimate that most of us are too “alternatively-physically-abled” to even begin to compete in real athletic ones.

QUOTE OF THE DAY…. We don’t really do quotes of the day here as we have no staff, but this one by JOHN HOWARD (ex PM of Australia) is quite OK

As the two night-geeks who read this blog both know, we have not any actual bloggers here but a staff composed entirely of Ship’s Senior-Apprentice-Blogging-Chimpanzee-Typists. It will be remembered that, a few nights ago, their off-duty Mess was wrecked by an incoming-comment on the port side, not spotted in the (currently out-of-order) Palantir, and flinging (really quite modern) Remington Machine-Type Writers,  also (less modern) bananas everywhere, while the poor buggers slept in their hammocks.     

Minimal-statists and other Libertarians will of course have points-of-view about the legitimacy of a “government”, and its right (or otherwise) to state what the prevailing culture, religion and civilisation is in a territory. These strictures would also, I think, be deemed to apply to state-appointed “incantors” (perhaps I mean what used ot be called “precentors” or praecantors) and priests – such as the staggeringly comical caricature of the Devil Himself, Rowan Williams, currently impersonating, and described as, an “Archbishop of Canterbury”. I don’t know if the word “incantor” yet exists in the English Language but perhaps someone will wiki it.

However, if there is general tolerance – for now – of a state and its administration, and the vast majority of its taxees and farm-animals think they are – or ought - to be living in agreement with some defined set of memes, set substantially by themselves for historical reasons and therefore agreed to (willingly or no) by their bureaucrats, with whom they are stuck in a temporal sense, then that is what ought to be accepted by “other” “cultures”. This ought to be the case, be they ever so aggressive and malevolent towards the host one. Their supposed anger is irrelevant and is of course their problem, not the host’s.

This from Christina Speight: 

The United Kingdom Needs A Leader Like This!  He obviously doesn’t agree with the Archbishop of Canterbury ……..


Ex-Prime Minister John Howard – Australia

“Muslims who want to live under Islamic Sharia law were told to get out of Australia, as the government targeted radicals in a bid to head off potential terror attacks.

Separately, Howard angered some Australian Muslims —– by saying he supported spy agencies monitoring the nation’s mosques. Quote: ‘IMMIGRANTS, NOT AUSTRALIANS, MUST ADAPT. Take It Or Leave It. I am tired of this nation worrying about whether we are offending some individual or their culture.. Since the terrorist attacks on Bali , we have experienced a surge in patriotism by the majority of Australians.’  

‘This culture has been developed over two centuries of struggles, trials and victories by millions of men and women who have sought freedom’

‘We speak mainly ENGLISH, not Spanish, Lebanese, Arabic, Chinese, Japanese, Russian, or any other language. Therefore, if you wish to become part of our society . Learn the language!’

‘Most Australians believe in God. This is not some Christian, right wing, political push, but a fact, because Christian men and women, on Christian principles, founded this nation, and this is clearly documented. It is certainly appropriate to display it on the walls of our schools. If God offends you, then I suggest you consider another part of the world as your new home, because God is part of our culture.’  We will accept your beliefs, and will not question why. All we ask is that you accept ours, and live in harmony and peaceful enjoyment with us.’

‘This is OUR COUNTRY, OUR LAND, and OUR LIFESTYLE, and we will allow you every opportunity to enjoy all this. But once you are done complaining, whining, and griping about Our Flag, Our Pledge, Our Christian beliefs, or Our Way of Life, I highly encourage you take advantage of one other great Australian freedom,


‘If you aren’t happy here then LEAVE. We didn’t force you to come here. You asked to be here. So accept the country YOU accepted’.

A thousand people a day being phone-tapped in Britain. (I presume they stay on the “can-do” list after the first time?)

So why don’t we see any job ads in the Guardian, asking for phone-tappers? The (not any) people who (admit to) doing it must be very busy; the state must be needing a few more by now. Do you know any mates who you drink with, who say in the bar……”Pint for me mate, yeah, mate, busy-busy-busy! Cooooooooooooooor….. (cough)…. Had to tap 437 people’s phones today mate, I’m knackered….Yeah, boring! All them right wing bloggers….talk talk talk, all day, all that politicky stuff mate, and then there was that scribbler Memberofparlymont fella, you know, Guido, yeah him in Brussels that fella, he wot grassed up that Peter Hain fella….yeah, had to do him too coz’ it’s orderz yeah…….”

The Daily Telegraph had this leading this morning. 

Shocked, I then took a breath and got out my trusty slide rule and did some sums. Here is a powerpoint slide of the UK’s population breakdown, from something called the “Economic and Social Research Council” (Golly! That sounds like some awfully grand outfit! I wonder what it’s for?) For those who don’t have powerpoint, there are about 48 million adults available to phone-tap, since I don’t think even this administration is routinely tapping the phones of under-16s (but you never know!)

Assuming 1,000 orders a day, issued by about 600 “agencies” or “bodies” which allow themselves to do it (that’s heading for two a day for every, say, local council even) in 2006, there will be more by now. We are looking at about 400,000 people a year, or just under 1 in every 100 adults, targetted every year.

This is about eight times as many people as are in prison for anything at all.

So who might be a target for the state’s interest in his/her private communications? The article tells us that “Councils” are interested in “people suspected of fly-tipping”, for example. If this is the case, then it’s clearly nothing to do with “fighting terrorism”, for which, if it was just that, I could feel some slight sympathy.

But I just can’t get my head round there being 1% of the UK’s adults -and  a different 1% every year since once the state starts to tap you then I can’t see why it would stop - suspected of involvement, even most peripherally, with terrorism. If that was so, then, conservatively, 2 MILLION UK adults have become terrorist suspects after 9/11 alone.

They can’t be tapping street-sweepers, OAPs, shop-girls, socialist buskers and street-musicians, librarians, Tesco shelf-fillers, MacDonalds counter-staff, primary-school-teachers (if female which is most of them), hairdressers, gay-lesbian-transgendered-outreach workers, or Ethnic “community leaders”. That’s most adults accounted for. So who’s in the frame? 

Why do the buggers need to do this stuff?

Are they………

(1) prurient, pus-exuding, sad individuals who have a personality problem? Unlikely, although this profession will attract the few that have the personal misfortune to be this way. Rather like recruiting guards and bullying-staff, at the socialist extermination camps of Europe and Russia, from 1917 to 1990. I just don’t think we have enough of those, although I could be wrong in this century in Britain.

(2) just “Bureau Crats”? That is to say, intellectual socialist/utopians, driven autistico-pathologically by the NEED to MAKE SOCIETY BETTER? This is as as hypothsised by one of our brothers and sisters at Samizdata a little time ago: do they just feel compelled to collect information of whatever sort available, about everyone, in case it “may be useful someday”…?

(3) just tightening up on tax-collection? (They are bust after all…)

(4) finding out what everyone is up to so they can (a) either tell them to stop it coz’ they like the orgasm that gives them, or (b) blackmail them by threatening to tell their wife about what they’ve been caught doing? I guess this puts them in category (1) after all.

(5) just ordinary reporters for the “News of the World”, merely trawling for “footballers’ sex romps”? (Why is it that when a footballer is “caught” having “a night of passionate sex” with a “blonde hairdresser” who is (not) his present girlfriend, the papers always refer to it as a “romp“?)

(6) checking on whether, when we ring from Tesco for further instructions about what to get, we are NOT buying unapproved foods such as chips, sugar, burgers, salt, British meat of whatever kind, airfreighted blueberries from Peru, or whatever? And to make sure that we have cycled there?

Whatever the reason, I can’t think of a nation alive today where there might be as high a level of phone surveillance as this one – except perhaps Cuba or north Korea, where the only people who will be allowed phones are the bureaucrats themselves, and there are few enough that they can and MUST be watched. For the safety of the Dear Leaders.

“COMMUNIST WORLD WITHOUT TESCO”. SCARY IDEA. Yeah, I thought you’d wonder about that one.

David Davis 

This missile (see above) collided harmlessly with the armour-belt abutting the port-side of the blog yesterday, in a heavy following sea. It was swiftly and quietly made safe by a bolg-operative (able, second class) who climbed out to the stats page and retrieved it for examination, under enemy fire. He will be mentioned in dispatches (from a dying country.)  (Check this one out.)

What is it, exactly, about TESCO, that upsets and riles lefties? I’d love to hear one of them actually tell us something about this matter. After all, Wal-Mart (American) and Carrefour (French, I think?) are both bigger in global sales value terms. I do not find on the internet, unless I have been purblind and stupid, Walmart (say) coming in for the execration that Tesco gets, daily, in the British media. If one is a fascist-lefty-food-denier-to-poor-people all over the planet, such as certain British male tele-chefs make themselves out to be, then surely one ought to attack the biggest target first?

The identified poor-people may be schoolchildren in Scunthorpe who just want their native foods, or sub-Saharan sand-scrapers (who’d like any food at all) suffering from a surfeit of Bob Geldof, various other “pop singers”, and their friends the Jerks-in-Mercs (they may be wearing sunspecs and medals, so approach the “jerks” with caution.)

Is “cheap food” a problem – as the Prince of Wales is on record for describing this as an “obsession”? (It’s all right for him as he runs a large commercial concern very well and properly(and there’s nothing wrong in that) in which many of the operatives are his colleagues and friends, and who will not let him and his starve – nothing wrong in that either….but he is insulated, sort of, from the consequences of his own statements.)

If the Market can produce cheap food, then why ought it to be made more expensive by decree? Perhaps I will soon have to write that people who want to prohibit, or ban, or otherwise inconvenience supermarkets, are actually mass-murderers (not only murderers of Scunthorpe kids who want to eat chips, bacon-barms and butties for lunch, but also are murderers of Africans.)

Perhaps I will anyway, to see what happens.

AND…………..your Che Guevara T-shirt is EVEN LESS COOL than I said it was yesterday, so take it off and burn it, you immature ass.

Wind Turbines and Wickedness. Is the money that’s going to be wasted the result of incompetence? Or instead – is it a strategy of truly deliberate evil?

 The figures involved and outlined below are so appalling, even by the wasteful standards of Cubanized socialist provincial administrations of the EU like this one in Westminster,  that they have to be repeated here today.

Apart from the opportunity-cost of NOT building updated Nuclear capacity as soon as possible, one has to consider a world in which the British are fighting at least two wars at once, probably for the foreseeable future: the very public and probably deliberate underfunding of our defence capability, not to mention letting the poor Tommies themselves go without essential weaponry, vehicles and protection is despicable, is probably an effect of all this lefty “windery”, and in my humble opinion is deliberate since ageing 1960s lefty hippy longhaired druggie student activists probably don’t like soldiers much, and especially Western liberal State soldiers, unless they

(1)  fight for dictocrasts or Jerks-in-Mercs-in-sunspecs, or

(2) goose-step en masse while looking up-stage-right somewhere off camera, or 

(3) look like Che Guevara (who was anyway not a proper soldier but a fascist murderer, and your T-shirt is NOT cool.)

That sentence is so long that it ought to have been my headline.

Astonishing cost to consumers of wind farms.   




Parliamentary Replies exposes astonishing cost to consumers of wind farms.   

Owen Paterson has been astonished by a number of Parliamentary Replies from Government Ministers on the cost of wind farms.  Firstly the Renewables Obligation will cost consumers £25.1billion between 2002 and 2027.  

He also attempted to get from the government some idea of the huge costs of connecting the planned 7,000 wind turbines to the national grid.

In a confusing response, Energy Minister Malcolm Wicks gave a number of figures adding up to over £10billion:  £560 million to connect new renewable generation in Scotland and the North of England;  further  £3.8 billion to cover network refurbishment and the costs of accommodating new generators between 2007 and 2012; £5.7billion from 2005 to 2010 to cover network refurbishment and development.  

Another astonishing reply revealed that the government has not worked out the cost of decommissioning wind farms and restoring sites to their original conditions.

Owen Paterson said “£10 billion is the same amount that it would cost to build seven new nuclear power stations, which would deliver exactly the same amount of power as the installed capacity of the 7,000 wind turbines.  The Government seems to be telling us that just to connect 7,000 wind turbines to the grid will cost more than it would to generate the same amount of energy from nuclear power stations.  This is before we take into account the enormous cost of building the turbines.” 

I will be tabling further questions to try to clarify the answers I have received so far.  The above information is astonishing and clearly vindicates VORTEX and other campaigners in Shropshire opposed to wind farms which are clearly a massive waste of consumers’ money.

Note to editors

Owen’s PQs can be found on the Hansard Website 

 HYPERLINK “http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/pahansard.htm” http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/pahansard.htm 

For further information on the local campaign on wind farms please visit Owen’s website  HYPERLINK “http://www.owenpaterson.org/” http://www.owenpaterson.org/

Further note to editors;

The Libertarian Alliance’s executive Committee believes that massive State purchases of so-called “renewable” energy generation “capacity” (using money extorted from taxpayers most of whom are opposed to it) are a tragic waste of both financial resources and also the opportunity to deploy those resources towards truly “renewable” electricity generation sources, such as Nuclear power stations. (Individual members of the Libertarian Alliance may disagree with this opinion.)

BINGE DRINKING. A Socialist MP, called a “Grogan”, blames a shopkeeper. Yeah, right. We all go to shops to get stuff and then we bingedrink and get rat-arsed in the street with it; hence all the 2am streetphotos.

Simon Heffer in today’s Telegraph has it right;

David Davis

Binge drinking is the only cure for Brown

If you want to know what Labour MPs do with themselves all day, here’s an example.

One of them, a John Grogan, has followed a missable career as a student union leader and local government flunkey by becoming MP for Selby. Better still, he is (and I am not making this up, I promise) “chairman of the all-party beer group”, a calling for which only being president of a student union can possibly prepare one.

With typical brilliance, he this week described Sir Terry Leahy, one of Britain’s most successful businessmen and chief executive of Tesco, as “the godfather of British binge drinking”. He said Sir Terry was underpricing booze in his stores “all the time”, and warned him this must stop.

I am sure Sir Terry would rather take commercial advice from a pet stoat than from this moron – at least, as a Tesco shareholder, I hope he would. And doesn’t Mr Grogan understand that binge drinking and the pervasiveness of the Brown Terror are intimately related?

(In what still used to be Czechoslovakia, there was in 1991/2 a politcal party called “Strana Priteli Piva” (the SPP) translating as the “party of the friends of beer”. Perhaps he ought to find it and join?)

ACRYLAMIDE…(don’t they mean acrylaldehyde?) and the EU – another assault on FOOD. I mean, what do these fascists want?

David Davis 

“Acrylamide” – CH2=CH-CO-NH2 – a fairly harmless organic intermediate in the production of some forms of plastics, has received a wide press lately, having been slated by the EU (no less!) for “increasing” the risk of uterine and ovarian cancers in “women” – (not in men, I hasten to notice.) it is apparently and allegedly a product of overcooking food in all the “nice” ways; that is to say, toasting and frying it. In fact all the ways that Man had cooked food (except boiling which produces tasteless crud and is the reason that “English” cooking has been satirized and execrated the TV-world over for 60 years, and is why “telechefs” exist at all.)

I mean, yer-no’……can you imagine a world without…..bacon? (No I don’t mean “boiled ham” either…) Or “Barbies”…?

Firstly; the pretentiously-higgorant journos don’t mean “acrylamide” at all – they mean “acrylaldehyde”, which was what we chemists call “acrolein”. It is mildly oxidizing in the presence of liver-alcohol-dehydrogenase, inhibits it, and can extend hangovers caused by other reasons. It tastes and smells nasty and so it therefore might be a little bitty toxic as is the case with other poisons. It is produced in small amounts by carbonizing fried food further than necessary. Its formula is CH2=CH-CHO….a bit different form acrylamide (which does not occur naturally.) (But we’re all going to die anyway sometime; the evolutionists say it’s necessary but I’m one of them and I’m not so sure, for the Universe is quite large.)

The pretentiously-higgorant journos don’t know this of course. They are merely busy imbibing some press-release, rendering its content so it’s a lot less exact than it was, draining it of meaning, and regurgitating some copy.

 The EU has now stipulated that we must not toast bread “more than is absolutely necessary”. We mjust fry potatoes to a “light yellow colour” and not any shade of “brown”. The PM ought to listen here.

Truly, we have become their farm animals. They are doing this for “our good”. Bugger them then, for a start. They’ll be telling us not to smoke next.

I think that the fascist master “Honestiories” want the “Humiliories” to eat tasteless nasty food as befits (our) station.

Oxford Union Debate disrupted by “People’s Censors”. So what’s new?

David Davis

This sort of thing began to go on in my day. Something happened to the fascist left in the 60s; some say that sex and long hair was invented and that they never looked back,  -  others just say that the buggers were let out of their foul cages without being made to bath first, and that we subsequently lost their collars and leads. Here’s the Daily Telegrapph on last night’s shindig – I guess it was a great hoot and a night out for the hired rage-boys;


Perhaps after 20 years by the mid-60s, the rage-boys had forgotten who their role-models were in the Reich and the USSR, and they thought themselves to be normal humans.

But to get to David Irving and Nick Griffin, two characters who seem to attract more than their fair share of spoiled tomatoes and eggs.

David Irving wants to say certain erroneous things about the Nazi holocaust in Europe. Why, I do not know, it seems an odd thing to want to devote your life to doing. Unlike the situation we have with the Global-Warm-mongering-promoters, the Holocaust’s “History is Settled”. There is quite enough evidence for the mass slaughter in general and gas-chambers in particular, including such prosaic items as engineering-design briefs and commercial recipts for the building-costs, Zyklon-B and other materials from the firms concerned; not to mention millions of personal accounts which can’t all be simultaneous fabrications.  In a remotely free society Irving ought to be allowed to say anything he wants; indeed he has already served time in jail for saying the same things in an unfree one, the continental EU. It is probable that he says what he says and writes what he does on account of some personality problems, that make him want to seek attention. Whatever, he is probably a harmless nutter. Ranting and jumping about with placards, and disrupting debates, could make more people give his views more credence than they deserve. The best policy imho would be to ignore the fellow.

Nick Griffin is a Cambridge-educated lawyer. He is the leader of what seems to be a rather left-of-centre, corporatist party, which appeals to the electorally neglected Urban Old White Working Class, on account of its articulating their direct concerns and their externally-repressed sense of lost nationhood. His party has won and regularly now wins the odd local council seat in elections, much to the disgust of the various Nazis in power in Westminster and in the Boroughs, many of which are quite pocket-like and also rotten, specially in the inner-urban areas where he has most support. These facts are clearly what puts him Beyond The Pale for the mediarati and the Enemy Class; his views are not fashionable to hold nor politically correct. There is no evidence that a BNP government would address either the concerns of its franchise-base, or get out of interfering in the economy and civilisation any more effectively than (Ageing) Labour, the “too-New” Tories or the sLip-Dems. Griffin has next to no chance of winning any seats at Westminster in any election soon; all he can hope to do is irritate the powers-that-be by exposing their dangerous lack of support and isolation from reality. Unpalatable as his views are to the UK political establishment, there is no evidence that gagging him, and periodically putting him on trial for saying stuff, reduces his popular support.

Libertarians believe that free speech should mean just that. Not the current setup where an increasing range of views is forbidden in public, and is increasingly criticized or restricted on private premises such as the Oxford Union. Nutters and unpopular prats of all sorts should be allowed to say and write what they please - and that includes Moslem “clerics” who advocate anti-civilisational-violence and “jihad” – whatever that stuff might be. We also should be free to call them whatever names please us – such as fascist imperialists, terrorists, pretentious twats, and the like, and denounce them to the end of our strength and beyond. The laws of Libel and Slander are quite highly-developed, and perfectly capable of coping with any situation that can be imagined. The natural rights of free people in a free nation should not be abated  – either by laws which serve only to inconvenience and bind, or by rentable self-appointed mobs-for-hire of Nazi “demonstrators”.

I hope they dodn’t mess up the Union buildings too much. Though from experience there will be some clearing up of shit and stuff to do today.

POST UPDATE: 19.21 GMT. TWO searches hit us, calling up “coal mining libertarian”, this afternoon. You can’t say we aren’t polymathic in our tastes!

Libertarians should be concerned about the destruction of UK farming, whether deliberately Gos-Planned by the EU, or whether merely imposed by British metro-Socialists who hate Britain, hate non-Socialist voters, and hate what makes Britain stand out.

This is about a phenomenon which troubles me in the night when I am asleep but not bolging, and ought to trouble all liberals and conservatives who value the possibility that there will be sustainable, modern Western life in Europe and also in the UK, after the EU shall have imploded.

This matters both in “Europe”, just now ground under the fascist Brussels heel, and also its occupied territories such as Britain.

Economic and independent agricultural strength needs to be maintined so that someone, most likely the UK since we have been forced to successfully estrange the Americans from us by running away from Iraq (so they won’t come to help us any more over anything - why ever should they any more? We have, though our tainting by socialism, become what the Vikings called “Oath-Breakers”) can reconstruct liberal national regimes on the European Continent, in the Anglosphere’s image of such things, after the EUSoviet has collapsed in ruin and starvation, as it for sure will do.

Libertarians ought to be concerned that the infrastructure of agriculture in Britain, which can’t exactly be put back in a day if stuff is all gone and we are a weed-and-insect-and-rare-orchid-strewn-theme-park instead, and which ultimately depends on free people freely choosing to grow and rear stuff, on MANAGED GROUND, should not be destroyed.

 Today, I have read some surprising stuff on Eurorealist, a Yahoogroups group. I do not know how to point you to a “group” on here because I am a bumpkin, so just look for “Eurorealist” on “Yahoogroups” – your are all good bloggeeks and blogo-trons. Christ knows why it calls itself “Yahoo”, it just seems silly and rather childish to me, but there you are, perhaps I am too old. Wasn’t it something you shouted in 1993 when you had just killed a great big pixellated socialist nazi monster spitting fire, on “Doom” or “Heretic”? Well, anyway…

There is a thread about the Foot and Mouth epedemic of 2001, plus connections to later events. the best thing I can do is reprint it here as it stood last on my machine;

PLease see my comments later on…………


Re: [eurorealist] Harry Randall has a point!! 
Date: 19/10/2007 14:25:29 GMT Daylight Time
From: indyshometown@yahoo.com
Reply-to: eurorealist@yahoogroups.com
To: eurorealist@yahoogroups.com
CC: freeuk@yahoogroups.com
Sent from the Internet (Details)

“Despite this engineered calamity it was Government
operatives, who due to incompetence? once again
released the virus in the summer of 2007 – leading to
further damage to the British livestock industry – was
this yet again deliberate?”
Judging from everything that has happened and their
unwillingness to vaccinate, I would say yes.
Ask yourselves the Occum’s Razor Question  (invariably the simplest answer tends to to be the correct one:
How did Britain ever get along prior to The EU’s CAP, MAFF & DEFRA?

Please list every single mass extermination of animals in Britain prior to
our membership of the centralised and damaging EUropean soviet.

AT A MEETING IN 1998 IN EU: A Decision was taken to destroy the British
livestock industry (No Ministers attended).
Information came from secretaries attending taking notes. 
PURPOSE? Poland, Slovakia, Slovenia, Hungary, Romania and other countries from the former communist block brought into the main body of the EU (2004). Needed to contribute to the EU ‘pot’
but were unable to pay their way & make a financial contribution. It was decided that
Poland would supply pigs, bacon,
and porcine products.
Slovakia and Slovenia would be bovine , milk and beef – and
Hungary, Romania etc. would supply sheep.

November 2000. MAFF approached T G Norman,
Carlisle, for ‘burn timber’.

December 4th 2000. Animal activists visit Heddon on the Wall farm, Northumberland.

January 18th 2001. 430,000 Euros allocated to F & M vaccine.


Early February 2001. EU begins checking F & M vaccine stocks.

SURPRISE! 19th February 2001 Foot and Mouth discovered in Essex abattoir.TYPE: Pan Asian type ‘O’, a new strain NEVER before
seen in the wild.
Likely to have been developed in a laboratory. TWO
labs in the UK -
Purbright and Porton Down.

It is understood that Animal Rights activists had ‘assisted’ links to the Government Labs.
It is confirmed that Animal Rights activists from Norfolk visited Heddon on the Wall farm.

It must be remembered the F&MV outbreak
orchestrated in 2001 led to
the needless slaughter of an estimated 12-14 M
animals, mostly perfectly healthy.
Despite this engineered calamity it was Government
operatives, who due
to incompetence? once again released the virus in
the summer of 2007 -
leading to further damage to the British livestock
industry – was this
yet again deliberate? 
September 2007, Bluetongue discovered in cattle. 
October 2007, Bluetongue spreads from cattle to
sheep. Peter King,
NFU’s chief livestock adviser, said “The biggest
concern is the economic
impact this is having on the price of meat when we
farmers were already
struggling with foot and mouth and low market
 prices. It could have
serious implications on the supply of British lamb.
This particular
strain of virus we have here is very different from
the kind that is
found in
North Africa” (ST report 14/10/07)October 15th, report considered to make UHT milk
ONLY type available

(a). reduce CO2 emissions by reduction in
refrigeration plant.
b). reduced by half UK livestock.

Source: Report Today programme R4 15th October 2007.
This will of course lead to a huge increase in  transport costs, as the
sub standard (not fresh) UHT is trucked to Britain -
a Country which,
until EU interference & The CAP, was all but self
sufficient in both
meat and dairy products.

> DRAW YOUR OWN CONCLUSIONS! Paper prepared with acknowledgment to Greg Lance-Watkins. More detailed information available at:

Click on
 Foot in Mouth from Menu
Harry M Randall 15/10/2007YOU MAY find the clip of Interest:http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=-66755815706353489



Now, I am the last person to be swayed by conspiracy-theories, given as I am to fiendishly enjoying taking part in the public flaying and later, slower, slaying, of 9/11 “truthers”, wherever I may find them. But on this food-matter I remember at the time, in early 2001, how neatly the destruction of many, many thousands of “small stock farming enterprises” fitted in with the metro-socialist view of “Britain” and “The Countryside”. There were no votes for Blair and his babes in “The Countryside”, or at least not very many (so these isolated “new” Labour voters wouldn’t matter, not affecting the many small  (new labour) Rotten Boroughs in the “cities”) and so whatever the countryside did that was rather smelly, and sort of unfamiliar to Notting Hill, would have to go.

If it was convenient for Blair’s masters in the EU to “plan” another future for the “Countryside of the English Regions”, then he would go along with it.

Moreover, destroying the primary capacity of the British Isles to produce useful protein-based food for itself would, in the medium term, strengthen the grip of Brussels on our Windpipe IF we should ever decide to LEAVE. (Remember, they NEED OUR MONEY, or else socialism in Europe is dead – and that means VERY dead.)

Yet again, I see the UK as the last bastion of liberalism – and therefore a hope of any form of minimal-statism continuing to exist after the USA (understandably) retreats back into Isolationism having been pilloried (yet again) over Iraq and Iran and what will surely follow on.

The EU sees this too, ‘coz the sum-total of the IQs of all those fascist enarques cannot be exactly zero.

They have to break us in our Island or lose the war.

All over again.

Oh, well, here we go, all over again, all over again. Dear God, I beg You; will this battle ever end? How Deep is Your Cup, that we have to drink from? 

Got to unblog now as I have a long-running dispute about knex, between my two children, to sort out.