Had a hard day on the farm todasy, so here’s some light reliefe.
Had a hard day on the farm todasy, so here’s some light reliefe.
It’s a great pity really, for the poor British, who have striven mightily over the centuries to achieve something resembling the outer shell of a pre-capitalist-barbarian warlord-polity, but with “added freedom” and some goodish bolt-ons… This sort of social structure I guess gives comfort to some, if not most, people whose main past-time is trying to just get by while avoiding thinking too deeply about much.
But one of the goodish bolt-ons is that this model also delivers a modicum of personal liberty to the vast mass of the subjects – sadly often against their will. They will live to regret this lacuna in their perception of reality.
Now, however, although the British have at last painstakingly evolved, within this structure, the grand tradition of being able to get rid of their “king” and hire another one from somewhere else if they don’t like the first one, and so although they have now got a more-or-less-harmless strain of hereditary “Heads Of State”, the supposedly-chief male heir now proceeds to go batchy on Global Wireless Tele Vision – and he does it often as well, which is worse.
It’s all rather sad. If the concept of republicanism wasn’t so innately un-conservative and redolent of philosophical rootlessness, I might be more in favour of it for the British. I’ll have to reflect a bit.
The GramscoFabiaNazis know precisely what they are doing, and they are emulating the destruction of “Old Nichol” on purpose. So that they can create worse places.
I was over at The Last Ditch’s place and I spotted this just now. Do go, I’m going to give it a try now and then, even me.
So, Gordon Brown has just popped in for a brew with the lads, over on the front, eh? Bet they’re pleased.
The effing bastard will either win the election, or there’ll be a hung-one. You just watch. He’s a wicked socialist scumbag schemer and shyster and snake-oil-salesman, just like his mate Stalin, and you see if I’m right or not. If he gets in again, you just see if he doesn’t end up having people murdered in dank cellars, in the “Ministry” of something or other. Read my friend Richard Blake’s novel “The Terror of Constantinople”, which is prophetic.
Bet each reader of this 1p that Gordon wins, and that the election will have been rigged. You can pay the Libertarian Alliance by paypal when you lose.
About Michael Foot I mean…
Obnoxio the Clown said something too about “one foot in the grave“.
…but I can’t.
He died today. He was 96: I’d be happy to reach that, but I probably won’t, owing mostly to high living, wild women and too much alcohol drunk while too young.
The problem with socialists is so, so easy to solve. As a human being, you have free will. You can, well, just walk away. Just like people give up smoking or drugs or drinking. In the end, they walk away, or die.
Foot never did. Perhaps the “feminist” Jill Craigie was just too sexy to shag (I am sorry, I do not know either way) and he never fancied any of the Tories’ (young female) “researchers”. We always knew about “researchers”, and they were always at least vaguely pretty, or even better than that: many of them “had family money”, and some were even the daughters of “Officers” (these only married “rising stars” and you were of course out of the running big-time – “look, you’re a really really super fun friend…but….”): but we being penniless, we could never get any.
In the end, Foot didn’t walk away – he just became an old socialist. He could not even not wear a “donkey-jacket” to the Cenotaph. Not that it really really matters at all what you wear while paying your respects to the War Dead, so long as you mean it.
But it was, well, just “impolite”. Socialists, ultimately, know that they “are serious” and so they don’t even want to disguise how they despise.
But the market will sort it out if let to. The price of grit and salt will rise as more people want to buy it if they are allowed to. Then more will be made available.
It is already -8C and falling.
I’ve brought in the free range pigs for the umpteemth time, its too cold for te poor buggers and we only have now about 20 of this sort. Some are actually in the house, in the scullery, the smaller ones and one sow was actually shivering when we brought her in. The others are in the outside enclosed lobby with some bubble wrap and lots of old newspspers. They will cope till the morning.
The socialists won’t learn. Or perhaps they will, and deliberately as the Bosss says, don’t want to play. Copenhagen has been truly rained on as a parade for them, with this what I’d have called “normal” weather for the time of year. they’ve just had it easy with all the mild winters since 1980 while all they Green-protesters was growin up.
I’m holding the frot today for the Boss who is doing chores he has to do sometimes.
The trouble with Labour’s reversion to “class war” in the coming election campaign is that it WILL work as a strategy. People are brought up under the school system to believe all that tosh.That’s why Labour are playing the class card because they know it will get them lots of votes.
You have to believe it’s deliberate. Just one look at what the poor blighters in schools, the childrenm of my farming colleagues, have to learn for English GCSEs and exams, tells you what theyre supposed to come out believeing. In two ticks you can persuade people educated like this that the Tories and toffs and Labour are “on the side of working people”. All that twaddle.
There’, Ive tried to write an intellectual essay. I hope its worked!
It says over on a comment thread at Samizdata that this piece exists, and it does. It also shows that we in the West still don’t get the seriousness with which our own Enemyclass, as the Boss calls it, goes about its business of shoving us all back ot the Dark Ages.
The following essay has been cross-posted from Samizdata to here, by kind permission of the author.
It’s been twenty years since my firm belief in a better way of life was vindicated. 17th November was the beginning of the end of an era shaped by collectivism, brutality and industrialised inhumanity. I have written about my experiences of communism on Samizdata before. Today I’ll use someone else’s words to describe the wasteland communism leaves behind.
In 1992, Peter Saint-Andre has written a disturbing, brilliant and accurate description of what communism does to the soul:
…the hunger that I found most disturbing was not of the body but of the soul. [...] The socialist state cared nothing for the life of the individual, and this was driven home in innumerable ways.Yet the overall effect was not merely physical — it was a deeply spiritual degradation. It is difficult to put that degradation into words. To me, the most striking sign of it was what I called “Eastern eyes”. I could see and feel the resignation, the defeat, the despair, in the eyes of people I knew. It was an all-too-rare occurrence to come upon a person with some spark of life in his or her eyes (the only exceptions were the children, who had yet to have the life beaten out of them). If it is true that the eyes are windows onto the soul, then the Czech soul under socialism went through life all but dead.
It is tough for me to come up with something to say 20 years on that is not tinged with bitterness and disappointment and if not for the significant anniversary, I would have left this memory unturned. Despite the amazing change 1989 and its aftermath brought to my life I feel no closure over the past and a sense of proportion in the way the fall of communism has been ‘handled’. Today we should be looking back at the last 20 years counting the many communists who died in prison or are still rotting there… I can only hope that future generations will revisit the past and will have far lower tolerance of collectivism and totalitarianism. It may be a futile hope as today’s teenagers have little knowledge of the world my generation grew up and my parents lived in. And so I am bitter and disappointed that people can say the word “communism” without spitting.
I am also bitter and disappointed because those who opposed communism have not won. It is still with us, in the idiotic juxtapositions of Nazism and communism, or socialism and free-market, used by those who aspire to communism and justify it by positing Nazism as the greater evil. It still raises its ugly head in those who despise free-markets and attempt to put a human mask on socialism by pointing out ‘failures’ of capitalism. Rather hard as socialism, like all totalitarianisms, has no face. It is the ultimate denigration of humanity, destruction of individuality, and subjugation of human beings to the vast merciless machine of control and power.
Communism is still with us in China and North Korea. One befriended by the West, the other frowned upon… but neither is ever challenged because of the oppression of its people, and only when it manages to ‘inconvenience’ the rest of the world. Once it falls, it will be horrifying and beyond belief to examine the monstrosities committed by the communists in the light of day. Again, I can only hope that the world will be shamed and aghast at letting this happen for so long. Until then, we only have testimonials such as this: Undercover in the Secret State
I am grateful to those who remember, struggle to understand and explain communism, and especially to those who have managed to capture something of the nature of the beast. Here are the ones I found. Please feel free to share yours.
The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression – the reference book of the communist evil with a tag line “Revolutions, like trees, must be judged by their fruit”
The Lives Of Others captures the paranoia and danger of an Orwellian world where everyone is monitored and, unusually for such world, shows impact of the individual as making a difference. Here is my review.
Burnt By The Sun (Unaveni slnkom) from a sunny day to Stalin’s terror… One of the most powerful films I have seen for a long time. Possibly ever.
No End (Bez konca) – a complex, subtle and haunting film set in Poland 1981.
Repentance (Pokayanie) – for the more surreal amongst us. The first ‘anti-stalinism’ film I have ever seen and will never forget. I remember sitting through the entire credits at the end, stunned and shaken. For context, this was screened in Czecho-Slovakia, publicly, in a cinema in 1987!
It is impossible, of course, to undo the tyrant’s crimes. But one of the tasks writers have set themselves, in the last 50 years, is at least to preserve the memory of the dead, and so to resist the tyrant’s historical arrogance.
The book’s opening paragraph makes the history come the full circle, back to the suffering of the individual:
The dead cannot speak. Can one retrieve their voices? Death under I.V. Stalin, the ruler of the Soviet Union from 1922 to 1953, has been written about but the dead themselves remain elusive because their voices have been lost to us. The present book is an attempt to recover the voices of those executed under Stalin.
Update, Andrew Marr replies in the DT.
Good one Charlie! Go bite the bastard in the ankkle!
But it’s a shame, Charlie my old fellow, that you have got things so wrong about cameron, who is not going to do diddly-squat about the EU, hes just said so.
The Boss=man is right, we shall now just have to start attacking the terrible Tories, I think I’ll make it my special business to do that from here on.
I meant the hoddies, not the woman and her daughter. Labour’s artificially-created client-underclass may contain many individuals for whom there will be no earthly use. It is a tragic and useless waste of human potential.
And ive just found this here.
I,ll reprint it just in carse, I’m sure the man won’t mind. The blog master says it should be in red to show its been lifted.
Well, this is possibly Labour’s last ever party conference in power, so I was expecting some big gimmicks, but Gordon Brown’s attack on 24-hour drinking is weak.
The move will be part of a wider package of crime measures that the Prime Minister will unveil in his crucial pre-election party conference speech. He has previously indicated that he is unhappy with parts of the licensing law changes that were brought in while Tony Blair was Prime Minister but has stopped short of overhauling the legislation.
As a teenager the one cause I really felt passionate about was not global warming (as we called it back then), third world poverty or the Rwandan genocide (which I don’t even remember) – it was 24-hour drinking. I hated the fact that all pubs shut at 11 and we then had to find a nightclub, queue for ages, and then pay over the odds to stand around somewhere so loud you wouldn’t hear Ian Paisley if he was standing next to you. Lloyd George ruined my teenage years.
Conservatives, who win most arguments through the law of unintended consequences, were strangely averse to the obvious fact that our First World War-era licensing laws only encouraged people to drink quickly and then head to even boozier venues. It was left to New Labour, in a rare moment of liberalism, to change the law.
The phrase “24-hour drinking” is misleading, creating the image of some Oliver Reed-style epic bender – often it just means theatre-goers popping in for a couple or people choosing to stay in their local past 11 rather than making a night of it. And it does not make alcohol-related social problems any worse – it doesn’t make them hugely better, but it doesn’t make them worse. In fact the number of venues open 24-hours is tiny, and the number of pubs open past 1 am is not huge, either.
The Government knows this, of course, but the real problems with alcohol are too difficult to deal with. The initial inconvenience is that too many city centres are dependent on alcohol – if they raise the duty on alcohol or arrested drunks wholesale or did anything to reduce the number of rubbish chain pubs then they may as well evacuate Liverpool or Newcastle.
Secondly, and more importantly, too many members of the violent community are also part of Labour’s 5-million-strong welfare army, people who do not pay fines because they know the authorities won’t chase them, and who do not modify their bad behaviour because they know the state won’t kick them out of their taxpayer-provided homes. This is why “drink Asbos” won’t work:
The measure will be part of a wider package of anti-social behaviour policies that the Prime Minister will unveil. It includes “drink anti-social behaviour orders” being extended to force courts to consider imposing a Drinking Banning Order against anyone convicted of a crime who was under the influence of alcohol.
The Drink Asbos will give magistrates the power to bar problem drinkers from bars and off-licences, Mr Brown will say.
Parents of any child guilty of anti-social behaviour will be given a parenting contract and where they refuse to comply with them, their benefits will be stopped. He will also announce a four-fold increase in the number of families covered by ‘family intervention projects.’
He will say: “These are binding contracts which require people to take one to one support or lose their benefits. We will double the number of these family intervention projects so that for the 50,000 most chaotic families and their 100,000 children there will be clear rules, and clear punishments if they don’t comply.”
But Asbos have been a terrible failure – half of them are breached and most of the time the authorities simply give the hooligan another “last chance” warning, like some ineffective and weak teacher. On the other hand they are genuinely illiberal and can and have been used by the authorities to persecute the merely eccentric or children with serious disorders.
This issue is relevant to the suicide of Fiona Pilkington, driven to her death by yobs while the police did nothing (for fear of “criminalising” the bullies by sending them to prison), because even if the authorities did intervene to stop her ordeal, they would still be bound by the law to re-house Miss Pilkington’s tormentors, the Simmons family, and scumbags everywhere know that.
If Labour really wanted to get tough on anti-social behaviour, whether committed drunk or sober, it would change the law so that the state no longer had to find a home for criminals among ordinary, decent people. But then, you wouldn’t want people to actually take personal responsibility for their behaviour, would you?
I am thinking about writing a candidate essay on this for the Chris R Tame Memorial Prize, as I could do with £1,000. It’s also to me a hot topic as I know some libertarians who have come to the position from being socialists, and I wonder how they’d react.
Ta to Manwiddecombe. Not seen him before, hes quite funny
How name DEFRA bureaucrats does it take to change a light-bulb?
About 165,000, and they’ve lied about it being duff.
Christopher Booker has discovered that the ban on Tungsten incandescent bulbs is actually not legal.
How many well-brought-up young Jewish men studying Law does it take to change a light bulb?
“It’s all right my dear son, your poor old mother doesn’t mind sitting in the dark already”.
…a political party that has the courage to say:-
WE WILL PUT FEWER POLICE ON THE STREETS AND ON THE “BEAT”,
for the solution is Good People and NOT more police.
David Davis (not that one, Ephraim Hardcastle)
Everybody likes to throw rotten cabbages at poor, innately good, motivated Iain Duncan-Smith. But what else would you suggest right now?
“More Police” may look like a sign of success: their presence may indeed locally and transiently resist the rise in figures for acts of bad-ness. But their existence is an effect of failure, and not success. People should think more, and so they ought to read more books – and I did NOT mean winners of the “Booker Prize” books.
There ought also to be a way for the Free Market to discover how there might be lots and lots of money to be made for James R Murdoch, by having less Wireless Tele Vision. Or preferably none at all for a few years.
Oh, and we could restock “Libraries” with a couple more books each, by having strong thugs on the premises who could lift wheelchairs full of the Disabled up to a height of about 8 or 9 feet.
Where are they now? Some are dead, some live in retirement and one or two partially redeemed themselves.
Libertarians recognise these guys’ ideological features, sadly, in the minds and hearts of today’s British and European bureaucrats. The fact that these seven called themselves “communists” is almost irrelevant to the ideological war we find ourselves in now.
Sean Gabb and Tim Evans will of course be able to confirm theories about their mundane and repellent taste in prime office furniture and decor.
The main struggle today is against the hold these dudes and their ideology has over the thoughts and actions of our home-grown apparatchiks and GramscoSalariat.
…keep a copy of “Mein Kampf” in their bedrooms are socialists. Their wannabe-detractors, socialists themselves, who complain, have only to read the stuff to see. Hitler himself proclaimed his “movement” as socialist. NSDAP.
If one is a proper liberal philosopher, one does perhaps have a copy, but one does not , definitely, keep it in the bedroom, for this is not done. It is available for reference in the “library”, perhaps under “plain cover”, and is, like “das Kapital”, filed under “Fiction” along with “Joe Kennedy – my part in Hitler’s deification” (autobiography section)…..
The British-today-lefties of all persuasions (which is to say, the Enemy Class,) who try to claim the moral high-ground by associating evil people with Hitler, had better watch out what sorts of Nazi-tricky-sticky-stuff their policy-positions (when analysed carefully) get them attached to. Like ID cards, collectivism, Stalin, the USSR, Ho Chi Mhinh, eugenics, racism and the like.
I found the blasted book unreadably boring, me. I managed abot 24 pages. It disappeared into the slime of Booker-Prize-novel-look-alikes, to which it naturally belongs as part of a genre. I have never read one of these I am happy to say, but – just like thinking about making love to Elizabeth Taylor when she was 20, I can imagine exactly what they would all be like so I do not need to do it.
The fact that he took its publication so seriously that he dictated it to poor slaves like Hess on a machine-type writer while still in prison, shows what a boring little shit the bugger really was. It is awfully sad that the German People still felt so enraged with their lot in 1933 (not altogether to be blamed all the time for that) that they felt bound to nearly elect the bugger.
…on the way to its hegemony. By deliberately fostering antifamilial and atomisational Trash-tv-mediated-policies and cultures, it turns ordinary, perfectible human beings into inchoate barnyard animals.
This is just down the road from here.
Beware the Enemy Class, for this is the sort of thing that its activites being about, and which it likes to do on pupose. It does. Believe me, for I am the Director of Northern Affairs for its opposition, and I sometimes watch in horror. It sets out to cause individual humans, who would otherwise behave normally towards, say, new-born-babies, to just ditch them in the attic in a box, if it means having to not watch Big Brother or Top of the Pops instead. And the removal of anything worthwhile from school learning has only a majority-part in this and not the whole blame.
WE watched, as is usual when we have the time, the Belgian Formula 1 GP, which was slightly less unexciting than normal owing to a good pile-up on the first lap. Perhaps we subliminally enjoyed the implied violence? I do not know….
…There is something wrong with today’s car-racing tracks, which I will deal with in time. But in short, they are (1) too short, (2) have got too many really really sharp corners straight after the start, and (3) don’t allow driver/car-changes midstream if you prang or the driver gets killed, and (4) don’t allow you to jump into the spare car (and where is it then?) while the track is still covered with shrapnel. Peter Davis and I did a nice track nearly two years ago on here, about 26 miles long and rather interesting on Googleearth. We will come back to it. You can serch for it in the meantime.
But…..male aggression. It’s probably one of the things that made Homo sapiens sapiens as successful as (he) is, in the battle for survival against shithead short-arsed-bears bureaucrats, sabre-tooth tigers Soviets, and so on. I have been thinking about this for some time as I find that male students vary considerably in their ability to manage or mask or evince aggression as a statement of attitude, and it does seem to vary corelationally by school. (The Governmint might want to know that.) Janet Daley today examines what she suggests the fascist PC-left have done to being about the explosion of gang culture and knife crime among young boys and young men. It’s worth a read, even though lots of libertarians don’t like her.
In “New Britain”, youth male aggression is not channelled, and so individual directionless crime is rife: why? Because:-
(1) There are no fathers, only “mums”. Girls are born to “mums”, but boys are born by parthenogenesis to “single partners”. “Fathers” are just devices which prodice the necessary gametes, seemingly on demand (I can’t figure out how or why.)
(2) Young boys have to have their heads shaved at three and watch football all day on the Wireless Tele Vision, and “hang out”.
(3) “Schools” have sold their football fields for the building of “affordable housing”, so there are no “competitive sports” which foster “elitism and “inequality” anyway, and so are bad.
(4) The Naitonalised Curriculum has been voided of content and also femiNazised, in order to render school (on purpose) seemingly useless to boys, so that they can be made to prefer streetgangs as a form of daytime outdoor relief.
Socialism (a fungus) of course needs this machinery to propagate within what is otherwise a highly-ordered civilisation, formed sort of accidentally under liberty.
Is socialism a fungus born out of evolution and natural selection, and which exploits a niche? DISCUSS
Mr Eugenides fulminates suitably in his inimitable style, the loss to the world of which would be inestimable.
I am not clear to what level “antidrinkism” has seeped corrosively into the minds of the Enemy Class, and more especially and importantly, I guess, into the minds of “leisure industry workers”. Such as barmaids and the like.This sort fo stuff is just a symptom anyway of something much deeper and more purposefully-malevolent.
But, whether or not there will ever be a Libertarian civilisation or nation, let alone such a government as I opined before, suppose there was:
Let’s suppose we have something approaching what CountingCats sort-of-agrees is currently unachievable – a State in which broad libertarian principles inform its actions as a State, and in which a narrow majority tries to behave as if we can all do what we wish with our bodies and so on. What then do we do with an essentially rebellious, vindictive, contrarian and mutinous rentamob of ex-stooges and ex-State-nannies, forever carping on about their hard-done-byness, their righteousness and the injustice of it all, since everybody’s health is going to the dogs unless they get their way?
What is to be done with these people? We can’t let them anywhere near any sort of political power or influence: they would simply re-erect all the stuff we are trying to trash. But to be able to do that, we’d have to compulsorily reduce their circumstances in some economic way also. Perhaps some particularly invasive and highly-retrospective tax investigations would do, or something to do with their googling habits for the past 400 years.
As I get older, and see the deepness of the engrainment in GramscoFabiaNazis of their habit of never apologising and never admitting error (admirable and essential qualities in libertarians of course) I wonder how we can eliminate their threat to humanity permanently without emulating their methods, and I’d like suggestions please.
We can discuss all this further at the 2009 Confernece of the Libertarian Alliance with the Libertarian International, on Saturday 24th and Sunday 25th October.
Please book now if you plan to, for places are going fast. To discourage you all from attending, I will be moderating a session on the Sunday pm, 25th October:-
2.15pm – 3.00pm Session 9 Tories and the Liberal Democrats: Prospects for a Classical Liberal Agenda
• Speakers: Shane Frith (Director, Progressive Vision)
Jock Coats (Geo-Mutualist); Mark Littlewood (Campaign Director, Progressive Vision; Blogger, Liberal Vision)
• Moderator: David Davis (LA Blogmaster, Libertarian Alliance)
Labour list seems to think it’s not, and Dan Hannan and the Americans are all “extreme right wing” for wanting to backtrack a bit.
“From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” is what the Karly-bastard said.
I direct you merely to the Russians, who are serious and who have not yet lost their pride and esprit.
This is not a cause for rejoicing: either that a boat, belonging allegedly to them, has been recovered, or that it is them and not less unworthy peoples’ Navies who could spare a few minutes to do the thing, when they could have done. There is something fishy going on here, and I smell a rat.
But I’d love to give you something to chew on if I could. In default of that, I refer you to my chums Boatang and Demetriou, who sock it to the wicked evil left , today, in marginally less positive terms than I customarily use.
It’s not really clear if B&D have gotten round to _/my/_ notion that the “left” has purposefully and fundamentally chosen to _/be/_ objectively wicked, or whether its effects, coming from “projects”, as tried time and time again, just make it look like that, even though it means to force people to be good and behave well – even à-l’outrance of killing them so as to ensure that [they are good and behave well].
Sometimes one just gets arsed off with writing, daily, daily, daily and more, about the effects of deliberate and directed GramscoScumbagism. We all know that the Enemy Class has, on purpose, created and is creating, and has cultivated and farmed (and is doing so even more fiercely while there’s time) people, so that they shall become specifically sub-human and de-socialised.
I didn’t mean to write about “Baby P”: but the images of the people directly involved shocked me – and I didn’t just mean the GramscoFabiaNazi “social” “workers” who “have lessons to be learned”:-
The socialisation of a person, for him (her…it…) to live peaceably in a modern complex civilisation with others, is a long and difficult process. [By complex, I mean anything that uses writing and that records history and thoughts as well as deeds, and probably after about 1,800 BC.] Painful and sometimes futile, sometimes successful, experiments were conducted in education and upbringing. These, and empirical data, brought us to about the early/mid 20th century, in which probably a higher percentage of humans than ever before was educated and socialised as children to a stage where a high Western civilisation, such as Britain, could regard barbarism, pointless savagery, totally-unrelieved destitution, and other pre-capitalist horrors as the hideousnesses that they have always been and sadly still are.
What that awful picture says, about what wicked, wicked, evil socialist “progressive” ideologues cheefully and with conviction and deeply-felt seriousness, do to ordinary people in the name of their doctrine, is utterly and unbelievably terrible. If I did not live in 2009 Britain, I could not credit that some people really, really aredeeply and sincerely driven to make others into machines that could do that, and that could get like that. Slavery is too small and innocuous a word for it.
I will thus maintain, in public debate if required so to do, that the poor tormented person in this photo has been created on purpose. She along with many, many thousands of others, of all the many different and mostly artificial sexes, is a planned construct of, and has been emplaced by, the Political-Enemy-Class. Like a tank-trap, or a mine. The job of these enslaved individuals is to do, individually, having been collectively manufactured, as much mortal damage as possible inside the structure of a normal civilisation which lives by evolved and mutually-agreed customs and behaviour. They will be maintained while they do this, with money and “outreach”: the fact that the money is confiscated in taxation off those who are to be destroyed afterwards, is as I said yesterday, the very, very most utterly secondary consideration – the very reason for comtemplation and execution of the evil deed is the problem itself. The people who invent these monstrosities are the wicked evil ones. The money is just “there”.
When these poor sad machines have served their purpose, or if they get slaughtered mostly be each other in the process, they will be discarded. The Enemy-Class cares not one jot or tittle. All that matters is that ordinary, classsical liberal nuclear-family-based civilisation, encompassing at least some useful education, is flattened. The majority must be forced to live in an endarkened, violent, lawless and chartless world, fighting for scraps both of food and energy and anything useful, while the _honestiores_ feast on tribute, lord over the _humiliores_, and shag whoever’s daughters it pleases them to do.
Sons too maybe – although I firmly believe homosexuality does not exist at all, and is also a fabricated Enemy-Class wind-up. I have never been shown any evidence to convince me otherwise. (Forget ancient Greek and Roman literature about it – it could all have been carefully fabricated by Oscar Wilde for the purpose. You know! Just like how the US fabricatedall the footage of the Moon landings.)
I digress: sorry. There is so much sadness and torment in the world, that it is hard to know where to start, or how often to branch off on a by-way and gun something down there, before returning to the straight-way.
But these tragedies exist because the wicked are paying, with stolen money, for them to be set up.
Please, please, somebody:
Please try, try hard, to convince me that the GramscoFabiaNazis have not actually designed the entire system of State-intervention solely in order to convert people into mindless machines, and that they have not deconstructed liberal education as a particular strand of this strategy.
Actually, it’s an error on my part: this is a Large White. But they still turn our brassica crops to filigree lace, rendering the plant exhausted and useless.)
What you do is slightly squash a pregnant (or not) female, so she dies, but is not dismembered utterly. then, you place her carefully near some brassicas and watch the sex-crazed males come along and shag her. Then they go away and die of course.
Result: less f*****g caterpillars, and more kohl-rabi, broccoli and the like. The purple thing surrounds a glob of unfertilised oocytes (I checked under the scope):-
The resurgence of the Libertarian movement in Britain occurred in the late 1970s under the direction of Chris Thame who’s life was tragically cut short in 2006. During his life he was the key person in organising the Libertarian Alliance, which aimed not to repeat what it saw as the errors of American Libertarianism. Firstly it would not contest elections believing these to be a waste of time and effort serving only to divide the movement and exhaust the movement over matters of triviality. Secondly, the Libertarian Alliance sought to avoid the conflict endemic in the Libertarian movement such as the conflict between Objectivists and Austrians and provide a forum for genteel debate.
The Libertarian Alliance saw its role as not engaging with the masses but in targeting the intellectuals – the 5% of the population that were interested in political ideas. Taking its cue from the Fabian Society, it published scholarly articles, organised conferences, spoke at University and appeared on radio debates in the expectation that these ideas would eventually be picked up by the political classes and implemented, much like the ideas behind the Institute of Economic Affairs were eventually picked up and became the template of thatcherism.
Needless to say it didn’t, the Libertarian movement in Britain which peaked in the early 1990s has been in decline ever since with its aging membership not being replaced with young members, to the point where the pessimistic amongst them predict that eventually there will be too few living libertarians to sustain a movement and it might die just as Libertarian ideas were dead through much of the twentieth century. This decline prompted Sean Gabb in conjunction with Chris Thame to resurrect class analysis, which for many has been regarded as the preserve of marxism. They concluded that Libertarian ideas whilst true were not being given the light of the day because they were a threat to the wealth, power and status of the class of individuals who draw, wealth, power and status from an activist state.
The Libertarian Alliance, in spite of this analysis continues its strategy of courting the intellectuals even though their ideas is not in the self-interest of the many statist intellectuals suckling at the states teat. The National Libertarian Front argues that radical political change cannot be achieved by publishing a few more pamphlets rather it must engage in the sorts of visible activism traditionally associated with the ‘far right’ and ‘far left’.
Posted by KJ at 10:43
- Jock Coats said…
- The National Libertarian Front argues that radical political change cannot be achieved by publishing a few more pamphlets rather it must engage in the sorts of visible activism traditionally associated with the ‘far right’ and ‘far left’.
I think it’s fair to say that this is slowly happening here. Many are realizing that we need real life examples of doing without the state. You will probably appreciate that we don’t go in much for “revolutionary” agitation here!
So my focus, for example, is in creating a local “sterling free” trading network for business-to-business and business-to-customer use in my county, and market based affordable housing projects without state subsidy, as a visible example of ways in which people can work fre of the state.
In that, it’s much more of a “mutualist” (see your article on Kevin Carson later) approach of building the institutions that will one day replace the state “organically” rather than trying to persuade a naturally not very revolutionary or activist population to decide on one big momentous change (at the ballot box or otherwise).
Time will tell – people do say that gradualism is a recipe for failure, but equally, our “Overton Window” approach is well enough established.
- 11 July 2009 18:01
- Sean Gabb said…
- An interesting analysis. A brief correction: the correct spelling is Tame, not Thame.
On the matter of our strategy, we still see our purpose as providing the intellectual underpinnings for any mass movement that may one day emerge.
This is turning into a proper debate, with lots of people’s viewpoints being happily exposed.
I wisch ti weren’t necessary to have to articulate what we mean, but if we must, then we must.
WE posted this on 9th April this year…..
I am not sure if the present Queen will survive to the age when she might be graciously allowed to preside over a Libertarian Great Britain, or even a Scotland-Wales-and-Ulster (England having left the UK and possibly requiring something else.) She is already old, and our triumph must still be a long way off as things go now. We must probably pin our hopes on Kate Middleton.
But the survival of quaint, harmless and deeply-morally-based rituals, in the few odd cracks and crannies of what remains of English Civilisation after the various successive ZanuLieBorgs that followed Lord Salisbury, is a good sign.
It is doubtful if there are more than 5 million people alive in the Uk today who know what Maundy Money means; how it originated, or what it represents theologically. Certainly it is not taught any more in Scumbag Schools, either as part of “R E” or anything else – let alone history. No other national traditions have anything similar so far as I know.
Kevin Myers, the great Irish journalist and Man of Letters, once wrote that a key positive of liberal democratic civilisations is that great uplifting liberty and freedom to forget. To be allowed, ultimately, to forget what things mean, that are done by big states – even in the end he said, for example, to forget in the centuries to come why we uncomprehendingly will hand each other poppies in the street on 11th November every year.
The poor wretched subjects of Kim Jong-Il (a troid which this blog loves to hate, for he is bad) are not allowed to forget who is their terrorizer and slave-driver: not allowed to forget what missiles and tanks they now possess, and are weekly paraded before their massed phalnaxes of hungry despairing cheerleaders. The poor Cubans are not allowed to forget the dead GramscoMarxiaNazi pig Castro, even though he died some four years ago) as actroids are wheeled sequentially out to become him, haranguing their cheering thriongs hour after hour, after hour, afte hour. And then on the Wireless, later.
But forgetting is what Free Peoples are allowed to do. It is an astonishing relief; what remains is the necessary social binding between free individuals who must and need to interact in autonomous ways, through the Market and through the normal guidelines of ordinary sociableness that define us as the thinking animal which first did language, for co-operation and survivability.
Nobody I bet you who you ask in the street today will give a f*** about Maundy Money: 91.267% of respondents will think you deranged for even asking. Many indeed of them are trying desperately to pay Gordon Brown’s bills: no washing of the feet of the poor for him! Ugh. Socialists historically who have met poor people, decide they don’t like them very much, and bugger off. In their black cars.
If we should ever succeed in forging a libertarian civilisation, here or anywhere, I would like to think that things like Maundy Money will survive. This in particular links the “Sovereign” with the rest of ordinary mortals, and shows that – whatever might have gone before – they are people too, and recognise a universal moral authority above themselves.
The reason you te more crime in rural areas in the Dark Ages is that there’s fewer people about.
Pubs are all closed and dead because of no-smoking and no vertical drinking.
No possible amount of police you could deploy, owing to logistic problems, could solve the fact that if you have a £15,000 Chippendale Commode under ZanuLieBorg, and you live in an isolated house in Much-Binding-in-the-Marsh, then some hood will remove it from you.
The solution is not “more Police”. This is the typical socialist solution, as propounded by the Tories. I do /not want to/ live in a country which has “more police”. This represents failure, a Falling from Grace for a civilisation, and an suggestion that people can only be made “good” by force and threats: the definition of “good” also suffers as a result, as it becomes artificial and at the whim of the police-paymasters.
This way, crime will not be solved until the entire nation consists of “Police”, and we shall all be watching each other.
The solution is /better people/.
Then, political parties will self-hucksterise on the platform of “fewer police”…or even “no police”.
I would like to live in a society where there was no need for “the police”. They sort of morph, into, well, you know, worse kinds of police. And the more money for police, the faster they morph.
/Better people/ will come into being automatically, when socialism fails to be taught as a /MEME/ in “courses”.
….and why, when I am editing this and other pieces online in realtime, do I keep on deleting great titles, and then I am having to replace them with saddo ones?
I was intrigued by a spread of responses at the Coffee House to Fraser Nelson’s thingy about how Gordon Brown’s lost it.
One in particular caught my eye. You should be aware that the thesis of his posting was whether and how politicians lie. I give you an exerpt:-
Brown himself upped the ante during that BBC package yesterday, telling Nick Robinson “I always tell the truth,” and (to me) sounding uncannily like Bill Clinton saying “I did not have sexual relations with that woman”. People who tell the truth never say “I tell the truth”. They don’t have to. It’s never in question.
The problem lies, strategically, not in whether Gordon Brown is lying about whether spending by “his” government will go up, or down, or even in “real terms” or “Sterling terms”. This now really does not matter at all. Indeed, discussions have already taken place, not just here but elsewhere, about whether prospective Prime Ministers, be they Cameron, Clegg (how can you have a british PM called “Clegg”?) Farage, Griffin or Paisley or Sutch or anybody else, ought to implicitly underwrite any Sovereign Debt taken out by this government – including what Brown’s got to try to do from now till June 2010, or draw a line and say “no more”….
I now reproduce a passage from a commentator on that thread at Coffeehouse:-
The underlying truth behind all British politics right now is that Labour have failed – and comprehensively so. We’re broke. Kids can’t read. Crime is the worst in Europe. Unemployment is soaring. Etc. Etc. There is no good story to tell. But Labour can’t very well base any campaign on a position of honesty then can they?
All they have left is to lie about their record and their plans. In the internet age that is no longer really an option. So Labour are out of options.
They’ve ruined the country. They deserve to be routed at the election. End of story.
This kind of protest is all very well. But ruining an importantly productive and historically-defining part of the population of a small spaceship – out of spite totally – which is “hurtling defenceless through the Universe”, as the lefties are frequently wont to tell us [anybody remember "Only one Earth"?] ought to be wrong and punishable.
They persistently go after us and our culture and civilisation, /because/ we publicly exposed the errors and inconsistencies in their supposed neopastoralist pre-capitalist-barbarian anthology of “ideas”.
If Labour have [again] failed, kids can’t read (we all know in our hearts it is so), crime is worst and also up (we know this too from observation) then in Civil Law if some employees of a firm had deliberately done this, they’d get sued and rightly.
We can’t allow those who now happen to be, or in the [increasingly dark] future will happen to be, the inheritors and torch-bearers of socialist ideology, to get off. It ought to be made clear, by all liberal, conservative, libertarian or free-market-oriented parties, that, in the end, the enemy will not escape.
/BLAME/ /will/ be attached to whosoever at the time of our victory is caught espousing Enemy Class ideas. We can’t pursue the dead for retribution, but we can pursue the living, and we will do so. Members of the Enemy Class still standing at the time would be presented with a bill for rectifying what they have done.
Obviously details would have to be worked out in more clarity, but I can’t see a problem with statements like…
“…if what you or your forebears did has ruined our economy and “cost” “£150 billion of other people’s money” (eg private pensioners) then /you/ who happen to be here now, are liable”.
Nature is (as my old-fella used to say) is “red in tooth and claw”. I can’t ever seem to figure out why the lefty-Nazi-conservationist-neopastoralist-barbarians always idolise the worst and most bloodridden predators.
…Or do they somehow recognise their own kin?
Here’s a new meme:-
“Socialism is de-civilisation and baby-killing”.
Here’s the de-civilisation bit. A Kent school has disinvited Morris Dancers of a tradition in which you black up your face with charcoal, as a disguise.
I only ask, because there is an interesting thread over at Samizdata, and not all of you will have seen it.
(Originally published on May 9th 2007)
This morning I had one of my most pleasant students over for an A-level Business Studies tute. we drank lots of coffee and talked about the definitions of many “business terms and buzzwords” that he needs to know of and use in the correct contexts when he writes his exam papers. (He hasn’t even been told except by me, to read the business pages of his newspapers, whatever ones they may be, even the tabloids, every day.)
This is an entirely amiable, “nice” young man, with a “normal” family background, and what he and his peers see as all the advantages of life in Blair’s New Britain currently going for him. He is averagely intelligent, whatever that means; but that is to say, that in my view he is capable of everything that a proper, rigorous pre “British-socialist” (as opposed to the much more rigorous socialist ones that existed and still to some extent exist behind the Iron Curtain) 1950s style education system can bowl at him. His horizons are only averagely narrow, and wider than many of his age group.
But something seems to have gone wrong with the amount of actual crunchy “hard” knowledge of the world that children are now expected to be aware of. It’s gone down. I see two strands of strategy at work here. Firstly, the “curriculum” has been progressively and continuously truncated. For example, the latest GCSE “science” syllabus for 14-16-year olds, in operation this year, is hard put to contain any actual science. This is just the example that I know most about, although you would be scared at what’s in – and also what’s NOT in - the current Geography syllabus. Secondly, the “institutions”, by which I guess I mean the “universities”, have for about four decades been turning out the kind of graduates that think individual people are a “Resource”, that they ought to be told what to think, and that the curriculum and popular media (including the content and presentational style of the ”Wireless Tele- Vision” News) ought to reflect the world-view of the coterie that’s running the institutions.
This generates a population of people who, on the threshold of adulthood, have to be told what simple words and terms of description mean. Or, they “sort of know” what stuff means, but “can’t put it into words” (his and their phraseaology, not mine.)
Am I alone in thinking that the destruction of the most beneficent and powerful engine of education that has ever existed in the world – the broad universe of British schools and universities up to about 1960 both here and overseas - is under deliberate assault? And if I am right, then what is “their” motive? What is the use of a population whose members have lost the ability to articulate thoughts and abstractions? I know that statists hate us for inventing liberalism, and for degrading the realisable frontiers of tyranny through the ages. But, couldn’t they just “lie back and think of the Gulag”, and allow themselves to be carried along, glowing with self-satisfaction and prosperity, on the swelling tide of riches that will percolate down to them from the many crackpots who will harmlessly prosper in a capitalist civilisation, and in which their rantings will be of negligible account?
Never thought I’d see that.
A Ceaucescu moment, withal.
For libertarians, the tragic comparison between the rightly-trashed junta that terrorized poor Romania for decades, and the GramscoFabiaNazi outfit we find we’d let in while sleeping, brings sorrow, and deep embarrassment. You want to know what people in real blood-and-guts-countries like, say, New Zealand, Cuba, or Poland, or Italy, or Tuvalu, think about our plight and how we allowed it.
But the comparison does also being encouragement. It means that Brown either can’t pass any more legisation, ever in his life (a good thing, we have too much already) and will stay ot fight on, further damaging the LabourNazis, or else he will be gone in a few days.
The latter is the worse option, for then Labour could try to recover in the polls. The need is for it to be so thrashed that it could be closed down by door-kicker-inners. Libertarians of course disagree about the extent to which it could be forcibly shut down as a criminal organisation, such as PIE. But at least some effort to, in the inter-regnum between the announcement of the election result and the taking-over of the administration by the LPUK whoever other than Labour should win this time round, should be marked by some “readjustmentof the furniture and effects” at government and Council Soviet offices countrywide.
Hard disks could be sifted out and malleted on the pavements. Especially in regard to any record of pension entitlements (I still do not share Sean Gabb’s leniency in this regard: I am a bit less positive than he is about not letting the buggers actually really really starve to death in the blown hedgerows.) There will not be time to dismantle them for the NdFeB magnets, tragic though this will be: the GramscoFabiaNazis work quicker than divisions of schoolchildren with screwdrivers….and may return….
Full and long-term degradation of the ability of socialism to re-infect the UK is worth the loss of all that Neodymium.
Industrial shredders could be trucked in. (See power stations below.)
All other serviceable computer hardware could be given to schools and charity shops. Furniture, including OKA (whatever that is) and IKEA (I know what that is) would have to be shred-chipped and burnt in power stations.
Oh, and the BBC will be shut immediately. As indeed Sean Gabb has often said. Property rights in the frequency bands used previously by the BBC will be auctioned off to whoever can pay now, and wants to use them***, so long as no (repeat no) management, “programme planning” or research staff from the old BBC are employed to fill these new slots. Technicians will be fine…for now….BBC “journalists” may have to attend “re-education facilities”, it depends.
In abolishing socialism, you have to start somewhere.
I’m sure it’s done on purpose, like other GramscoFabiaNazi wickednesses.
“Miss” “Jacqui” “Smith” is, er, ummm, to “resign”.
This is because we are Classical liberals, and we know about things.
Patricia Hewitt to “stand down“. (She does not look very well, and she _is_ 60. And she probably knows that all political careers end in failure.)
Poor old bat. Let her go. It is not suitable to execute women.
You know, it’s a funny thing: it troubles me in the night: it’s about how absolutely insensitive to the moods and needs of real human beings GramscoFabiaNazis actually are. Today, you have some of them whining on in the Guardian about how Brown needs to survive “one more week of torture”, in order to pull through and drag the charred bollocks of Stalinism out of the upended, raging barbecue of mass opinion on his and his cronies’ total cock-up of this nation.
How on earth do real people (I presume?) get like that in the first place?
I think it’s the central problem that libertarians ought to address: how do we stop socialism/Fabianism actually happening, in anyone’s brain, anywhere, ever, in the first place?
You know – swamp-draining stuff.
There are two hypotheses about how these people got to see the world through such a distorted prism.
(1) “They” really really believe what they are saying about how a liberal civilisation of free individuals ought to be chained and regulated (by them) and express sadness and incomprehension that we can’t see it their way. They really think that a “Honestiores/Humiliores” model is the right one, and that they are the first and we are the second, and that the technology required to maintain it is minimalist, and that if only we are persuaded, all will be well.
(2) It’s all a put-up-job, a mask of concern to hide their ineffably-wicked determination to destroy, to upend as above, to viciously (jack)boot the whole of Mankind – barring themselves, their tribes and their harems (of both sexes I opine, though not at the same time of course) to the Neolithic Age. (GreeNazism must feature strongly here.)
The problem of how and where and when that prism of distortion was implanted in their brains also remains. I can’t tell today what ought to be done with most of the staff of our schools and universities, but it’s got to be considered.
I can’t really tell any more which it is, of (1) or (2) above. Can anyone help?
Furthermore: we also are still left with the problem of what to do with them, and what to do with exterior nations inevitably friendly to them after we shall have cast them out. Bodwyn Wook dealt with this the other day too.
Huh?…Have I missed something important while at work today?
I do not think that struggling people in Africa, or even elsewhere, care much. If people want to read poetry, or even create some, then that is a real libertarian issue, and they can do it.
Professors of it can’t help much.
Can’t really see what they-professors are for. (No point them reading it to you, for you must be able to do that for yourself,)
Whoops has hit on what I’d say was an unlooked-for advantage of high-rise tower blocks, in the coming Endarkenment.
(Here’s what I said about Thanogly-Djanogly. Perhaps he ought to be a foot ball-ist, with a name like that, not a politician? Look, he needs his gates, ‘coz people don’t like him, or else he thinks they don’t.
But you’d better hope your assaulters have not got artillery of any kind, I suppose. That the lifts might be put out of action by it, is the least of your worries! What if the building falls “at terminal speed”? (Load of pilotsfortruth9/11.org crap). How will you get out?
How about a Motte-and-Bailey castle, or better, a proper one, or even the really really strategically-focussed ones, such as was built by Edward I, like this one? (It’s about two and a half hours down the road from here on Richard Brunstrom’s cameraed-roads.) This was his contracting-engineer.
There’s still time to buy something if you have the dosh. Sell your yacht. Now, and take it in cash, gold or silver bullion (not “money”).
Well, my last posting went down like a lead balloon, or should I say, in these hyper-flagged-parliamentary-expense-claim times, a concrete duck island. But it says at The Landed Underclass that ANPR camera systems are all the rage among our Enemy Class, and can be used for all sorts of fun activities suitable for all the family. For once, I’m on the side of the Evil BBC, which has flagged this up.
True, the BBC stringers may all be irremediably-incorrigible lefties right now, complaining that one of their number, a professional member of Rentacrowd, has been victimised by these devices. But as Churchill said in 1941, about Hitler’s assault on the USSR, he might be persuaded to include a favourable reference to the Devil. (None of what I have advocated will pay in the end of course, but in these times, our enemy’s enemy is our friend.)
|“If Hitler invaded Hell I would at least make a favourable reference to the Devil in the House of Commons.”|
I hasten to hope that the Cameroid, if and when he gets elected as he possibly will, inside the next year or so, will demolish all this stuff, but I doubt it somehow.
ITEM:- You can make a duck island now, for less than £20 !!! Here!
Interesting and thoughtful analysis here, of the state of consciousness called constitution-ness.
The solution of course, as we so often say, is better people. But to be able to get some, we have to have some liberty.
I will start by saying that it is very juvenile, and also flies in the face of historical fact and actually existing records created in detail by the people-Immolators Themselves, to deny that The Holocaust took place. It is a pointless and futile act, in some cases I am sure designed only to get attention.
That said, it ought not to be a crime, anywhere at all, especially in Germany and Austria for the mmost clear of Classical Liberal and liberty-relevant reasons, to deny these facts. Mountebanks, idiots, and sad people with self-constructed axes to grind, ought to be allowed to say what they believe. Perhaps even a honing of the truth and a better understanding of it will come about as a result. Also perhaps not. But the liberty to say what one thinks is paramount. Sean Gabb did a large piece on holocaust Denial a while ago, here. It already has 243 comments.
But today we learn that an Australian person has been sentenced to a period in chokey for Holocaust Denial. I can’t see the point of this, can you?
Furthermore, what is Australia, a supposedly sensible and down-to-earth country, doing behaving like that?
The way to avoid States making laws that say things like Holocaust Denial is a crime, is for there to be
(1) less powerful States, and
(2) better people.
Unfortunately, people can only become better by
(a) knowing in advance what is good and what is bad, and
(b) staying awake more.
This all presupposes that there must be such a thing as Absolute Morality, and what I guess I’d call “Objective Good” and “Objective Evil”, and so it rather cuts the ground from under the feet of
(ii) Other forms of moral relativist.
Afterthought….about the sort of people who make Holocaust Denial a crime: AND could the MPs’-expenses fleabag-bag-of-scumbags’ stories get any better? We hope so….and we await.
|Ian B on Sean Possibly off-line|
|Hugo Miller on ‘Operate on this mother…|
|Radical Rodent on Sean Possibly off-line|
|David Davis on Sean Possibly off-line|
|Dr Sean Gabb on Sean Possibly off-line|
|Neil Lock on Sean Possibly off-line|
|marklibertarian on 1984 Was an Instruction M…|
|David Davis on Sean Possibly off-line|
|Paul Marks (@paulvma… on 1984 Was an Instruction M…|
|Paul Marks (@paulvma… on 1984 Was an Instruction M…|
|Paul Marks (@paulvma… on Stephan Kinsella, “The Role of…|
|Mr Ecks on You Cannot Negotiate with…|
|Dr Sean Gabb on You Cannot Negotiate with…|
|Ian B on You Cannot Negotiate with…|
|Julie near Chicago on You Cannot Negotiate with…|
Or send your contribution to:
The Libertarian Alliance
2 Lansdowne Row
London W1J 6HL
By Nigel Meek
Conservative Party Politicians
Buy Hard Copy
By Sean Gabb
The Column of Phocas
Buy Hard Copy
By Chris R. Tame &
Novels by Richard Blake