Tag Archives: Taxation

How soon will the Euro implode?


UPDATE:- I said this the other day, too.

David Davis

About 12 years ago, or it may be 13, I bet a YEM* person £25 that the Euro, recently issued, would sink to UD$1.00 by that Christmas. It did fall, a bit: my prediction was only wrong in degree -  but I lost my bet and ponied up.

Now Peter Oborne thinks the project is at last about to come undone.

* “YEM” was the “Young European Movement”. God knows what’s happened to that.

Another interesting (and worrying) read


David Davis

I was idly scanning “Underdogs Bite Upwards” – as you do – earlier, and it says there that the Green Party actually want to do these things. If it was not scary – these are the kinds of people that truly believe what they say, just like we do – then it would be droll. But it’s not droll, for if they got anywhere near such a heavily-empowered State as this one, then they would really get started.

They were going to come for our dogs but we spoke out


Michael Winning

just in time then

Tax cuts for a smaller government


Michael Winning

I found this over at The Englishman’s Castle, hes up early like me he is. It’s a clever spoof on the people who I think pay for the Labour Party and its bloated bust budget, that lot called Unison or summat:-

Coming soon, to a “little local shop” near you…


Michael Winning

VAT on food? Counting Cats has noticed and all. i don’t seem to see much on it in the press so it’s maybe on the cards.

Hope they’re not ration-cards, neither.

What’s a “carbon-neutral-tourist”?


David Davis

Go to the island of Bute (Scotland) and find out. I don’t think Trudie Styler would qualify, for a start.

h/t The Englishman’s Castle

Lord Tebbit should address the Enemy-Class-history-erasers directly (British-State-GCSE History papers to be added sequentially – keep looking…)


David Davis

The British-State “history” “syllabus” is a current and festering disgrace, has been designed on purpose with a civilisation-erasing(ours) -intent, and will have to go.

“The English were responsible for slavery” (discuss the sources given to you. Do not refer to other sources.)

“The Tudors brought war, smoking and piracy” (discuss the given account by a Spanish monk.)

“The capitalists of the Industrial Revolution exploited workers deliberately, especially children” (discuss the sources given including the extract from a novel by a writer called Charles Dickens.)

“Haig was the Butcher of the Somme” (discuss the sources given.)

“The salt tax in India was the cause of Ghandi’s rebellion and was unfair to poor Indian people” (discuss the role of modern Quangos in forced dietary-choice-editing by New Labour…(I wish))

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3042-3-W-QP-JUN08.PDF (a paper)

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3042-3047-3-W-MS-JUN08.PDF (its “mark scheme”)

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3042-3047-1-W-QP-JUN08.PDF (another paper)

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3042-3047-1-W-MS-JUN08.PDF (this paper’s “mark scheme”)

Here’s some serious papers for British 16-year-olds, concerning what “educationists” think that these people ought to think about “The American West 1840-1895″:-

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3041-3046-2A-W-QP-JUN08.PDF (the paper)

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3041-3046-2A-W-MS-JUN08.PDF (its mark scheme)

“British social and economic history” … the assumption that Trades Unions are innately a good thing, and that opposing them as infringements of property rights is bad, is taken as read:-

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3043-1-W-QP-JUN08.PDF (a paper)

http://store.aqa.org.uk/qual/gcse/qp-ms/AQA-3043-1-W-MS-JUN08.PDF (its mark scheme)

More to come…..

Nice work if you can get it


David Davis

Jeff Randall pulls the trousers off the Quangos and their cost to us.

Tilting at last year’s windmills


David Davis

“Green Taxes”, on “motorists”…to “fund cuts for families”. Yep, families don’t do any motoring: these proposals will really, really wow them on the remaining reservations where Mondeo Man can still be found clinging onto his natural habitats. People will be wetting their pants with delight, and will get killed in the rush to vote out the gramscofabianazis.

“Zak” Goldsmith, or whatever he’s called right now, ought to be made to live, all the time, in a cottage halfway up a mountain in mid-Wales. No electricity, no gas, no piped water, an “AGA” (whatever that might be), shickens for making methane for the gas-lamps, oh, and I’ve just spotted that he’ll want BROADBAND to talk to forehead-Dave.

You’d really have thought that a “progressive” party would want to withdraw the hem of it’s garment from all this “Green” nonsense, specially after Climategate.

Silly fellows.

teh funneh


From Man Widdicombe.

Meanwhile, in the Nissen-Hut, working out the subtext of this message


David Davis

“Ministers will say” that “the professions” should “stop recruiting young people in private education”.

I’m not sure what the duty-Chimpanzee type writers dislike more: the notion that the governmentists will “say” that people who have paid twice for their children’s education must now get nothing at all, or that this “government” has decided that it is a set of farmers, who farm animals called “The Middle Class”, that can be farmed for taxation-revenue as required by varying the size of said farm.

Norman Tebbit’s blog kicks off


Nichael Winning

Go read all of it, the old codger always said things unpopular with whatve noe become our Enemy Class. Can’t think why, perhaps they are just bad.

Worth a (bath) plug


David Davis

This via The Last Ditch via Dick Puddlecote, is hilarious:-

It will be interesting to see…


…what grim Gordon Brown and the fun-Chancellor do about this. They’ll either have to increase taxation (even more) or force people to work longer hours….in which case, who pays the employers…?

David Davis

Perhaps cutting your hours to save your job, and thus decreasing your liabilities to the State, will be classed as “Tax Evasion” in the 23,447th  Criminal Justice Bill introduced by This Government. (Queen, offstage: “One is getting a bit bored with these now…can’t one announce something else?)

We were made to “apologise for slavery”, we who were the first to disinvent it. And by the people who support the people who will stand or fall by how much tax revenue they can raise over the next few years decades.

Boris Johnson on Taxation


David Davis

True words, but nobody will listen except the rich who can leave anyway.

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.

If I wanted to destroy the UK’s taxation-base….


..and I was Gordon Brown, then this is how I would start off.

David Davis

I thought that Statists like taxation. I thought they liked to do it.

They not only like [other people] to pay it, but they like to raise [lots and] lots of it.

If they want to do it, then there perhaps ought to be something large and worthwhile to tax economically and profitably. Surely, it’s worth more net revenue to tax about 10,000 guys each collecting lump sums of say £200,000 each, every year year in year out, (40% of 20 billion = 8 billion for 10,000 audits) than to tax 20 million people each yielding, let us say, £4,000 each per year (80 billion for 20 million audits) and with the same volume of paperwork per unit as the big guys?

They will merely have 200 times the paperwork per billion raised, if they drive the Banks offshore, as they now will.

And I haven’t even costed in the marginal taxation-losses due to death of small-businesses who service the bonus-earners.

How to kick the UK further into the poo: part 1 – tax “the City” more.


David Davis

Yep, that’ll really make banks and traders want to stay here, won’t it.

They’ll queue up to open bigger offices, and employ more people, so “Lord” “Turner” can define how “socially useful” they are, and administer suitably-popular public spankings.

AND

If “The City has grown beyond a reasonable size”, then that makes Lord Turner a “PLANNER”.

Ahhhhhhhhh……………Gosplan! Bisto! Stalinism!

And I don’t know whether Samizdata got to it before I did, but you can read Jonathan’s excellently detailed analysis here.

Road tolls, and no tax cuts: time to slag off the Tories, in advance of their (still debatable) win


David Davis

Some of us have always known that, in the event of a ZanuLieBorg defeat, they not having rigged the results sufficiently or stuffed enough !”postal votes”! in their Rotten Boroughs , a Tory win would not mean the start of a Long March Towards Liberalism.

For those who are confused, I, in here, use the word “liberalism” with a _/small L/_ to mean free-market non-socialist/minimal statism: this word belongs to us and not to the Enemy Class or people like US “democrats”, who have twisted and corrupted it, and who deliberately and purposefully and with conviction lean towards big-statist Nazism. Watch Obama morph as he finds his feet, more’s the pity – and we did warn you nearly two years ago about what he would get like.

So now we are being softened up with “no tax cuts,” and “possible increases”, and a delay in the “pledge to abolish IHT”, and even “road tolls”. The upside is there won’t be any money to build many “new roads” for some time.

Tories in the UK think that once the election is “won” – (will it be? Better be quite serious about the guys you face, for they hate you and us and they won’t stop now) – they will get an easy ride from “right wing bl0ggers”, whatever those are. Well, we shall have to see, but the signs are not enouraging.

Cameron thinks that we’ll all have to dig into our pockets to right the wrongs of this administration: but he did have other alternatives as follows:-

(1) Formally repudiate ALL UK sovereign debt taken out by _this_ administration after a date he could have set. That would stop the borrowing in short order…

(2) Announce that instead of tax rises, or non-removal of most existing imposts, very very large areas of the State would simply be closed down… He could simply publicly nominate huge departments and fiefdoms for absolute closure and which are not populated by Tory voters, which is most of it, without any electoral penalty….The fact that Sterling would rise on that revelation would not benefit Brown as cameron would already have said that he’s not going to pay any more new debts incurred by the said Gorgon…

(3) He could then announce the prospect of actual tax cuts, seeing as he’d save at least £300 billion in wages bills straight away. Conservatively [bad pun, sorry] we could have £150 billion of tax cuts per year, plus an extra £150 billion earmarked for debt servicing, and we might get out of debt in as little as ten years. Moreover, the hundreds and hundreds of thousands of desperate ex-public-employees, starving on the streets and many even without housing – it having been repossessed and the Banks unable to sell or let it, would drive wages and real rents down to a right market-clearing level, which will benefit the private sector which could then recover a modicum of tax-paying-ability in time.

But the Tories won’t do it, will they.

They are _/not really serious at all/_.

Time to attack them, now, before it’s too late.

Monday morning, same old statist crap roundup


David Davis

UPDATE1:- Guido has a thing up about possible new directors of the IEA. I favour our own home-grown, hand-knitted Dr Tim. Best man for the job: libertarian: heart in right place: won’t empty the Westminster wine-cellars, not today anyway: and some more of our stuff might get published, even for no money!

EARLIER:-

It says over at Guido Fawkes that “Ed” “Balls” is still running the government, and The Devil agrees, while over at Iain Dale’s place the big news is…Mandelson’s lying…again! (Don’t you all just get tired of this stuff after a while?)

At least The Englishman managed to get out of his Castle and go punting yesterday – wonder for how long that will still be allowed?

And … I think we said something about this before, but if not, then not. But if you are a government, and you get to a situation where you’re paying out to your clientariat more money that you take in from taxation, in order for said clientariat to not work, then isn’t it time to call in the Scottish Accountants? (Oooops, aren’t some of them on the gravy train already?)

However, interesting take on the concept of “decivilisation” – a useful word which I shall proceed to use unattributed henceforth, from a proper Scottish Accountant.

Jonathan Pearce over at Samizdata is probably feeling the same emotions.

Landed Underclass has gone silent for a bit…hope he’s all right. Or perhaps everything we think about this shower of wicked GramscoFabians has been said? (He’ll post now in a few minutes’ time, you just watch…)

MPs and taxation-avoidance (which we can’t now do) so it gets worse.


Go here.

They’ll probably all have to go, except for about three. What is to become of us?

BBC License Fee: Chauffeur-driven cars = £100,000, hotels = £24 million? That’s missing the point.


David Davis

The tory-Quisling-graph takes the BBC to task over its license fee. (Again.)

The Enemy Class will not take any notice of us if we keep going on about their fripperies. Who cares if £100,000 is spent on ferrying two Enemy-Warlords from the train to the office? Small-change, and won’t convince anybody.

This is not the point, and The Enemy Class knows it. The danger is that we will miss it (the point.)

Anyway, if they dared to rub shoulders with the starving, thirsty, sweating mobs on The Tube, they’d get scragged: and even __we here__ don’t want that: not really. It’ll just make the place harder to turn into a peaceful liberty-loving libertarian civilisation than it’s already going to be.

The issue is about whether there ought to be a poll-tax-funded-State-Nazi mouthpiece at all. The entire organisation has become iniquitous, in that it’s now quite cheerfully and openly partial to the objectives of the GramscoFabiaNazis. It needs just to go, like poor Michael Martin – who, now he’s toast, looks just like he always was: a rather dim and useful idiot-fall-guy who drew convenient flak, and was ultimately for use by the real Enemies of Liberty.

No, sorry.

We should assault the structures of The Enemy Class head-on, from now on. We must question the need for these structures’ existence at all times. We must take each chance to abolish something they have made, as it comes, not waiting a second. We must never miss the chance to deliver boot-kicks to the head, until total dissolution, to anything of theirs we have managed to destroy.

They will never give up: they are incorrigibly evil and anti-human, and want a permanent-world-in-aspic, of cowed /Humiliores/ serfs slaving for a patina of /Honestiores/. They _must_ be stopped, and prevented from ever re-arising, or we are doomed. We  _must_  treat infestation by their philosophies as a notifiable and infectious disease, like malaria or the Plague. (So the Universities have got to be fixed quite soon then.)

Charles Moore often champions the BBC-license-fee-refuseniks. You can follow links to him out from here.

Here come the bastards, again, for your money, ‘coz they have run out of the last lot they shysted.


David Davis

The Landed Underclass has spotted a move to “tax search engines”. I have to wonder how that’s going to work. It’s clearly a case, if true, of  “if it moves, tax it.” He says it came from this lot here, and the Mail here…apparently to “help the BBC”.

But…I thought the BBC had “The License fee” – no?

Here are some comments from the Mail link:-

“The government wants to give money to the BBC as it’s the one organisation that supports them and there will be an election to fight .”

#”What’s British TV got to do with Google”

“we pay enough for our broadband now, next thing will be gormless gordon putting a tax on the air we breath, but I guess MP’s will put that down on their expenses, like they do with their broadband…….”

No wonder the State wants “universal broadband”.


 

 

 

Ho ho ho


It’s only little


Mummylonglegs

Strange. On my desk, as we speak, is a little parcel. A special little parcel In this parcel are 3 little t-shirts. They belonged to 3 little people but as of yesterday, at 12.30pm the became the property of one Gordon Brown. So he shall recieve them. Along with little the t-shirts is a little note, which reads :-

Dear Gordon,

                            we hope you like our little t-shirts. We liked them too but Mummy says they now belong to you as you need them more than we do. Mummy says she doesn’t need to send you her shirt as you already have it.

                                From Big Squid, Middle Squid and Ickle Squid

I state this is strange because as I look at this little parcel I see all my hopes and dreams for my Squids in there too, along with their little shirts.

Gordon Brown
10, Downing Street
London
SW1A 2AA.

http://andtherewasmethinking.wordpress.com/2009/04/22/1317/

That’s it – lights out


David Davis

New 50% tax rate “on the rich”.

Some will go, because they can. The taxation take will be neutral at best, and he has not heard of the Laffer Curve. Or he has, and is justbeing deliberately socialist and thus wicked on purpose. (I’m sure Tony H will plangently and loftily advise that it’s been superceded by something better and more relevant, discrediting some American heroes into the bargain. Oi!!! You, Hollick, at the back there, heckling. Pay attention!)

ZanuLieBorg will pick up a couple of points in the polls, to -17%.

Brown will call an election and will win by 13 seats. Ballot boxes will have been found to have been tampered with. We will be told “move along, there’s nothing to see here”. The BBC will rejoice on election night at the perspicacity of the British People.

Enough for him, for a bit longer.

If UK “plc” was a company, all that would need to be decided is for how long to send the directors and auditors to prison.

No longbows in the 1190s, sorry!


David Davis

Wrong!

And…jeans? Yuk.

 

Nah

Nah

So that’s curtains for pubs then.


David Davis

“More than 200 MPs” are backing a campaign to……”

…where have we heard all that self-regarding tripe before? When will the goverNazis realise that, not only have we all realised that what they touch (or regulate) turns to dust and ashes, but that we are fast realising that they are doing it on purpose?

Measures to save the “Great British Pub”, as outlined by The Libertarian Alliance:-

(1) Abolish (ideally) all Excise Duty on alcoholic drinks:

(2) Allow __Publicans__ to dictate whether or not they individually want to allow “smoking”, lap-dancers, food, strippers, “Ladies of the Night”,  football screens, children, music etc, in their own premises:

(3) Abolish ALL drink-driving/alcohol-blood-level legislation, and impose astonishingly large fines and/or prison sentences for injuring or killing someone while drunk in charge of a vehicle:

(4) Stop conflating deaths of drunk pedestrians into “drink-drive-deaths”:

You can’t do it by making “supermarket lager” more expensive. People who buy this won’t go to pubs anyway. Let Pubs make themselves more attractive and individual, remove the disabilities of mostly responsible drivers and smokers and enjoyers of social activity in groups, such as watching lap-dancers, eating burgers and chips, bear-bating and the like, and pubs will recover.

The Crown Dependency of Forvik


David Davis

Interesting place: I must investigate some more. It may be that more geographic parts of the planet, within the UK,  might be persuaded to secede from Gordo-Jaqcistan. Technically, if it was a bit of the United Kingdom, I would be advocating treason, but I don’t somehow think that real soldiers would come after such people, and Shetland is not really part of the UK in spirit anyway, even if close geographically. Only interior ministry troops would be an irritation and a bother, until they starve to death.

Perhaps Daniel Hannan would support a move for people to take citizenship of this Forvik place, if Gordon Brown persists in smirking shallowly, in front of people, about how badly he has done as a Chancellor and also as a PM.

The ZanuLieBorg British State hates poor people….


….and it is probably privately still “utterly relaxed about people getting filthy rich”….(was it Mandelson or Blair said that? Does it even matter?)

…and “And There Was Me Thinking” has noticed what I have noticed too. She, however, views the interfering State medical-Gramsco-MarxiaNazis in a slightly less positive light than I do.

David Davis

…but we have, just in, “Price of Alcohol could double”.

It’s bad enough for wretched stalinised poor people, who are those who mostly smoke, being charged 25p (about 0.22 Euro or 16 cents US) for a fag, and who have little else in the way of worthhwile pleasures in life except horrible nasty lefty State Tele Vision (for which they also have to oay the BBC regardless.)

Make their alcohol – probably the only other thing that’s nice in their sad lives that they have left –  double the price, and it will do nothing but drive more petty crime in the direction of nicking the stuff.

Intelligent people, such as big crime bosses, will also get into the act of fermenting and distilling hooch on a large and untaxed scale. Does the Government really want that? Does the NHS really want the fallout from that – both in crimestats and secondary health effects?

UPDATE1:- The Landed Underclass explains trenchantly why the ZanuLieBorg GramscoNaziNannies don’t understand economics. It’s why their only pretence at a “Reich” failed, after all: RIP 1917-1991.

UPDATE2:- The Remittance Man demolishes the AlcoGramscoNazis mathematically. Do go read the whole thing.

UPDATE3:- Legiron does a comprehensive fisking job on Lamebrain Donaldson too.

While we yet slave, the trough-pigs still hoover in the money


David Davis

Perhaps it would matter less that Members of the European Parliament scoop £200,000 per year in “expenses” and “allowances” (that’s about USD  $  300,000) if what they did was essentially harmless and unimportant to the rest of us.

I’m not sure that President Barack Obama even earns quite that total amount (with his ordinary pay of course) and you oculd argue that he deserves it more in return for the augmented stress of his own job.

We at the Libertarian Alliance often say that being engulfed in the EU is “a” problem, but it is not “the main” problem, for Britain and in particular England (which not only does the nett paying for the EU boondoggle, but against which and against whose traditions, customs and commercial practises “EU directives” are often specifically “directed”.

But the EU is certainly an expensive problem, aside from the legislative implications. if we could leave, we could abolish VAT.

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.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/daniel_hannan/blog/2009/02/19/meps_walk_out_when_vaclav_klaus_questions_european_integration

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

Thanks for spotting this….


…and so today, the British Open Grauniadista-tweaking-contest Grand Challenge Cup goes to The Landed Underclass….for finding this rather fine material. Stylistico-philosphically-speaking, I have my covert suspicions that Landed and Belfry may be the same man – just using two different pub disguises, but I’m keeping quiet about that one.

David Davis

And this is good stirring stuff. I’m not surprised that the “left” is eternally whingeing that there are few outstanding, fast-responding socialist blggers: the people they’d need are all writing for the enemy.

Libertarian Alliance Bulletin


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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

I have agreed to speak at the following meetings:

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

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

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

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

Society for Individual Freedom

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

Libertarian Alliance home

State camera blatancy: the gloves come off


The Landed Underclass published this yesterday. On the basis several other bloggers and we here think it’s astonishingly perceptive, it will probably go viral on the interweb thingy before long. But with Sir’s permission, we happily republish it in full and unedited here:-

The following:-

©The Landed Underclass,  http://landedunderclass.wordpress.com 2009

BLATANCY AWARD (live linked back in title, for originator)

One of the advantages of living in the country is that one is unlikely to encounter anything like this [the Times, found by the outraged Obnoxio]:

The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) has approved a new generation of cameras that are linked wirelessly and operate in clusters, meaning that speeding drivers will be caught whichever route they take across a wide area… they read numberplates automatically and transmit data instantly to a penalty-processing centre… They are harder to vandalise than Gatso cameras because they are suspended from arms on six-metre poles.

Quite apart from the vandalism aspect (ain’t any of you all heard of a lariat?) there is the usual difficulty.

Valley Bottom is a sedate bit of road, and only about six feet wide by the sheep field, but it is not a cul-de-sac. Once in a while one of the local youths drives along it, as fast as he possibly can, a rusty Citroën Saxo (or it might be a Fiat Punto; all this car talk is really rather soiling, isn’t it?), its intrinsic gasps, rattles, squeaks and waterpump scarcely competing with the exhaust, which instead of a silencer now has part of an euphonium attached to it, and the stereo, the alternator loading of which being the reason why the car can manage no more than 58mph (at 139dB(A)/10m).

Because the driver has (as is his wont) omitted such petit-bourgeois poltroonery as insurance, driving licence and vehicle registration, it will not matter if he is on every visit tracked from low Earth orbit by some huge American spy satellite. Nothing will happen to him; it never does, thanks, no doubt, to his customary precaution of having different number plates, stolen from different cars, on each end of his ungentleman’s conveyance.

The big disadvantages of speed humps as a ‘rat-running deterrent’, or whatever, are that they cost only a modest amount to install (and generate work only for council mateys, not for shadowy surveillance-and-security companies run as sidelines, via holding companies in Switzerland and the Cayman Islands, by members of ACPO, as if policemen would ever do such a thing; for shame), they don’t generate a revenue-stream for anyone, and they might even impede official vehicles.

That the tired old chestnut of ‘global warming’ has to be trotted out to defend this desperate fundraiser probably indicates roughly how blatant it is.

Obnoxio:

More lamp-posts, more piano wire! Will there be enough?

If I may say so: typical young software chap; lives in a dream world. Just you try attaching anything, my lad, let alone piano wire, to any of this modern streamlined, aluminium, low-pressure-sodium type municipal street lighting. If it doesn’t slide straight off then the wretched thing will simply buckle. What we simian, brachiating, favourite-spanner-dragging hardware types call ‘not man enough for the job’.

If this lynch-mob thing is going to work someone is going to have to do one of those GPS-assisted surveys about where to find the surviving proper, traditional, ladder-bracket-equipped, cast-iron Victorian gas-standards, with, given the nature of the beast, an SWL of about 3cwt or so (as opposed to tacky, undersized imitations thereof made in China out of monkey-metal and sold in Bodgitt & Quickley’s to people with plastic Georgian porticos, self-adhesive bullseye windowpanes and fairtrade garden gnomes), and someone else is going to have to organise some kind of booking system, doubtless computerised, for their use, otherwise it’ll be complete chaos when the time comes.

Personally I’m opposed to capital punishment. Such a waste in a case like this, when many hours of harmless family televisual entertainment (and/or a very popular website) could be had from little cameras covering the Jobcentres patronised by our erstwhile ‘leaders’. Their answers to the inevitable questions about ‘aptitudes’ might even be worth putting on the side of a bus.

Rewarding Failure


How the internet will be regulated and throttled, at an ISP near you, and soon.

http://www.littlemanwhatnow.com/2009/01/payments-for-failure.html

Sean Gabb: Another Rant about the Recession


Free Life Commentary,
A Personal View from
The Director of the Libertarian Alliance
Issue Number 179
28th January 2009
Linking url: http://www.seangabb.co.uk/flcomm/flc.179

The Car Industry Bail Out:
Are There no Politicians Now Who Understand Economics?
by Sean Gabb

The British Government has just announced what may be £2,000 million of subsidies for the car industry in this country. Responses to the announcement range from gratitude that jobs and manufacturing capacity are to be saved to complaints that the subsidies do not go far enough. My reading and viewing may not be comprehensive, but I have seen nothing in the mainstream media denouncing the subsidies as at best politically motivated – much of the car industry being located in constituencies held by Labour – and at worst economically illiterate. Since the first grounds of denunciation ought, after nearly twelve years of these people, to be self-evident, I will devote myself here to the second.

We are continually told at present – which is somewhat more than usual – how government spending had created, or will create, so many jobs. Therefore, the immense expansion of the British State since 1997 has created three hundred thousand jobs or whatever. Some deplore this because most of those employed can be expected to vote Labour. Hardly anyone denies there has been a net addition to the number of employed. The same reasoning underlies all discussion of how we are to get through the recession on which we have now started.

The truth is, however, that government spending does not so much create as displace employment. Every pound spent by the Government must first be taken from the people, who cannot then spend it for themselves. If the money is taken is taken through taxes, it exactly reduces the ability of the people to spend or invest it for themselves as they wish, or to save it for transfer, via the banking system, for others to spend or invest as they wish. If the money is borrowed, it again exactly reduces the amount of money that the people can borrow to spend or invest.

It is more complex if the money is printed by the Government – or, more likely nowadays, borrowed from the banks in a fractional reserve system. But if its effects are often hard to trace until after the event, inflation is no less a tax than any other means of providing money to governments. It may reduce the actual purchasing power of money left in the hands of the people. Given the downward pressure on manufacturing costs we have seen during the past generation, inflation will at best reduce the potential purchasing power of money that already exists.

This being so, the argument that government spending creates employment relies on a blindness to the concept of opportunity cost – that every pound spent on paying one salary is a pound less to spend on another salary. Put more simply, it is a case of what Bastiat described as “what is seen and what is not seen”. We see the jobs created by the Government in it “regeneration” projects. We do not see the jobs that would otherwise have been created to supply things that people actually would have bought had the money been left in their own pockets.

For the past six months, the argument has been reinforced by the claim that government spending is needed to make up for a disinclination by others to spend or invest. This being so, it will not be a zero sum game, but will create net employment. There is no doubt that there has been a deflation. People are borrowing less and saving more. The banks have been increasing their financial reserves. But it does not follow from this admission that government spending is needed to make up the deficiency. The fall in spending is not the cause of the problems we face, but is a symptom.

For perhaps the past decade, many central banks in the rich world have kept interest rates below the level needed to balance the supply of savings and the demand for loans. When other prices are forced below their equilibrium – rent control, for example – the result is shortages. In the fractional reserve system that we nowadays have, however, pushing interest rates below their equilibrium has simply enabled the commercial banks to create money out of nothing. In the past, this would have led almost at once to price increases. This time, with most consumer goods made in countries where supply curves are very elastic, and with exchange rates only loosely related in the short term to the financing of foreign trade, and with financial and property markets able to absorb what long seemed to be limitless amounts of money, the result was a speculative bubble, in which consumer prices hardly rose, and in which most of us were persuaded that we were growing richer.

These bubbles never last. The new money is brought into being through bank lending that cannot continue forever. There comes a point where people have taken as much debt as they can service, or  where they have invested on the basis of trends that stop rising. It is then that some event that would otherwise have been overlooked becomes the excuse for a panic. The bubble bursts. Net borrowing turns negative. Prices of overbid assets fall. Prices of securities fall to the value of their underlying assets – assuming there are any that can be identified. Much investment in new capacity is shown to have been unwise.

On this reasoning, the present fall in spending is not an event in itself that needs to be and can be cured by higher government spending. What we now have is really part of a cycle that began with the artificial lowering of interest rates, and that will end with the liquidation of the unwise investments and the correction in asset prices. The British Government’s policy of trying to halt the deflation with higher spending and even lower interest rates cannot do better than lengthen the cycle during its unpleasant phase. It also increases the size of the State – which already takes far too much of our money and spends it on things we would never buy given a free choice.

But I return to the bail out of the car industry. This is not a case of limiting collateral damage. The car industry is not a fundamentally sound victim of circumstances. It is instead one of those sectors in which unwise investments were made. There is no shortage of finance for businesses that really are considered sound. Even I still receive one or two pre-approved loan offers from banks I never knew existed. If the car companies cannot borrow to maintain their working capital, it is because no one believes in their fundamental soundness. Even at the height of the boom, it was claimed that there were too many car makers, given present and future demand for cars. There will now be several years when hardly anyone with an ounce of common sense will spend money unless he must on a new car. No one seems to care if estate agents all over the country are losing their jobs. If car workers are now to lose their jobs, it is for the same reason.

Of course, there are things the Government could do and ought to do to help the car industry. These are all negative. For the past twelve years, it has been running propaganda campaigns and piling taxes and regulations that have tended to make driving less attractive than it might otherwise have been. These propaganda campaigns should be ended. The road excise and petrol duties should be cut. The cameras and yellow and red lines should be taken away. The police officers now deployed to harass drivers should be dismissed – there being, in any event, more policemen than needed to enforce the laws of a free country.

I move back now to the general difficulties we face. With increasing desperation, Gordon Brown is denouncing anyone who questions his policy of inflation as wanting to do nothing. Well, doing nothing at all would be an improvement on what he has been doing. However, there are things the Government could do. None of it would take us back straightaway to the prosperity we have lost. But it would shorten and moderate the pain that stands between us and recovery. I suggest the following:

  • The Government should balance its budget – and do so not by increasing taxes, but by spending less. This would tend to restore confidence to markets that are presently working on the assumption of a soft pound, and where default on the national debt is no longer thought impossible.
  • The Government should force all banks that have limited liability to reveal their true financial position. This would not be an interference in their private affairs, as limited liability is a privilege bringing responsibilities that may be varied as thought reasonable. This would again tend to restore confidence, and it would do more than printing money has to persuade the banks to start lending to each other.
  • The Government should return to a fully convertible gold standard. Unless otherwise contracted, it should be regarded as fraud for a banker to take a deposit and not have sufficient reserves to redeem it at once on demand. This would prevent the periodic explosions of credit that are behind the trade cycle.
  • Of course, the Government should also abolish income tax, valued added tax and excise duties. If this does not cut the tax burden by three quarters, it should abolish some other taxes. To keep the budget balanced, it should also cut spending.

I could go on, making more and more claims unlikely ever to be conceded by the British Government or any other. But the first two, plus a few cuts, would go far to shortening the recession. Sadly, even these will not be tried – not at least until the Keynesian remedies everyone wants have been tested to destruction.

Further Reading:

Murray Rothbard, America’s Great Depression
Henry Hazlitt, Economics in One Lesson
Hans-Hermann Hoppe, Credit Creation or Financial Intermediation?: Fractional-reserve Banking in a Growing Economy

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

Mr Eugenides guesting at The Devil does “climate change” wonderfully well.


Update1:- (from the Devil today 29th Jan 2009) where he picks up from Tom Nelson that more and more people are noticing the glaring contradictions and total lack of scientific rigour emanating form the warmists’ camp.

David Davis

We ought to use him to warm the planet for it will need it. Antarctica is of course getting both colder and warmer at the same moment, so the “mystery of global warming’s missing heat” is of course solved: the models predicted it all along. So pay up, taxpayer-suckers.

Not a bail-out


No, not at all, at all at all at all.

David Davis

Lord Mandyperson of Rumba of Rio, who I cannot find it in my heart to like or trust at all, although Tony my old mate insists he is very bright and interesting and I’d be charmed to have the bugger (sorry) to dinner***, is going to not bail out the UK car industry. What he has just found out is that all the workers live in Labour constituencies Pocket Boroughs, and if the same fate befalls their firms as did nearly Northern Wreck, then he’ll have some explaining to do in front of the Gorgon.

Can’t have the electorate labour voters suffering from our polices, now, can we.

***I’m sure he’d be charming to have as a dinner guest. I’d dispute amicably with him till Kingdom Come. The trouble is, I don’t know anybody else who likes or who trusts the bugger or who – more to the point – would turn up, if Mandy was scheduled to appear. He and I and Tony would have to scoff the grub ourselves.

The facts of life: it is impossible to confront them without becoming a conservative…


…..as Old Labour chancellor Denis Healey has realised, through experience.

David Davis

In this DT interview, Healey says several things about personal wealth, and about progressive taxation, calculated to upset Gordon Brown and Alastair Darling. I don’t think hes’ just sayin’ it to make the Quisling-Graph happy: who the f*** cares about it anyway? It’s becoming dead-tree-press just like the rest, only more slowly, being nominally conservative.

Nah. the poor old bugger – God bless him – towards the evening of his life,  has realised which way is up.

I did not look kindly on him for stating on live Wireless Tele Vision, that Margaret Thatcher “glories in slaughter” – (wikiquote Guardian Newspaper 2nd June 1983) – re the Falklands War, and I think in particular regarding our sinking of the old American cruiser renemed “General Belgrano“. But if he’s repented of both that and also of socialism, then he deserves a peaceful old age.

Musingsonliberty: another interesting new blog spotted.


David Davis

Might be interesting. Here it is.

Go and talk to Richard Murphy about Tim Worstall


David Davis

Here’s the Richard Murphy thread….

…and here I think is the TW one. And it’s probably this one too.

SMOKING, health fascism, New Labour, and Children: two more reasons why you should smoke. And Keeley Hazell wants her little shops to stay open late.


UPDATE:- And Gordon Brown wants  __YOUR__  body…..

David Davis

We talked about this some months ago. Now also, you should smoke for the children, and also to keep up ZanuLieborg’s taxation-takings, so they can continue to dip their hands in the Till at the expense of poor-people who have nothing else much to lighten their miserable Nazi-jackbooted lives.

It is an absolute wonder, to me, that nobody else in the media-Glitterati can see that we are being marched, by jackbooted ThugNazis in our government, back to a pre-capitalist, neo-feudal society, that looks like anything pre-1381 – the date of the first bourgeois tax-revolt.

Ordinary common-or-garden Nazis were disarmingly frank and openly brutal, by comparison. They approached Mugabe’s PR skills, in fact.

Now  then….This caught my eye as the Firefox foxthingy animal-dooberry started to run just now.

What else is “to be sold under the counter” on direction from “ministers”, in due course?

Alcohol (causes death by driving), knives (kill people), tabloid newspapers and “Zoo” and “Nuts” (offend wimmin), FHM, pork (offends Moslems and contains cancer-causing chemicals), automobiles (pollute the planet), and we could all name more things that “dangerous”, “offensive” or risky in use.

You’d have thought that this junta, so keen on promoting the plight of “small shops” and “small businesses” would want to make it easier for them to sell gear to people, not harder. I don’t believe for a moment that !”ministers” who write and spout this stuff are unaware of its shining fascism: I think they mean it very, very sincerely and that they absolutely know that they can, must, and will force people to behave in defined ways predicated by themselves and theyr gramsco-Marxian “uni” Tutors. Just regard some of this blisteringly fascist prose:-

Tobacco products will be barred from display in shops despite fears it could hit small stores during the economic downturn.

The new restrictions come after an extensive consultation on measures to reduce the number of children who take up smoking and helping those already addicted to quit.

But ministers will not go as far as recommending all cigarette packaging be plain with only the brand name and health warnings printed on them.

Sales from vending machines will also be restricted as research has shown children can buy cigarettes from them easily even though they are supposed to be in places where shops owners and pub landlords can supervise them.

Experts are keen to build on the success of the ban on smoking in public places, introduced in England in July 2007, and the increase in the legal age to buy tobacco to 18.

The main opponents have been concerned at the impact on small businesses during the downturn and a surge in illegal tobacco smuggling into the UK.

Last night a Business Department source said: “We know that business has been resisting this but there are times when the consumer’s interest must outweigh that. We believe the public are with us on this move.

“We have asked smokers’ views on this too. There is no doubt that the vast majority want to quit.”

It was reported last month that Business Secretary Peter Mandelson was attempting to block the moves because of the effect on small newsagents and corner shops which rely on cigarette sales for up to a fifth of their custom.

Research has shown that children recognise many brands of cigarettes and prominent displays of products helps to reinforce their familiarisation which influences them to take up smoking. A study in California found children aged between 11 and 14 were 50 per cent more likely to smoke if they had been exposed to tobacco marketing in corner shops.

Shelves full of cigarettes also lure those trying to quit smoking into buying more packets or tempted those trying to quit to buy them, the Department of Health consultation said.

Almost a third of smokers thought removing cigarette displays would help them to give up.

The products will not necessarily have to be placed under the counter but should not be visible, ministers will say today.

It could mean that cigarette packets are covered, placed in a cupboard or a back room.

Launching the consultation in April, health minister Dawn Primarolo said: “It’s vital we get across the message to children that smoking is bad. If that means stripping out vending machines or removing cigarettes from behind the counter, I’m willing to do that.

“Children who smoke are putting their lives at risk and are more likely to die of cancer than people who start smoking later.”

Other countries have already banned the display of tobacco at the point of sale or are planning to do so including Iceland, Thailand, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Norway.

Latest figures show 22 per cent of adults smoke in England, which is down by 1.9m since 1998, and the Government is on target to reduce this to 21 per cent by 2010.

However almost 30 per cent of those in routine and manual jobs still smoke and rates are not dropping in this group as fast.

Smoking is one of the leading causes of early death and accounts for 87,000 deaths in England each year and smoking related illness costs the NHS £1.5bn a year to treat.

Among children nine per cent of 11 to 15-year-olds smoke regularly, rising to one fifth of teenagers aged 16 to 19. More than three in ten 20 to 24 year olds smoke, which is the highest of any age group.

And…I’m sure that Keeley Hazell would not want her little local shops, in Bromley, to go bust through lost ciggy-sales…the sales merely lost to the pushers, at £125 for 20 smacks! I’m not betting on it, but I’d guess the “street” price of 20 “Marlboro’s”, not legally manufactured by Philip Morris, at all, to be about £5 or £6 per spliff… and that’s for starters, until it gets more difficult to supply….

Sorry Im not allowed to smoke on film....

"Sorry I'm not allowed to smoke on film...."

Barack Obama: a conservative in disguise after all?


David Davis

I don’t think so, but it could be nice to hope.

Perhaps we’ll have some music later to celebrate.

But in the meantime, this piece from friend Paul Marks on Samizdata is good reading, about bankers, greed, other kinds of sin, and dodgy election practices in places called Chicago.

Two Britains now…Brown’s Green one, and the one that does the paying.


David Davis

Besides there not being very many libertarians – period – I am prepared to bet around 50p that there are even fewer who work in or depend in any way on the “Public Sector. Michael fallon’s article here in today’s Sunday Quislingraph, outlines the sheer scale of the Brownian State Clientariat problem, but does not even hint at a solution. Paradoxically, a poor wretched tyrannised 3rd-world economy may be better able to cope with such conditions than an intricate, highly-stressed 1st-world one like the UK. At least it’s got the gangsters of the world like Russia, France and the dictators of those unfortunate nations now going down the pan llike Venezuela (and the UN to screw even more out of the likes of us) to send it money, “aid”, tanks, gold beds and Mercs-for-Jerks.

The scarcity of Libertarians in British State employment means I can afford to be as negative as I like about what should be done with the millions of State buggers.

Since we unfortunately are constrained to hold elections and thus decide which lot of Statists gets power for a few years until we get bored with them, Fallon is right not to touch the issue of what should be done about our “Public services” and the featherbedding of their “employees”.

However, Sean Gabb in a pamphlet originally drafted as “How to destroy the Enemy Class” , but now published as “Culture revolution, Culture war“, is more radical. He does not actively suggest – or even at all – that we should round the bastards up at gunpoint while torching their offices and homes, then string them up or lynch them in the street.

This will not even be done in return for their depredations into our savings and purchasing-power, their wilful destruction of our traditions and culture, education system, folk-memory (you can see just one aspect of this described by Tom Paine over at The Last Ditch, and it’s OUR fault for letting it happen), landscape, our institutions both great and world-renowned and also our smaller, even more important local voluntary ones which did more than their duty for centuries, often almost invisibly. (And, I thought I’d better direct you to this which we said some days ago, about hairdressers in a place called Norwich, and mulled wine, and banning it being given to customers at Christmas…you don’t understand a word I’m saying, do you.)

But for me, and it’s probably a good thing that I will never get my way, something more akin to a bloodless revolution but encompassing suitable revenge, such as these measures following. I would do over their offices thoroughly – that bit anyway: it will be fun to take mallets to all their hard disks, and make huge street bonfires of all their records – inclusing their “employment history”, their CVs, and pension “entitlements”….. And then:-

(1) Put the buggers out on the street – all of them. (“Salaries” will be stopped, as is natural in a case of this kind – there has been wilful thieving of the money of others. They have knowingly received monies “raised” by “taxation”, and have accepted it and spent it.)

(2) Cancel their pension rights and entitlements (there has to be suffering, for purgatory to be achieved, and it will concentrate their efforts into finding profitable private sector work such as driving white vans to boot-fairs at 06:00 am on Sundays in the winter, cleaning windows or bricklaying.)

(3) Deprive then of the Franchise, for periods from five years to life. Redundant Ministers of the Crown whose departments have been closed, and all socialist MPs past or present (except individuals like Frank Field, Kate Hoey and the like) will be deprived for life: persons who previously described themselves on purpose as “Directors of Civic Engagement” for “Hospital trusts” (whatever those were) will get five to ten years.

There may be other measures I would take, designed strictly to prevent a new political class from ever regaining control of so many levers of power, and trying to hold onto them so irrevocably. Certainly the number and reach of State “Ministries” will be drastically cut, as will the objectives and staffing of “local councils”. they might be allowed to plant dafodils, and sweep pavements – even run libraries, but not much more.

A British Libertarian State would also, for example, have nothing to do with “providing” any sort of “education” whatsoever, nor would it want to hijack “the environment” as an excuse for meddling threateningly and violently in people’s private affairs such as who they wish to employ to collect their refuse and scrap fridges, TVs etc. The “Foreign Office” might profitably be closed and its residual functions transferred to the Offices of the Secretary of State for War (I am afraid there will still be wars, and some may be unavoidable – it will depend on the other “States”, for the duration of their existence.

I may suggest other reforms later. But the situation of people who have actively sought “employment” in “Public Services” is, in most cases, akin to that of Death-Camp Guards and “shower room staff”: They knew what they were doing, and there must eventually be a cost.

The cost to probably hundreds of German people – and a surprisingly high number of Austrians (why?) -  who did this job in death camps as “Public Service” was “special treatment”, but this time at the hands of us or (worse) the Russians, and not by Himmler who invented the phrase. The cost to hundreds of thousands of others, mostly probably innocent of actual crimes, but only because the mass of the rest failed to not vote for the NSDAP in 1933, was death by bombing.

Nowhere do I suggest that we should, if and when our time comes, exact ultimate revenge on our home-grown Nazis, be they great such as “Ministers” and “Local Authority Chief Executives” or small, such as “gay disabled lesbian outreach assistants”. But they should pay a physical price, in public, that is inconvenient, depressing, involves non- or minimal participation in the future good fortune of innocent people in the private sector, and is also prolonged. They should not be allowed to enjoy re-invigorated capitalism until they are too old to profit.

Sorry if this is ostensibly cruel, but the wilful, premeditated, and long-planned “misprision of destruction” of the only civilisation that is the Father of Freedom, should be recognised jurisprudentially.

Destroying Britain on purpose – The Idea: New LA series – dispatches from a dying country, number 1. The pub.


Vicki Woods (strange woman, odd views for an existential conservative, but sometimes she writes well, is, er, now, er, “helping to run a village pub”…)

David Davis

(Credits to Dr Sean Gabb, author of a book entitled “Dispatches from…..” You may even still be able to buy that book by going to his page.)

If you set out to utterly destroy a nation – nay, a culture, for that’s really what we are – without actively resorting to terror-Police and NKVD and Gestapo tactics openly  – at least not quite yet… – then what you do is this:-

You can’t storm all its houses using the army or the police like Stalin did in the 20s/30s: the Police are on your side since you pick them, pay them and brainwash them, but the Services are not – you can’t pick them….yet, so you can’t brainwash them, as they are the wrong guys. So, what can you do?

You can, via the “Long March Through The Institutions”, constrict a cadre of activists who know instinctively for Gramsican reasons that they must get into “positions of power”.

Then, you can set out to carefully and deliberately erase all its icons, its defining characteristics that help bond its people together socially, its customs (better if they are really really old – the erasing causes more glue to dissolve without people really seeing how or why) its ceremonies, and all its little details. If you are a Fabianazi, this is OK even if it takes some time. You know it will work in the end, you have all the time in the world, and you have also set up an “education” “system”, which does the following things:-

(a) looks as if it is “free”,

(b) looks as if it “benefits” the “underprivileged”,

(c) looks as if it’s well-founded using real hard knowledge,

(d) looks as if everyone can “succeed”,

(e) tells everyone how wonderful you are to “give” it to them,

(f) rewrites their nation’s historiography (while they watch the TV progs your friends have created for them as anaesthetics.)

At the same time you make it harder for people to avoid the said system – even though you can’t yet close down schools by force that are “outside the system” – which is to say, other people’s private property. But you make jolly sure that you f*** up the curriculum something proper anyway, so you increase the probability of turning out a majority of radicalised pre-socialist children, who will not know how to value and venerate the things that you are going to set out to destroy. One of these is the “Pub”.

Most foreign readers of this blog will know what a “Pub” is. A “Public House” is really actually a private house, in which the owner graciously permits strangers to come in and buy each other drinks, in the warm, and have a smoke, a gossip and a dust-up occasionally. You can be (and are) barred for transgressing his rules, as it’s his “house”. The food, if any, since nuts, crisps and pork scratchings have always been more than sufficient, is really irrelevant, and is in fact a post-modern reaction to celebrity “tele-Chefs”, nearly all of whom are lefties except for Anthony Worral-Thompson who seems to have been put out to grass, and to the post-modern fashion for “families” to go to Pubs – a weird idea.

I think that the “Pub” was the place in default of the Witanagemot or the Thing, where the Men (of somewhere) went to Discuss Matters. Travellers were graciously allowed in too, a fine and advanced modern liberal idea. Culture could therefore spread rapidly, even before “Posts”, then News “Papers”, Wireless Radio, Wireless Tele Vision, or the Inter “Net”.

This is why “Pubs” are under attack – not just from the high taxation of alcohol for all sorts of spurious reasons supposedly connected with “health” (we are their Farm Animals, you see.) They are also attacked through the phantasm of the promoted image of the unfriendliness of a “drinking den”, peddled by the Enemy Class which sees this object as a disease of the “Working Class” – which has to be eradicated. Furthermore, If I was a ZanuLieborg Stalinist, I would attack pubs since that is where people might go to mutter bad things about me, together, with others whom they know well, over a pint or three, and thhus secure in the company of their own mutual trust. This cannot be allowed.

So the “Pub” has got to go. If it’s converted into a “gastro” object, run as part of a chian by one of your “party backers”, to be frequented not by regulars but by itinerant tourists (much safer, see last para) then that partly plugs a tax-hole, and makes out that the Fabianazis pretend to understand what “the people” want.

If it truly closes, then that’s a benefit for Stalinism as well. You’ve shoved a nail up the nose of a culture that you hate, despise and want dead, by removing something it needed and valued, without knowing even how to articulate why. By further isolating your peaceful and conservative enemies, who have never voted for you and never would know how to want to, you can further demoralise them. Win-win.

Right now as I write, we are coming into the “Police breathalysing Season”. This in today’s Britain is now the traditional season in which a given number of pubs tries to stay open and not go bankrupt, while the British Terror-Police, as the opposing team, try to see how many people they can arrest for driving out of pub car parks after having ordered a drink. The fact that out of about 800-odd people a year killed on the roads in situations where alcohol is inplicated, about 70% are drunk pedestrians, is always ignored, and never stated.

That’s very nice (and some Moon-stuff, flagged to me via a loyal reader.)


David Davis

Here’s the Moon. I couldn’t get Worpress to let me paste it below little Jennifer, what a bummer:-

And little Jennie’s working all in a good cause too, and she even has nearly all her clothes still on. Seen on Guido, too late to be hypertopical but fun all the same. The nice little Scouse bit‘s one of ours, from down the road. She must be already up to about 4-foot-eleven these days, wonder if she gets refused lottery tickets and alcohol in shops?

Here she is in a more useful pose:-

(item: something weird has happened. I had the pic up earlier but it’s now been taken down and not by me as I operate this blog, and I can’t even backload a copy up again, which I saved as a jpg on my machine. Weird. The government must be behind it.)

But we seem to be allowed this one…..for a bit….

And yours is a large one too!

And yours is a large one too!

Simon Heffer and Rod Liddle arguing about the “Pre-Budget” Budget.


David Davis

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid2150453001/bctid3242284001

I don’t know how to paste these, but it’s there anyway.