We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Samizdata quote of the day

And another thing – the argument that we can all support Cameron’s leftward lurch because it’s all an act and he doesn’t really mean it – he is lying pretty low. I might be prepared to give someone the benefit of the doubt on the grounds that they are telling the truth, but to give someone the benefit of the doubt in the hope that they are lying through their teeth?

8 comments to Samizdata quote of the day

  • Verity

    Very astute, Wolfie. Agree. That is a most stupid position from every angle.

  • Not lying, using clever language!

  • Not lying, nuancing.

    Using leftist, centrist language.

    Mind you enslaving teenagers seems a little illiberal.

  • Chris Harper

    I encountered this in the lead up to the 1997 election. I knew many people, of a leftish persuasion, who were hoping that Blair was a liar and who were prepared to support him on that basis.

  • Selsdon Man

    Guido criticises Dave – cue the gunpowder?

  • When Guido finally turns on Cameron; and at this rate it will be sometime next week, it will get ugly quick.

  • Paul Marks

    There is nothing “clever” in allowing it to be reported (without contradiction) that the Conservative party will oppose even allowing private medical cover to be tax deductable.

    Calling this que jumping is absurd – it actually makes the que shorter for other people.

    Nor is it clever to appoint men like Zac Goldsmith to policy commissions – either the leadership will have to accept their (radical collectivist) policy ideas, or it will reject them (and get denouced by the very people it appoited as a stupid P.R. stunt).

    Nor do politicians change for the better in office (although they often change for the worse).

    Mr George Walker Bush did not forget about his demands for big government “compassionate” conservatism when he became President.

    There has been the biggest increase in domestic government spending since President Nixon (and he had the excuse of a Democratic party Congress) – “No Child Left Behind” the Medicare extention, the failure to veto spending bills……

    Mr Cameron is no closet small state man. As he says himself most people do not care about having a small state (and he wants the votes of these people).

    I can not even blame the high ups for selling out ordinary Conservative party members (as I did when Mr Major was leader) – ordinary party members voted (and by a large margin) for Mr Cameron.

    Even Mr Davis’ moderate anti statism (which sought to make Britain more like Ireland where government spending is about 35% of G.D.P. rather than 44% of G.D.P.) was rejected.

    Mr Cameron did not come from nowhere – and he did not just come from the world of Oxford and the corrupt P.R. activities of Carlton television.

    It must be understood that the Conservative party (like the Republican party in the United States) is not really a “small government” party at all.

    I have been a member of the Conservative party for many years and I still hold that there are small government people within it.

    But one must accept the truth, neither the Conservative party in the United Kingdom or the Republican party in the United States are controlled by small government people.

    And I am not talking about their support for wars overseas (I make no comment on that), I am talking about domestic government.

    Perhaps the Republican party will recover and toss out the waste of space people who control so much of it (I do not know enough about the Republican party to make a judgement), but I doubt the Conservative party will.

    Such things as the “A list” of 120 candidates (half male, half female but all picked by the centre) will ensure that recovery is made as difficult as possible.

    “But we will win the next election”.

    Perhaps we will, but we will simply continue to undermine civil society – just as Labour and the Liberal Democrats do.

    It may be that things will have to get a lot worse in the West before they get better (unless the decline is terminal).

    I think we need a nation to reject the path of statism and try and safeguard civilization – I do not know what nation might do that, but I believe that people in other nations might follow if the people of one nation (even a small nation) gave a true lead.

  • anon

    It is depressing that you have to hope a politition is lying through his teeth.

    On the bright side, they usually are.