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 – They are late stage Romanov stupid Establishment clearly running an operation to get Farage.
If they do force him out – clearly the game plan- over technicalities about what he did / didn’t declare, I think they’ll start a firestorm.
The public will see this as the attempted stitch up that it is. Clacton folk (I know them a little) will reelect him in any by election.
Demands to destroy the rotten political establishment will assume a revolutionary vibe.
I almost want the Times columnists types to be so stupid. They are late stage Romanov stupid.
– Douglas Carswell
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
It is as if they are following the “get Trump” lawfare campaign waged by the Democratic crime family, but expecting it to work. I think it will pan out exactly as it did in the USA. People are not stupid and can see such a blatant establishment stitch up for exactly what it is.
Haven’t they tried – and in fact partially succeeded – at shoving Farage out several times?
He will always have those enemies, because he’s much like Trump.
These are recycled “charges” – the same statements “Farage received millions of Pounds from dodgy person” have been made before, several times, yet each time the statements are presented as new – that is odd.
It would have been better had Mr Farage had, at once, reported the gifts of money for his security and social media campaign – but he was not a Member of Parliament when the gifts were made.
Should someone in politics accept gifts from an old friend? I plead guilty – as I have received “gifts in kind” (gone out to dinner and so on) from old friends and received them whilst I was a paid Unitary Authority Councillor. As long as the person is in no way doing business with the public authority, and as long as they really are an old friend (not some new person who is trying to establish a relationship) there is no problem in this.
People in politics are not paid much – I know that is not believed, but it is true. For example, I was paid 15 thousand Pounds a year as a Unitary Authority Councillor – someone (same age, same background) going into a different line of work would tend to be paid far more. I am presently, as a Parish Councillor, paid nothing-at-all (which is why I work two different paid jobs – one job at an amusement park, and another paid job in the very early morning seven days a week).
Mr Farage would have earned far more money if he had stayed in financial services – he did NOT enter politics for the money.
The classic example is Edmund Burke himself – who received financial support first from the Marquis of Rockingham and then from Earl Fitzwilliam.
This in no way altered the conduct of Edmund Burke – who, for example, openly opposed Earl Fitzwilliam on the French Revolution.
Although I should point out that Edmund Burke “cut off” Earl Fitzwilliam for a time, due to the latter’s support for the French Revolution – till Earl Fitzwilliam changed his position.
Yes – that is the way round it worked, not “my opinions are what you pay them to be” but rather “I will no longer accept money from you – till you agree with me”.
In America the classic example is Thomas Jefferson – who kept having to be bailed out. Perhaps the greatest President (for example he abolished all internal Federal taxes – including the infamous whisky distilling licenses and tax) – but his personal finances were a disaster area. He could not have functioned in politics without support – any more than Edmund Burke could have.
I remember when the left-establishment tried to destroy Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas (one of the few Justices who is any good) because he regularly went on holiday with an old friend and the friend paid.
Clarence Thomas is not rich, his friend is – so his friend paid. His friend was not a party to any cases before the Supreme Court. So what the left-establishment were really saying was (and is) “only rich people should be in public life”.
Plutocracy. An interesting position for the left to take.
I’d be surprised if this ends with Farage being made to stand down.
More likely this trickle of stories about Farage may plant the seed in a few (maybe not many, but enough to have an effect) that Nigel is just ‘the same as all other politicians’ – ie unprincipled, greedy, self-serving etc. I am not saying I agree with this narrative, I’m just describing the narrative such stories might be trying to push. Even if they just push a few per cent of voters back to the Tories or not voting, that might be damaging to Reform (and it’s interesting that the latest story comes from a Tory press outlet like the Times because they and the Telegraph do appear to be trying to give Kemi Badenoch, a renewed ‘push’ as they would say in pro-wrestling).
I do wonder if it’s actually a better way to try and hobble Reform. Making Reform to look like unique threats to democracy or controlled by Russia etc will likely backfire, like it did with Trump. Making Reform look like just more of the same old politicians might have more impact. I remember back in 2009 that the MP expenses scandal that the amounts of expense abuse was mostly really trivial, but they seemed to anger a lot of people more than the colossal amounts of money being thrown at bailing out banks at the time. Expenses and donations scandals, anti-corruption drives, etc often act as containment (fuel anger at individuals while the system largely is left unchanged).
We will see.
Paul: I was a school governor when I was a city councillor, and one time I asked my colleagues: how much do you think I’m paid? Estimates were in the 30k-40k region. £8,900 I replied. Less than minimum wage, almost less than dole.
In fairness and considering the cause, Farage could be squeaky clean. I dont believe he is. Money.
I think that’s a good assessment. Claiming that Farage is on the payroll of Russia or an out and out crook is silly. Saying that he’s done very well for himself financially out of current affairs (all those expenses as an MEP, the gifts from that bloke in Thailand) add to that image: he’s a bit of a chancer, on the make, 1970s game show host vibe, good with the patter, annoys pompous people.
He has an issue. Reform is overwhelmingly about him. Yes there are others but that’s the perception. Then there’s the challenge of getting enough MP candidates who are U.K. to the job.
His being mates with Trump is a declining asset, and likely to be more so after the mid-terms.
The party appears stuck at 24/5% in the polls.
Your belief is based upon what?
Taking large sums of money from people.
These gifts all date from a time when Farage was not an MP, and had no intention of standing as an MP. Only the complete ineptitude of Rishi Sunak and the Conservative government led him to decide to stand. His intention had been to spend the autumn of 2024 in the USA covering the election there as a GB News journalist.