I think we may have finally found a justification for burqas. 
|
|||||
|
November 18th, 2002 | 9 comments - (Comments are closed)
 I don’t know who Johnathan Galt is but his name has a certain resonance round these here parts for reasons which don’t need a great deal of explanation. I do know that he has a website that contains a number of video clips which most certainly look and sound authentic. (You will need some sort of reliable media-playing software to view). Of particular interest is the footage of a man called Abu Hamza who preaches at the Finsbury Park Mosque situated but a few miles from where I live. According to Mr.Hamza, ‘kuffirs’ (er, that’s us, gentle readers) are fair game for robbery, enslavement and murder. Charming. November 17th, 2002 | 8 comments - (Comments are closed)
All change in China this week, as the ‘old guard’ of the ruling Communist Party step down in favour of younger, more vigourous leaders. So change only in terms of personel, not policies. The new boys would not have been allowed within light years of the reins of power were they not commited to continued rule by the Party. But that doesn’t mean that it is going to be easier for them to do so. For the last 20 years or so China has been moving from command to market economy and now over 50% of the GDP is generated by the private sector. The changes have been formally recognised by the decision to allow ‘capitalists’ to join the Party so that their interests can be represented as well. Yes, that is absurd but how else are the ruling elite going to cope with changes and stay in power? Capitalism in China now appears to be irreversible so the big question is how long the present political architecture stand erect against the hurricanes of economic change on the ground. November 15th, 2002 | 7 comments - (Comments are closed)
My word, HMG has been busy of late. You’d think the prospect of impending Middle East conflagration might slow them down a tad, but no, not this lot. They’ve still found the time and dedication to set hundreds of monkeys loose on thousands of typewriters and they’ve whipped up a thunderous swarm of new laws and initiatives with which they hope to cure All The Problems in the Known Universe. So what, exactly, are the primates gibbering on about now? Let’s see, shall we:
They’re going to whack up taxes again so they can feed the public sector while endlessly tinkering around with the Soviet-style systems in a vain attempt to get them to work properly.
None of which will stop our houses getting burgled, our cars getting stolen or our loved ones getting mugged for their loose change.
Yes, because abolishing the right to a fair trial is a sure and certain way to keep the crime figures down!
?????????????????????????
Be afraid. Be very afraid.
Hello to the European Arrest Warrant, goodbye to Habeas Corpus.
Alright, I’ll give them that one. Long overdue actually. Still, if you toss around enough mud, some of it hits the right spot.
More jobs for Guardianistas!
More semi-literate cretins taking degrees in ‘Cake Preparation’ to keep the unemployment figures from rising.
More jobs for Guardianistas!
We set about abolishing England, keep our masters in Brussels happy and provide even more jobs for Guardianistas!! An HMG Trifecta!
And even more jobs for Guardianistas plus the added benefit of crippling industry with lashings of unnecessary red-tape. What’s not to like?
You realise, of course, that this means war.
Because Europe is heading down the toilet-bowl of history and we are determined to bravely follow them.
We’re going to abolish breathing.
And we’ll even save time and paperwork by remitting your money direct to the numbered Swiss bank account of Mr. R. Mugabe. It’s all getting a bit much, it really is. I think it’s beginning to overwhelm me. Living in Britain is like taking part in a 24-hour Grumblethon. Phone in with your generous pledges, ladies and gentlemen. All receipts to HM Treasury who will syphon it all off into the infinite black hole of the public purse, never to be seen or heard from again. Just keep paying and smile like you’re having a good time. I’m fed up, I’m tired, I’m seriously grumpy and I’m going to bed; perchance to dream of a better world where Saddam Hussein is a cab-driver in South London, Al Qaeda is a gameshow host and where all the monkeys have been rounded up and put in the zoo where they belong. November 14th, 2002 | 5 comments - (Comments are closed)
For me, the highlight of last weekend’s Libertarian Conference in London was the after-dinner talk delivered by Richard Miniter. Richard is one of those people who has a resume so chocked full of impressive achievements that it leaves one wondering how he manages to fit it all into one life. As well as being an award-winning business journalist he is also an expert on security matters and will shortly be publishing a book on America’s terror war with Al-Qaeda. He is currently a Senior Fellow at the Centre for the New Europe. His presentation was utterly captivating, not just because of the breadth and depth of his knowledge but also due to his style of delivery which makes every person in the room feel as if he is talking to them personally. During the hour that he spoke, I heard not one cough, nor saw one fidget, nor even one yawn stifled. So fascinating and important were Richard’s insights that they are worth replication here, if only in a précised form. There is no way I can do the presentation full justice, nor replicate it in its entirety. I was far too interested in what was being said to bother with the distracting and unseemly practice of taking notes. November 13th, 2002 | 19 comments - (Comments are closed)
Brian Micklethwait once engaged me with an interesting, pet theory of his. It goes something like this: you can always tell when an organisation or institution is about to die because, just before they expire, they spend gargantuan sums of money on a big, swanky, impressive, dedicated headquarters. Brian has a bagful of interesting theories which may or may not hold water but it is the one above which flagged up for me when I read this:
Brian, you’d better be right. November 12th, 2002 | 6 comments - (Comments are closed)
Whatever else may or may not be said about US Democrats, they are certainly not slow to respond to adverse events. Almost immediately after the mid-term term elections, some of them (grassroots supporters it would appear) set up a ‘message wall’ that gave other disillusioned or frustrated activists an opportunity to, shall we say, let off a little steam. Or possibly suffer a full nuclear meltdown judging from some of the comments. “BRING BACK THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY AND THE WEATHER UNDERGROUND!!!!!!!!!” Yes, that’s bound to increase your popularity. “Now I know what moderate Afghanis must have felt when the Taliban took over!” They’ll be wearing burqas in Boston before the year is out. “OVER FIFTY PERCENT OF AMERICANS SUFFER SOME FORM OF MENTAL RETARDATION” The Democrat campaign slogan for 2004? “DUBYA’S APPROVAL RATING IS STILL LOWER THAN ADOLF HITLER’S!” And nowhere near Saddam Hussein’s! I very much expect that the Democrat leadership is huddled in a smoke-free room somewhere at Democrat HQ trying to figure out why they lost. My advice would be, please see above. November 10th, 2002 | 4 comments - (Comments are closed)
When Generalissimo de Havilland introduced the ‘comments’ facility on this site, I made a promise to myself that I would never tailor any of my articles to pander to the likely responses that such a facility makes possible. It is a good rule; sort of ‘publish and be damned’ only without the regency swagger. However, I intend to make an exception in this post and this post only because I know that what I am about to say will attract a whole raft of predictable admonishments from those you of with a Phd in ‘Stating the Obvious’. So here is an FAQs section which I strongly recommend you read and absorb before proceeding further.
That said, there are many things in this life which bring me untold pleasure: the love of my family, the affections of a good woman, watching Chelsea win the FA Cup, a stimulating evening with close friends and a large rump steak with English mustard are all among them. But, last night, I would merrily have swapped all of those in return for the intoxicating, enervating, memorable, boundless joy of watching the American socialists get shoved through the electoral meat-grinder and turned into hapless, hopeless, abject little patties of self-pity and recrimination. As the results flooded through in the wee early hours, I squealed with shameless glee, I punched the air in triumph and I even managed to earn a complaint from my downstairs neighbour after waking her up at 5.30 in the morning by marching around the lounge to the lockstep of ‘Semper Fidelis’ blaring from my CD player. Yes, I got that carried away. I laughed, LAUGHED like a drunken buccaneer at the sight of the BBC newsanchor announcing the Republican victory, looking as if she had just been f*cked with a dead cat. It was more than celebration, it was revenge. I love the smell of the BBC being napalmed in the morning. As you may already have guessed, I have temporarily suspended my animus towards parties of state because as someone (I can’t remember who) once said it isn’t always a choice between the good and the bad; sometimes its a choice between the bad and the even worse. Well, in my book, the socialists come under the category of ‘even worse’, so I’ll throw whatever muscle I have behind the other guys, though they may be merely ‘bad’. If I was an American, then the Republicans are not what I would want, but what I want (what I really, really want) is simply not on the table, so I’d take the best I can get. So, thank you President Bush for making this Englishman very happy. Your country is the engine of Western civilisation and, right now, whatever else it may or may not be, it is not in the hands of the left. On any reading, that is profoundly good news, and I am not so proud that I cannot jump down from that lofty fence, wipe the splinters from my raddled posterior, and give credit where it is so richly due. November 7th, 2002 | 16 comments - (Comments are closed)
I didn’t think it would happen quite this quickly but it does appear as if the much-predicted disintegration of the British Conservative Party is now well and truly underway. It has been brewing for a while. The party is riven with squabbling factions such as traditionalists versus modernisers, pro and anti-EU, liberal versus authoritarian and mercantilist versus free marketeers. No party can long survive, let alone thrive, the eruption of that many running sores. Had they had the benefit of a leader strong enough to unite them (in the way that Tony Blair has managed to stamp his authority on the equally fractious Labour Party) then they may have pulled off a revival-trick but I was not alone in believing that Iain Duncan Smith was not that leader. And so it has proved. On the face of it, the crisis issue (whether to allow non-married couples to adopt) hardly qualifies as the kind of major rock on which political ships could be expected to flounder. More likely, it has been siezed upon by a posse of the discontented as the means of launching an ‘intifada’. It is always possible that the Tories will pull off some sort of miracle and survive as a major political party of state but I am doubtful for they are not just batting against an unassailable Blair or their own brittle consensus; they are also the first high-profile victims of the radically changing political fabric of Britain and the increasing disconnect between the public and established politics. So, I think the end is near for the Tories as we have known them and that leaves New Labour in the role of ‘the establishment’ to be challenged. But, by who or what? That’s the real question. November 5th, 2002 | 8 comments - (Comments are closed)
Have reports of Turkish westernisation been greatly exaggerated? It appears that an Islamist Party is now in the hot seat following yesterday’s election. Looks like various plans in various War Rooms may now have to be hastily redrawn. November 4th, 2002 | 7 comments - (Comments are closed)
One of the many ways to spark a bickering row between conservatives and libertarians is to bring up the subject of Gay Rights. More particularly the idea of Gay Union or ‘Gay Marriage’ ( a term which, for reasons I shall explain below, is an oxymoron). The proposition that same-sex unions be publicly recognised as legal and binding raises all sorts of hackles for all sorts of reasons. At the risk of generalisation, most conservatives (and a surprising number of socialists) regard such a move as potentially damaging to the accepted social convention of the nuclear family. This line of argument is not entirely without merit, for customs and conventions often exist for good reason. Unfortunately, they very often become codified under state law thereby attracting the antipathy of libertarians who go on to chuck the baby out with the bathwater. The problem lies is approaching the subject from an ‘all or nothing’ viewpoint which invariably boils down to one party or another badgering politicians to extend a government seal of approval to a particular version of marriage as a form of official validation. State benedictions (with complimentary tax classification) are not required and I suggest that clarity can be brought to the debate not by warping and extending existing definitions to breaking point but by recognising and dealing with differences. Marriage is a heterosexual institution arising from the need of a woman to secure a reliable provider for her babies and the need of a man for a trustworthy vehicle for the onward transmission of his genes. I realise that men and women get married for other reasons too but that does not alter or diminish the basic driver behind the custom. When I hear of Gay Rights groups demanding the right for same-sex couples to marry my response is not one of discomfort but one of puzzlement. Why? Why do gay men or lesbian women feel the need to dress up as heterosexuals when, in all other respects, they have made it abundantly clear to the world that they are not? → Continue reading: Vegetables can never be meat November 3rd, 2002 | 34 comments - (Comments are closed)
A rare treat for me yesterday evening, albeit at the cost of an arduous three and a half hour drive down to the East Kent coast. The treat was a dinner party at the home of fellow Libertarian Sean Gabb, his lovely wife Andrea and capitalist-buccaneer radical Rebecca Baty. Sean and his wife live in the old garrison town of Deal, from where, on a sufficiently clear day, you can just see the coast of France; a fact which must have concentrated 18th Century English minds wonderfully. The place reeks of history. Aside from the smattering of satellite dishes, the winding alleyways (too narrow to drive a car down) and huddled regency houses impress one that neither the topography nor fabric of the place has much changed since Napoleon glowered malevolently across the Channel. It was a splendid and rousing evening. Stimulated for the most part by the sheer clarity of Sean’s thought processes, I drove home with a mind wrought giddy with ideas, the fresh blood of which has now begun to coagulate into something like A Manifesto for a Pragmatic British Libertarian. Presumptuous I know, but that won’t stop me working on it. Though a snappier title would not come amiss. November 2nd, 2002 | One comment - (Comments are closed)
|
   |
||||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||