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]
|
“I love you, and I am a socialist”
This is what I, via the wonders of television, watched being said to David Cameron.
A young doctor made this comment to Mr Cameron when this leader of a British political party turned up at a demonstration of doctors and, whilst denouncing the Labour party government for not providing jobs for all qualified young doctors, promised “every single one of you” a job (or words to that effect).
To some people the above proves that Mr Cameron is a good leader of the Conservative party, to other people, such as myself, the above shows that David Cameron is not the leader of a ‘Conservative’ party at all.
We see the same facts but interpret them differently.
No no, not money. I need ideas.
I recently agreed to do another chat spot on 18 Doughty Street TV, and like a fool I picked Tuesday March 20th, i.e. this evening, all unaware that tomorrow is Budget Day, and we would all have to talk about the damn Budget. I hate, hate, hate Budget Days and Budgets, and conversations about Budget Day and conversations about Budgets, from the depths of my soul. I find the details of tax law deeply depressing and complicated, not least deeply depressing because so damn complicated. Plus everyone on regular TV drones on about it all for hour after hour, while saying (because knowing) extremely little, like cricket commentators when it is raining only not funny or interesting.
Anyway, I got an email this morning from His IainDaleness which included the following instruction:
We will talk about tomorrow’s budget in the first half hour. Please come armed with three things you’d like the Chancellor to do and three things you think he actually will do.
Any suggestions? I particularly need help with the “he actually will do” bit. Generally, presumably, he will (a) kiss babies and (b) steal their lollypops. (A lollypop for whoever can pin down the movie reference there.) But more precisely, what specific horrors are in the pipeline? I assume a lot of anti-4×4 crap. But what else?
And, of course, suggestions about what he should do will also be trawled through with a view to me using the best of them tonight, probably without credit to the originator.
I think that the entire government down be shut down for ever and taxes lowered to zero. But I think they want something more precise than that. So far, I can only think of saying, again, that The Top Rate of Income Tax Should Be Cut to Zero, which I think is a brilliant idea, if only because it makes the current lot of leftier-than-thou Conservatives squirm.
I am now off to read what UKIP has to say, budget-wise. (So far I have not got beyond the heading. Which should surely say “fiddles” rather than “tinkers”. The Emperor Nero was a violinist, was he not?)
…so did the Catholic Church speak up for him?
The BBC reports:
[T]he Catholic head of England and Wales, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, said the government was rushing through the [Equality Act (Sexual Orientation)] regulations – after MPs were asked to approve them without debate.
He accused the government of “an abuse of parliamentary democracy”, adding: “Profound public concern about aspects of these regulations has not been heard.”
Where has His Eminence been for the last decade? The Blair administration has been applying the “programme motion” (pdf explanation) to curtail parliamentary debate and adopting wholesale the device of “framework legislation” to legislate by the nominally endorsed decree dressed up as statutory instrument.
Wave after wave of revolutionary legislation, stamping out liberty in every quarter and establishing imperial inspectorates in place, has gone through on the back of tendentious PLP briefings calling votes from MPs who have not participated in a debate and have no real idea what they are voting on. How come it is only abuse of parliament when it infringes the Catholic Church’s right to tell people what to think about gay sex, by telling them to think something different about it?
As odd as it may seem today, there was a time when the Conservative opposition was expected to call for cuts in the levels of taxation if only to pressurise the Labour government into not raising taxes too much or too quickly. Occasionally (very occasionally) they even lived up to this expectation.
But that ‘golden era’ is a long way behind us now:
Gordon Brown is expected to raise taxes substantially on larger-engined cars in Wednesday’s Budget.
Some reports suggest that road tax on the least fuel-efficient cars will double to about £400 a year.
Mr. Brown is not to be blamed. After all, it is sheer foolishness to expect a pig to issue anything but a grunt. No, the man to blame is David Cameron. His pernicious eco-tax manifesto has not only incited a pissing contest with the current Chancellor to see who inflict more punishment on those wicked Gaiacidal motorists, it has also (in electoral terms) legitimised this latest round of pure plunder.
The Tories are the enemies of the people so please remember your ABC (Anyone But Cameron).
Tomorrow is national No Smoking Day. Whoopeeeeeeee!!!!
I shall mark the occasion by puffing my way through at least one pack of my favourite Belgian cigarettes (not contributing to the cavernous coffers of HM Treasury makes the experience so much more enjoyable) while blowing great, billowing clouds of grey, acrid, carcinogenic fumes into the air.
I shall consider quitting if and when we ever have a national No Nagging, Preaching, Hectoring, Finger-Wagging, Pecksniffing, Condescending, Nannying Or Sanctimonious Sermonising Just Bugger Off And Mind Your Own Fucking Business Day.
Thanks to my investigative reporting skills, I came across the following draft of the Conservative Party manifesto for the next General Election. It makes for fascinating reading:
“A Tory Party will be a Green government. Global warming, along with terrorism and capitalism, is the greatest threat to our lives. Today’s Tory Party has shed its outmoded addiction to markets, freedom and selfish individualism. Instead, we pledge to shut down industrial civilisation during the course of our first term of office, although we realise that this goal is an ambitious one. Flights will be banned, along with cars, buses, trains, central heating, electric power stations, ports, ferries, factories, foundaries, shipyards, computer stations, everything.
We do of course accept that this policy is a radical one. However, under the funky leadership of David Cameron, a man who has already been prepared for the big challenges of life by his career as an old Etonian and executive for Carlton Communications, we believe our policy of returning to a glorious pre-industrial age is one that is sure to capture the public’s imagination.
Vote Conservative.
Sounds like a real winner to me.
Gordon Brown or David Cameron was alarmed at the possibility of their rival stealing a march in the first media fistfight between both camps. The two politicians needed to punch their green credentials at the public. Cameron’s nonsense on aircraft taxes was launched on Sunday to derision and environmentalist applause. An early headline that can be reversed if the public’s tolerance for more tax withers: a likely outcome under Brown.
How did the Chancellor respond, now that he has appropriated Bambi’s teeth prior to his seat? He promised to phase out old-style lightbulbs and subsidise home insulation:
The Chancellor promised that grants will be available to have every home insulated in the next 10 years.
He also wants to phase out wasteful old-fashioned lightbulbs by 2011 and remove ‘standby’ functions from TVs and DVD players that use electricity when left on.
The prudent Chancellor, ever unwasteful of political manure, was recycling spin from Europe and Australia.
Following measures recently adopted by the Australian government to scrap incandescent light bulbs from Australian homes within three years the Spring Summit on 9 March urged the Commission to “rapidly submit proposals” on:
* Energy savings from office and street lighting “to be adopted by 2008”, and;
* “incandescent lamps and other forms of lighting in private households by 2009”.
Irish Prime Minister Bertie Ahern was quoted by Reuters as saying: “We are very impressed by the Australians and before we came to the summit, we had already been in touch with them and looking at the issue.”
The old story of European projects repackaged for domestic consumption, as ignored by your mainstream media. The Chancellor was quite clear that his green policies were designed to set new regulations and taxes within a European framework, extending and affirming our regulatory state in verdant wrapping.
… in the Charity Commission report into how UK charities can be better harnessed to do the state’s work (dressed up as a survey of what they are already doing). It is called Stand and Deliver [pdf].
[Hat tip: Minette Marin in the Sunday Times]
The Conservative Party has long been regarded as having a certain nostalgic, and some would say romantic, yearning for the past. I had no idea that this included a desire to drag us all back to the 19th Century:
Harsh new taxes on air travel, including a strict personal flight “allowance”, will be unveiled by the Conservatives tomorrow as part of a plan that would penalise business travellers, holidaymakers and the tourist industry.
The proposals, to be disclosed by George Osborne, the shadow chancellor, include levying VAT or fuel duty on domestic flights for the first time as part of a radical plan to tackle global warming.
The Conservatives will also suggest – most controversially of all – rationing individuals to as little as a single short-haul flight each year; any further journeys would attract progressively higher taxes, a leaked document entitled Greener Skies suggests.
Even if this is just policy-mongering, the fact that such proposals could even be considered is per se a megaphone-warning about the true nature of the Tories and their future likely conduct.
The mobility that has been afforded to people on relatively low incomes by cheap international air travel is one of the most productive and liberating benefits of this age. By declaring war on this, Cameron and his lickspittles show themselves to be not just opportunist but also disreputable and loathsome (as is anyone who either supports them or votes for them).
As for me, I will be unaffacted. I do not intend to hang around long enough to witness the huddled masses setting sail from Southampton to seek a better life in the free world. If (God forbid) Cameron does win power in the next election, I shall utilise my air travel ‘ration’ to purchase a one-way ticket out.
A Conservative front bench spokesman has been sacked for racially insensitive remarks, leading one former Conservative cabinet minister (Michael Portillo) to note that while people complain about the professionalisation of politics, this is what happens when you bring in people with life-experience outside politics: they do things no professional would.
A true professional can get away with more than dodgy anecdote. He can make a direct appeal to public xenophobia, and hang a major strand of government policy on it. And do it in such a way that no-one calls him out on it:
It is unfair that foreigners come to this country illegitimately and steal our benefits, steal our services like the NHS and undermine the minimum wage by working.
Of course he is a socialist, so he could not be a racist, could he? But make no mistake about it, this is a dog-whistle to the political base of the Labour Party among the white working class.
It is not the legality of immigrants that makes their competition unwelcome. It is the fact of competition. Those who compete most effectively are legal migrants from the Commonwealth or Eastern Europe who have rights to the services as well as work ethic and education. Resentment does not check your papers: ‘illegal immigration’ is code for ‘immigrants’ tout court. Note John Reid’s language: “foreigners”.
So when your landlord checks your ID and registers where you live for the authorities, in fear of a £20,000 fine; when Kylie and Madonna, Rupert Murdoch’s children, Sheikh Maktoum, Shilpa Shetty and all have to be fingerprinted for their ID cards* to make sure they are not “stealing our services” as well as adding to the colour of our national life; when you have to prove your residential status to see a doctor, who probably has to have an ID Card marked “Foreigner” if he is one of the tens of thousands of overseas doctors working in Britain (and threatening the minimum wage); when you.have to prove your own identity constantly for the official record even in private transactions and it would be so much easier to ‘volunteer’ to join the National Identity Register… then remember it is all the fault of filthy foreigners coming here, not in the least the exploitation of popular racist sentiment for political advantage. The Home Office has to watch you, just in case you might be a foreigner.
* Or not, since I can not see them hanging around to put up with it. All the world’s interesting people, who live here for the combination of privacy and open society, might well go elsewhere.
Regulars will know that this blog does not have a lot of time for political correctness. They will also know, however, that this blog does not also have a lot of time for racist bigots – or “race realists” as these creeps call themselves these days – either. As Ayn Rand once remarked, racism is the oldest form of collectivism. And like all forms of collectivism, it ignores the unique differences between individuals.
With that in mind, the resignation of this idiot was inevitable and wholly justified. I read the Telegraph comments and see that a lot of people defended the views of the Tory MP who said what he said. It makes me realise that I have as little sympathy for parts of the “right” as I do for a lot of the “left” as well. Non-white soldiers have put their lives on the line in the service of their comrades and their regiments. This MP would do well to remember that point.
The House of Lords of the United Kingdom and Northern Ireland was formed (informally by Simon de Montfort, although some would trace it all the way back to the Anglo Saxon Witan, and formally by Edward the first) of the great landed families and the bishops – first just of England, then of Wales, then of Scotland and finally of Ireland (now just Northern Ireland).
The dominant opinion today holds that it is wrong for a House of Parliament to be made up of the aristocracy plus a few Bishops. So first the powers of the House of Lords (or House of Peers as it is more formally known) had its powers greatly reduced by the Acts of 1911 and 1949, then in the 1960’s an unwritten convention came into existence that no new hereditary peerages would be created, only life peerages. Perhaps this was on the Thomas Paine grounds that “hereditary legislators are as absurd as hereditary mathematicians”. Although Mr Paine never explained what was so good about elected mathematicians or what upholding the traditional principles of law had to do with mathematics anyway.
The government headed by Mr Blair has got rid of almost all hereditary peers, thus leaving the Bishops, in modern times joined by the Chief Rabbi and so on although by appointment, not by right, and the ‘life peers’, the people appointed by recent Prime Minister – mostly by Mr Blair himself. It is felt by most members of the House of Commons and by many outside it that only elected people should be part of Parliament and they are pressing for a fully elected House of Lords.
This would at least have the virtue of there not being ‘second class’ members of the House – as would be the case if some members of the House of Lords were elected and some were not. However, it does miss an important point. If the House of Lords is not going to be a House of Lords, why have one at all? Why not just have the House of Commons? After all many respectable nations (Norway, New Zealand and so on) have a ‘unicameral legislature’.
The United Kingdom (for all the existence of the Welsh and Ulster Assemblies and the ‘Parliament’ in Scotland) is not a federal country. So how is this second elected chamber to be elected?
If it is elected in much the same way as the House of Commons it is just a waste of money as it will mirror this House, and if it is elected in some way to counter the House of Commons there will be conflict between the Houses (not in, say, the sense that there is sometimes ‘conflict’ between the United States House of Representatives and the Senate, but real conflict). In the past a government with a ‘radical agenda’ could always say “we are elected and you are not, so you may delay us – but in the end you must give in on the fundamental points of our platform”, this was as true for Mrs Thatcher as it was for prior radical Liberal and Labour party governments.
But, with an elected ‘House of Lords’ or whatever it is to be called, they could turn round and say “we are elected as well and you are not getting out of the EU” (or whatever the measure was).
Lastly my fear is that an elected second chamber would be elected using proportional representation, thus meaning an alliance of leftist parties would hold a majority for ever, and would be elected on a regional basis – part of the old plan to divide the United Kingdom (really divide England ) into €uro regions under the control of the European Union.
|
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.
|
