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]
|
Another triumph for the Tory Party It never takes more than a week or two to have my dislike for the political class resoundingly reinforced yet again.
In particular, those who wish to see a Tory government rescue our civil liberties from the predations of New Labour would do well to read this and this and then ask themselves why they think voting for these people is going to make the slightest bit of difference when push comes to shove.
|
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.
|
However much the tories like to present themselves as being for people’s rights, the rights are normally those of people that might be described as “friends”, such as fox hunters.
Anyone who believes they will extend rights for people to carry on their own lives without interference is mistaken.
The Conservative government of Thatcher/Major did very little in terms of social liberty (remember the Video Recording Act and the attempt to have ID cards for football supporters).
On the other hand, the choice is simple to me: economic and social oppression (Labour) or just social oppression (Conservative).
Astounding that Peter Lilley should regard the ID card issue with such little concern that his dinner party takes precedence over his voting on this. When the nuLab backbenchers bother to actually rebel against their own whips – something that I should think is no small feat in this day and age of Millbank ‘total control’ – one might at least expect the Lilleys and Widdecombes of this world to be there as well.
By the way David Davies MP is not the same as David Davis, the ever hopeful leadership contender.
I have a low opinion of most people, and I am also quick tempered (especially when I think I am being insulted, a classic sign of “low self esteem” I suppose), but I think you are going over reacting to this (pot calling kettle black – as it may be for me to say this of anyone).
The fact of that matter seems to be that the great majorty of Conservative M.P.s voted against the measure – in spite of the long term (collectivist) state of public opinion and the general moral panic over terrorism (the fact that all the Madrid bombers were carrying valid I.D.s and that the July 7th bombers actually were careful to carry their informal I.D.s just passes most folk by).
If all the Conservatives had turned up and voted no would the measure have been lost, or would a few Labour rebels have just switched sides? A lot of this revolt may well have been shadow boxing anyway (“how do we give Blair a bloody nose, and please the activists back home, without actually undermining the government”).
As for the modernizers – well of course, people who put style over substance are not actually likely to die in the last ditch against I.D. cards.
No doubt Mr D.C. has now come out top in the vote – I will go and look on the “Conservative Home (or whatever it is called)” website.
Do not ever go there Perry – it is good for information, but the opinions that are expressed and the way they are expressed would make you think even less of Conservatives that you already do.
I have been an active party member for 25 years (yes I am old). and I can assure you that most Conservative party members rather like freedom – they are not libertarians, but most Tories are decent folk (and remember I judge people harshly). Certainly “the scum rise to the top” (that is true in many organizations), but I would say that even many Conservative M.P.s (although perhaps not a majority) are decent people.
One can normally tell quite quickly (without any deep ideological enquiry).
“Gut instict” may not tell you what a man’s policy views will be, but it can tell you whether he is a decent sort or not.
When I have gone against my instinct I have normally done wrong.
For example, I remember voting in the last F.C.S. election – for the “libertarian” candidate, against the “leftist” candidate, even though I thought that the libertarian candidate was a bad man (dishonest, cowardly and corrupt) and I thought his foe was a decent man.
Look up who was the last Chairman of F.C.S.
As for his foe. He has not turned out to be a liberatarian, he may have voted for the I.D. cards for all I know – but I have met him a couple of times over the years and I still think he is a decent man, like most Tories.
Can decent people be lazy bastards?
Yes.
Especically when not being lazy will not achieve anything.
If the Labour party only had a tiny majority (or no overall majority at all – as was the case at the end of the 1970’s) trying to ambush them might work.
With a big majority it will not, relying on Labour rebels is (perphaps unfairly) considered a daft plan.
In these circumstances it must be hard to summon up any interest in going to the House of Commons.
After all the great speakers (Enoch and the rest) are all dead.
These days (we are told by the image people) every one must make speeches rejoycing in our, degenerate, society and praising “social justice” and other buzz terms.
David Davis looked like he was going to vomit when he finally forced out the collectivist term “social justice” in a recent exchange (he had been attacked for not using the term by the image people).
Considering how many tens of millions of people have been murdered in the name of “social justice” I am not surprised he would rather be out hill walking (of course, after so many I.E.A. conferences Mr Davis knows exactly what “social justice” means and the history of the deeds of its suppporters).
Giving a speech must be a nightmare these days. One has to come out with all the crap about how one loves every group in society and wishes government to help them…….
Anything else and the media will tear you apart.
Of course you have to sound convincing when you come out with the crap – which is where Mr Davis fails of course.
He would plainly like to say that he would just like government to stop messing about, but people (in politics) are not allowed to say that anymore. So he has to say things like “using centre right methods of choice to help…….”
Rather than just say “We have got to stop wasting money on policies that just make everything worse”.
As for celebrating modern Britain, that must be almost impossible for a man with any honesty at all.
Of course, it is easy for me. I could tell the modernizers to go jump in the lake – but I am not in politics.
Someone who is standing for election is trapped in this nightmare.
Try and tell the truth and you are “right wing” – which, the media imply, is the same as eating babies.
D.C. (who looks like being the next leader of the Conservative party) is said not to believe in anything (not in some corrupt way, he just fell into politics and moved to a high position because he was well off, from a good family, and is quite pleasant), so it is much less difficult for him.
He does not have force words out.
Perhaps (if he did not already vote against I.D. cards) he would do so if asked, he is suppposed to be nice man – keen to please.
“Does not believe in anything” sounds harsh, but remember that means he does not believe in any bad things.
What I have written sounds a bit odd, I have just been to a concert. I left the computer room and heard music – I followed the music and found a concert and was invited to stay and then people gave me wine (not something I normally drink – water is more my line), so I am in an odd frame of mind.
“I have just been to a concert. I left the computer room and heard music – I followed the music and found a concert”
What were they playing? By the stacatto tones of your empathic description of life as a Tory leadership candidate, I’d guess it might have been something by Stravinsky…
“Especically when not being lazy will not achieve anything.”
“In these circumstances it must be hard to summon up any interest in going to the House of Commons.”
I seem to recall you arguing in favour of voting because it makes a difference – only last week one such article by you was posted here. Well now following that sentimental dirge in praise of activism, you tell us that MPs might as well not bother voting because it won’t make any difference (if they can’t be bothered to vote on something like this, then what on earth are they going to vote on?) – so why the hell should anyone bother voting for them in the first place? Once you’ve re-elected them to their constituency offices, they’ll not even bother showing up to vote themselves!
They are lazy bastards – if they can’t be bothered to vote, then they should resign their offices so they can piss off to as many dinner parties as they like.
It is an extraordinary list.
David Davies and Peter Lilley have both been in the forefront of opposition to the scheme. Several of the others have declared themselves against in principle. They need a good excuse.
Only two can I identify as supporters of “ID cards” as a matter of personal conviction, though there may be a couple more, and only one of those would openly cross the whip, I believe: Ann Widdecombe.
If Michael Howard can vote on the right side, having been a Home Secretary pushing a similar scheme a decade ago, then no Tory really ought to be struggling with this.
That said, I would prefer it if all MPs would ignore the whip and vote their conscience on the question. By my reckoning the majority against would comfortably exceed 100 under those circumstances, and the Bill would stand no chance of passing. The terrifying thing is not the neglect of these Tories missing a 2-line whip, nor the astonishing pair of Lib-Dems who skipped a 3-line, but the fact that the Government can so con its own members with entirely vacuous “concessions” and push through a radical constitutional change, under guillotine at every stage, without ever answering its critics or putting forward a valid argument.
The western world is full of socialist and crypto-socialist administrations doing things that readers and writers on this blog might disagree with, but they feel the need to put forward grounds for what they do, and are subject to scrutiny and constraint in the legislature. We appear to have an absolute dictatorship.
Ah! the Tories doing what they do best – snatching defeat from the jaws of victory.
guy herbert writes:
“We appear to have an absolute dictatorship.”
I fear this is exactly the case – and has been for the past few years.
This display (or rather the lack, thereof) by Conservatives was disgusting.
Let alone not being fit to govern, they aren’t even fit to oppose.
That article was written months ago Mike. Did I really say that people should vote?
Perhaps I did (after all I still vote myself), but I can not think of any rational reasons to do so.
As for what I heard – it was the Divertimento K136 by Mozart. It (along with other works) was played by the Bolton “New Century Strings” a group of young people whose positive attitude puts nasty despairing people like me to shame.
Only three months to go.
Paul,
No you didn’t actually say people should vote (so you can forgive yourself the irrationality of that!) – I took it as the implied meaning of your post.
‘The Bolton New Century Strings’? Was the concert recorded at all I wonder…?
I appreciate of course that what you choose to write here is entirely up to you, but I do wish you wouldn’t write despairing or spooky comments about yourself without explaining them. There are only three months to go to what? Christmas?