“We have an incoherent attitude to freedom in this country. We imagine that we value freedom above almost everything else and yet at the same time we are neurotically averse to risk. Every time something terrible happens, such as the murder of a child, the public clamours for something to be done to ensure that such a thing never happens again. Such unspeakable suffering must not have been in vain; inquiries must be held and systems must be put in place; all such risks to children must be eliminated. Yet the harsh truth is that risk is the heavy price of freedom.”
She points out that the development – as elaborated below on this blog by Natalie Solent – will poison civil society and discourage volunteering. I think that is actually part of the idea. I have long since abandoned any notion that such developments are introduced by well-meaning but foolish people. Their intentions are to Sovietise British society, to put all law-abiding adults under a cloud, and rip up the autonomous, private spaces that make up civil society. There is a comment I remember being made by the late Tory MP, Nicholas Budgen: “Old Labour wanted to nationalise things; New Labour will nationalise people.”
Yes, but they would be powerless without the support of well-meaning but foolish voters.
I head someone on Question Time making the point that the Daily Mail was scaremongering about the plans for background checks on anyone coming into regular contact with kids, but yesterday or tomorrow it will be scaremongering about child-molesting perverts roaming our streets. The Daily Mail, of course, has no need to be consistent, or even vaguely logical, but it seems hell-bent on creating exactly the sort of nanny-state society that it decries.
“Everything in the State, nothing outside the State, nothing against the State”
Hardly a new realisation.
The Daily Mail is the vanguard of “right wing statism” or “tory statism” or whatever. The general modus operandi is to talk extremely loudly about freedom, individual responsibility and the “nanny state” while constantly demanding more state intrusion, tougher laws etc. It’s the nosy old trout who complains bitterly about the Bin Police, then reports her neighbour to the council for dropping a sweet wrapper in the street. It’s a disgusting, poisonous rag.
“It’s a disgusting, poisonous rag.”
True. But unfortunately the Daily Mail is also about the only newspaper published in Britain that is worth reading.
The article is not about the DAILY MAIL.
Alice-
Please, in the name of all that’s holy, tell me that the above is a joke.
Perry-
No, but it looks like the comment thread is at the moment. Don’t worry, another 50 comments or so and it’ll be a furious exchange of walls of text about either Land Value Tax or Anarcho-Capitalism.
IanB, it will probably be a quite a stretch for one of the Georgist maniacs to try and argue that the solution to kiddie killers is an LVT, but I’ll admit these characters are inventive!
Johnathan, I’m appalled. You should know that LVT is the cure for every problem ever presented by now.
Let’s see… paedophiles in an area will lower the land value, therefore…
IanB, nooooooooooo!
Its extremely refreshing to see someone say this. I’m sick to the back teeth of seeing so many worrying developments written off as “incompetence”, “cock up” etc etc ad nauseum.
Ian, you are just having a slow day, aren’t’ you:-)
You can only anally rape one child at a time. You can weaken the rule of law for all children at the same time.
You cannot care about the children if you wish to bequeath them a society with a decreased rule of law.
To Katabasis 08:06
Thank God someone has said that. What you identified is what I have been trying to go on about for three years.
Coming here to argue, and to scragg people, is much much better than going to the pub.
You can’t get arrested, for a start, even if you were to “glass” somebody (don’t worry, I won’t, all our hearts are roughly in the right place, er….)
I think Alisa 13.09.09 (11.46 am) is seeing what I have been seeing.
The combination of pithed voters, who can’t think but only feel, and can’t argue, together with the Enemy Class which can do both, is fatal to liberty.
Here is a point that relates to us all. The Magna Carta is a document that curtailed arbitrary government, and is recognised as a corner-stone of liberty for centuries.
What will Britain be doing to commemorate this event, when the 800th signing day is due, 15 June, 1215?
This could be a date lauded by libertarians- turn it into an individual rights day! Whilst it was initially about barons keeping a king in check, it symbolises much more!
Government doesn’t prevent predation. Like game wardens at a hunting preserve, they assure the licensed can bag their limits. Wants give rise to idealism. Systems work to stablize. Ideal systems stablilize the wants. Want meets won’t.
Nicholas Budgen was right.
As Hayek argued (in the Constitution of Liberty) the “reformed socialists” may have moved from nationalization of industry to the Welfare State – but the Welfare State is so broad (in their eyes it covers all aspects of human life – as the German writers who wrote about the”Welfare State/Police State” in the 18th century argued it should) that it amounts to the nationalization of people.
As for the Mail.
Well I do not know about the Daily Mail (although I a have soft spot for Richard Littlejohn), but Peter Hitchins in the “Mail on Sunday” is a strong FOE of the violation of Civil Liberties (I.D. cards and so on).
The point of a Consitution is that it is supposed to limit the damage done by popular outcries (after popular outcries by a MINORITY by the way – people who shout so loud that is seems like they are the whole public), however the Monarchy and the House of Lords have been undermined in Britain – and the elected government is vulnerable to outcries from angry minorities (who claim to be the whole people).
In the United States the written support for liberty in the Consitutition of the United States is sometimes effective – but often not.
This is just more jobs for public service parasites.
There will be so many people on this list that it will be impossible to see the wood for the trees. The Sex Offenders list is the same; 98 % are no risk to anyone and the rest should be rotting in jail.