Shameful bias

Geert Wilders: Dutch treat

So you’re the leader of the Netherlands’ youngest, and now second-most-popular political party — and the reason you’re doing so well so soon is that your policies strike a chord with many Dutch. You believe in smaller government and lower taxes; you believe nuclear power is a safer bet than nuclear energy; and you believe that creeping Islamisation poses a serious threat to your country’s national identity.

And now someone wants to make a guerilla documentary about you. The production company is a left-leaning, activist outfit called Red Rebel Films; its aim is to insinuate that you are ‘Far Right’, guilty of ‘hate-speech’, mentally unbalanced, a control freak, a conspiracy theorist, a Zionist extremist, an Israeli spy, a fascist and a Nazi. How unreasonable would you have to be to refuse?

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. Wikipedia Bias – Jimmy Wales does the right thing
  2. Japan: whatever happened to the nuclear meltdown?
  3. Lord Fellowes is right: posh people are the last persecuted minority
  4. Liking the cut of Rommel’s uniform doesn’t make you a Nazi

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

I thought I was having a Nobel laureate for tea. Instead, the BBC had me for lunch

Last week I was stitched up like a kipper by the BBC.

Perhaps you saw the programme — a Horizon documentary called Science Under Attack. Perhaps you were even among the dozens whom it inspired to send me hate emails along the lines of, ‘Ha ha. Think you know more about science than a Nobel prizewinner do you? Idiot!’ Perhaps it’s time I set the record straight.

It started in August last year when I had an email from a BBC producer/director called Emma Jay. She was making a film on ‘public trust in science’ to be presented by the next President of the Royal Society, Sir Paul Nurse. ‘The tone of the film is very questioning but with no preconceptions,’ she wrote. ‘Sir Paul is very aware of the culpability of scientists and that will come across in the film. They will not be portrayed as white-coated magicians who should be left to work in their ivory towers — their failings will be dealt with in detail.’ As an ‘influential blogger on climate change’, would I chat to Nurse about my views? Though I had my suspicions, I agreed after Emma had reassured me that Nurse was genuinely open-minded on the subject and had no axe to grind.

In fact I was rather looking forward to the meeting. It’s not often you get an actual Nobel laureate (Physiology or Medicine, 2001) popping round to your home. Besides, I was keen to find out what he planned to do about the Royal Society’s increasingly embarrassing position on anthropogenic global warming.AdTech Ad

Both his predecessors — Lord May and Lord Rees — were fanatical warmists and shifted the Royal Society’s politics accordingly. Last year, 43 of the Royal Society’s members wrote in protest at its advocacy of what remains an unproven hypothesis. By allying itself so closely to the politicised ‘consensus’, the Royal Society seemed to be betraying its traditions of honest scepticism (‘Nullius in verba’) and also running the risk of one day being proved humiliatingly wrong.

What I didn’t properly consider — though of course I should, having done the odd bit of TV myself — is how documentaries like this really work. When your presenter announces, as he so often does, that he is ‘going on a journey of discovery’, he is in fact doing no such thing. Right from the start, often before the presenter has even been chosen, the director and producer know exactly where the film is going and what it is going to say. The interviewees are mere pawns: the camera is to be pointed at them until such time as they can be prodded into saying what the documentary requires.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. The Nobel Prize: way deadlier, more damaging and evil than dynamite
  2. Sir Paul Nurse – saviour of the universe!
  3. RealClimategate hits the final nail in the coffin of ‘peer review’
  4. Obama’s won the Nobel Peace – WTF?!

One thought on “I thought I was having a Nobel laureate for tea. Instead, the BBC had me for lunch”

  1. Nige Cook says:13th February 2011 at 11:53 amFearless Frank, if you replay the video a few times, http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=3Un7u2AZnjw&vq=medium#t=14 you see the that James gave the right answer. Nurse believes the Club of Rome’s 1974 claim in its report Mankind at the Turning Point: “The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man”, so he uses this cancer diagnosis consensus argument on James Delingpole, who after hours of discussion (edited out by the BBC and Nurse) has told Nurse that AGW is “not science”.

    The cancer analogy presumes that the earth has cancer. In 1974 when the Club of Rome formulated it, the consensus was that global cooling (due to dust and pollution from natural volcanic eruptions and from industry) was screening out sunlight, and we were in for runaway glaciation and a new ice age. This was even popularized in the 1967 BBC Dr Who sci fi tale, “The Ice Warriors”, where future Britain is being swamped by glaciers.

    AWG is not science, but is a political manipulation due to efforts to promote ignorance by using “peer”-review to censor out the NASA scientists who discovered the facts about negative feedback on CO2 temperature changes from increased cloud cover, and “hide the decline” lying using data fidding from tree rings (which aren’t a proxy for temperature, since tree growth in the real world is sensitive to other factors, especially cloud cover). They don’t have any mechanism for CO2 to affect temperature. The earth is not a greenhouse, because you don’t have any cloud cover inside a greenhouse! Pumping out more CO2 just affects the cloud cover, not the temperature.

    If anyone is pathetic, it’s not James.

Comments are closed.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Television: Weekly Shockers

Did you hear the one about Jordan’s disabled son? Unlikely, since you probably don’t watch Tramadol Nights (Channel 4), nor read the Mirror (‘Katie Price furious after Frankie Boyle joke about her disabled son’), nor the Guardian (‘Frankie Boyle’s Katie Price joke sparks Ofcom investigation’).

Don’t worry, I’m not going to repeat it here. What kind of sicko do you think I am: Rod Liddle? It’s an issue, nonetheless, on which my sympathies are more torn than common decency tells me they ought to be. Sure, it’s absolutely disgraceful that a nasty Scottish comedian should make light of the suffering of an eight-year-old boy with septo-optic dysplasia and autism. On the other hand, any joke that provokes the collective handwringing of the entire libtard media, the world’s dullest celebrity (Price), the world’s most stupid celebrity (her ex Peter Andre), Amanda Holden, Mencap and Ofcom must, almost by definition, be one we should cherish and Re-Tweet as often as we possibly can.

And what on earth were these people expecting of Frankie Boyle anyway? It’s not as though he’s the new Ronnie Corbett, tickling us gently with his relaxed armchair monologues. Frankie Boyle uses comedy like a broken bottle in a rough pub. He’s genuinely scary and hard and unpredictable. That’s why people go to see shows and even to sit in the front row and be hideously abused by him. They want to see just how low Boyle is prepared to go. And the answer, hence his career, is lower than anyone else.

An expert on violence once told me that similar rules apply in street fighting and gangland warfare. It’s not how good you are at martial arts that counts, or even how big you are. The one who wins is the one who turns more brutal, more quickly than the opposition. It’s the theme of the Bob Hoskins classic The Long Good Friday. It’s the theme of real-life gangs in cities around the world: whichever has the heaviest- duty weaponry and most merciless footsoldiers is the one that gets to control the trade.

Not, you understand, that I’m brandishing Boyle as a small-willied man does his Ferrari or his pit bull. Though I admire his fearlessness — such as the way the week after the Jordan furore, he moved on to telling jokes about cancer victims — I don’t find him nearly as funny as I do, say, Harry Enfield and Paul Whitehouse, or Armstrong and Miller, or Mitchell and Webb. I never go, ‘Oh good. Mock the Week’s on!’ Still less do I have any urge to watch again his latest sick-fest Tramadol Nights.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. How the BBC censored my monstrous, hideously offensive ‘Irish joke’
  2. Am I offending the wrong Americans?
  3. The fake disabled are crippling our economy
  4. Dumbing down: the awful truth

2 thoughts on “Television: Weekly shockers”

  1. Chris P says:11th January 2011 at 4:20 pmAnd yet you yourself call people “libtards”. Are you still stuck with playground vernacular.

    You have zero useful knowledge that could be used to move the planet forward. You are just like all the other scum on the other side of the Atlantic. Getting paid to write garbage that puts fear in the hearts of the gullible.

    Scaremongerer.

    The people I know who come up with new ideas and solve difficult technical problems aren’t gun carrying Tea Partiers at a political rally.

  2. Don Stuart says:12th January 2011 at 5:57 pmThere there Chris, go and soothe yourself with a nice rub down with the Independent. Mummy will be along in a minute to tuck you in with a piece by Polly Toynbee.

Comments are closed.

Post navigation

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Rallying Cry

Britain’s Trillion Pound Horror Story (Channel 4, Thursday) was unquestionably the most important programme that will appear on British television this year. Yes, even more important than Downton Abbey.

The thing that really drove home just how important was the point, quite early on, where the Fawn turned to me and said, ‘Ohmygod! Where do we emigrate to?’ And it’s not as though the Fawn has ever been one of those irksome left-liberal wives who keeps undermining her husband’s thought-through right-wing wisdom with prissy right-on inanities based on nothing more solid than hormones. No, sirree.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. How ‘Right-wing’ was Anders Breivik?
  2. Why us?
  3. When the world ends, will I know how to cook our cat?
  4. Are music festivals better with children?

4 thoughts on “Rallying cry”

  1. Velocity says:20th November 2010 at 1:33 amAhmen to that James and Congrats to Mr Durkin for once again hitting the nail on the head.

    You are one of the few UK journalists to ‘get it’ regards the scam that is Gov’t and climate change. But like the Tea Party you still don’t ‘get’ the ultimate solution.

    Namely you believe in (much) smaller Gov’t and (much) smaller taxation.

    But you’ve not completed your education if i may be so forthright, and hopefully not at all patronising. Because you’re still sold on the idea of Gov’t. The ultimate liberal idea, the very seed to another generational failure, another scam down the line, keeping the baby of liberalism which turns into socialism and fascism.

    Gov’t is the enemy within. Gov’t always was the enemy, of freedom, free choice, and free markets, all along.

    We don’t need less Gov’t. That’s doing only half a job. We need zero Gov’t, zero taxes, zero laws and zero regulation.

    Think about it and free yourself from ever having or needing a politician in your life to tell you what to do or force his ‘dvise’ down your throat.

    Freedom and free markets will give you all you seriously need faster and better and more efficiently than any Gov’t structure will ever give you. Society is a self regulating mechanism like the climate. No Gov’t required.

  2. Velocity says:22nd November 2010 at 1:12 pmJames,

    Just read our “Only the Tea Party can Save Us” article and from the bottom of my heart, I couldn’t agree more. I’ve felt the way you so eloquently described, including the depression of returning to fuk-wit PC rule obsessed Britain, for many years.

    But as my above post mentions, you’ve not found the solution, because like the Tea Party and honourable people like Ron Paul, you still don’t fully understand the reason for this cancerous growth in wealth and freedom destroying Gov’t.

    The answer is not small Gov’t and less Gov’t.

    The answer is zero Gov’t, no Gov’t.

    The problem is Gov’t is a monopoly power structure, as apposed the free market where two apposing forces (consumer and business) find balance through the competition mechanism. Only the competition mechanism gives the consumer, or citizen, choice (ie. power).

    There is zero difference between a Western ‘democratic’ Gov’t and the USSR central controlled committee structure. Just in the West the Gov’t machine is surrounded with some free (over regulated) enterprises that prop up this monopoly power structure a little longer.

    Power corrupts. The Founding Fathers of America knew the dangers of Gov’t, and knew they were giving birth to a beast that could be tyranical. Their worst fears came true. But they should never of unleashed a monopoly power structure called Gov’t, even the quant stupid idea called “democracy”, they should have killed this potential tyrant baby at birth.

    You, Ron Paul, the Tea Party all have the alien inside your chest. You just want smaller less intrusive Gov’t but you are all carrying, like the Founding Fathers, the seed of the next generation of alien being to kill our freedoms, suck the life out of our free enterprise and wealth creation. The little alien called small Gov’t is ready to explode out of your chest at any time you turn a bling eye, and ravish all humanity again.

    Society, people, the herd is a self regulating mechanism.

    We do not need Gov’t, nor Law, nor Judiciary, nor Police (3 more monopoly power structures).

    We need competition for our (citizens) business. That passes power to us, the citizen, to decide what succeeds and what doesn’t.

    Freedom and Free (competitive) markets. The only mechanism that works.

    Gov’t IS the problem, not the solution. Think it through my friend and you will reach a true Nirvana, not a half baked one like the Founding Fathers that’ll give birth to the next layer of human scum (tyranny).

  3. MarcoB says:23rd November 2010 at 9:40 amHi James

    I did watch the documentary and it hit some great points except one…. the biggest one of all…
    That the reason behind 4.8 trillion deficit is simple, the government borrows all it’s money from the bank of england at interest (inflation). And where does the bank of england get the money? Well, it prints it out of thin air. It works on the same principle as the FED. If all the money was paid back, there would be no money… it’s the biggest ponzi scheme of all, like playing at a poker table, were each round ends, the house takes a cut of the winnings (interest) while the public/economy has to fight for the decreasing number of chips on the table or borrow more.

    In a free nation, the govenment needs to be able to print money debt free. As long as the money is backed by resources( gold, silver, oil, coal) or the countries infrastructure (airports, railways, ect) inflation doesn’t occur. Watch “the secret of oz” if you haven’t already and you get a great understanding of how screwed up this all is.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U71-KsDArFM

    Marco

  4. Velocity says:28th November 2010 at 1:57 pmMarcoB

    Spot on. The problem with our money is it is debt, debt money. The problem is structural. Until someone changes the money system, of our labour/productivity being transfered through debt free money, most of the rest of the major problems (bank debt, Gov’t debt, consumer debt) will not be solved (properly).

    By the way our £4.8T debt is not a “deficit”. The deficit is the annual Gov’t shortfall between what the crooks take off us in taxes and what they spend. The spend so much they have to borrow the deficit. Our debt is the combined sum of these crooks spending over many years.

    Everything Gov’t touches turns to crap.

    That’s because every part of Gov’t, from education to healthcare, police to judiciary, transport to energy, is a monopoly power structure. We have no choice (ie power). We have to swallow whatever crap this toilet called Westminster forces down our throats and takes out of our pockets. If you don’t pay this ‘democracy’ its taxes it’ll put you in jail.

    ‘Democracy’ and Gov’t are both 4 letter words.

    When will we ever take our freedom back from this f**king bankrupt criminal Ponzi scheme called a democratic Government????

Comments are closed.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

I’d Take Lord Curzon over Gandhi – and So Would Many Indians

In India last week I found myself thinking about Mohandas Gandhi and his famous quote when asked what he thought about western civilisation. ‘I think it would be a good idea,’ he replied.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. There is nothing ‘smart’ about rationing electricity
  2. Money for nothing
  3. Sixto Rodriguez: the rock’n’roll Lord Lucan
  4. What Lord Tebbit says: a bit more right-wingness will do Cameron no harm at all

One thought on “I’d take Lord Curzon over Gandhi – and so would many Indians”

  1. Velocity says:20th November 2010 at 2:05 amWhat’s getting Indias poor out of the gutter is precisely what got England out of sheep skins and scratching a living every day like the birds and the bees: industrialisation.Or put another way. mans understanding and exploitation (management) of the Earth. That is the wealth stream that creates er, wealth!

    Ghandi and his first rung on the tool ladder, the basic cotton wheel, will get no man nowhere.

    The English used an energy source (coal) combined with smelting iron (technology) to take the basic cotton wheel to new productive heights (wealth). That’s what turned England into the global powerhouse it was, and Germany now is, and China and India are becoming.

    Ghandi bless him just didn’t understand industrialisation. That’s what comes of being educated at liberal twat establishments like Oxford.

    PS. how much more useful/productive is your Tut Tut driver than Ghandi and his cotton wheel. I’m living in Rome at the mo, and marvel at every traffic lights the sight of private enterprise filling every niche and opportunity with immigrants offering my ciggy lighters, tissues etc etc. Thank God Gov’t doesn’t run everything. Imagine getting to the other airport without the private sector there and only Gov’t officialdom to help out?

Comments are closed.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Life’s Too Short to Be Nice to Lefties

Now I know why so many people hate me. It came to me in a flash during dinner with a group of bright, articulate, well-balanced sixth-formers from Roedean girls’ school. I was banging on in my rabid right-wing way about the importance of free markets and the shortcomings of feminism and suchlike when I happened accidentally to vouchsafe that the proudest achievement of my life had been teaching my children to read. And it was as if, all of a sudden, I’d waved a magic wand and sprinkled myself in fairy dust. The mood softened. You could almost see the thought bubbles above the girls’ heads, saying: ‘Aaah!’ and ‘Gosh maybe he isn’t, like, so totally evil after all.’

‘Blimey!’ I thought to myself. ‘That’s where I’ve been going wrong!’ And a plan began to form in my head. My wife has long been telling me that I need to find ways of stopping people thinking I’m such a grade-one Berkshire Hunt, and my Roedean experience confirmed it. Clearly, from now on, I would have to attend all my speaking engagements accompanied by a puppy. With a lovely blue ribbon round its neck. And dozens of photos of me changing my kids’ nappies and helping old blind ladies across the road. And a fund of anecdotes, like the time I spontaneously invited a party of Congolese orphans with leprosy to come and join me in the jacuzzi. (‘Oh, never mind all the floaty bits, kids. These warm soothing jets are the least you deserve after the hell you’ve been through!’) And a T-shirt with a big smiley face on with the caption: ‘Oh. By the way. I’m really NICE.’

No, not really. In fact the conclusion I drew from my Roedean experience was the exact opposite: that in future I will try even less hard to make people like me at public speaking engagements. I think it’s time we on the right fought back against the tyranny of nice; time we told it like it is, without prettifying our arguments with love-me-do asides about how many kittens we saved from drowning this week, and without trying to show our audience how reasonable and balanced we are by conceding that our ideological opponents have the occasional point.

Read the rest in the Spectator.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

In search of lost time | James Delingpole

September 21, 2010

My friend Mickie O’Brien, late of 47 and 44 RM Cdo, died the other day. I’m not sure how old he was — late 80s, I would imagine — but, whatever, it was good going for a man who should have been killed at least twice in the 1940s, once at the Battle of Kangaw when the Japs shot away half his stomach and once when he walked deliberately into a minefield to rescue a French farmer. For one exploit or another Mickie won an MC.

The question I used to ask Mickie most often was how he managed to cope with so much fear and horror.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. How ‘tech-savvy’ Barack Obama lost the health care debate thanks to sinister Right-wing blogs like this one
  2. When Lego lost its head – and how this toy story got its’ happy ending
  3. Climategate: we won the battle, but at Copenhagen we just lost the war
  4. Education in horror

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Eat local organic food if you like, but don’t kid yourself that it’s ‘green’ – James Delingpole

September 21, 2010

Don’t get me wrong, I love farmers’ markets. I love going to the fashionable one in Borough, London, and that wonderful rich feeling you get whenever you don’t buy anything. And I love going to the one near me in south London and bantering and haggling with the fish man till he succumbs to giving me some amazing bargain like five decent-size Dover sole for a tenner.

I also really like the idea of putting money direct into the farmer’s pocket rather than helping finance yet another bloody edge-of-town Tesco. And I like the espresso man with his espresso machine. And the jolly sausage ladies. And the free-range eggs. And the Eastern European man who gives me a discount on the veg. All these are the kind of good reason as to why one might support one’s local farmers’ market. But what isn’t a good reason is this notion many people have that by shopping local they’re helping to save the planet. Because they’re not. Quite the opposite is true, in fact.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. Memo to Prince Charles: CO2 is not a pollutant. CO2 is plant food.
  2. Stung into stupidity – or heroism
  3. What Dave and his chum Barack don’t want you to know about green jobs and green energy
  4. How green activist scientists rigged the EU pesticide ban which has cost farmers and businesses billions

2 thoughts on “Eat local organic food if you like, but don’t kid yourself that it’s ‘green’”

  1. Tom Forrester-Paton says:22nd September 2010 at 9:28 amAn anuvver fing: The locavores are not just wrong in the terms that prevail in this bastion of reason, they are wrong in their own terms, as well. In deploring the use of “airfreight” to deliver Kenyan beans to Dutch markets, the locavores overlook the fact that the beans travel as a cheap backhaul cargo, usually in the bellies of passenger aircraft which, if the locavores succeeded in forbidding the traffic, would still fly the same route, repatriating holidaying Europeans – the “carbon footprint” of their journey is practically zero.

    That’s of course if the Moonbat Tendency hasn’t succeeded in shutting down that remaining source of Kenyan economic betterment, tourism (for purposes other than attending climate conferences). Which is another argument. I suppose.

    What particularly pisses me off about this Kenyan green bean crap is that in general, and by and large, and on the whole, I approve of the British Empire, including the benign way it wound itself down. But my approval depends critically on the post-colonial states being allowed by the developed world to go about the business of developing themselves (properly, I mean, not just as aid-junkies) unmolested. Examples of cogent African business development are rare enough without their pitch being queered by a bunch of ignorant, pharisaical harpies.

  2. pola says:27th September 2010 at 2:11 amit’s not about the carbon footprint which is a scam anyway as you seem to understand judging from your latest article in the telegraph about bilderberg and global cooling. the point is that the industrialized countries move more and more towards economies which do not produce anything but are pure ‘serve’ societies. this is not sustainable for any country – if it doesn’t produce anything and has to import everything. that’s the whole problem that the us, uk, and many european countries are facing. and even if your crop is destroyed by one bad season you still have the knowledge, you still have food stored from the previous season and if not you then your neighbor. it doesn’t take a scientific paper to understand the sanity behind the idea of being independent in your food supply either as individual or as a country. just common sense.

Comments are closed.

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

Opiate for the masses – James Delingpole

September 14, 2010

One of the few things I respect about mainstream TV is how utterly shallow and addictive it is. In many ways it’s like crack: it doesn’t pretend that it’s good for you but it gets you to where you want to go way more effectively than tofu or wheatgrass juice or organic dolphin-friendly tuna caught with rod and line. Sometimes it achieves high artistic standards too, but this is usually a fluke, which happens despite the medium rather than because of it. TV isn’t like film or opera or theatre or sculpture or any of that poncy stuff. Its main job is to get you out of it as quickly as possible — an opiate for the masses.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. Cult splatter flick director Richard Curtis talks about the film that made him famous
  2. Obama’s won the Nobel Peace – WTF?!
  3. Why you don’t see Hamas firing rockets on TV

 

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations

It Is Not Drugs That Cause the Problems, It’s the Wholly Unwinnable War on Drugs

As a spliff fan, myself. . .

At a dinner party a couple of years ago I was lucky enough to be sat near one of my heroes, Roger Scruton — like being a couch away from Socrates at a symposium. But then, halfway through, the great man began sounding off on one of the two things he is completely and utterly wrong about (the other one being pop music): drugs.

By ‘drugs’, of course, dear, brave, brilliant Roger didn’t mean to include the alcohol he had been quaffing all evening nor yet the highly addictive yet legal nicotine death sticks of which the Fawn and I had partaken before dinner. What he meant was yer proper, actual, tabloid horror drugs: cocaine, ecstasy, LSD, heroin, and the deadly, evil ‘gateway’ drug they call ‘spliff’.

As something of a spliff enthusiast myself I thought this was a bit much. Especially coming from a man whose philosophy generally springs from the most rigorous logic and the soundest libertarian principles. And I was about to speak my mind when an elegant, distinguished fellow with a double-barrelled name sitting opposite did so for me. ‘When I was in the City I used heroin for ten years,’ he said. ‘It never did me any harm. Rather enjoyed it actually.’

Britain has a serious drug problem. The world has a serious drug problem. And the serious problem is this: we have collectively decided to make criminals of the billions of otherwise law-abiding citizens who wish to pursue the perfectly natural human instinct to seek occasional chemical or herbal escape from reality. We imprison people who shouldn’t be imprisoned. We waste money which would be better spent elsewhere. We increase crime, corruption and violence. We deny cash-crop farmers a living. We finance narco-wars. We enrich criminals. We destroy lives. The drugs ‘problem’, in other words, is almost entirely of our own making.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. Worrying about pop stars who don’t do drugs
  2. Meet Finland’s answer to Vaclav Klaus
  3. ‘Trougher’ Yeo recants on global warming
  4. The officers who played fireball hockey with me have been scandalously betrayed

3 thoughts on “It is not drugs that cause the problems, it’s the wholly unwinnable war on drugs”

  1. yaosxx says:27th August 2010 at 4:17 pmVery daring article James and on the whole spot on. Can’t thing of anyone else who would dare to write such an article in this way. Loved the ketamine/czarist ball episode!
  2. Dave Stocker says:30th August 2010 at 5:40 pmSpot on from me, too, James. In the TV documentary series you referred to, former Govt drugs advisor Nutt made a telling point. He said something like ‘[the government position] is clearly not about the science, it’s about morality.’ I have yet to hear a politician from either end of the political spectrum confidently articulate just which moral principle is invoked to justify drug prohibition. Could it be that pleasure ought to be earned thru’ hard graft, without shortcuts, or is it about protecting the vulnerable, or both, or something else? I’d like to hear what members of our new government would answer to a carefully-crafted question along these lines.

    As I understand it, evolution is about the interaction between the individual ‘organism’ and the ‘environment’. Recreational drugs are increasingly part of the contemporary ‘environment’, and should perhaps be considered as an evolutionary force. Those who don’t handle them respectfully or are taken over by them will simply die, and it shouldn’t surprise us.

  3. MERL says:15th September 2010 at 8:25 pmHAS NO ONE NOTICED THAT OUR WARS, OUR WEATHER, THE BAD VACCINES, ETC PLUS THE PRESENT EXONOMY AND TAKE OVER BY GOVERNMENT ALL GOING IN THE SAME DIRECTION……….SYNCHRONIOUSLY?

    CHECK OUT WHAT SCIENCE ALREADY IS AWARE OF….NIBIRU 12/21 / 2012

Comments are closed.

Post navigation

Scan to Donate Bitcoin to James
Did you like this?
Tip James with Bitcoin
Powered by BitMate Author Donations