Communitarianism is a freedom-hating totalitarian philosophy like any other | James Delingpole

June 27, 2011

The most unsettling aspect of modern politics is that the Enemy is no longer plain in view. We may feel in our bones that we are as oppressed, disenfranchised and generally shat upon, in our way, as those who suffered under Nazism, Marxism and fascism. But the actual evidence doesn’t seem to bear this out.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. Only a totalitarian New World Order can save us now says Naomi Klein
  2. Nazis: the gift that goes on giving
  3. Ayn Rand’s books are deliciously anti-statist, but her philosophy is borderline Nazi
  4. Freedom of speech is dead in Australia

One thought on “Communitarianism is a freedom-hating totalitarian philosophy like any other”

  1. Nige Cook says:2nd July 2011 at 5:48 pmA great goal for an objective stops people from taking any real responsibility for their actions, because they can believe that any amount of “short-term” evil (like genocide) is justified by “long term” great goal’s benefits, like extra living space and an incrementally cleaner or less crowded environment. They know they have a “noble” goal of getting rich quick or making the world a utopia, so any method they use to get it – no matter how much it costs, how inefficient the solutions are, how much faking of “evidence” and no matter how many ad hominem attacks on justified criticisms – is justified to them.

    This is why these people never back down when disproved over mere “details”. They’re precisely like Hitler, who slapped his knee and said “I have nerves of steel” in 1933 when criticised for racism by Dr Max Planck, who told Hitler that Germany would suffer from the loss of Jews from German science under Nazi laws. Hitler and Stalin were stupid top dog bureaucrats who allowed utopian visions to block the perception of fatal flaws in their plans. Planck was able to get a face to face meeting with Hitler since he was founder of the quantum theory of radiation. Hitler ignored Planck’s warning, and kicked out top Jewish physicists from German academia (who fled to America), hence losing WWII by failing to make an atomic bomb. If Hitler had listened and given up racism, they would probably have made the bomb and dominated the world. Planck’s oldest son was killed in WWI and his younger son was executed by the Gestapo for an assassination attempt against Hitler.

    Such people are just deluded by wishful thinking into believing that they are morally justified by pursuit of big utopian goals, so that they don’t need to worry about the lying and evil details. The self-excusing “impossible to falsify” big-goal bureaucracy is the real evil. Trotsky had it right in The Revolution Betrayed (1936): Stalin appointed 15% of the population as bureaucratic administrators who did what they were ordered, just like the massive “eco-goaled” public sector today. With bureaucrats in power, liberty is dead.

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

Stuff of legend – James Delingpole

June 21, 2015

A few years ago, my at-the-time-quite-impoverished screenwriter friend Jake Michie told me about this brilliant new children’s TV series he’d dreamed up about the Knights of the Round Table. All the male leads would be young and pretty with boy band haircuts; Arthur would be a bit of a rugger-bugger lunk, while the real hero would be a younger Merlin who would use his magic to get his pal out of all sorts of scrapes; and obviously there’d be monsters and demons and suchlike to stop the kids getting bored.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. The Right to Swear is Integral to Being a True Conservative
  2. History like it used to be
  3. If only I’d known when I was younger that my background was my greatest strength
  4. Headfirst, sometimes sideways, I was swept down a treacherous, rain-swollen river

 

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

There Will Never Be Justice If We Leave It to Lawyers

The big question this week is: ‘Should Giles Coren be bound, gagged, shackled and sentenced to life imprisonment in the torture block of the sexual offenders’ wing of Black Beach maximum security prison in Equatorial Guinea, there to become the plaything of Mad “Mamba” Mbigawanga, the Man-Rapist Giant of Malabo?’

Well, obviously, when you put it like that, the answer’s obvious.

We all hate Coren, those of us who know him, those of us in the media especially, because his very existence is such a maddening repudiation to one of the precious few consolations in this vale of tears: that real talent goes unrewarded.

Look at Jeremy Clarke. OK, so he has a Speccie column rightly worshipped by those in the know, among them Hugh Grant, apparently. But it’s not like Jeremy Clarke’s a household name, is it? He hasn’t got one of those stupidly paid mega-columns in the Mail or the Times. He doesn’t get fish-finger manufacturers ringing him saying, ‘Please Jeremy, please be the next Cap’n Birdseye and allow us to buy you a fleet of BMWs.’ He doesn’t get a 60,000-plus Twitter following just by swearing a lot and telling us what he had for lunch at his latest blowout with his new chum Michael Winner. He doesn’t get paid to go on primetime TV series where all he has to do is eat and get drunk and burp for Britain’s entire male student population to want to give up shaving so that they can all be that little bit more like him.

(to read more, click here)

Related posts:

  1. Free the Greenpeace 30! (And spare us any more whingeing from Damon Albarn, Jude Law and that bloke out of the Clash)
  2. Christian Forgiveness: Much overrated
  3. Climategate: the lawyers move in – those scientists are toast!
  4. Tim Yeo: no headline can do him justice

2 thoughts on “There will never be justice if we leave it to lawyers”

  1. Nige Cook says:31st May 2011 at 9:35 am“The one great principle of the English law is, to make business for itself. There is no other principle distinctly, certainly, and consistently maintained through all its narrow turnings. Viewed by this light it becomes a coherent scheme, and not the monstrous maze the laity are apt to think it. Let them but once clearly perceive that its grand principle is to make business for itself at their expense, and surely they will cease to grumble.”

    – Charles Dickens (novelist and ex-law court reporter), Bleak House, Chapter 39, http://www.online-literature.com/dickens/bleakhouse/40/

  2. Velocity says:9th June 2011 at 12:04 amWell said Nige ….or well put Charles Dickens

    The Law is an arse… like Govt we never needed this pompous rediculous man-made edifice …whoever thought we need a bunch of old farts in wigs and 2 sides of fee-feeding parasites (that’ll be lawyers) to administer ‘justice’ (which in truth just retribution) is living in LaLa Land

    the West is disappearing up its own arse with these institutions none of which do what they say on the can and are in fact just instruments of oppression of the people for the elite

Comments are closed.

Post navigation

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

Our Island Story

I vividly remember the moment when I saw my first black person. It was December in either ’68 or ’69, so I would have been three or four at the time, and my father’s works had arranged some kind of coach outing to meet Father Christmas. Seated near me was a black child a bit older than me, and I recall gazing fascinated at the blackness of his skin and noticing that it had white blotches on it like a mirror image of the dark freckles and moles on my skin. ‘Daddy, what are those white things?’ I asked, pointing at the boy’s skin. ‘Pigment,’ my father explained.

It’s not the sort of detail you could make up, is it? And I’m sure most Englishmen of my generation or older will have had similar experiences. It’s not a racist observation, merely a statement of fact, that in our youth Britain was much, much whiter than it is now. So white that unless you ventured into the inner cities, it was quite possible not to see a ‘coloured’ person at all.

Suppose, then, you wanted to create a cosy, long-running TV series which would have especial appeal to the group of people who most watch TV. No, not students and the long-term unemployed: they’ve got Countdown and Shameless. I mean all those oldsters who don’t do Facebook and Call of Duty (Black Ops), who know the words to the ‘Beer at Home means Davenports’ ad, whose schooling included being taught how to add up and write in joined-up handwriting, who think Britain isn’t what it was and that nobody has any manners or respect any more. If you were designing a show just for them, how would it look?

Here, I would suggest, are some of the key ingredients: chocolate-boxy, unspoilt English villages with honey-coloured stone; a total absence of wind farms; a solid, reliable, if slightly dull detective of a certain age — ideally played by that wonderful chap who used to be Jim Bergerac, ah, remember Bergerac, happy days; plot lines involving country-house mysteries of the kind that greats like Margaret Rutherford as Miss Marple used to solve; sly, shifty old rustics, blimpish colonels and bluff Mine Hosts; churches and churchyards and churchgoers; extremely limited use of iPods, iPads, Xboxes and PS3s; no ethnic characters.

You’ll have noticed that the series I’ve described, more or less, is Midsomer Murders.

Read the rest at the Spectator.

Related posts:

  1. Government’s £6 million ‘Bedtime Story’ climate change ad: most pernicious waste of taxpayers’ money ever?
  2. What Labour has done to our education system is criminal – as this heart-rending story shows
  3. Why the BBC cannot be trusted on ‘Climate Change’: the full story
  4. When Lego lost its head – and how this toy story got its’ happy ending

 

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

Triumph of the West

If at the beginning of the 15th century you’d had to predict who was going to dominate the world for the next 500 years, the answer would surely have been China. From the sophistication of its sanitation system to the size of its fleet, China — under the Emperor Zhu Di and his eunuch naval commander Cheng Ho — was a country going places. Its mighty, 400-foot-long ships sailed as far as Malindi on the East African coast and probably Australia. It had invented the clock and, of course, gunpowder.

Europe, during the same period, was — relatively speaking — a stagnant, backward mess. Architecturally, it had nothing modern that could match the glories of the Forbidden City in Peking or imperial Nanjing. It was decidedly lacking in Confucian harmony and cohesion: a mishmash of violent, squabbling, plague-ravaged city states and warring kingdoms. Between 1330 and 1479, one quarter of deaths among the English aristocracy was violent.

By the end of the century, though, something had changed. Columbus, in a ship one tenth the size of Cheng Ho’s, had discovered the New World, while Vasco da Gama had opened a new trade route to India. And by 1842, the power imbalance had grown so great that to punish China for confiscating some of its opium Britain was able to demand reparations, including $21 million, the opening of five trade treaty ports and the establishment of a crown colony on Hong Kong.

Where did Europe get it so right and the Chinese so badly wrong? This was the question asked by Niall Ferguson in the first episode of his six-part series Civilisation: Is the West History? (Channel 4, Sunday). I can’t say I’ve been a particular fan of his earlier stuff, which has always struck me as a bit abstruse and pleased with itself. But this new one looks set to be an absolute cracker: cogent, urgent, persuasive and compelling.

Read the rest at the Spectator.

Related posts:

  1. How The West Was Lost (ctd): the Burkini
  2. Sporting triumph at school is even sweeter than the smell of napalm in the morning
  3. Allen West: America’s next black president?
  4. Margaret Thatcher dies; Dave basks in the limelight

5 thoughts on “Triumph of the West”

  1. Nige Cook says:14th March 2011 at 9:28 amYes, it wasn’t too bad. I saw it and Niall Ferguson half won me over with his discussion of the role of science in the military, showing off Benjamin Robins’ book which attempted to mathematically predict air resistance effects on cannon shell in his 1742 New principles of gunnery were enthusiastically taken up and extended three years later by the German language translator, the ubiquous mathematician Leonard Euler, in his improved Neue Grundsätze der Artillerie, 1745. Robins argued that the effect of air resistance increases with the initial velocity of the projective, which was revolutionary because the previous half-baked analysis by Tartaglia in 1537 and made parabolic by Galileo in 1638, claimed that air resistance was only important near the end of the trajectory.

    In fact air resistance is highest when the velocity is highest (in the early stages), because the drag is due to dynamic pressure, which as Euler found is clearly proportional to the square of the velocity of the shell. So as it slows down, air resistance becomes smaller, not bigger (as previously believed from intuitive guesswork). The key problem was determining the shell’s range as a function of gun elevation angle and the initial velocity of the shell. Napoleon studied the French version of Euler’s revision, and was able to get his gunnery more efficient than his rivals, whose military relied on an excessive amount of preliminary “test shots” to empirically determine the best elevation angle (wasting time, wasting cannon, and forewarning the enemy!). So the basis of Napoleon’s success was the brainpower of an English physicist!

  2. Nige Cook says:14th March 2011 at 9:41 am(Sorry, I was interrupted while writing the comment above; the second sentence is a dog’s breakfast.)
  3. JimmyGiro says:14th March 2011 at 6:04 pmI totally agree with your assessment of the Headmaster, in Jamie’s Dream School, as being the weakest link. And therein lies the value of the show; not so much for Jamie’s hopes, but for the way this show promises to expose some of the excuses that professional teachers (and their unions) come up with, such as blaming parents.

    Whether these ‘dream teachers’ succeed or fail becomes dwarfed by the incite we will all get by watching the reactions of real kids in real lessons. And I’ll bet a pound to a penny that the Headmaster will inadvertently expose his political training, along with the culpability of the teaching profession as it currently stands.

  4. Velocity says:15th March 2011 at 2:30 amNial Ferguson nailed only 1 major force for Europes, and latterly Americas, economic success: competition. It’s the most powerful force in capitalism.
    The other key he missed was freedom. Freedom of the individual to push boundaries, wether that be technology, industry or science (ie. knowledge).
    He touched on Chinas regression from being the most advanced nation but he didn’t nail the reason: authority or centralising of power.
    Centralising power of economic progress is fatal. Ity proved fatal to China.
    Whereas in Europe entrepeneurs, primarily agricultural and industrial, had room to breath. However Americas freedom surpassed Europes increasingly stifling Govts which is why America overtook authoritarian Europe so rapidly.

    Incidentally James ‘The Abyss’ is about to kick off i believe. The Euro and US stock markets have just taken what looks like the beginning of an accelerating wave down.
    This is important because it’s a lead indicator for the economy. And it also leads all political events (markets = horse… politics = cart).
    This last stock rally is being nicely ‘peeked’ by Merkals Emperor like orders for the minnows of Europe and agreeing to increase the Eurozone bailout fund. But this stock collapse is marking the beginning of the end for these last ‘chummy’ and ‘friendly’ Euro Clubbers. The declining stock market will now bring on devision, fall out and the inevitable split of the Eurozone in the next year.
    Tell Hannan… he’ll like the news… in fact if he knew how events unfold he could make the news and mark his place in history! He was very brave to use my line that business does not need the EU/Govts to trade across Europe in his speech at the EU. He gulped a bit delivering such a powerful message but deliver it he did (kudos for that)

  5. herkinderkin says:15th March 2011 at 2:37 pmJames – Nailed, pretty much. I cannot disagree about the key advantages:
    competition, science, property rights, medicine, the consumer society and the work ethic.

    Neither can I disagree about that these are negatives:
    bunny-hugging, diversity awareness training, renewable energy and the EU. The last is taxation (and regulation) without representation.

    The way that successive UK politicians of both left and right have ceded sovereignty to the EU.is treason in my book. NZ politicians have similarly ceded sovereignty to foreign interests and the UN. Perhaps it’s no coincidence that the same leaders have abolished the death sentence for treason. Playing it safe, no doubt.

    Two comments are necessary.

    It is ironic that China, which is growing very fast, has central control, but does it in such a way that it now at last has all of the key advantages you identified. (Actually, they always did have the last, the work ethic.) I am uncomfortable with the excesses of the control the Chinese exercise, but it seems to be working overall. The Chinese are out-performing the West.

    Part of their success – a big part, arises from the headlong rush of western businesses to source their manufactured goods from the cheapest sources. As a result, manufacturing in the West has severely diminished. The short-term profits have been made, but the overall wealth of western nations has declined sharply.

    And the Chinese, and latterly the Indians, are beginning to laugh all the way to the bank.

    Competition, science, property rights, medicine, the consumer society and the work ethic. greed may not be such a crash-hot idea. It might be a good thing if western governments exercised some controls designed to promote growth. And abandoned the cloying, unecessary growth-limiting controls of carbon taxes.

Comments are closed.

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

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