Is a British Libertarian a Fabian-turned-upside-down?

David Davis

I’ve been heavily criticized from time to time by people that ought to know better, for inventing the word “GramscoFabiaNazi”. However, google seems to hit it nearly 5,000 times, an increasing proportion of which are not things I wrote.

Earlier today I came across this piece. British Libertarians like constructing “Think Tanks” and indeed it seems the Fabian Society was to be seen as one of these by its members: although a later objective was to hijack and farm the political franchise of (initially) the “Working Classes” later to be followed by everyone else.

The strategy of telling people what they ought to want, then making them want it, seems to have worked for the Fabianazis. Sometimes I have a go at, for example, shopkeepers. Often a shop till is busy with a shambling chav in pink pyjamas and with a “Fazackerley Facelift”…”yeh…and can I have 20 Embassy…..and can I have 10 rollups…..and can I have £10 on the lecky (another 40 seconds gone)…and can I have £5 on the gas….(40 more seconds)…oh and can I have a  strawberry wkd…and the Daily Star…..(then goes back and gets 2 litres of cider)….(is that it luv? Er….yeh……”) But if there’s nobody waiting I sometimes try things like:-

“YOU PEOPLE…ought to not want to be told what to sell, and to whom!” I refer here to local CouncillorNazi bullying, and legal strictures about such as tobacco and alcohol.

“IF ALL YOU SHOPS…had risen up as one, and instantly shouted “f*** off”, to the Gubblentment about “minimum pricing for alcohol units”, then you wouldn’t be forced to charge me £1.99 for my Special-Brew! What the hell is a “trade association” for then, if not to stand up for your own rights?” (They don’t understand that one: they think that their association, whatever it is, is just for holding an annual dinner to which they take the wife, and then tells them what the government demands of them next.

We here have spent most of our lives trying to tell people what they ought to want. this seems like a Fabian tactic to me. The question then arises:—

How is it that the FabiaNazis have been so successful, and are on the point of winning the entire war – and almost globally, and by contrast we are such failures? And this, when what we have to offer is so desirable, and is free? And what they offer is control, slavery and tyranny? Where have we gone wrong?



  • GramscoFabiaNazi types are successful because they appeal to base human desires: free meal tickets, comfort, no consequences for irresponsibility and other state goodies… These paternalists don’t want ‘their’ children growing up; just as parents often hold back their own children’s development to avoid loss of status.

  • Jeriko One is correct – as is David Davis.

    This is why trying to “use leftist tactics to do the opposite” as some (quite sincere) libertarians do, does not work.

    Different ends require (in this case) different means. Lying and appealing to base instincts – that will not work for the foes of the Fabians. Or the followers of Saul Alinsky in the United States – his tactics seem to fascinate some foes of socialism who keep asking “how can we apply them”. Short answer – we can not apply Alinsky methods, they are evil methods specifically designed for evil ends. Like the Fabians.

  • OK. I might agree. So what ought we to do then?

  • They have won because they have the Establishment, and we have not. And they have the Establishment because they are the Establishment; the ruling elite who had taken mastery of society by the flowering of the Industrial Revolution.

    People tend to use metaphors for their society in terms of things they understand, and model their society on it. The Jews were shepherds; they created a shepherd God who provides pastoral care for his flock. The metaphor of the industrial revolution was “the nation as factory” (shared with the Marxists) because that was what the new ruling class of factory owners understood. During the shiny-suited financialisation of the economy in the 80s, we became “Great Britain PLC” because that was what they understood. As an erotic cartoonist myself, I would see “the nation as bawdy 1970s Carry On hospital”, which is why I should never be allowed near the reins of power. Or maybe it is why I should be.

    Anyway, the Victorian ruling class who spawned the Fabians saw their lives in terms of a chocolate factory with a model village attached, in which the grateful inhabitants are ministered to, have nice houses, and aren’t allowed any beer (but they can have a library). That is Fabian Britain; “the nation as chocolate factory with a model village attached”; and that is where we live. Except since the 1980s the chocolate factory has been run by loud men in shiny suits instead of bewhiskered Quakers after a management buyout.

    No, I’ve no idea how to change this.

  • I’ll offer one thing though. Are we asking the right questions?

    Libertarians spend an awful lot of time talking about what’s wrong with everyone else. We ought to be asking what’s wrong with us. If 99% of people are doing something, the 1% shouldn’t be asking what is wrong with everyone else. They should be asking why they themselves are different. It’s everyone else who is normal.

    Think of it this way; a terrible plague breaks out. Your spouse, your children, your parents, your colleagues, your friends, they all die. But not you. You haven’t got the plague. The interesting question isn’t, “why has everyone else died?”. The interesting question is “why haven’t I?”.

    So, we should stop coming up with ever more convoluted explanations of why everyone else is a collectivist. That’s normal. We need to know what is the matter with us. Then, like our plague survivor, we can use that knowledge to cure other people. If they aren’t dead already of course, I mean.

  • A small point but factory owners were never a ruling class in this country – if they were such things as the 1875 (Disraeli) union act would not have been passed

    Good point about asking the wrong question. For example when I was at junior school I should not have asked myself “why do they all believe what is being taught” (basically a view of history that is “at first there was darkness – and then THE STATE said let-there-be-light”I should have asked “who do I not believe what the teachers are saying and what I see on television” – that is not normal for a young child, and I did not think of myself as a rebel (not at all). I actually thought that the teachers and the BBC people (and so on) were rebels – and that (I admit) is a bit bleeped up on my part.

    David – what do we do?

    Once I thought “prevent the coming bankruptcy” (cultural as well as economic).

    Now I believe it is probably “survive it and rebuild civil society”.

    Accept that I will not be helping with this task – as I will be dead (most likely in a irritating and pointless way).

  • Following on from my “what’s wrong with us?” question, I’m just interested if there’s anyone else here apart from myself who once considered themselves part of the Proggie Left, and sympathised with it, and changed to being a libertarian? Or is everybody else libertarian from birth?

    • I don’t know Ian. For my part, I was a Tory from age 7, when I wanted to vote for SuperMac in 1959, but was prevented owning to my age. I remained so, as a Tory, during the awful tyranny of the Wilsonio-HeathiaNazi years. Then in 1979, I changed to the Liberals and therefore voted for
      Thatcher, who pretended to be a Tory but was actually a liberal. This is why the Tories murdered her in 1990.

      I know that my dear friend and colleague Sean (at whose feet I sit and hear wise words always – and Paul, you should too!) will maybe slightly chastise me for saying that about Thatcher. But say what you will – she wasn’t a British 20th-century-Conservative in the classical sense.

      Probably the libertarian was always there in me, for I never ever cleaved to the proggie left, even as an uneducated child/teen. These people always smelled wrong somehow, specially the ones that used to come round to my mother’s house, and were billed by her as “veeery educated”, and “very academic educationalists”.

      And there is no such thing anyway as a “left libertarian”: that is an oxymoron. I finally made the leap across what to most people is an unbridgeable ravine in the late60s/mid-70s when I got to know Chris Tame. Old Chris T made it look so easy that I did it in seconds, without thinking.

      I am probably the longest, and the oldest living and surviving member of the original LA. I think I was number 4. Chris is dead, I don’t know where Judy is, some other fellas and girls ran off in 1980, and, well, here we are still. I expect Sean is number 5 or 6. I think that old Tony Hollick has a fairly low membership number also – if indeed we were to have such things.

  • Thanks David, that’s interesting. For myself, I always believed strongly in personal freedom, but believed (wrongly) that Leftist policies could achieve that end. My conversion was somewhat Damascene, and a mixture of realising that (a) Lefitit policies were not actually leading towards freedom, but in the opposite direction and (b) a “rational” thought process of being interested in economics (inspired partly by working as a maintenance man in the City) and trying to figure out how money works. I had made some basic “proto-Austrian” progress on my tod, before I discovered the real thing on the internets. I have a strange, undeserved pride that I had actually figured out subjective value on my own.

    I am afraid that I spent the 80s being a typical spart hating Thatcher. I now regret that of course. But I also feel that I have some insight into why the Thatcher administration was so thoroughly unappealing to young with-it groovy happening people like what I was; presentationally they were fucking diabolically bad.

    But anyway, this is probably a bit conceited, but I sometimes feel I have a little more insight than others here about what makes the Enemy tick, because I actually was one of the bastards.

    • The Thatcher administration buggers all wore suits. This was of course a very very very bad way of projecting hip liberal freedommy-stuff to people, especially all of “the cheeeldren” aged between about 15 and 28, which was most people of that age group in the UK, and who didn’t work or live in inner London in Yuppie-Occupations as I did.

      Worse, these were pin-striped, and you had to have a silk tie, in a sort of brick colour. I had to buy at least one, if not more, striped suits every year: you could NOT be seen to be going into the office in the same suit two days running, or you’d be “carpeted” at your “assessment meeting” every six months, for “lacking drive, ambition and self-motivation”. You could also wear a regimental tie, if you’d been in a regiment; it also really had to be silk or you would “be socially dead”. (Rayon ties from M&S or BHS or “the tie rack” were a death sentence, and bosses could tell at nine yards if you had one on, because they smelled.)

      Later in the 1980s, the silk tie had to have a basis of yellow: this was when the “estate agent young men” began to take over the Tories and the FCS after Thatcher fired Chris Tame and us LA people for trying to infiltrate the Tories and subvert the FCS and re-target it. I still yet have lots of these rather pretty ties from the 80s, many of which were astonishingly expensive.

      Oh, and Ian, don’t even get me started on “shirts”…..

  • David – there have always been pro freedom people within the Conservative Party, see (for example) the “Libertarian Strand” in Greenleaf’s “The British Political Tradition”.

    Indeed, even in the 19th century more Conservatives than Liberals were active members of such organisations as the league for the defence of liberty and property, or the personal rights association.

    For example in the town I am sitting in – even in the 1870s it was the Liberals who were in favour of higher taxes (to create government schools and a council) and the local Conservatives who were opposed, And on social matters – it was the local Liberals who tended to favour such things as probation and the local Conservatives who were hostile.

    Of course it a very mixed picture – with (for example) the national Conservative leader, Disraeli, being a statist to the core.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s