Burn a banker?


Unfair to bankers


David Davis

The State should get the hell out of Banking – and I mean literally, in the sense that it should not even issue Monies if it holds an enforced monopoly on this activity, legitimised directly by itself. I am not going so far as to say that a State should not issue a Money at all – just that others ought to be allowed to compete.

The Free Market will discover very fast whose moneys are worth something and whose are not.

The kneejerk-Daily-Wail-three-health-scares-a-week-MSM-rag-style lynching of “bankers” for our current woes, caused as they actually are by a profligate and financially-incontinent Stalinist State, ought to be exposed for what it is: fingering an easy and conspicuous small target instead of the real culprits. Shades of Hitler and the Jews under Weimar and later, come to mind.

In the 90s and early 2000s, poor old Sir Fred Goodwin was only doing what all other “successful” (in the context of the time) bankers were doing, only more aggressively. He’s Scotch after all, so we can’t blame him for his aggression in business either.

These people were responding in a logical way to what the British State Treasury was doing to its own (monopoly) money: they were “getting it away”. What would we have done in their stead? Inside the only system they knew, they were trying to turn worthless paper into (at least some) performing assets.

Nick Cohen blames the left…so do I.


David Davis

In the Observer, he analyses how it all came about.

UPDATE1:-

But to explain, perhaps, to other libertarians, why I have seemed to be praising what seems to be a lefty writing somethng, I ought to have included the link to Coffee House where his article was summarised. here’s part of what he meant:-

“the paradox of the 1997 Labour government was that it was at once a left- and a right-wing administration. It wanted a huge public works programme. It aimed to redistribute enormous amounts of wealth. To achieve both these desirable goals, it made a bargain with the markets. All right, the political left said, we will accept extremes of wealth we once denounced as obscene. With the City accounting for a fifth of the British economy, we will embrace your speculators and not drive them overseas with tough regulation. If the authorities overseeing the Wall Street markets or the Frankfurt bourse become too inquisitive, capital will always be able to find a sanctuary from scrutiny here. Nor will we restrict the operations of financial services even though they are entrapping our supporters in levels of debt that the puritan in us finds frightening. We will concede all this if in return you will give us the tax revenues that will allow us to build the new schools and hospitals, and increase the incomes of our struggling constituents. For all its virtuous intentions, the political left was living off the proceeds of loose financial morals. Prostituting itself, to be blunt.”

Ah…of course…we should have known. The Marxist CofE Archbishops do.


David Davis

Here, you can see the whole sad thing, but…

…to prove my point in the title, I have to quote directly from the article:-

The Archbishop of York, Dr John Sentamu, condemned the financial traders who made millions by driving down the share price of leading banks as “bank robbers and asset strippers”.


In a powerful speech to City bankers on the effects of the credit crisis on Wednesday, he denounced the “Alice in Wonderland” world of global finance where short-sellers profited by laying bets that shares in HBOS would fall in price.

Meanwhile the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, warned in a magazine article that modern devotion to the free market is a form of idolatry and that Karl Marx was right in his analysis of the power of “unbridled capitalism”.

The pair’s attacks came following a tumultuous week in which four major financial institutions went bust or were taken over, triggering multi-billion pound government rescue plans to steady the markets, after traders targeted banks that had been weakened by exposure to unrecoverable mortgage debts and a reduced ability to borrow money.

I have to say, here, that I originally thought that Dr John Sentamu was (what messrs Sellar and Yeatman called, in “1066 and all That“) a Good Thing. But sadly, he’s turned out to be just as bad a fascist lefty as all the other Stalinist/de-Christianising redistributionist terroristloving Devilworshipping lefties of today’s Chief officers of the Church of England. John Carey was probably the last Archbishop of the CofE who could be called (more or less) Christian.

And…let’s just straighten this out while I’m on fire…the “women priests thing” is not the problem. It is a Feminazi sideshow, conducted merely to undermine the CofE as an Anglospheric Institution, which used once to act to do great good, for more people, for less money, and in less time, that socialism and “big-state-charity paid for out of taxation. the Feminazi thing, and the aggressive promotion of “gay” priests, to help shatter the bonds of memory about ordinary charity and Christian life in England. It has largely succeeded.

( Regarding the “molestation” issue, many priests, in all times, and in all religions, have liked choirboys or over-young girls. I submit that it’s to do with the emotionally-highly-charged states that lonely men and inspired young people, forced together in concentrated study and practise of skill, can reach, in the environment of a grand and numinous building, and in the presence of very very large, expressive music and deep emotions. Anything that went on as a result ought to have been merely a matter for the civil authorities, if their voters decided to take a position…which under Liberal Classical pluralist democracies, they have been allowed to for the first time!)

(Furthermore, nowhere, nowhere did Jesus Christ ever say that women could not minister to His Word, nor that they could not bear His Witness to others. Indeed, Mary Magdelene did more than her heroic duty in this regard, in her life, in Jesus’s own time. He just didn’t think it was worth mentioning separately: he had other stuff to do.)

But I digress (shut up, you KNOW you like it!) Let’s get back to hysterically chewing the trousers and underpants off the two English Archbishops, who have so disgraced themselves, in public, and who have yet again succeeded in shooting capitalism, the ONLY father of Freedom and Natural Rights, in the foot.

I have to quote Sentamu again:-

Speaking to the Worshipful Company of International Bankers (what’s this? Ed.), Dr Sentamu said: “Those who made £190million deliberately underselling the shares of HBOS, in spite of its very strong capital base, and drove it into the bosom of Lloyds TSB, are clearly bank robbers and asset strippers.

“We find ourselves in a market system which seems to have taken its rules of trade from Alice in Wonderland, where the share value of a bank is no longer dependent on the strength of its performance but rather on the willingness of the Government to bail it out, or rather on whether the Government has announced its intentions so to do.”

Dr Sentamu will speak in New York on Thursday as the United Nations hosts a summit on the progress made by world leaders to end poverty. (Next post: how to staple jelly to the ceiling. Ed.)

He clearly has understood nothing. Which is to say, that the price of something is what someone else is willing to pay for it now, and which can be known right now (today) or else also estimated in the future IF all other factors are equal and the Bank’s (or whatever’s) behaviour is unaltered (say 6 months’ time or whatever.)

Or, he has been got at, by whatever Nazis and other fascist lefty scumbags are at work inside the fabric of the Church of England.

I did admire the silly bugger. In the face of white-hot post-Christian Blairism in Britain, Sentamu deliberately baptised real people, by Total Immersion, in public. He could have been hauled off, and even martyred by Stalinist shits and twats like David Blunkett and Ed Balls and “Jacqui” “Smith” (such an anodyne name, for such a person!)

YOU know! Hate-crimes, and all that anti-Western, fascist leftist multiculturalistical shit. But he did it. I think he’s been got at by the other bugger, the Welsh windbag with the bushy eyebrows.

You might buy a used car from him, but would you let him hold your baby?

You might buy a used car from him, but would you let him hold your baby?