You have to buy one of these


David Davis

I just chanced on this. It looks very fine. The Officers of the Libertarian Alliance will, naturally, be thinking of ordering some, for the Committee, but sadly funds do not run to this sort of extravagance. So it’s “theory A”, then.

But the bugger has at least six cars….


(And The Devil has spotted that Iain Dale has spotted the latest assault on motorists’ legal standing in the case of accidents with cyclists and pedestrians…bet 50p Charles won’t be charged if a cyclist hits his stationary Aston and injures himself…)

David Davis

I can’t decide, taken over a period of many years, whether…

(1) to like the Prince of Wales as an intelligent and thoughtful man who is troubling to find feasible solutions to what he honestly thinks are real problems,

(2) to despise him as hypocritically uninvolved in the real day-to-day business of being one of his future subjects – or,

(3) merely as a poor sad tormented intellectual weakling, adopting the squashed shape of whichever Fake Charity sat on his head most recently.

Today, owning a fine Aston Martin which he loves to drive (naturally enough), and at least five other personal vehicles, he goes on yet more about us needing to be persuaded of things such as this:

“We must surely be able to organise ourselves… in ways in which we are not dependent on it [the “car”] to such a great extent for our daily needs.”

He may be sincere, or more likely just pressured by strong and committed members of the Enemy Class. If the latter, then “choice-editing” as proposed by people like Madeleine Bunting will not come up into the poor sad bloke’s radar – he’ll just assume that – because he’s a sort of nice harmless bloke who wouldn’t hurt a fly, literally – ordinary individuals will just want to and also can go along with these dis-mobolisation plans the Enemy Class has for Teh Masses.

I'm all right, Jeeves - you can walk, it's good for you.

I'm all right, Jeeves - you can walk, it's good for you.

A rather nifty scam…


to do these things:-

David Davis

(1) get lots of poor-people’s cars confiscated,

(2) get another nail in the coffin of non-surveillance,

(3) increase the income-stream of the insurance-arms of busticated banks owned by the taxpayer government.

The Englishman’s noticed it too. Wouldn’t be surprised in the Devil and Obotheclown say something mild also.

The “civil liberties campaigners” apologists for mild surveillance, and the “motorists’ organisations” semi-detached arms of State Transport Control always go about rearguard actions the wrong way. They say things like “the scheme is sound in principle, but…” and “it will penalise law-abiding drivers who forget…” – all of which is quite irrelevant to the principle of defending liberty under Common Law.

The tobacco manufacturers made exactly the same mistakes in the early 1980s, when smoking and tobacco advertising was under assault. They tried to justify resisting an ad-ban by saying that it was “all about persuading people to switch brands” – rather than actively and politically resisting what amounted to State-censorship of information about legal products. Nobody was going to swallow the brand-switching nonsense, and the Enemy Class certainly didn’t.

So here we are again.