Libertarian Alliance Blast-from-the-Past, No:1 … More on metrication, the EU, and British home-grown fascists

David Davis

(I originally wrote this on 18th October 2008. But some of the points raised deserve a new airing in the light of recent events in Parliament and how these relate to fascism and the Enemy-Class-Hatred of all things moral and English.)

Earlier today I just flagged this up. I now have time to say something. (The original post is not only lower down your page but also here.)

The EU, with its usual disarming frankness about objectives, has gone on record as saying that it’s not really important if people here (or by inference elsewhere) go on using pre-metric, which is to say “Imperial” measurements. For one thing of course, these are still commonly encountered in all sorts of places on the continent of Europe.

The real subtext of the assault on “Imperial” measurement use in the UK is of course, and always has been, ideological and manichean. It is obvious, now that we know the facts. Those kinds of people who so publicly have championed “metrication” (and that also included the quite un-necessary and politically-motivated “decimalisation” of our currency) share a fully philosophical objective: what is this objective, then?

It is the exemplary punishment of Britain: especially, it encompasses an objective of the destruction of a place which they view as “England” – together with all its customs and traditions which act as a sort of conservative glue. The whole idea of “England”, historically, is essentially conservative. England’s history returns almost like clockwork, to a theme of looking to tradition and custom (as understood at the time of decision about the future) to decide what to do. This is mortally dangerous to gangsters like Lenin, Marx, Stalin, Hitler, Gordon Brown, Pol Pot, Kim Jong Il (who will continue to remain dead), Huggy the Chav, Ken Livingstone, Castro (who has been dead for some time) and whoever that bugger was who ran the Sendero Luminoso (I hope there won’t be a pop group called that any time soon.)

This stuff, this conservative glue, hard to create over the centuries, but easy to abolish with a Gestapo-sweep of A4 paper containing “enhanced statutory requirements”, holds a free people in friendships and relationships in a comfortable place, and confers order on civilisation. This of course is quite inimical to the fascist/stalinist concept of “more and faster change”, beloved of “management” “consultants”, or one of the other ones, which is “best practice in health and safety”.

Most importantly, it is because an essentially conservative civilisation is all that stands in the way of the intended destruction of what helps ordinary people to live and get better and better as time advances – that destruction which is crucial for the survival of wreckers, murderers, fascists, socialists and other theoretical idealists who have never inhabited anything more important (such as a factory or a mine or a ploughed field) than a room at a university. These latter groups know, with every fibre of their being, that their usefulness and significance diminishes visibly and fast, with the arrival of every person who can make his own way and decisions in his life.

You can’t, if you are a statist, allow people essentially to better themselves and their lives…and then you just go home and grow stuff or watch TV. The hog won’t slaughter itself.

There will come a time when they won’t need you or your “help”, and they will be able to know it. If they are armed, then you are toast already (so you’d better have got their guns off them quite early on.) If they are unarmed, then you will still have a difficult time, and you may have to shoot the right people (they didn’t in this case), but you may get through if you can manufacture a scare or two, preferably together, and hobble them further.

I think that British statists, being cleverer and more (what Stalin called) “serious” than continental ones (their weather is better and the food and girls are nicer, so they don’t really have to concentrate so hard) are far, far more finely-tuned to the threat of incipient liberty arising in a population, than their European conterparts.

I shudder to think with what ruthless efficiency the Police authorities in the UK would have complied with Nazi orders to round up people and have them “resettled”. Anti-Imperial-measure-police-and-Soviet-staff are merely taking a “directive” at its face value, and applying it to the letter, together with their own ingrained (ought I to say “institutionalised”?) racism against a civilisation which they (rightly) see as the one which has done most to try to make them as redundant as possible.

These dudes are far more dangerous than deeply-respected scholars wearing silly hats, and…

…we have not seen the last of them yet.

David Davis

GreeZanis and AmilaR-nights-scumbags probably represent the largest single danger to ordinary civilisation in The West. The Muslims have been set up as a stalking-horse, to divert real anger from these other guys instead. They should rebel amd perhaps seek damages from this administration.

The Shadows on Thursday

David Davis

We may regret the coming Endarkening, and feel powerless to do much about the buggers who assail out liberty at every turn. But Western Civilisation has left an enormaous and unexcelled Canon: of giant science and engineering, immortal literature, unassailable philosophy, and shit-hot music.

The devil may have had all the best flags and uniforms, so as to reduce sovereign individuals to multiply-directed automata, who would then do his will, while thinking it was their own.

But who the f*** cares, when we can do this to his face, on a blog?

That's better, that's more like it, see if you can pick up  a St Hilda's chick while wearing that.

That's better, that's more like it, see if you can pick up a St Hilda's chick while wearing that.

Destroying Britain on purpose – The Idea: New LA series – dispatches from a dying country, number 1. The pub.

Vicki Woods (strange woman, odd views for an existential conservative, but sometimes she writes well, is, er, now, er, “helping to run a village pub”…)

David Davis

(Credits to Dr Sean Gabb, author of a book entitled “Dispatches from…..” You may even still be able to buy that book by going to his page.)

If you set out to utterly destroy a nation – nay, a culture, for that’s really what we are – without actively resorting to terror-Police and NKVD and Gestapo tactics openly  – at least not quite yet… – then what you do is this:-

You can’t storm all its houses using the army or the police like Stalin did in the 20s/30s: the Police are on your side since you pick them, pay them and brainwash them, but the Services are not – you can’t pick them….yet, so you can’t brainwash them, as they are the wrong guys. So, what can you do?

You can, via the “Long March Through The Institutions”, constrict a cadre of activists who know instinctively for Gramsican reasons that they must get into “positions of power”.

Then, you can set out to carefully and deliberately erase all its icons, its defining characteristics that help bond its people together socially, its customs (better if they are really really old – the erasing causes more glue to dissolve without people really seeing how or why) its ceremonies, and all its little details. If you are a Fabianazi, this is OK even if it takes some time. You know it will work in the end, you have all the time in the world, and you have also set up an “education” “system”, which does the following things:-

(a) looks as if it is “free”,

(b) looks as if it “benefits” the “underprivileged”,

(c) looks as if it’s well-founded using real hard knowledge,

(d) looks as if everyone can “succeed”,

(e) tells everyone how wonderful you are to “give” it to them,

(f) rewrites their nation’s historiography (while they watch the TV progs your friends have created for them as anaesthetics.)

At the same time you make it harder for people to avoid the said system – even though you can’t yet close down schools by force that are “outside the system” – which is to say, other people’s private property. But you make jolly sure that you f*** up the curriculum something proper anyway, so you increase the probability of turning out a majority of radicalised pre-socialist children, who will not know how to value and venerate the things that you are going to set out to destroy. One of these is the “Pub”.

Most foreign readers of this blog will know what a “Pub” is. A “Public House” is really actually a private house, in which the owner graciously permits strangers to come in and buy each other drinks, in the warm, and have a smoke, a gossip and a dust-up occasionally. You can be (and are) barred for transgressing his rules, as it’s his “house”. The food, if any, since nuts, crisps and pork scratchings have always been more than sufficient, is really irrelevant, and is in fact a post-modern reaction to celebrity “tele-Chefs”, nearly all of whom are lefties except for Anthony Worral-Thompson who seems to have been put out to grass, and to the post-modern fashion for “families” to go to Pubs – a weird idea.

I think that the “Pub” was the place in default of the Witanagemot or the Thing, where the Men (of somewhere) went to Discuss Matters. Travellers were graciously allowed in too, a fine and advanced modern liberal idea. Culture could therefore spread rapidly, even before “Posts”, then News “Papers”, Wireless Radio, Wireless Tele Vision, or the Inter “Net”.

This is why “Pubs” are under attack – not just from the high taxation of alcohol for all sorts of spurious reasons supposedly connected with “health” (we are their Farm Animals, you see.) They are also attacked through the phantasm of the promoted image of the unfriendliness of a “drinking den”, peddled by the Enemy Class which sees this object as a disease of the “Working Class” – which has to be eradicated. Furthermore, If I was a ZanuLieborg Stalinist, I would attack pubs since that is where people might go to mutter bad things about me, together, with others whom they know well, over a pint or three, and thhus secure in the company of their own mutual trust. This cannot be allowed.

So the “Pub” has got to go. If it’s converted into a “gastro” object, run as part of a chian by one of your “party backers”, to be frequented not by regulars but by itinerant tourists (much safer, see last para) then that partly plugs a tax-hole, and makes out that the Fabianazis pretend to understand what “the people” want.

If it truly closes, then that’s a benefit for Stalinism as well. You’ve shoved a nail up the nose of a culture that you hate, despise and want dead, by removing something it needed and valued, without knowing even how to articulate why. By further isolating your peaceful and conservative enemies, who have never voted for you and never would know how to want to, you can further demoralise them. Win-win.

Right now as I write, we are coming into the “Police breathalysing Season”. This in today’s Britain is now the traditional season in which a given number of pubs tries to stay open and not go bankrupt, while the British Terror-Police, as the opposing team, try to see how many people they can arrest for driving out of pub car parks after having ordered a drink. The fact that out of about 800-odd people a year killed on the roads in situations where alcohol is inplicated, about 70% are drunk pedestrians, is always ignored, and never stated.