Mikhail Gorbachev in the Washington Post does not agree with me about Georgia


David Davis

And he’ll get more readers than I do.

But at least Kerplunk thinks this instead.

Thank God for Kerplunk.

Richard Littlejohn (terrible, terrible little man, so unpolitically correct)


David Davis
DAILY MAIL   19.8.08
Why haven’t the Left got Georgia on their minds?
Richard Littlejohn

Pity I was away last week. I must have missed the march through London against the Russian invasion of Georgia. What a magnificent sight it must have been – half a million protesters standing firm against tyranny and supporting freedom and democracy.

I’d have loved to have heard Red Ken denouncing the bloodthirsty gangster regime in Moscow, George Galloway comparing Vladimir Putin to Hitler and Tony Benn declaring it was all about oil.

What’s that you say? There was no such rally? I suppose they must all have been too busy demonstrating against Chinese oppression in Tibet and demanding a boycott of the Beijing Olympics.

Or perhaps not. Funny how the Not In My Name crowd always overlooks aggression by Communist or ‘former’ Communist regimes.

There’s no such reticence when it comes to portraying George W. Bush as the new Hitler or daubing swastikas on the Israeli flag. Look at the protests against the wars in Iraq and Lebanon.

The same people who can’t wait to burn the American flag in Trafalgar Square are only too happy to ignore Russian, Chinese and Iraqi genocide.

 

Where were all the marchers when the Russians were crushing Chechnya? Why so silent on Tibet? They must have been looking the other way when Saddam slaughtered the Kurds.

It hasn’t been difficult to find apologists for the invasion of Georgia. We’re told that the ‘American-educated’ Mikhail Saakashvili provoked the Russians beyond all reason. What did we expect encouraging the spread of democracy in former Soviet satellite states?

No wonder Moscow feels threatened when independent countries it once ruled by military might become members of the European Union and apply to join Nato.

Putting a Western missile defence system in Poland is like waving a red rag at a bull, the sophisticates say. Putin has no option but to retaliate.

I don’t remember them demanding the withdrawal of Soviet nukes pointing at Western capitals from East Germany. Back then, the Guardianistas were all for one-sided disarmament on our  part.

The Left has always been picky about their protests. While they rightly denounce white racism in South Africa, they stay silent on black racism in Zimbabwe.

They bang on about American cultural imperialism, but have nothing to say about Russian or Chinese military imperialism.

America is constantly denounced for its ‘yuman rites’ abuses, but you never hear a dicky bird about the denial of basic freedoms in China or throughout the Muslim world.

Europe’s Leftists define themselves by their hatred of the U.S., yet cheerfully tolerate all kinds of tyranny elsewhere. They’re against ‘torture’ at Guantanamo Bay, but take a relaxed view of Chinese and Russian death squads.

There are still plenty of ‘comrades’ in the Labour Party and the trades union movement who regret the day the Berlin Wall came tumbling down. They’re only too willing to give succour to the enemies of freedom and democracy around the world.

So the official line is that the war in Iraq was nothing to do with Saddam boasting that he had weapons of mass destruction and defying a whole slew of United Nations resolutions to which he agreed after the liberation of Kuwait. It was all about oil.

Yet the invasion of Georgia was justified because Russia was ‘provoked’. So we can assume that Putin never gave a moment’s thought to Georgia’s pipeline to the West? 

What about the announcement last week by a Russian general that Poland was now a prime target for a nuclear strike because it had the audacity to agree to site a Nato defence shield within its borders?

I must have missed the CND press release on that one.

A new survey says that British attitudes towards the United States are governed by ignorance of the facts.

For instance, most people here and in Europe believe America sold Saddam most of his arsenal. The truth is that just 0.46per cent of Iraq’s weapons came from the U.S. Russia supplied 57 per cent, China 12 per cent and the cheese-eating surrender monkeys across the Channel were responsible for 13 per cent.

The U.S. is routinely portrayed as anti-Islamic. But in 11 out of 12 of the most recent conflicts between Muslims and non-Muslims, America has sided with the Muslims.

Other widespread myths such as Americans being denied medical care if they don’t have health insurance are simply not true. Filthy, unregulated Russian and Chinese factories and power stations spew out poisonous gases, but America is branded the world’s biggest polluter, even though it has done more to cut carbon emissions since the year 2000 than any other country.

The ‘liberal’ media has a vested interest in perpetuating such lies. The Left seems to be gripped with some kind of political penis envy of America, which can be assuaged only by sucking up to tyrants and dictators.
If we are entering a new Cold War, you can guarantee that the Left will once again be on the wrong side.

There’s nothing new in this. Forty years ago this summer, the big demonstrations in London were against America’s war against communist North Vietnam, not the Russian invasion of Czechoslovakia.

So no change there, then.
My personal opinions on this sad incident are known to you all. The Libertarian Alliance takes no official line on the matter. Richard Littlejohn says what many people think, who are disenfranchised, notwithstanding the Daily Mail’s questionable stance on many issues, and its possible falsification of an antique letter (see Sean Gabb’s post yesterday.) 

The USSR says “Poland is now a nuclear Target”. I thought, that with Gorbachev, that the USSR had grown up.


I od hope everybody notices this one, since it it now getting serious (as Stalin would have said.)

Civilised nations DO NOT GO ABOUT defining in public, or otherwise, other nations as “Nuclear Targets”. Specially in a time when OUR companies are enriching, by YOUR PM’s leave, YOUR oligarchs who own OUR Foot Ball Clubs.

Sorry General! You shall have to go. If I ever meet you, even at a Chatham House Symposium, at the Royal Institute (for) (of?) (who cares a f*** which!) International Affairs (or whatever the thingy is called) I, a Lancashire Bumpkin, will have to kill you.

David Davis

How can we sit here on our arses, and say that “what goes on in Georgia is not our concern and _does not affect our vital interests_ … “, when unsocialised, pre-capitalist barbarians say this? “THIS” is a USSR General Officer in the DT, describing what his government would do to Poland, a nation in NATO, because it has decided to have some American missiles, a good move I would have thought in view of the coming war, which crept up on us while we were asleep.

I have to return, to entrench the necessarily hawkish position that I have been taking here. I know that many libertarians are rightly suspicious of statist aggression. I am also. But the present most crying need, as far as libertarianism is concerned, is to defend what’s left of roughly-liberal-western-democratic nations, so as to keep fertile ground for libertarianism itself.

It’s much harder if we are starting out from the Gulag itself, or from the face of a firing-squad, than from London or Liverpool, be they ever so trodden-under by local stalinists.

It’s no use to carry on, if we are all 100% dead, or enslaved. The wicked will then have won.

I repeat: “Russia”, while it continues to be socialoist and to behave as though it can direct events and regimes in other nations, must be regarded as having no “near abroad”.

WE have a near abroad – it is called “the world”. Governments that behave like the current one in the USSR, are making messes in OUR backyard. It is OUR job to clear it up, kick their butts, take names, and impose detentions.

Can’t all you buggers get it into your heads that there is Good, and there is Evil, and that both are objectively definable? A war may come: You have to know how to decide which side you are on.

Georgia again … further to Sean Gabb’s grand piece, interesting view from Down Under


David Davis

… at Kerplunk, tuesday 12th August. Very good analysis, worth reading in full.

I perhaps did not make myself quite as clear as I ought to have done in my very hawkish statements about this conflict that is developing. Because we (the West) have done nothing on account of not really being able to do anything, it will get worse – not necessarily today or in Georgia, but elsewhere. It is my sad prediction that we shall eventually  be forced to intervene, somewhere. I do not think we will raise a finger for the Baltic States, should they come under some pressure, nor the Ukraine, USSR passports having previously been issued in large numbers.

I am afraid that I do not really accept the diplomatic notion of a “near abroad”, in relation to neo-tyrannical powers, such as the USSR Russia. Rather as militant Islamists and Wahhabis view the world, where there is the Ummah-Wahida and the Dhimma. There is, logally for me, no “near abroad” in which the USSR Russia is allowed to behave as an occupying power.

This notion is an illusion, fostered by intellectual sympathisers with socialism, who live in the West, have never grown up and had real jobs, and who can afford to send their servants to queue at “little local shops” for organic food, served to them by a jovial grocer in a brown labcoat, in line.

Now, through all this Georgian hoo-hah, I have realised something. It has come to my notice that I honestly and sincerely view tyrants (such as Putin)  – all of whom are leftists in the end – as Dhimmis.  Thus they are seen by me as living on borrowed time, not with us but somewhere else: also, for now, at our pleasure, in “our” (“our” is not accurate: it is more accurate to say, other sovereign individuals’) lands, and to be dealt with as soon as possible, and they and their actions and beliefs are to be consigned to the dustbin of ideas.

The people they enslave, which is to say, mostly “their” own that they have elcosed in a “Reich”, are there to be liberated (by us.)

Conversely, libertarianism does not, ot me, encompass the concept of a “near abroad”, in which the writ of individual liberty runs, and not tyranny. Everywhere in the Universe is meet to be rid of collectivism. Why? Because is it inherently bad, and that’s the end of the matter.

In this respect, I really am a jihadist turned upside down. I want the West to actively stand up for liberty, without any regard for national self-interest or cost. I believe this on principle. I do not think that it disqualifies me from being a minimal-statist-libertarian with Old Whig tinges.

But we won’t, will we.