What to do next: how shall we make Gordon Brown’s socialism unacceptable and dangerous to espouse, and who shall we sue?

….and why, when I am editing this and other pieces online in realtime, do I keep on deleting great titles, and then I am having to replace them with saddo ones?

David Davis

I was intrigued by a spread of responses at the Coffee House to Fraser Nelson’s thingy about how Gordon Brown’s lost it.

One in particular caught my eye. You should be aware that the thesis of his posting was whether and how politicians lie. I give you an exerpt:-

Brown himself upped the ante during that BBC package yesterday, telling Nick Robinson “I always tell the truth,” and (to me) sounding uncannily like Bill Clinton saying “I did not have sexual relations with that woman”. People who tell the truth never say “I tell the truth”. They don’t have to. It’s never in question.

The problem lies, strategically, not in whether Gordon Brown is lying about whether spending by “his” government will go up, or down, or even in “real terms” or “Sterling terms”. This now really does not matter at all. Indeed, discussions have already taken place, not just here but elsewhere, about whether prospective Prime Ministers, be they Cameron, Clegg (how can you have a british PM called “Clegg”?) Farage, Griffin or Paisley or Sutch or anybody else, ought to implicitly underwrite any Sovereign Debt taken out by this government –  including what Brown’s got to try to do from now till June 2010, or draw a line and say “no more”….

I now reproduce a passage from a commentator on that thread at Coffeehouse:-

The underlying truth behind all British politics right now is that Labour have failed – and comprehensively so. We’re broke. Kids can’t read. Crime is the worst in Europe. Unemployment is soaring. Etc. Etc. There is no good story to tell.
But Labour can’t very well base any campaign on a position of honesty then can they?
All they have left is to lie about their record and their plans. In the internet age that is no longer really an option. So Labour are out of options.
They’ve ruined the country. They deserve to be routed at the election. End of story.

The underlying truth behind all British politics right now is that Labour have failed – and comprehensively so. We’re broke. Kids can’t read. Crime is the worst in Europe. Unemployment is soaring. Etc. Etc. There is no good story to tell. But Labour can’t very well base any campaign on a position of honesty then can they?

All they have left is to lie about their record and their plans. In the internet age that is no longer really an option. So Labour are out of options.

They’ve ruined the country. They deserve to be routed at the election. End of story.

This kind of protest is all very well. But ruining an importantly productive and historically-defining part of the population of a small spaceship – out of spite totally – which is “hurtling defenceless through the Universe”, as the lefties are frequently wont to tell us [anybody remember “Only one Earth”?] ought to be wrong and punishable.

They persistently go after us and our culture and civilisation, /because/ we publicly exposed the errors and inconsistencies in their supposed neopastoralist pre-capitalist-barbarian anthology of “ideas”.

If Labour have [again] failed, kids can’t read (we all know in our hearts it is so), crime is worst and also up (we know this too from observation) then in Civil Law if some employees of a firm had deliberately done this, they’d get sued and rightly.

We can’t allow those who now happen to be, or in the [increasingly dark] future will happen to be, the inheritors and torch-bearers of socialist ideology, to get off. It ought to be made clear, by all liberal, conservative, libertarian or free-market-oriented parties, that, in the end, the enemy will not escape.

/BLAME/ /will/ be attached to whosoever at the time of our victory is caught espousing Enemy Class ideas. We can’t pursue the dead for retribution, but we can pursue the living, and we will do so. Members of the Enemy Class still standing at the time would be presented with a bill for rectifying what they have done.

Obviously details would have to be worked out in more clarity, but I can’t see a problem with statements like…

“…if what you or your forebears did has ruined our economy and “cost” “£150 billion of other people’s money” (eg private pensioners) then /you/ who happen to be here now, are liable”.


“Brown” booed by “veterans” at D-Day celebrations. And the BBC. And what to do about socialism.

David Davis

Never thought I’d see that.

A Ceaucescu moment, withal.

For libertarians, the tragic comparison between the rightly-trashed junta that terrorized poor Romania for decades, and the GramscoFabiaNazi outfit we find we’d let in while sleeping, brings sorrow, and deep embarrassment. You want to know what people in real blood-and-guts-countries like, say, New Zealand, Cuba, or Poland, or Italy, or Tuvalu, think about our plight and how we allowed it.

But the comparison does also being encouragement. It means that Brown either can’t pass any more legisation, ever in his life (a good thing, we have too much already) and will stay ot fight on, further damaging the LabourNazis, or else he will be gone in a few days.

The latter is the worse option, for then Labour could try to recover in the polls. The need is for it to be so thrashed that it could be closed down by door-kicker-inners. Libertarians of course disagree about the extent to which it could be forcibly shut down as a criminal organisation, such as PIE. But at least some effort to, in the inter-regnum between the announcement of the election result and the taking-over of the administration by the LPUK whoever other than Labour should win this time round, should be marked by some “readjustmentof the furniture and effects” at government and Council Soviet offices countrywide.

Hard disks could be sifted out and malleted on the pavements. Especially in regard to any record of pension entitlements (I still do not share Sean Gabb’s leniency in this regard: I am a  bit less positive than he is about not letting the buggers actually really really starve to death in the blown hedgerows.) There will not be time to dismantle them for the NdFeB magnets, tragic though this will be: the GramscoFabiaNazis work quicker than divisions of schoolchildren with screwdrivers….and may return….

Full and long-term degradation of the ability of socialism to re-infect the UK is worth the loss of all that Neodymium.

Paris is worth a Mass.

Industrial shredders could be trucked in. (See power stations below.)

All other serviceable computer hardware could be given to schools and charity shops. Furniture, including OKA (whatever that is) and IKEA (I know what that is) would have to be shred-chipped and burnt in power stations.

Oh, and the BBC will be shut immediately. As indeed Sean Gabb has often said. Property rights in the frequency bands used previously by the BBC will be auctioned off to whoever can pay now, and wants to use them***, so long as no (repeat no) management, “programme planning” or research staff from the old BBC are employed to fill these new slots. Technicians will be fine…for now….BBC “journalists” may have to attend “re-education facilities”, it depends.

In abolishing socialism, you have to start somewhere.

***The RSGB might pick up some cheapo, for Radio Amateurs.

Oh, the tragedy

David Davis

You cannot, you just cannot, go to Guido’s comment thread on this post, and not cry at the sadness and sorrow of people, at what has been done by the Enemy Class. Look up in particular, Blake’s7, and caesars wife, also Alan Barnes, and the replies to these people, who I believe are honest, and not Enemy-Class-Plant-posters implanted to make us feel happy.

Sean Gabb is great, Sean Gabb is merciful. The last weekend just gone, we had long discussions about what ought to be done about the Enemy Class. Sean thinks there ought to be an event of “Truth and Reconciliation”. If in his eyes the Enemy Class publicly apologised, individually all, for what they had done, and what money they had shysted, he’d let them go.

Sorry. I would not. Everything they have destroyed, and everything they have taken, will have to be fixed. By them. With their labour, and their personal money and that of their families, to extend the full knowledge and horror, of what they have done, to more people who thought that they loved them, and who depended on them (or thought that they did, and who thought they were honourable public servants.)

And I’m not even sure I would stop there….no, I wont:-

…Our precious things which meant nothing to them and everything to us – our totally meaningless and totally fun local traditions which contravened “health and safety”, our FISH (OUR fish, OUR fish to hunt or farm as we decided, not anybody else’s) , OUR duodecimal money, our REAL money, our sovereignty, our  _unarmed_  Police, OUR local slaughterhouses, OUR privacy not theirs to give and take away, OUR museums (such as the Maritime, and the Imperial Museum of Science and Industry) which reflected our and the right view of our history, in the way WE wanted them to do – the IMSI in the 50s had a  _coal mine_  in the basement: now it has coloured plastic balls and waterslides…) And more besides that you can all name.

All these things fostered a culture of critical liberalism, inimical utterly to the Enemy Class of GramscoFabiaNazis.

I am an old, old man, and I want these back in place, for the future and for the children, before I die.


Time to sack our MPs … the more expense censorship, the faster their feet won’t touch the ground ot of the place.

….and delete their pensions….

….and Guido has this just in now….

David Davis

What a farcical situation they are generating. For themsleves to be jeered at some more, and for us to ‘avv-a’-luff.

They can then try to live on what they have trough-pigged in their fat years. We commented yesterday about how some MSM commentators, even, think these mountebanks might be allowed to live, and in what, when in London.

They’ve all got grand second homes, in which they pretend not to live, so these can be sold by them. “Jacqui” “Smith” can live in her sister’s boxroom.

In future, MPs can be little old ladies, some of whom might need to be paid some money out of Chritian charity, and retired Colonels, some of whom might not.

RBS: The Paul Myners/Harriet Harman/Derek Wanless thingy smells ever more fishy.

UPDATE:- Ooooooooooooh, look at this one too! Guido again. the sheer brass neck, the czhutzpah (if that’s how it’s spelt – I have no clue what czhutzpah is, maybe it’s an African cooking sauce) of these stalinist graspers just beggars the imagination.

David Davis

I smell a rat. I see it floating in the air. (Hat tip Guido, for Guido-guiding us to here.)

It seems that socialists will always be found, in the end, with their hands in the till. Be they ever so compassionate towards Working People – or just “The People” – be they ever so Fabian, so – well – Toynbee-esque, they can’t keep away from money, they simply can’t do it, it’s not in their nature, it’s like a magnet to them.

Perhaps it’s their institutional-amorality. They’re always gassing on about “capitalists” and their “worship of profit over people”. They trumpet their credentials to the rooftops: just read any article by Polly Toynbee for example, like this one.

(Pol) Pot calling kettle black, all over again, and again, and again….

Why can’t they just throw in the towel, stop pretending to want to “redistribute” other people’s legitimate property to those whom they purport to “represent”, and simply join the existing game?

Some may win: then they can be philanthropic without hurting others. This will be fine, and conservatives will not complain. We have done it for centuries. Then of course you die.

Some may not win, and some may even leave “out of the  money”. But that’s just life: so do we, and so have we also done for centuries. Then, after it’s all over, you die as well, even if you have failed first. It’s the rules of the game.

The stalinists don’t mind it happening to actors and actresses (many of whom they themselves f***, like JFK did) like that – so why not themselves? 


Harriet Harman, Sir Fred Goodwin, pensions, law and contract. The Army speaks. A suitable update from ARRSE

UPDATE2:- Dear old Legiron. Much better writer than I.

UPDATE1:- Here were our previous thoughts about Sir Fred and the fragrant Harriet.

David Davis

This part of the thread from here, on ARRSE, is instructive:-

Post Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:08 am

She needs to be very careful about a Court of Public Opinion
If she does listen to it she might not only find herself out of a job sharpish but she and her mates losing their gold plated pensions and expense packages aswell
Funny how public opinion now suits as stated by Old Snowy plenty of other things are desired by the public but we won’t get 
They fought tooth and nail to stop the public finding out about their pensions etc and such othert things as Iraq and WMD’s 
I saw a report that stated he had paid into the pension for 30 years starting with bank of Yorkshire and Clydesdale Bank so who is she to take it away from him?
The Goverment wil rake in tax from it and also he wil have paid plenty of tax over the years as well    

But whilst they kick off about this it stops what a p1ss poor job they are doing off the front page

Posts: 2692
Joined: Feb 20, 2006

Post Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:09 am

Apologies, but I think Harman’s drivel is worth repeating as one of the most outrageously stupid remarks of the century (so far):    

“… but it’s not enforceable in the court of public opinion and that’s where the Government steps in.”

Notwithstanding that this shows the most staggering ignorance of how the country should be governed, isn’t it amazing that she’s suddenly so interested in public opinion, to the point of proposing a shameful piece of opportunistic legislation when it might earn the gobment a few cheap points — but somehow forgot the importance of public opinion when sending the nation into an illegal war?

For the last few years, especially since Bush was elected for the second time in the US, I’ve had an increasing sense that watching UK and US politicians is like looking through a distorting mirror. It seems more and more like watching children playing at being politicians. They open their mouths and the most unbelievable, ill-considered, illogical sh1t just pours out.

Yeah, I’m pi55ed off with Goodwin and the other greedy swine, but the government is at root responsible for this, by inadequate regulation, by mindless boosterism of unsustainable economic growth and by its pathetic and ill-thought-out response to the crisis. Goodwin is a symptom more than a cause.

And where the hell does Mandelson, of all people (“intensely relaxed about people getting filthy rich”, remember?) get off by giving righteous lectures? 

They are barmy to be such spineless, clueless hypocrites, and barmier still to think we haven’t noticed.

What are we going to do about these ba5tards? How do the adults reclaim the reins of power?

Posts: 216
Joined: Dec 27, 2007
Location: The goat farm

Post Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:26 am

The whole sorry interview is here:    


Start at 35mins 15 secs in.

There are not enough adjectives in the English language to describe how loathsome she is. Proof once again that this gubment think they are above the law and will do anything and say anything as long as it scores popular point with the voters.
When the history books are writen in a few years time, people will wonder how we managed to vote these jokers in threetimes!

Posts: 1443
Joined: Sep 20, 2007
Location: slightly right of Ghengis Khan

Post Posted: Mon Mar 02, 2009 8:31 am

Sir Fred Goodwin, pensions, property rights, Law, Legislation and Liberty: an open letter.

We have an update via the Army, here. And the MSM thinks this will not happen, here.

David Davis

Sir Frederick Goodwin

Late of…..

…..c/o The Royal Bank of Scotland plc

42 St Andrew’s Square

Edinburgh, Scotland

Dear Sir Fred

I do not know where you are at present and I presume it’s not at the above offices, but never mind. I am sure the good ladies at the Southport Branch will have this sent to you, after I have presented hard copy to them tomorrow morning. The purpose of this private letter is to advise you that I, and perhaps many thousands of other ordinary folks, are appalled at the way Mr Harriet Harman (we call her on the blog “Horrid Hardbint”) is getting at you publicly, and threatening to invoke what we also call, on here, “State Directed Property-Confiscation”.

It is really of no interest to me at all, nor is it to others I know, what your agreed pension is to be. It is the least of our worries at this time. I, as a customer of your Bank (it is actually quite a good Bank, and has not been more than usually unreasonable over the 20-odd years of my association with it – from Holt’s days – remember that one?) would say that if it and you  – and even the ghastly/oily Sir Paul Myners – had agreed a sum for you to b***** off with, than that should be it.

If the Law says a contract is admissible at Law, and therefore can be defended in a Court, then what business is it of Hardbint and her nasty fascist friends in the government to pretend they can overturn it, using what they have the brass neck, the immortal rind and thickskin, to call “public opinion”?

Are laws to be changed by merely what the sitting government says is “public opinion”? What, then, is Parliament for? A very dangerous precedent for the prospects for individual liberty – and in particular property rights – would be set by Harbint’s words, if she were able to translate them into actions.

You  __must__  certainly defend yourself, and vigorously, and by whatever means are at your disposal, to keep a contractual arrangement which has been legally agreed with you. For you to not do this will be an abrogation of YOUR own responsibility as a Subject of the Queen to defend the Rule of Law. If you do not, then a bad precedent will have been set, and everyone’s legally-agreed property will be under an existential threat.

The duty to do this falls to you more than to others (a) because you have just been publicly attacked and threatened by an Officer of the State, and (b) because you probably have more resources to do this than the rest of us.

I remain

Yours sincerely

David Davis

Blogmaster, The Libertarian Alliance