What is to be done?

David Davis

I was contemplating an essay about the increasing intrusiveness of State surveillance of individuals the world over, and the increasing restriction of their thoughts and writings. But then, checking in my informal way before typing, I looked about me and it seems The Cautionary Revelation has been thinking along the same lines.

Our problem as libertarians in particular is that we eschew force and coercion, based on our beliefs in Natural Rights. This is fine and quite correct of us, and honest: and it is academically consistent with a philosophy of individual liberty under a minimal Common Law. However, we have in the end to ask where we not only hold self-congratulatory conferences, and not only continue to publish learned pamphlets about why liberty is really fairly astonishingly good at sorting out everything under the sun, and begin to ask:

“What is to be done about these GramscoFabiaNazis, who have always been, if you read the subtexts, cheerfully and openly honest and frank about what they have always intended?

Jeremy Clarkson lynched by BBC and RNIB PC Stalinist PR apparatchiks … Carol Thatcher merely lynched earlier

David Davis

Here, Sean Gabb commented on Carol Thatcher’s PC lynching in public, for saying something in private. Now, Jeremy Clarkson’s blood runs in the street-gutters, for saying, in public, what everyone with half a brain thinks in public anyway: just take Nicholas Sarkozy’s comments on Brown’s wrecking of the economy….even the EUSoviet does not stretch itself to upend all commonsense to the extent we have been railroaded into doing by our “leaders”.

I’m sure that the vast majority of the staff of the RNIB are really nice and kind people. If, God forbid, I was blind or last my sight, I’d be grateful for their help. But they are no diffreent from the rest of us in that they have a human responsibility, a duty in reality (like us all) to resist the encrouachments of public and increasingly private thought-control and langauge-demolition, to the end of their and our strength.

When there were, in the last century, “enough people who could and wanted to make a difference”, people who forgot their moral obligations – such as the 33%-odd of German voters who voted for the NSDAP – ended up standing disconsolately (those who were left standing) among a billion tons of rubble (which we cleared away.)

As Auberon Waugh would have said: “I’m not suggesting yet that we should line up and shoot all Big-Charity-Public-Relations-Directors in the street” but these people have no less duty to actively oppose PC-word-control that do the rest of us.

These two are not the first, and I fear they will not be the last. I seem to remember that Prince Harry is being hauled on the Rack for referring to a chappie in his squad (in his own squad, a private grouping of brave men who all know each other terribly well, for goodness’ sake!) as a Paki.

So, the buggers will lop off the tall-grasses first, then they will come for the rest of us. Bastards. Rot in hell (no, it’s too good for you. The Outer Void instead.)

Getting at Prince Harry: the new lefty bloodsport (allowed of course)

David Davis

Prince Harry has been publicly lynched (again.) About three hundred years ago, he jocularly referred to one of his soldier mates as a “Paki” – which is what he was, and still is I think – in good humour, in an airport departure lounge in front of the other young soldiers. I don’t recall any complaints or Daily Marxist Mirror headlines at the time, do you?

Worse follows! Apparently he’s “offended” all “British Asians” – has anybody asked the Chinese, the Japanese, the Iranians, the Iraqis, the Indians, the Nepalese, the Khazakhstanis for that matter, and all the others, if they have been “offended”? Or the Siberian Esquimos…or have I offended these by failing to class them as “Inuit”?

As Auberon Waugh would have said, “I’m not suggesting that it’s yet time to summarily shoot all people who own phones with video-cameras in them”….but do you get the impression that there are some people about who, on purpose, use liberating Western technology to bring back the Endarkenment?

Perhaps I should be offended to be called a “Brit”. I happen to think it’s chav, low, horrid and insulting, and far far far worse than “Pom” or “Rosbif”.  “Brit”  of course ought to offend all English Englishmen, or even British British-people (so of course the BBC uses the awfully repellent word “Brit” all the time as often as it can – just as “Paki” is supposed to offend all Pakistani Pakistanis, is it not?

Oh, and I DON’T think Harry was wrong to go to a party four years ago wearing a swastika armband.

(1) It was a party, you wear silly stuff, and get drink while satirising bad-people.

(2) They were all young. This is their job.

(3) WE can’t aribrush nazis socialists who killed people more scientifically and industrially than other socialists did or still do, out of history, out of a desire to be “nice”, by pretending they didn’t exist. Further to this matter, look as this assinine piece of supplication by bureaucrats.

The british-stalinists’ gloves come off at last: frontal assault on the English Language

David Davis

3rd November update: here’s Gerald Warner in the DT.

Use of “Latin based” phrases banned by councils, as “ELITIST”, and “DISCRIMINATORY”.

These f*****rs either don’t learn about how hated they are, OR they know it and are just continuing to bully and threaten because they know that they can, OR they have no sense of the ridiculousness of their position.

While idly perusing the Dead-Tree-DT just now I spotted this asinine move by Soviets Councils. At least the correspondent and the classical scholars consulted did not use that phrase which I most hate (apart from “Survival of the Fittest”): “Political Correctness gone mad”.

To win, death-eaters and other types of stalinist, including Nasis and Marxists also have to destroy our language. To me, this is an act of war against a society which represents the least unfriendly environment for libertarianism. Here I go again.