Blog archive from the golden age of London libertarianism
The luvvie collective of Hollywood can always be relied upon to weigh in on political matters with some kind of slick little production, usually about as welcome as a turd in the punchbowl.
Happily these days the riposte is never far behind. So here’s their anti-gun message spliced up with some of the actors own work to the glory of violence. It’s the old adage; take the beam out of your own eye, people:
Tags:
Date:
Up next:
Before:
This is good too:
LikeLike
Still no issues of liberty in the UK to write about?
LikeLike
I post what i want to post. Other people can post what interests them. If the subject doesn’t interest you, then go and find something that does interest you, and don’t bother me with snarky comments.
LikeLike
You’re right, free speech is much more important:
Facebook bans Gandhi quote as part of revisionist history purge
*Smirk*
LikeLike
James – as neither freedom of arms or freedom of speech (people can not be allowed to express their opinions – after all they might express racist opinions) exist here in Britain they can not preserved (because they are already gone).
Besides the various international treaties the British goverment has signed up to (both European and U.N.) mean that freedom is a dead letter here (ironically these treaties, that are really intended to crush freedom, are presented as “pro freedom” and “pro Human Rights” – lots of pro freedom generalities and pro statism specifics).
So it is rather pointless trying to save the live of Lady Liberty in Briain – as she is not only dead, but cold and stiff as well. The values of the “New Britain” were expressed in the opening ceremonies of the London Games – lots of stuff on the NHS (and so on) nothing on freedom (and that is correct – that is the New Britain, after all the “Conservative” Prime Minister thinks that “Nudge”, a totalitarianism by the installment plan “libertarian paternalism” book, is wonderful).
[Although should this change at some point, should Lady Liberty have a chance of returning from the next world, then sign me on for what needs to be done in Britain].
Such things have to be defended where they still exist – the United Startes, And it is tragic that people who make their living via freedom of speech (Hollywood types) do not understand that their freedom to make violent movies (in which white businessmen are always presented as the bad guys) can not be divided from the freedom to own the weapons in real life.
However, let me present a compromise – let the media celebs (both Hollywood and “journalist” types) have total gun control – FOR YOU (and your bodyguards).
After all if people should “rely on the police” – then that should start with YOU.
LikeLike
I’m not convinced by the implication that freedom of expression exists in the US. To a greater extent than here, of course it does, but America suffers its own backwardsness in other ways.
I have no problem at all with the guns and the American obsession with them. I also have no problem with putting the spotlight on the hypocrisy of the chattering classes of Hollywood. What perturbs me is a blog purporting to be the ‘home’ of libertarians in the UK which has a continual obsession with guns in another country. Even Reason isn’t as obsessed. From my perspective (yes, I know, “fuck off if you don’t like it” etc) it’s disappointing to see, again, British libertarians obsessing with what happens in a distant country in which we are spectating from the other side of the fence.
LikeLike
The internet is international. Whatever is posted here can be read anywhere. There’s no obsession. It is a story, and I – not anyone else – have posted a number of things on the same subject. As it’s Christmas, other bloggers have not posted anything. I have also written on the EU, and other things. Did that meet your approval? Any word of praise for that, or difference of opinion that the world may learn from? As far as I know, you’ve never previously commented on anything I have written here, which has been on many other subjects. So you save your pearls of wisdom for this occasion.
What do you want? That I run everything past you, who I don’t even know, who doesn’t care to leave a name more than his Christian name, before I post it? Tell me, what should I be writing about? What, pray tell, do you, dear reader, wish me to spend my time crafting prose upon? What is your obsession, I wonder? You use the word four times.
You said yourself ‘fuck off if you don’t like it’. You have other options. You could even write something yourself on a subject of your choice and send it to Simon, who set up the blog. I’m sure he would post it, he’s always open to new writers. That way at least you could practice what you preach, rather than merely attacking what I have written on the gun controversy, which, if gathered together in one post, rather than spread out over four or whatever it is, would not amount to more than one short chapter of a book.
LikeLike
The American “obsession” with guns – the media (and education system – with their demented “gun free zones” not understanding this actually makes schools and universities slaughter houses waiting to happen) are indeed “obsessed” with firearms.
But ordinary people regard firearms as tools (like axes) – to be used to defend themselves (and othes) against those who wish to violate their property (whether these be ordinary criminals or what the Chinese call the “official bandits” makes a tactical difference, but not a moral difference).
Talk of a “gun culture” and (even) “guns as a sexual metaphores” (or whatever) applies to Hollywood (ironically a gun control obsessive place) not to most ordinary people.
“He who sees through the eyes of Morgoth sees all things crooked” this is why the msm should be avoided – they distort everything (like looking into a carnival mirror) . Even a sincere libertarian is going to have his (or her) view of the world utterly distorted, if they rely on the msm.
And the picture the msm give of ordinary Americans is as false as the picture the msm gives of everything else.
LikeLike
Right Wing Hippy has a point. I was not aware of the Gandhi quote.
I was aware that the British (stupidly) maintained the salt monopoly in large parts of India – inherited from the Mughul rulers (Philip Francis tried to get it removed way back in the 1700s).
I was not aware that there was an effort an gun control – but it does not astonish me. Many of the crazy policies that were later pushed on Britian (such as government railways, government telegraph, governent financed “internal improvements”…..) were first tried by British officials in India.
Sadly the Fabians who took over India after independence pushed the “Permit Raj” even further (wildly further).
As for communal anarchists – I am not fond of them.
And I accept that Facebook is private property.
But the (pro Obama) top Facebook people are acting like total scumbags.
“We believe in freedom of expression – AS LONG AS YOUR POLITICAL OPINIONS ARE THE SAME AS OURS”.
Scumbags.
Utter and complete scumbags.
LikeLike
By the way – this is not just Facebook.
The antics of Google are infamous (at least among anti Obama people).
There seems to be a radical contradiction in the thought of internet business people……
“We live to build up our business – as part of our personal creativity”.
But also,
“All power to Obama – may the government grow ever bigger in its taxes and spending, and may its regulations control every aspect of human life”.
They do not seem to see the contradiction.
Perhaps because of the Peter Pan (“we are students who never became old – we did not even graduate”) life style that many internent people have.
“I am not really a middle aged millionaire – I am young student HAIL OBAMA”.
And it is not just national politics.
It is also State politics.
What State is most associated with internet zillionaires?
California.
What is the highest government spending, taxation (or will be in 2013) and most regulated anit business State?
California.
The contradiction in their thought – made into material reality.
San Francisco – the city of the very rich (the internet crowd) and the poor (on welfare).
And nothing in between.
LikeLike
Libertarian Home 
Leave a reply to Paul Mrarks Cancel reply