THE SUNDAY ESSAY: a clearer blueprint for cultural reform in the West

No words necessary – just read.

The Slog


Citizens under 25 or over 55 have more in common than they realise. If they join forces at local level, then over time practical community culture can take over from national political ideology as the best way to effect lasting change. 


Have you ever noticed how old people tell you the past was always better, and the more naive end of young people insist the future is going to be wonderful? They both agree that Now sucks. But in turn, the Young say the past was nasty and brutish (“before we ‘ad the EU, like”) while the Old insist that the future is bound to be a dystopian nightmare.

As a wrinkly, I would of course argue that our education taught us to be far less trusting…

View original post 2,340 more words

Socialism Explained

Socialism Explained

This was posted in the comments section in a Daily Barclaygraph article back in 2013 (by “Tayles”). Can’t think of anything to add, quite frankly 🙂

“There is a great moral evil at the heart of the socialist vision. It declares that a fairer, happier society can be achieved if the entire nation is conscripted into a great collective effort, the fruits of which are allocated according to individual need, rather than individual achievement.

Setting aside its obvious fallaciousness, this vision offers no voluntary participation. It does not ask whether you wish to join this great endeavour – whether you’d rather take your chances and test your own abilities, rather than accepting your share of the collective effort. It demands that everyone set aside their personal preferences and give themselves over to the cause.

This assumes that individuals are not sovereign beings. Instead, they are the property of the state. Their ambitions, abilities and efforts can only be used in its service for the benefit of the rest of society.

I consider this a fundamentally immoral attitude, but lefties just shrug. They can’t see the problem. The sanctity of individual freedom just doesn’t register with them as mattering. They normally trot out some trite comment about how people are born into a society to which they already owe a debt, and which continues to help them throughout their lives, and for this reason they have no right to consider their life to be truly their own.

But any society that provides an infrastructure that benefits future generations, then uses it as a stick to beat them, is a tyranny – as is a society that demands anything more than a small amount of tax to maintain that infrastructure during a person’s working life. Payment of tax is not voluntary and most government policy is not subject to individual consent. To coerce money from people, to spend it on things without their consent, and then to blackmail them into giving up their liberties in exchange is not liberal democracy – it’s a protection racket.

If people want to give to charity, and to support their friends and neighbours, then that’s fine and admirable. If they want to organise voluntary organisations to help others or pay extra tax to the government to fund benevolent causes, then that’s fine too. As long as it’s their money and their choice. The moment they start demanding other people’s money without their consent, they cross the line.

If you disagree, if you think that everyone should be forced to pay towards causes you consider worthy, then at least have the balls to admit that you are no friend of freedom. You are a fascist, pure and simple”.