Well, I agree that we should hang them all

Politicians from Britain’s three main political parties should be hanged and their voters tried for treason, a Ukip candidate has said.

Labour, Conservative and Liberal Democrat politicians have committed Britain to “slavery inside the EU dictatorship” and should be punished by death, Gordon Ferguson told prospective voters in a letter delivered ahead of Thursday’s council elections.

Anybody who votes for those parties is “guilty by association of treason against our nation”, he added.

But I do use the phrase in moments of hyperbolic rhetoric rather than actually meaning it.

111 comments on “Well, I agree that we should hang them all

  1. I’d suggest a good look at the junior ranks of other political parties before you try claiming that UKIP’s anything special in this regard.

  2. As I have said before, a socially and economically liberal party ticks my boxes; a party tryimg to stop beautiful, talented young people move around the world to make a life, or dislikes people who are ‘different’ just doesn’t.
    The problem is those’junior’ ranks aren’t necessarily that junior. I really don’t believe Nigel Farage has the slightest problem with Romanians or anybody else, so how did he get here? And why couldn’t he just say of the tit who who wants to shoot ‘poofters’ “He’s a tit. Don’t vote for him because he’s a tit”?

  3. You can be a gift on a quiet afternoon, Ironman. “beautiful, talented young people…” so the plain, ordinary middle-aged can jut sod off, eh?

    Anyway, on topic, can’t we at least hang those getting an EU pension? Getting out of the EU is the meat and potatoes, but ejecting the traitorous statist scum from the gravy train is the … um … gravy.

  4. No2EU is anti-European for the right reasons: wants to stop Europe destroying all the public sector elements of the post-war British economy.
    I can’t understand why right wing blowhards would vote against Europe: the EU is set on the most extreme anti-collective bargaining ,privatising measures .they normally rave about.

  5. Can we at least dig up Ted Heath’s remains and subject them to some ritual humiliation? And perhaps exile the political class to a remote island somewhere, rather than hang them? I notice that the Diego Garcia lease with the US is up for renegotiation this year (by Dec 2014, assuming it hasn’t already been sorted) so we could get that back and plonk them all there.

  6. Well, it does seem a bit harsh, but fair.

    Not too sure about the practicality of prosecuting voters, but I’m definitely up for seeing Nick Clegg sentenced to death by being chased over the cliffs of Dover by big breasted women.

    Incidentally, did the Telegraph cover the leaflet the Conservatives sent out featuring a picture of a mosque, with text in Urdu promising the Tories would “cater for Muslim needs”? That was a beezer, and I suspect rather more alarming to most people than Sir Bufton Tufton running as a UKIP councillor.

    Ironman – good luck in your quest for truth and beauty and nice guys in politics. Send my regards to Rocinante.

  7. @DBC Reed ‘I can’t understand why right wing blowhards would vote against Europe’

    Because – unlike most lefties – we can see the problem in allowing people to have power over you whom you cannot later dismiss when they start taking the power in directions you do not like.

    Your sort normally need about ten million bodies before the penny drops, so we should I suppose be grateful that, spud-thick and wrong-headed as you are, and even if it’s for the wrong reason, you’re anti EU.

  8. Jim – We could always send the B-Arkers to St. Kilda. But think of the poor puffins.

    Nobody seems to give a shit about puffins anymore. I blame Hollywood, which hates puffins and constantly produces scripts for the benefit of bloody penguins.

  9. The unified front the three other parties are now putting up against UKIP really does show how much more seriously they are threatened by them now.

  10. @Jackart ‘How are you not embarrassed by what UKIP has become?’

    Christ. Are you not embarrassed by what whichever party you support has become?

    It seems to be the Tories. I mean, seriously.

    The one thing, apart from the EU issue, which might persuade me to vote UKIP is the monstering they are getting for a few dickheads saying ludicrous things. They are frightening horses somewhere, and that appears to me to be a good thing.

    Some councillor somewhere says he hates gays.

    OK, so I give you a Tory MP dressed up as a member of the SS and ask you, being as you’re a grown adult and not a ‘journalist’ hunting clickbait, does it fucking matter?

  11. David Moore – the three parties plus the media, which has stopped bothering even to pretend to treat the Kippers like any other party. I haven’t seen such naked partisanship since the BBC was campaigning for Obama.

    I’m unimpressed with what muck they’ve managed to rake so far though. A council candidate turns out to be a bit swivelly-eyed…. sink me!

    Labour’s shadow cabinet is openly threatening white men in the judiciary and on company boards that there’s too many of the pale-skinned, penis-toting bastards and they plan to punish them by law, but let’s worry about some silly overblown rhetoric in a would-be UKIP councillor’s letter instead.

  12. Roue le Jour et Jim

    If ordinary, ugly middle-aged people can find jobs here then good luck to them. It’s just that I’m only interested in the young, beautiful and talented. They’re the ones who drive our world forward; not us old idiots. So I’m not impressed by any – ANY – party that sees the future as a threat or believes in denying people their natural inclination to better themselves.

  13. Ironman – yes, Romanian gypsies are famously gorgeous. Also our immigration policy should be designed around the desires of would-be immigrants, not the interests of the British people.

    Wot?

  14. Poor old Jackart. He won’t need to hold his nose to vote for Blulabour these days–he’ll need a fucking gas mask to go in the poling station.

    Reed: How many times does it have to be said?. Privatisation has nothing to do with the free market –it is corporate socialism. The free market is where you and your customers do the deals and the fucking state doesn’t even get an opinion on the matter. If the eeuuuww are involved it will be even more of a corrupt stitch up than usual.

    As for shooting/hanging the public–well you socialist bastards have lived that, never mind said it in a speech. What’s your problem?.

    And it is true that if the “public” were not lazy thick twats 99% of the problems this blog covers would not exist.

    Well–perhaps that’s not enough on its own. In a free market, it doesn’t matter that Joe Average is a lazy thick twat. The need to earn a living forces him to a certain level of competence –even if he has little interest outside of his labour’s. The market works anyway. It is only politics that causes average thickness to become a deadly danger. Improve your life by working on yourself and your productive efforts–all mankind is uplifted. “Improve” your life by voting for Dr Turd and his Feelgood Brotherhood and all mankind slips a bit further down the shitter.

  15. But I do use the phrase in moments of hyperbolic rhetoric rather than actually meaning it.

    Well the other parties should keep it quiet. Or UKIP may sweep the nation.

    I mean it. And hello to the good people at GCHQ.

  16. Steve – “Nobody seems to give a shit about puffins anymore. I blame Hollywood, which hates puffins and constantly produces scripts for the benefit of bloody penguins.”

    F*ck Yeah. But should Fraterculaphobia be punished by death? You know, I think perhaps it should.

    Ironman – “So I’m not impressed by any – ANY – party that sees the future as a threat or believes in denying people their natural inclination to better themselves.”

    The British are well down the road to extinction. And the government is filling the country with people who come from countries that hate us, and their children hate us more. Most of them with long standing historic grievances against us. Yeah, optimism, seems the natural choice innit?

    Boko Haram is full of people trying to better themselves. You need to make sure that you idea of a good way to better yourself is the same as their way. Because, for instance, it is not true of a great many of our Jamaican brethren. Unless you think mugging and dealing are good ways to better yourself.

  17. I’ve said something similar about those responsible for pushing electricity prices thru the roof, thereby putting us in recession and freezing app 20,000 Brits every year. That would have many of the same people at rope’s end, though I also include Beeboids who lie and censor to promote such atrocities.

    However, in almost every case where the aforementioned liars and censors find a UKIP councillor with unusual opinions and make a major story of it it turns out there is worse in the other parties, but it isn’t “news”. For example have you seen anything about the LibDem councillor arrested for making child porn videos?

    Most obvious was the headlines about the UKIP candidate who thought floods were due to God (rather than ecofascists and the EU as they actually were). It turned out that when he actually said it he had still been a Tory councillor and this it only became news retroactively.

  18. Dear Mr Worstall

    I believe the Common Law penalty for those guilty of treason is still death, though by beheading rather than hanging. That nice Mr Blair changed the statutory provision of the death penalty for treason, but he could not change the Common Law.

    The Tower of London is the traditional venue for executions.

    DP

  19. @Steve: St Kilda’s too close. The chance of them being liberated by fifth columnists is too high. Diego Garcia is a minimum 1000 miles from land, so no-one is getting off there other than on an official boat/plane or in a box. Its a bit harsh, but the families will have to go too, especially as Labour seem to have turned into the hereditary party. In fact I’d say all people who have ever had any senior role in any of the major political parties/governments or been appointed to a quango by any of them will have to go as well. Diego Garcia is 10 square miles in size, we can get a fair few concrete multistory blocks of flats on it I’m sure. In fact, in a sort of ironic twist, we could relocate some of the UK government call centres there and our former masters could man the phone lines in return for their keep for the rest of their days. Everyone’s a winner.

  20. I believe the Common Law penalty for those guilty of treason is still death, though by beheading rather than hanging. That nice Mr Blair changed the statutory provision of the death penalty for treason, but he could not change the Common Law.

    Isn’t that nice. What seems to be a FOTL come to lecture us on how the Treason Act 1351 (like Magna Carta, years various, and the Bill of Rights 1688), despite being Statutes are some how “Common Law”.

    Sighs …

  21. “Also our immigration policy should be designed around the desires of would-be immigrants, not the interests of the British people.

    Wot?”

    The paradigm is interesting here: we need to design an immigration policy. We don’t stop, on this generally liberal blog, to ask first of all whether we need an immmigration policy and, only once we decide we to, then start to design it. Instead, it is simple axiom that we must have a policy; Courageous State anyone?

    So, we believe in freedom of movement of Capital. We believe in free trade. Yet, freedom of movement for people, of labour? No, not that!

    If we must have an immigration policy – and in the real world I guess our crowded island means we must – then let it be based upon points, upon the young, the talented, the beautiful.

    But instead here we sit, grumpy old men raging against our changing country and trying to turn back the clock. Immigrants can’t be allowed in here because they’re different and they depress the wages of my fat slag grandaughter in her sloppy leggings: how is she ever going to get her foot on the housing ladder? Well, just like her classmates: she can shag Wayne in the pub carpark and get a flat from the housing assication. Meanwhile the Polish girl goes and gets a fucking job.

    And yes Steve, some Romanian gypsies are beautiful. And Poles. And as for the Czech girls..Tim?

  22. Ironman – speak for yourself, I’m not old and I’m usually cheerful.

    So, we believe in freedom of movement of Capital. We believe in free trade. Yet, freedom of movement for people, of labour? No, not that!

    Astonishingly yes, most people do believe they can trade with their neighbours without extending an open invitation for all of them to move here.

    Yes, we need an immigration policy. In large part because we have a welfare state. Until that day comes when we all live in Galt’s Gulch with your beautiful, hardworking Romanian gypsies and no welfare state, we need to find some way of avoiding being swamped by the hordes of not terribly bright or useful people our welfare state attracts and retains. Because currently, we’re being taxed to pay for our own displacement. It’s the age old free rider problem.

    To be blunt, I don’t give a tuppeny fuck about the hopes and aspirations and tearful sob-stories of immigrants. I only care what’s in it for me and mine. Cute young Polish lady with a medical degree? Welcome aboard. Illiterate goat herder hoping for a free flat in Birmingham? Fuck right off.

  23. @ Ironman

    If we must have an immigration policy – and in the real world I guess our crowded island means we must – then let it be based upon points

    I think that’s exactly what Farage is arguing for?

    FWIW, migration actually worked fine when it was just “Western Europe” and mainly similar standards of living.

    For those that wanted to move, typically, the young and attractive came to places like London, and others retired to the Med.

    Perhaps not so practical the wider it gets (ie complete freedom of movement), with such very different standards of living, and benefits and more thrown in as well? Hence, yes, given the size of our small island, it is surely an issue that needs addressing, to some extent whatever that may be, and something which three pro EU parties have absolutely no interest in doing.

    Back on topic, didn’t Heath in fact confess before he died? OK, he didn’t hang for it, but that’s a different matter..

  24. But instead here we sit, grumpy old men raging against our changing country and trying to turn back the clock. Immigrants can’t be allowed in here because they’re different and they depress the wages of my fat slag grandaughter in her sloppy leggings: how is she ever going to get her foot on the housing ladder? Well, just like her classmates: she can shag Wayne in the pub carpark and get a flat from the housing assication. Meanwhile the Polish girl goes and gets a fucking job.

    The thing about garbage is that whatever it starts out from, it always ends up smelling the same. Every pro-immigration maniac ends up revealing not so much that they like immigrants or immigration, but that they hate the natives.

  25. “Yes, we need an immigration policy. In large part because we have a welfare state. Until that day comes when we all live in Galt’s Gulch with your beautiful, hardworking Romanian gypsies and no welfare state, we need to find some way of avoiding being swamped by the hordes of not terribly bright or useful people our welfare state attracts and retains”

    The problem is – as I do repeat and as nobody ever responds – the Ukip poster, featuring a young Irish male model btw, quite expressly talks of them coming to take our jobs; not our benefits. It is a direct appeal to the losers.

    Personally I’m not offering to give anybody easy benefit money, but that includes useless Brits as well.

    “I only care what’s in it for me and mine.” Yeah, me too if you like. But let’s follow that logic: your family isn’t mine any more than a Romanian gypsy’s is or the bilingual kids of some German woman are.

    Migration cuts both ways, young Brits might want to go somewhere else, driven away by the fear of the new that characterises our aging demographic; should they be stopped? (Don’t answer that, I know already).

    We think moving goods and money and services is freedom and write long pieces condemning Ritchie, yet at the first true sight of the free and changing world we claim we want we reveal ourselves basically to be as he is.

  26. IanB

    “Every pro-immigration maniac ends up revealing not so much that they like immigrants or immigration, but that they hate the natives”

    Don’t be fucking stupid. I’m a white Englishman, why would I “hate the natives”?.

    I’m making the point that people are the same wherever they come from. Migration is for the young and talented; the ageing and the losers will naturally oppose it.

  27. @ Ironman @2.29pm

    OK, but how does complete freedom of movement work, and I mean today, with where we are now, not in some ideal scenario.

    I can see how it sort of worked with a smaller common market of similar and equals (and without the straight jacket of the euro).

    My guess is that money and / or “skills” (in its loosest sense) almost by definition has to come into the frame somewhere, but more than happy to understand a better solution?

  28. PF
    I think I’ve said that. We are indeed in a crowded island (but please remember that, if immigration stopped today, we would still ahve a popluation of about 70 million by 2037) and so a limit to the number of people having a right to live here is sensible. So, once we get to that point, basing right of entry on deminstrable talent, money , YOUTH, these are all legitimate rationing mechanisms. And benefits shouldn’t be an option.

    What is not legitimate is the Romanian gypsies bollocks that we’ve had on this thread. Liberal economics fits with liberal

  29. Liberal economics fits with liberal social policy. That must include the right to move and settle wherever you want, hedged by absolutely necessary restrictions. Anything more than that is the imposition of the Courageous State.

  30. Ironman –

    “The problem is – as I do repeat and as nobody ever responds – the Ukip poster, featuring a young Irish male model btw, quite expressly talks of them coming to take our jobs; not our benefits. It is a direct appeal to the losers.”

    And by losers, you mean the British working class. Well, why should they welcome lower wages and increased job competition? What’s in it for them? Why shouldn’t UKIP appeal to British workers? They are trying to get elected. Britain is still a democracy. Therefore they need to give people reasons to vote for them. Not bore the tits off them with tales about how their neighbourhoods suddenly crawling with foreigners is The Wave Of The Future. Working class folks may be “losers”, but they’re not stupid.

    “Migration is for the young and talented”

    And the illiterate. And organised criminals. And people who think gang raping your fat slag granddaughter and beheading her boyfriend Wayne would be good sport. And all their uncles and cousins and parents and grandparents.

    “the ageing and the losers will naturally oppose it.”

    Well, shit. As a higher rate taxpayer who isn’t old, I didn’t realise I was a loser. But more importantly, you’re a winner, right? A big winner. On account of holding the right opinions.

  31. Ironman – “Liberal economics fits with liberal social policy.”

    Hmmm.

    Even the libertarian utopia of Galt’s Gulch restricted who could move there.

    In real life, we don’t even have liberal economics of course. We have an NHS, state education, housing benefit, state pensions, disability allowance, unemployment benefit, etc. Which aren’t realisti

  32. Damn phone…

    -cally going away. Combining a welfare state with liberal immigration policies is madness. You get more of what you incentivise, and the current arrangements incentivise the worst to come here.

    The USA could afford a liberal immigration policy back at the start of the 20th century. But they had a vast, mostly empty continent and no welfare programmes. A very high percentage of the poor huddled masses buggered off back home when they couldn’t hack it in America.

    We don’t have that advantage.

  33. @ Ironman

    Yes, I fully accept that the posters themselves are mainly LCD “clickbait”.

    So, once we get to that point, basing right of entry on demonstrable talent, money , YOUTH, these are all legitimate rationing mechanisms.

    Liberal economics fits with liberal social policy. That must include the right to move and settle wherever you want, hedged by absolutely necessary restrictions.

    Are these contradicting, or is it those “necessary restrictions” that make the rest of what I say below somewhat superfluous!?

    It’s interesting that Brits (or others in the west) generally don’t have much problem migrating provided that those migrating have “something” to offer (talent, youth etc as you allude).

    And if we have “nothing” to offer, why should any of us expect (or have the right) to be able to go, live and do as we please in someone else’s country?

    We argue for the free trade of goods, for the benefit of our people / nation, and usually there is a mutual benefit. Where we argue for the free movement of people, should that not be pursuing the same goal, ie for the benefit of our nation.

    Amongst equals that is usually easy to negotiate. For example, pretty frauleins and signoritas with their youth and talent in return for our wrinklies and their pensions. Even where not equals, money deposited in return for residency, skills and other can provide mutual benefit.

    But where there are huge discrepancies in living standards, allowing unfettered access probably won’t bring any “mutual” benefit. It doesn’t stop the free negotiation (as for goods), but surely not a “right” to move and settle; surely I have to earn it (or negotiate it) in some way?

    If true freedom of movement, then perhaps someone can explain how existing nation states can fit with this, and with the disparities in wealth and income that exist today. For the leftie supra nationalists that’s an easy one, the nation state is their enemy, but for the rest of us?

    I don’t believe – for all of the increasingly frantic MSM smears – that Farage is arguing for anything more than UK plc being in charge of its own negotiations, and which we clearly aren’t with our current EU membership?

  34. PF – haven’t you heard?

    If you buy a pint of milk from Mr Sayed’s corner shop, the liberal thing to do would be for him to invite you to lodge in his house.

    I thought all non-losers knew that.

  35. It’s funny, we really do want to put up the barriers to movement of labour. We really do hold that we cannot allow a foreign worker to come here and compete directly for jobs. And yet, that is exactly what we all say we are in favour of when discussing imports and exports or companies tendering for contracts in the UK. What curious opinion clusters we all hold.

    Steve

    Do you really need to characterise immigrants as “the illiterate. And organised criminals. And people who think gang raping your fat slag granddaughter and beheading her boyfriend Wayne would be good sport.” You know as well as I do the lunatics that do that are second generation immigrants, not the immigrants themselves. That is a problem with our society – or parts of it; not an immigration problem.

    And who said anything about providing any sort of welcome to “all their uncles and cousins and parents and grandparents.” That is the fall-back idea of them stealing our benefits. But I’ll repeat – and i’m still waiting for the Ukip response – the poster was about them stealing our jobs. This is all based upon us having a welfare state that I don’t believe in and don’t believe anyone does. I wouldn’t ever consider giving an immigrant benefits.

    And as for “you mean the British working class. Well, why should they welcome lower wages and increased job competition?” really? Increased job cometition yes, but lower wages? Are you really going to give us the Richard Murphy/Howard Reed line that all employers are rentiers, paying much less than they need to for staff because of immigration and increased competition for jobs? Do you really think UK employers would be paying or be able to pay significantly more today if we had not experienced immigration? This isn’t the Tax Research UK blog.

  36. “But more importantly, you’re a winner, right? A big winner. On account of holding the right opinions.”

    No mate, I’ve never sought to hold the right opinions. I’ve been arguing – boring my friends – about the EU and the single currency for well over 20 years now. I held the view when I couldn’t have been less fashionable, less bien pensant.

    But I’m not going to blame ‘them’ be they foreigners or poofters for all life’s problems; that is for losers.

  37. Can I ask what has happened to all the usual contributors who do not live in the UK. You’re all immigrants where you live, where do you stand on going and stealing a local’s job?

  38. Ironman – You know as well as I do the lunatics that do that are second generation immigrants, not the immigrants themselves.

    I’m sure this is a great comfort to their victims. But here’s a wacky thought – how about not letting followers of a retarded medieval cult colonise us? That way, we won’t have to worry about them or their many children, then blaming ourselves when they go full medieval retard on our streets.

    And who said anything about providing any sort of welcome to “all their uncles and cousins and parents and grandparents.”

    Umm, reality did? For that’s what happens.

    This is all based upon us having a welfare state that I don’t believe in and don’t believe anyone does. I wouldn’t ever consider giving an immigrant benefits.

    Beliefs are overrated. Give me people who are up for making practical improvements any day.

    Increased job cometition yes, but lower wages? Are you really going to give us the Richard Murphy/Howard Reed line that all employers are rentiers, paying much less than they need to for staff because of immigration and increased competition for jobs?

    So you’re all in favour of liberal economics. But you don’t believe the laws of supply and demand apply to labour? Intetesting.

    But I’m not going to blame ‘them’ be they foreigners or poofters for all life’s problems

    Even Peter Mandelson?

  39. It’s funny, we really do want to put up the barriers to movement of labour.

    It depends what you mean.

    Completely unfettered, and with the full EU28 (and wider) right now, actually perhaps yes, to some extent.

    Otherwise, no, hence my comments above about negotiations / equals / mutual benefits, etc.

    I wouldn’t ever consider giving an immigrant benefits.

    I don’t think we can change that one whilst a member of the EU? At least not for EU member states which this is all about?

  40. PF

    And we should leave the EU and will get the chance in 3 years depending on the outcome of the next gaenral election.

  41. Could we all try to decide on one line of objection please. Are we complaining about people comnig to the UK and stealing our jobs or our we complaining about them coming with granny and stealing living lazy on our benefits? Or do we think they are hard worknig but we’re just too crowded? Which one do we want to jump for?

  42. No Steve your quite right, the ethnicity or country of origin of a lunatic is of no interest to the victim; I’m sure the citizens of Nairobi don’t care overmuch that the massacre of their loved ones was planned by an Englishwoman. However, if we intend to implement an immigration policy based upon a blood libel then I would suggest it does matter.

  43. Ironman –

    “Could we all try to decide on one line of objection please. ”

    Eh, why?

    “blood libel”.

    Christ Almighty.

  44. Steve

    We go and on about Romanians, we take out newspaper adds about them, quite specifcally single them out. We use a history that has absolutely nothing to do with them, from another culture, another religion, from another part of the world, brought to the UK in an earlier decade under very different rules, INCUBATED IN THE UK and we conflate this with Romanian gypsies to suggest that THEY are a danger.

    And we finish with “Chrsit Almighty”.

    Blood Libel.

  45. And we should leave the EU

    Agreed.

    and will get the chance in 3 years depending on the outcome of the next general election.

    Would you trust someone to deliver any kind of fair in / out referendum on the EU when the person who will control that process has already told you categorically that he wants to stay in? I do not trust David Cameron.

    Forget Thursday’s elections for a second, that’s easy.

    For 2015, this will come down to individuals, ie whether a prospective MP – and forget party labels – is some drippingly wet, obedient, Europhile Cameroon (or the red / yellow equivalent), or not.

  46. PF

    You have brought us back full circle and got me to re-pose the question:

    How did a party that started out as a free market campaign to exit an undemocratic statist momlith end up posting full page adverts in national papers singling out one particular nationality as barbarians at the gates?

  47. Ironman – I’ve advocated nuking Liverpool from orbit before, but now I fear someone must’ve beat me to it and accidentally ripped a hole in reality itself.

    “We go and on about Romanians, we take out newspaper adds about them, quite specifcally single them out. We use a history that has absolutely nothing to do with them, from another culture, another religion, from another part of the world, brought to the UK in an earlier decade under very different rules, INCUBATED IN THE UK and we conflate this with Romanian gypsies to suggest that THEY are a danger.”

    Um, no. And your confusement here – your inability to follow and distinguish between the threads – explains your earlier plea for people to simplify their objections. It ain’t simple, except in the land of imagination, where sweet Romanian gypsy girls frolick and a good time is had by all, except those working class types you call “losers”.

    Are you sure listening to Justice n Peacers dribble into their Twinings is good for your mental acuity?

    “Blood Libel.”

    Yes, isn’t it ironic that you use the term “blood libel” to champion the immigration of people who hate Jews? And you also suggest enlightened concern for “poofters”, while simultaneously blaming Britain for the antics of people who want to stone poofters to death?

    I’m beginning to think you might not be the real Ironman after all. Or perhaps you’ve succumbed to oxidisation.

    Our Lady of Victory, pray for us.

  48. “How did a party…”

    It’s a perfectly fair question, and I don’t have an answer.

    To go back to a thread a week or so ago, the best I can offer is:

    a) I don’t believe Farage himself believes “literally” in the posters, and

    b) “foot soldiers”.

    But that doesn’t change what I (and I suspect many eurosceptics) want, and which is simply for Westminster (whose MP’s we can at least eject at the ballot box) to have substantially more “control” over this island than Brussels (whose bureaucrats we have no democratic voice over); and hence what I understand by “Farage & UKIP” versus “Cameron” (or the other two) – if that helps at all..

  49. Of course, the irony of that is that Farage wants Dave to have more power and it seems that Dave is happy for Brussels to have it instead…..

  50. It is reasonable to treat capital and goods differently to people. Trade does not bring with it the ability to change governments directly whereas people do.

  51. “…where do you stand on going and stealing a local’s job?”

    I don’t give a fuck. Alright?

  52. UKIP is now a populist authoritarian party and not remotely libertarian. See Matt Ridley in The Times today.Vote UKIP, get Milipaedo…Simples.

  53. Ironman,
    All parties have succumbed to this sort of scare tactic in recent years haven’t they? UKIP have gone further, but that’s just degree.

    Anyway, my objection to “unlimited” immigration would be this:

    1) All things need some sort of regulation, otherwise they just don’t work properly. After all, the “rule of law” is pretty much universally agreed to be the core requirement for a market economy to function.

    2) It is clear, from strains evident all over the place, and from our bonkers house prices, that immigration has not been managed properly. Part of this is down to Labour pretending that it wasn’t happening. A side-effect was that this policy was never properly discussed (timid New Labour may well have caught the public mood on this, but didn’t bother trying).

    So, the movement of capital and people both need some regulation, and basic management. Further, creating open borders amongst such disparate countries was bound to require cause problems. As with the Euro, if you don’t do things competently, then it doesn’t matter whether something is a good idea or not.

  54. Peter S

    I was being sarcastic. But you’re right not to give a fuck; I have similar views on Eastern Europeans coming here.

  55. Tim,
    “I’d suggest a good look at the junior ranks of other political parties before you try claiming that UKIP’s anything special in this regard.”

    And how old would the junior ranks of UKIP be?

  56. Ironman
    May 19, 2014 at 2:33 pm

    “I’m making the point that people are the same wherever they come from.”

    Could there be anything more patently untrue than that?

  57. Ironman
    May 19, 2014 at 8:34 am

    “a party trying to stop beautiful, talented young people move around the world to make a life”

    If only they would. But they all want a job – and the overwhelming majority of them want it here. And most of them want a house built for them to live in – here.

  58. Ironman, don’t argue with Kippers. They’re a cult. Might as well argue with Moonies. (I exempt our host who has quietly backed off and retired to Portugal.)

  59. Luke,

    That’s actually quite funny..:)

    Not quite sure sure how you got all the way over to cult, but imaginative I’ll give you.

    Personally I prefer Dave’s “swivel eyed” brigade… – oh no, sorry, that was for Conservatives who are keeping their heads and still voting for him, those that weren’t were the extremist fruitcakes..

    Kipling’s fruitcake cult, quite clearly…

  60. Ironman – “Instead, it is simple axiom that we must have a policy; Courageous State anyone?”

    We have a policy. Unless we are going to have a policy of abolishing that policy, we will go on needing a policy. Even free trade is a policy.

    “If we must have an immigration policy – and in the real world I guess our crowded island means we must – then let it be based upon points, upon the young, the talented, the beautiful.”

    Indeed. Or better yet, let it be based on the principle that we don’t want anyone else moving to the UK. Ever.

    “But instead here we sit, grumpy old men raging against our changing country and trying to turn back the clock.”

    So you’re taking the Guardian’s line that there is such a thing as progress and we can do nothing about it? We cannot stand athwart history and shout stop?

    Ironman – “The problem is – as I do repeat and as nobody ever responds – the Ukip poster, featuring a young Irish male model btw, quite expressly talks of them coming to take our jobs; not our benefits. It is a direct appeal to the losers.”

    Actually the losers would be the ones without a job, not those with them. But yes, the young and low skilled are especially threatened by immigration. Doesn’t make them losers. Even if it did, so what? Are they not men and brothers too? Prick them and do they not bleed?

    “Personally I’m not offering to give anybody easy benefit money, but that includes useless Brits as well.”

    Except only half your utopian scheme is going to be implemented and you know it. You will not end the welfare state or even get close. But you will co-operate with the Labour Party in their efforts at population replacement and with the Tories in their effort to help their mates in the CBI by providing as much cheap Third World labour as they like.

    “But let’s follow that logic: your family isn’t mine any more than a Romanian gypsy’s is or the bilingual kids of some German woman are.”

    Actually that is not true. That is kind of the point. His family is probably genetically closer to yours. What is more his family has been through the same history as yours more or less – what the Battle of Britain means to your nearest is more or less the same as what the Battle of Britain means to his. Not, for instance, that there was no difference between the two lots of kafirs. It means that your family members can rely on his family members in a whole range of situations.

    “We think moving goods and money and services is freedom and write long pieces condemning Ritchie, yet at the first true sight of the free and changing world we claim we want we reveal ourselves basically to be as he is.”

    Bollocks. Bollocks on steroids. Freedom cannot be a suicide pact. That is what you are demanding. Ritchie is deluded. As is anyone who looks at Boko Haram and says what Britain really needs is people to come here and rape our schoolgirls before selling them into slavery.

    Ironman – “Don’t be fucking stupid. I’m a white Englishman, why would I “hate the natives”?.”

    I don’t know. Why do you hate the natives? You clearly do. It is not unusual for British people to hate Britain and the British. Polly does. That is why they want lots and lots of Africans to come to the UK and make it a foreign country.

    “I’m making the point that people are the same wherever they come from. Migration is for the young and talented; the ageing and the losers will naturally oppose it.”

    Is there anything more f**king insane than that? No people are not the same. Africans are often borderline retarded for one thing. That may be because of poor diet. It may be because of cultural bias. It may be genes. But it is a fact in so far as we can tell. Even if you do not like that claim, and all the science is agreed it is true, they come from radically different cultures. We have failed to assimilate anyone to British culture except people who are very close to it anyway. We are not assimilating them. So your argument is an argument for endless suicide bombing until there are no more British people left. You think we are losers?

    Ironman – “We are indeed in a crowded island (but please remember that, if immigration stopped today, we would still ahve a popluation of about 70 million by 2037) and so a limit to the number of people having a right to live here is sensible.”

    Yeay! The Labour Party will succeed in abolishing Britain, as they intended to do. Let’s help them do it even faster!

    Ironman – “Liberal economics fits with liberal social policy. That must include the right to move and settle wherever you want, hedged by absolutely necessary restrictions. Anything more than that is the imposition of the Courageous State.”

    You are falling into the same fatuous error Polly does. We do not support Free Trade because of Free Trade. We do so because it works. Most liberal economic policy is morally questionable. But it works. So we should support it. But a liberal immigration policy does not. The point of politics is not to adhere to some political purity test. It is to make life for everyone better. Importing a billion Third World peasants does not make life better for anyone in these isles. Nor for the Third World peasants in the long run.

    Therefore we should not do it. End of story. Ayn Rand might disagree. She might think that ideological purity is all that matters. Well she can rightly f**k off.

    Ironman – “We really do hold that we cannot allow a foreign worker to come here and compete directly for jobs. And yet, that is exactly what we all say we are in favour of when discussing imports and exports or companies tendering for contracts in the UK. What curious opinion clusters we all hold.”

    Not at all. We are in favour of free trade because it is good for us. Free immigration is not good for us. Therefore no sane person should support it.

    “You know as well as I do the lunatics that do that are second generation immigrants, not the immigrants themselves.”

    Sorry but this is an argument for allowing more immigration?

    “And who said anything about providing any sort of welcome to “all their uncles and cousins and parents and grandparents.””

    How are you going to keep them out?

    “Increased job cometition yes, but lower wages? Are you really going to give us the Richard Murphy/Howard Reed line that all employers are rentiers, paying much less than they need to for staff because of immigration and increased competition for jobs?”

    How do you go from paying workers the market rate – which will be lower if there are more workers available – to being a rentier?

    “Do you really think UK employers would be paying or be able to pay significantly more today if we had not experienced immigration?”

    Yes I do. The Industrial Revolution was possible in the UK and not in China because wages were higher in the UK. Right from the start. Since the Black Death or longer. Employers would be paying higher wages if not for immigration.

    Ironman – “No mate, I’ve never sought to hold the right opinions.”

    Except when you do.

    “But I’m not going to blame ‘them’ be they foreigners or poofters for all life’s problems; that is for losers.”

    See – not so far from the Guardian are you? Not only can you not deal with other people’s objections properly, you have the same totalitarian need to categorise them as a pathology.

    Ironman – “And we should leave the EU and will get the chance in 3 years depending on the outcome of the next gaenral election.”

    Bollocks. Whatever happens in the next election, Britain will never have a chance to leave the EU. Cameron does not mean it. He never did.

    Ironman – “Could we all try to decide on one line of objection please.”

    Why not both? It is not as if immigrants are of one type.

    Ironman – “We go and on about Romanians, we take out newspaper adds about them, quite specifcally single them out.”

    They occupy an unfortunate sweet spot – criminal enough that everyone objects to them on sight, White enough that people can complain about them without being accused of racism. Like the Polish plumbers. No one gives a damn about the Poles. It is the Pakistanis that are the problem – and they would be a problem even if they were Nordic.

    But you will of course squeal like a stuck pig about race.

    Ironman – “How did a party that started out as a free market campaign to exit an undemocratic statist momlith end up posting full page adverts in national papers singling out one particular nationality as barbarians at the gates?”

    Telling the truth is habit forming. Once someone is brave enough to say f**k off to the EU, they are usually brave enough to say a lot of other things too. Even saying that the barbarians at the front door are, actually, barbarians.

    But not everyone. PC is very strong.

  61. Jack C – “2) It is clear, from strains evident all over the place, and from our bonkers house prices, that immigration has not been managed properly. Part of this is down to Labour pretending that it wasn’t happening. A side-effect was that this policy was never properly discussed (timid New Labour may well have caught the public mood on this, but didn’t bother trying).”

    Two things to say to that. The first is that the Blair government openly said that they were interested in population replacement – bringing so many Third World peasants to Britain that the Tories would never be elected again. And to that end they sent out people like Peter Mandelstam to scour the Third World for people to come here. They spent our money recruiting people to replace us. It has been managed well. From their point of view. And Lee Jaspers can look forward to his son being Prime Minister because British people will soon be a minority in Britain.

    Second it is not that it was not properly discussed. It is that everyone who tried to discuss it was shouted down as a racist. Thrown out of their jobs. Bullied. Silenced. Again, it was well managed from the point of view of the Labour Party. Not for the rest of us.

  62. @ theophrastus

    UKIP is now a populist authoritarian party and not remotely libertarian. See Matt Ridley in The Times today.

    Evidence? I’m not paying Murdoch, whatever Matt has to say – any other reference or link to support the basic premise?

  63. theophrastus – It’s in The Times? Must be true then. 🙂

    “UKIP is now a populist authoritarian party and not remotely libertarian.”

    Well, compared to what?

    The Tories? Labour? The Lib Dems? The Greens? The SNP? The BNP? Sinn Fein? The Ulster Unionists? Um… the Natural Law Party, if they’re still yogically flying about?

    Can’t see any logic in suggesting the Kippers are more authoritarian than any of the above. Indeed, the precise opposite is true.

    The folks in purple rosettes aren’t setting HMRC on your bank accounts, ramping up the national debt, debasing the currency, creating another housing bubble, threatening to legally restrict the number of white men who can serve as judges, censoring the internet, banning free carrier bags, driving up fuel costs, pathetically rattling sabres at Russia, trying to fix the price of alcohol or electricity or rents, creating new criminal offences to jail parents, criminalising football supporters, forcing you to recycle, hiding the fags in shops… have I missed anything?

    This is where I become slightly exasperated at chaps like yourself and our friend Ironman. We’re all big boys who understand that politics is a dirty business and democracy guarantees we’ll never get everything we might like. If you don’t like or want to vote for Farage’s Fightin’ Fruitcakes, fine. But don’t pretend you’re making some sort of principled stance for liberalism or whatever, because you’re not. By deciding not to support the only viable small government, liberty-minded alternative on the ballot, you’re supporting the statist quo (yes, sic).

    None of us gets to opt out from the consequences of election results, so criticising the mote in Farage’s kind blue eyes and declaring oneself libertarianer than thou while allowing a much bigger shower of bastards than UKIP to get back into office is just pointless navel gazing.

    If you or the Times come across any UK political parties, with a chance of returning elected representatives, that are more libertarian and less authoritarian than UKIP, do let me know so I can vote for them.

    “Vote UKIP, get Milipaedo…Simples.”

    If by not voting for Camernonce we get Millipedo, I don’t care because they’re two cheeks on the same plooky arse. But at least I’ll have helped skelp one of those cheeks. Simples.

  64. Luke

    It really hasn’t been worth it has it, but I can imagine Nigel Farage reading this and putting his head in his hands wondering how his anti-EU message morphed into this crap.

    It really has been like a spell on Tax Research as commentators ‘do a Ritchie’, reveal their scarcely hidden prejudices and descend into raw abuse.

    Pick your favourite, the conflating of Romanians with Muslim terrorists, the stated desire to bomb an English city to the ground or the belief that we can’t have free trade in the absence of government intervention.

    On reflection I think that last is most revealing. It matches anumber of other comments that show, dedpite all our stated beliefs, that a number of us actually are at eart Big State authoritarians.

  65. Jesus Wept.

    You are Norris from Coronation Street and I collect my £5.

    Now change your Tena Lady, there’s a good laddie.

  66. Steve

    My last post referred to raw abuse and your response is…

    This really is Arnald-level stuff.

  67. Ironman – “or the belief that we can’t have free trade in the absence of government intervention. On reflection I think that last is most revealing. It matches anumber of other comments that show, dedpite all our stated beliefs, that a number of us actually are at eart Big State authoritarians.”

    Actually the last just proves that your opinions are so shallow and feeble that they rest on a willful misunderstanding of everyone who disagrees with you.

    A bit like Ritchie I admit.

  68. Ferrous Puler –

    You think that was raw abuse? 🙂

    Remind me, who was it who started calling people “losers” and talking about “fat slags”?

    And what SMFS said.

  69. Ironman, “labour” does not migrate. People do. That’s the difference between free movement of goods and services (labour is the latter of those) and free migration.

    The most basic element of property is the right to refuse entry. If you have a libertarian commune and are obligated to allow anyone to join, it’ll stop being a libertarian commune before too long. Because people don’t just bring labour, they bring themselves.

    The failure to grasp this basic distinction is the rabbit hole too many libertarians and free marketeers fall down, and end up demanding open borders. The benefits and rights of trade are very different to communing with those others.

  70. Did you not read what i’ve said about raw abuse? Do you not think that perhaps, just maybe, more raw abuse is a poor response?

  71. It isn’t abuse. It’s a metaphorical or whatever thingy that notes that there are all kinds of error that start off with different errors, but end up in the same place, hence the “all garbage smells the same”. My mum used to have a more polite version from her vicar I think, that communism and fascism end up in the same place (wise vicar, she had) but it’s the same thing.

    You can start off with either assuming the collective is everything, or assume it is nothing; either way you will end up with denying the basics of human organisation.

    I feel as if I’m forever pointing this out to anarchists of various stripes; the first thing that any propertarian anarchism will do is create a myriad “nation states” with controlled borders. If you don’t have a controlled border- whether around land, or the person, or your lawnmower- there is no property. So, there can never be a right of free movement in a free society.

    You can at best have (and should have) the right to leave any property. What you don’t have is (a) the right to enter another property or (b) to slag off people who control their borders like what you did in this thread. Borders are the basis of freedom.

  72. Do not conflate EU immigration with 3rd world.

    Not quite the same thing, and EU membership or not, the last has nothing to do with it.

    Much as I dislike what the EU has become, not so long ago there was much less free movement of people in Europe and that was NOT a good thing. So lets not throw out the baby with the bathwater.

  73. The problem with the open borders loons is that they only want the bathwater and glory in the destruction of the baby.

  74. monoi – “Do not conflate EU immigration with 3rd world. Not quite the same thing, and EU membership or not, the last has nothing to do with it.”

    Not quite, but not exactly massively different either. Half the EU is distinctly Third World. Virtually none of it works well. Italy is so dysfunctional because it is full of Italians. Greece because it was run by the Ottomans for such a long time. They are both more functional than, say, Nigeria – which is, I am sure, impressing us all in how utterly incompetent a Third World state can be this week – but not much more.

    “Much as I dislike what the EU has become, not so long ago there was much less free movement of people in Europe and that was NOT a good thing. So lets not throw out the baby with the bathwater.”

    What possible positive effect can there be from movement of people about Europe? How does pushing the functioning states of Northern Europe to become more like the useless dysfunctional states of Southern Europe help anyone?

    The only thing that the movement of peoples about Europe has brought us is more rape. And thieving. All the major developments in European history have taken place in small city-states, or at least states, with bugger all immigration – Athens, Jerusalem (arguably), Florence, Elizabethan London. Nothing useful has come out of ethnically diverse multicultural societies.

  75. “Nothing useful has come out of ethnically diverse multicultural societies.”

    Neil Armstrong must have shared that sentiment as he stood on the moon and his thoughts turned to the German scientsits employed by NASA.

    Couldn’t you just start every comment with “I’m not a racist but…”

    Actually, forget it. I’m not carrying on having a discussion with an racist, a perve who wants to shag 14 year old girls and…Arnald. You guys can talk to him. goodbye.

  76. If we had a free market –not the present mixture of welfare/warfare, mixed economy–the mixture being state and corporate socialism with a little bit of free enterprise left–then I’d say let them come. No dole, no handouts, no special favours–our ways and no putting their capers ahead of native inhabitants. No multiculti–no anti-racism (ie anti-white) –then we could get a real idea of who wants in and if they are worth having. At the moment the scum of the state are encouraging a quiet invasion to destroy this country–Nu and Blu Labour alike.

    When the economic shit hits the fan and lots of people in this nation have to try and wheelbarrow their giro money to the shop before its value reaches minus figures—then the hatreds will explode. It would be rough enough with a mono-culture, but with what we have now?.

  77. I’m not a racist, but I never eat the black jellies. And I don’t trust that guy with the curvy sword in the Fry’s Turkish Delights adverts.

  78. Ironman–get your circuits checked. The USA and Germany–language and minor customs aside–are the same culture with–(socialist poisoners also aside) the same traditions and the same classical heritage. Tell us about some European nation whose Islamic scientists are sending them to the Moon (other than by suicide bomb) and your point might have more validity.

  79. PF:
    Matt Ridley (pbuh) wrote in yesterday’s Times:
    “the Ukip campaign ploughs steadily farther off the rails into the anti-immigrant bushes, in search presumably of former British National Party voters, it becomes ever easier for small-government, classical liberals — like me — to resist its allure. Nigel Farage once advocated flat taxes, drug decriminalisation and spending cuts. Now his party has dropped the flat tax, opposes zero-hours contracts, is hostile to gay marriage and talks about subsidising farmers and growing the defence budget…”

    Steve:

    “Well, compared to what?
    The Tories? Labour? The Lib Dems? The Greens? The SNP? The BNP? Sinn Fein? The Ulster Unionists? Um… the Natural Law Party, if they’re still yogically flying about?”

    Compared to what UKIP was, UKIP is now a diiferent beast. Hence, Matt Ridley’s remark above.

    “If by not voting for Camernonce we get Millipedo, I don’t care because they’re two cheeks on the same plooky arse. But at least I’ll have helped skelp one of those cheeks.”

    That’s just the tired UKIP line that the three main parties are politically equivalent. But they aren’t. Democratic politics is about priorities, as no party is likely to be able to meet all your or my political preferences. If Milipaedo is elected, we’ll get rent controls, price controls, a higher NMW, higher taxes, more immigration…resulting in the usual socialist car crash. If Cameron is elected, we stand to get an in-out referendum on the EU. If I was in a constituency where UKIP was the main challenger to a Labour or the Lib Dem incumbent, I would probably vote UKIP. As it is, I’m not; and Cameron’s Conservatives are my only choice.

  80. “a perve who wants to shag 14 year old girls and…Arnald”

    Arnald, I don’t know which perve is out to shag you, but if he doesn’t take no for an answer, phone 999.

  81. @ Theophrastus

    Matt Ridley (pbuh) wrote in yesterday’s Times:

    “the Ukip campaign ploughs steadily farther off the rails into the anti-immigrant bushes, in search presumably of former British National Party voters, it becomes ever easier for small-government, classical liberals — like me — to resist its allure. Nigel Farage once advocated flat taxes, drug decriminalisation and spending cuts. Now his party has dropped the flat tax, opposes zero-hours contracts, is hostile to gay marriage and talks about subsidising farmers and growing the defence budget…”

    OK, now I understand, and many thanks for coming back.

    I’ve got news for you though; whilst there is clear sense in what he says, this is a straw man argument.

    Decent chap that Matt Ridley is, he is not a “potential” UKIP supporter, I mean not any more than say Daniel Hannan or Douglas Carswell. He is a “Conservative” (clue) member of the House of Lords, and therefore saying whatever he can right now to shore up the Conservative vote?

  82. Theophrastus –

    “If Milipaedo is elected, we’ll get rent controls, price controls, a higher NMW, higher taxes, more immigration…resulting in the usual socialist car crash.”

    I agree.

    OTOH if, miraculously, Camernonce gets back in, we’ll get more deficit spending, more windmills, even higher electricity prices, more politically correct sneak attacks like the gay marriage surprise, more dismantling the armed forces, quite likely higher taxes again if receipts fall again when the cheap credit money hose is turned off, more money spunked on foreign aid, more nanny statism, and more immigration… resulting in a slightly slower motion car crash.

    ” If Cameron is elected, we stand to get an in-out referendum on the EU.”

    Meh. I know a lot of people, in UKIP especially but also the Tories, really want a referendum. I don’t really want a referendum, I want us to get out of the EU. I don’t actually care how. Referendum, Act of Parliament, tactical nuclear strike on Brussels – whatever.

    A referendum grudgingly conceded by a Prime Minister who’d be campaigning to stay in at any cost, with the full force of the British State and the EU and the media behind him, is of no interest to me. That’s a rigged game.

    “If I was in a constituency where UKIP was the main challenger to a Labour or the Lib Dem incumbent, I would probably vote UKIP. As it is, I’m not; and Cameron’s Conservatives are my only choice.”

    I’m in a Tory seat too. I voted for our incumbent in 2010. Next time around, definitely not. I’m tired of being pissed on and told it’s raining by Lord Snooty and pals and their shitty blue Labour tribute act.

    If this is conservatism I hope it goes extinct. Far as I’m concerned it’s time to spew out the lukewarm. If that means Ed Miliband for PM, so be it. The Tories deserve to be crushed in the marketplace of votes. We should punish the weak and the foolish, or they’ll never learn anything.

    The only one I respect is Michael Gove. And much as I like the guy, he’s not enough to offset the uselessness of his colleagues.

  83. PF

    Yes, Ridley is a peer who takes the Tory whip in the House of Lords; but, given his very liberal, even libertarian views, on many topics, he is just the sort of peer UKIP should have been able to win over.

    I don’t see how his observation is a straw man argument. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

    Steve:

    All you have done there is restate that you believe in the political equivalence of the Tories and Labour. I would never claim the Tories are perfect, only that they are the least bad option of the real and practical options available. We need to destroy Labour before we destroy the Tories. A fragmented right will result only in years of demented socialism.

  84. A Camoron “right” will result in years of demented socialism as well. Face it–the Tories as you might have known them are dead. Whatever shit comes down let the blame fall on open socialists not on socialists masquerading as free market supporters.

  85. Ironman – “Neil Armstrong must have shared that sentiment as he stood on the moon and his thoughts turned to the German scientsits employed by NASA.”

    As has been pointed out, the Germans were remarkably close to the WASP culture of North America. And NASA is a great example of the problems of diversity – when it was entirely White and male, it put a man on the Moon. Now it is searching for every employable Black and female engineer they can find ….. they are interested in out reach to the Muslim world.

    “Couldn’t you just start every comment with “I’m not a racist but…””

    Why would I want to? If something it is true, it is true if it is racist or not. Show me that I am wrong and I will change my mind.

  86. Theophrastus – “All you have done there is restate that you believe in the political equivalence of the Tories and Labour.”

    Yes.

    “We need to destroy Labour before we destroy the Tories. A fragmented right will result only in years of demented socialism.”

    Aye, there’s the rub.

    Since we operate under different assessments of the usefulness of Cameron’s Conservatives and how different they are to Labour, we draw different conclusions.

    How do you propose to destroy Labour, BTW? If I was the PM, I’d defund their allies: drastically shrink the public sector, immolate the quangos, cut off the charities, abolish the DfID, emasculate the BBC, lay waste to the Leftist Studies sector of academia… I’d even find time to put a helpful boot on the Guardian’s arse and nudge it more rapidly towards bankruptcy by banning all public sector job adverts in newspapers (they can use the Jobcentre Plus website for free instead).

    This wouldn’t destroy Labour, of course. But it would weaken them. And be fun to do.

    Has Cameron done any of this? Ha. He’s been sucking up to people who will never vote for his party for so long I think he’s forgotten how to do anything but piss off actual conservatives. Being the MP for Witney hasn’t helped his political education. Folks there would still vote for the Conservative even if he was caught shitting in the middle of Church Green.

    Why is the right fragmented? Because the Conservatives under David Cameron abandoned their base and haven’t found any new voters to replace them with. They’re now left with trying to alternately scare people with Ed Miliband / laugh at Ed Miliband. Well, Ed Miliband will be the one laughing come next year.

    Nothing lasts forever. The kindest thing to do now would be to take the Conservative Party out for one last walkies, before giving it a quick and humane ending. I’ve got no use for the fake Right, and neither do a lot of other former Tory voters who aren’t coming back.

  87. @ Theophrastus

    By straw man, I simply meant that I didn’t believe Matt Ridley, having taken the Conservative whip, was really up for voting UKIP (and of course I could be completely wrong, pure speculation on my part!), and which was the underlying premise, ie now that UKIP are evil, he might not do that (was it ever a real proposition?).

    Apols if it’s the wrong term.

    It’s funny – for all of the increasingly raised voices on here, I genuinely can’t help thinking that, ignoring any lefties, there is not a lot of difference between most in this discussion.

    Mainly a few sticking points and which have successfully polarized the rest of the discussion?

  88. What’s nice about people who all smell the same, is that when they catastrophically lose an argument, they all have the same reaction, which is to start throwing around arbitrary and nonsensical denunciations.

    Congratulations Ironman, you win the Predictability Prize for today. Now go and stand in Twunt’s Corner with your friends.

  89. Ian B, thanks.

    Just wondering how many Kipperish people just don’t like the way the UK already is and have buggered off elsewhere, in which case we should ignore them. You don’t fit that category. Maybe my query is a non starter.

  90. Luke, I vote Kipper for two specific reasons; the EU is a bad idea, I think open borders are a bad idea at this point in history, and it is the best way to tactically vote against the hegemonic parties and upset the political system (I often wonder if the latter reason would have caused me to vote Labour a century ago). Does that make me a Kipper?

    So far as I can tell, most Kippers aren’t libertarians and many would be as horrified by my liberal opinions as poor old Ironman is.

    If it’s any help, my own view is that ex-pats shouldn’t have a vote. If you want to vote here, you should live here. Again, that’s my interpretation of the propertarian view of the nation state as collective.

  91. Luke,

    If it helps at all, London (loosely) – and I very much welcome what London has become in the last 20 years or so, and very much gained from new skills, youth, talent and dynamism (from migration that has come from both the rest of the UK and much further afield), all of which has enhanced it immeasurably.

    And which, I believe, doesn’t change the substance of a single thing that I’ve written above.

  92. IanB

    Again, don’t be fucking stupid. I am not horrified by your liberal opinions because you hold any. On what planet is an ethnicity-based closed border liberal?

    Btw, Richard Murphy is very fond of the words ‘hegemony’ and ‘hegemonic’ as well.

  93. Ironman, before calling somebody fucking stupid, I suggest you read what they wrote. I said nothing about you being horrified by my liberal opinons. I said that i don’t fit the profile of a “stereotypical” Kipper, in polite reply to Luke’s polite question. I wasn’t talking to you, or about you, or with you in mind at all.

    You see, I don’t actually seek your approval. You are wrong, for stupid reasons, so attempting to pander to your stupidity would be counter-productive.

    Richard Murphy is also probably quite likely to use words like “and”, “the”, “bacon” and “bicycle” as well. The English language is for all to use; it is how we communicate. If we don’t use the same words, we cannot communicate. I’m very fond of “berk”. Consider it used to refer to yourself.

    And finally, I’m not interested in an “ethnicity based” border. Just a border. I’m not allowed to climb over my neighbour’s fence and use his garden; not because I’m English, or Caucasian, but because it’s his fucking garden. If you think “liberal” means abolishing property, it’s up to you, but you’re standing in twunt’s corner if you really think that.

  94. Okay, messed up. It’s early morning. I did refer to you, but it was not in relation to border issues, but your pathetic and snidey “perv who wants to fuck 14 year old girls” further up the thread. Which was illustrative of a man who has no argument, knows he has no argument, so turns to irrelevant denunciations. Thirty years ago I was putting up with this kind of thing from shits like you because the issue then was gay rights and I vocally supported them too.

    As I said; all garbage, it smells the same.

  95. Dear Mr Worstall

    @ Surreptitious Evil May 19, 2014 at 1:17 pm

    “Isn’t that nice. What seems to be a FOTL come to lecture us on how the Treason Act 1351 (like Magna Carta, years various, and the Bill of Rights 1688), despite being Statutes are some how “Common Law”.

    Sighs …”

    The first parliament described as such sat in 1236, 21 years after Magna Carta of 1215

    http://www.parliament.uk/about/living-heritage/evolutionofparliament/originsofparliament/birthofparliament/overview/firstparliaments/

    The Bill of Rights was enacted in December 1689, codifying the Declaration of Rights, which was signed by William and Mary in March 1688 (old style), the year changed at Easter in those days.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689

    Many statutes codify Common Law. That does not mean that the Common Law can be amended or annulled by changing the codifying statute, though I am sure our beloved leaders would like us to think so.

    I hope this helps.

    DP

  96. PF:
    It’s funny – for all of the increasingly raised voices on here, I genuinely can’t help thinking that, ignoring any lefties, there is not a lot of difference between most in this discussion.
    Mainly a few sticking points and which have successfully polarized the rest of the discussion?

    Yes, by and large. But the UKIP trope that the three main parties are indistinguishable is not only empirically false but also a sign of deep irrationality in those who take it literally. Trade-offs and preference rankings are the stuff of social, economic and political life. Yet the proponents of the LibLabCon want to deny this, perhaps because it makes politics simpler and less challenging for them.

    I am now semi-retired, but I still run two small businesses. And for me a Milipedo government would be a disaster…

  97. “So far as I can tell, most Kippers aren’t libertarians and many would be as horrified by my liberal opinions as poor old Ironman is.”

    You see, I did read what you wrote and what you have written about 14-year-old girls, you fucking stupid pervert.

  98. “So, we believe in freedom of movement of Capital. We believe in free trade. Yet, freedom of movement for people, of labour? No, not that!”

    If I own a farm in some anarchist utopia and I employ people from outside the farm to come and work for me, I do not owe those people residence on my farm and they are not entitled to part ownership of my farm just because they work there.

    Since the UK is in theory collectively owned by all voting adults, importing more voting adults without the express permission of those already living there is not an acceptable thing for the government to do. Being a voting adult in the UK entitles access to various lavish benefits paid for by everyone. Importing more people from poor countries where these benefits are very attractive means the current population paying for the upkeep of the new population without their consent.

  99. Many statutes codify Common Law. That does not mean that the Common Law can be amended or annulled by changing the codifying statute, though I am sure our beloved leaders would like us to think so.

    I believe the requisite phrase is “citation please”. Statute law regularly amends or abolishes Common Law.

    FOTLs get this wrong. Regularly. That may be because their source is a barking anti-Semitic moron.

  100. Congratulations, Ironman, you have read but not understood a damned word. Probably because you are, demonstrably by everything you write, just plain fucking stupid.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.