Timmy elsewhereSeptember 16, 2014 Tim WorstallTimmy Elsewhere8 CommentsAt the ASI. Owen Jones, democracy and the rule of law. previousOn the subject of John OlivernextTimmy elsewhere 8 thoughts on “Timmy elsewhere” Mr Ecks September 16, 2014 at 12:41 pm Democracy is in every way inferior to freedom. As for the rule of law–which law?. Simple Universals–do not attack/ do not steal/honour the contracts you have agreed to. Absolutely. The rest?. Must wear a seatbelt/can’t smoke in a pub–etc, etc, ad nauseum–they can shove the rule of those as well. Ironman September 16, 2014 at 12:48 pm Owen Jones – Ritchie shows all the same traits – believes in democracy as his principe-of-choice when it can be used in support of whatever it is he wants. Something like “how can you say no when so many of us want it”. If, by way of contrast, a majority wants what he doesn’t (the large majority that didn’t like gay pople in 1985 for example) then it becomes mob rule, to be resisted. In short Owen believes in himself and in getting his way. Ethics: the study of getting what I want. Dongguan John September 16, 2014 at 1:00 pm When someone starts talking about a “democratic People’s” state then you know they’re a wrong ‘un. Rob September 16, 2014 at 1:57 pm Why do all the “Tribunes of the People” view “the people” as a mob? Surreptitious Evil September 16, 2014 at 2:49 pm They’ve got to get _something_ right? Van_Patten September 16, 2014 at 8:14 pm Ironman Summed it up perfectly – these two clowns are birds of a feather. Only in favour of majority rule in so far as it further their beliefs – hypocritical, profoundly historically ignorant and totally intolerant. Noticeable that they are two of only four people to block me on Twitter – most other users, however much we disagree will normally agree to beg to differ. They are also the two users who use the term ‘troll’ most liberally, basically as shorthand for ‘I disagree with you but can’t actually out argue anything you say’ lazystudent September 17, 2014 at 1:20 am This point about holding government to their contracts reminded me about the arguments over the subsidies and guaranteed payments for electricity generated by wind and solar that the last Labour government put in place. And when the current government tried to change them, there was a great uproar from the usual quarters about the government trying to renege on contracts. I wonder if there’s anywhere on the internet we can find an example of the same groups and individuals arguing the government should be held to the contracts it has signed for reneweable energy feed-in tarrifs, and shouldn’t be held to the contracts they sign under the TTIP? Squander Two September 18, 2014 at 9:31 am Tim, I have a question. I’m with you on the contracts side of the TTIP, but it does seem to be covering a bit more than that as well. Did the Australian Government sign a contract never to ban branding on cigarette packaging? And did the Egyptian Government sign a contract never to raise the minimum wage? If not, what is the basis of those two cases under the TTIP? Thanks. Leave a Reply Cancel replyYour email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Website Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.