A bit of a rant.

Posted on January 21, 2008
Filed Under Politics, Rants |

Good god Keith, that is the most appalling sentimental nonsense. It’s the kind of thing that George Bush would read when he goes off to bed with a biscuit at eight-thirty pm…

I think you may have missed the point Tom.

Let me explain the metaphor:

Bush and his cronies (and our government, don’t want them to feel left out) are the staff. They harp on about freedom and liberty when they are the ones most responsible for taking them away. They’ll be happy to euthanise her to protect their power and maintain control of a population they see as an economic asset.

They say that all the new security measures and procedures are being brought in in order to protect our freedoms, I say bullshit.

ID cards are simple a way to count, number, and control us like we were a herd of cattle. Like a supermarket monitors its stock levels or a factory the quantities of materials in their stockpiles. Internet censorship (which the linked article talks about) is merely a way to control the information that we get. Its not about ‘protecting the children’ at all. The list talked about in the linked article is not overseen or approved by any kind of democratic process, it is arbitrary and secret, meaning that the government (any government, not just the current one) can put sites it doesn’t like on it and they will be blocked by ISPs, no questions asked.

Children are not protected by measures like these, children are protected through living communities in which the individuals look out for each other. Communities where you know your neighbours and aren’t afraid of walking the streets at night. Neither do these things stop terrorists, there is no evidence to support such assertions. Terrorism is defeated by the simple act of not being terrified. Personally I refuse to change my life one iota to protect myself from terrorists, If I do then they win.

Religion is no longer the opiate of the masses, we now have reality TV, soundbites, and minority lobby groups with loud voices telling us what we should be concerned about. We are being fed a diet of fear and paranoia about nightmares that just don’t exist on the scale that we are led to believe. All for the sake of a passive, docile and compliant workforce. Nero gave his subjects bread and circuses, we get X-factor, Neighbours, and non-documentaries about the end of the universe. Hypnotised by pretty pictures and soothing noises we live our lives in the service of a machine whose interest in our happiness or well being only goes as far as making sure we keep the wheels greased.

We are a fragmented society, living in fear of those around us. The state cannot protect us from an enemy that does not exist. There are not paedophiles lurking malevolently outside every school, neither are there terrorists plotting in every mosque. The very idea of these things being true is ridiculous and yet we as a population swallow this charade and let the government walk all over our right to make our own decisions about things which are frankly none of their business. If the landlord of a pub wants to allow people to smoke on his premises that’s his business and the business of the smokers, anyone who doesn’t want to drink in a smokey pub is perfectly within their rights to go elsewhere.

The day is not long coming when you will be required to comply with a uniformed official stopping you in the street saying “Papers please,” or face arrest. Sound familiar?

The ‘freedom’ they promise us is hollow, they allow us to shift the blame for our mistakes and shortcomings to others, to society, their environment, drugs, or poverty. The people who say “something must be done” are insipid weak willed cowards who don’t want to risk doing something themselves in case they get the blame when they fuck up. Freedom is always a sham if the free are not responsible for the consequences of their actions. A heroine user dies of an overdose or gets shot robbing someone’s house? Well, in my opinion they had it coming. We are told that these people are not responsible, the drugs made them do it, their upbringing is to blame, society is at fault. I’m sorry but they made the choice to take those drugs in the first place, no-one ever has no choice. There is always a choice and you should stand or fall by the results of that choice. To deny this is to belittle everyone, to deny one person’s humanity denies the humanity of all and reduces us to nothing more than cattle

The amazing thing is that those in government don’t see that the easiest way for them to avoid taking the blame for mistakes made when meddling in the personal lives of its population is not to meddle in the first place. Let people make stupid decisions and don’t try and protect them from the results. The only limits on freedom should be the freedom of those around us.

Sorry about the rant, I agree that the piece was a bit too saccharine and schmaltzy. I will concede that point at least. But I see the world chaning around me every day, and not for the better. We are being lied to, herded, and our freedom destroyed and no-one seems to care. It makes me really angry.

Rate this:

2.5

Bookmark to:

Add 'A bit of a rant.' to Google Bookmarks

Comments

5 Responses to “A bit of a rant.”

Tom Donald (Who am I?) on January 21st, 2008 10:57 pm
I think this viewpoint could only come from the position of a well-fed person in a very safe society. These liberties that you claim as the normal state of mankind are utter luxury to the hungry and the desperate. We have traded the joys of utter self determination for the rich yields of a deeply interdependent society. Historically, that has meant a disciplined society (which you seem to want) which means a policed society (which you don’t seem to want).
“The only limits on freedom should be the freedom of those around us.” We all limit each other’s freedom just by sharing each other’s space. The question is not whether freedom should be limited, but how should we share the burden of each other’s presence so as to limit the pain?
And it seems to me that this society has considerably more “freedom” than it did thirty years ago. Things aren’t getting worse, they’re getting better. Here’s a good f’rinstance: the internet. Freedom of communication of thought, rendering totalitarianism almost impossible. Hurray! It’s good, isn’t it…
Rate this:

2.5
mandrill (Who am I?) on January 22nd, 2008 10:21 am
Thats as may be Tom, I hold this viewpoint purely because I have the comfort and time to think about it. But the liberties I talk about are not a luxury, they are a basic right of every human being on the planet. What you seem to be implying is that for people living in poverty in mud huts to be subject to the whims of brutal totalitarian regimes ,is ok, because they don’t know any better. Even the hungry and the desperate have choices, those choices are often restricted by their governments. If one field is not fertile enough to support a family, the sensible thing to do would be to plant somewhere else but unless the state allows people to move around freely this is impossible.

“We all limit each other’s freedom just by sharing each other’s space.” Quite right, this does not mean that the state should take any part in enforcing those limits. If I were the owner of a business, say a B&B, that did not want to allow homosexual couples to stay in my B&B then that is none of the state’s business. With any luck I would lose custom as a result and not be in business very long. I would have to live with the consequences of that decision, rather than resent the guests that the law says I have to accept.

Whatever happened to self discipline? Are you telling me that I am unable to control my own actions? That I am nothing more than an automaton, reacting in an instinctual animalistic way and require constant supervision to prevent me doing harm to others and myself? If thats the case then you insult me, yourself, and every other human being on the planet. We are all capable of self control, if you think that we’re not then you may as well have everyone sectioned right now. I’m not saying that there is not a need for some kind of policing, what is needed is a redefinition what constitutes a crime. If everything you want to do, say or think is illegal to some degree or another, even when it causes no harm to anyone else then something is drastically wrong; that seems to me to be where we’re heading.

You are a different kind of idealist to me Tom, For me the question is always whether freedom should be limited (N0, not by the state at least). Why should the presence of another human being be a burden? And why should the state have any say in how we shoulder that burden? It belittles human dignity to say that we cannot live with one another without state mandated supervision ready to rap us on the knuckles if we dare to offend our fellow man.

Freedom of communication of thought is a wonderful thing, but to be of any use it relies on the quality of those thoughts being high, rather than Facebook and MySpace pages filled with the trivia which the rest of the media leads us to believe is important. Totalitarianism is not impossible just because we have the internet, it just has to be more subtle and suffuse our our entire culture with its propaganda at a level that we just don’t notice.

The state (any state, the world over) should not have the right to use force to coerce me into living my life by their rules, that is the right of the individual. If someone wants to punch me in the face fro my opinions then they should be perfectly within their rights to do so, but I should also have the right to defend myself with equal force. I’ll not have some bureaucrat in a sinecure job telling me what I can and cannot say, read, watch, listen to, who I can associate with, who I can do business with, or what I can do with my life backed up by threat of violence, imprisonment, or impoverishment.

Our society is degenerating into a vapid mire of do gooders telling us how to live “For our own good,” because “they know best.” Well I’m sorry they can fuck off and mind their own business. I will decide how I live my life, and if that offends someone they can say so themselves and I will give their concerns due consideration. Only a coward does that through a proxy backed up by threats.
Rate this:

2.5
mandrill (Who am I?) on January 22nd, 2008 10:22 am
wow that was another long one, sorry but you did have to poke the hornet’s nest.
Rate this:

2.5
Tom Donald (Who am I?) on January 22nd, 2008 8:16 pm
I think you vastly exaggerate the size of the state. Government is one bully in the human playground, but not the dominant one. The dominant oppressor is personal and familial ideology, not government. That’s why I claim that our culture is much more free than it was, because of the ideas that people carry around with them, not because of any characteristics of government or state at either time.
And the organs of the state about which you moan. They’re paper tigers for the most part. Have you ever worked for the council? Or the NHS? Or the police? I have, and my experiences lead me to believe that if anyone tried for real totalitarianism in this country, they would be completely foiled by the utter uselessness of the bureaucracy that is the beating heart of any totalitarian state.
I think you are confusing Daily Mail world with the real world. Daily Mail world is a coherent and comprehensible place, where evil forces batter the decent brit. The real world is undocumented and inconceivable, and full of bitter men projecting their frustrations into… the Daily Mail. Don’t be fooled. It’s not the evil forces that shape our lives, it’s our living meat writhing in the contradictions of our socialisation.
Rate this:

2.5
mandrill (Who am I?) on January 25th, 2008 10:42 am
Paper tigers they may be but even paper can cut. The wounds may be smaller and less severe but get enough of them and you’ll still bleed to death.
Rate this:

2.5