Last Post (possibly)

Well, I've not had much time to update this blog for some time - I've a half finished redesign, and plenty of other changes floating around my computer which I'm realistically never going to complete. And during 2011 that's only going to get worse as I'm moving to North Yorkshire, so living out of a hotel initially, followed by house-hunting and settling in is going to take up at least 6 months of next year...

I'm not giving up blogging permanently, but certainly will be for the whole of 2011, and I am retiring Obsidian as I'm evaluating a few changes in my life. Firstly I'm going to seriously start investigating setting up a political party and placing out feelers across various parts of the country, and I can't do that and be a keyboard warrior at the same time, and as we saw with the DK/Brillo debacle if you manage to get yourself noticed politically, then having a swearblog isn't going to help you out any.

Secondly, there are a few things I'd like to do before I get married and start a family. Again, if I'm spending my days frothing in outrage on the internet, that's time I'm not spending doing something more personally useful.

Thirdly, I've been enjoying share dealing. Started 6 months ago, and I'm 60% up - had I not inadvisedly bought into Barclays, and instead invested further funds in Xtract then I would actually be around 500% up. Not bad for a beginner, and the good people at Cityunslicker have my gratitude for posting helpful information which I have used as a guide. I see this as a way to build up funding for my life and retirement plans, again blogging will distract me from that, and when I start playing with tens of thousands as opposed to hundreds of pounds, distractions would be a bad thing.

So I'd to thank everyone who has contributed to comments, and to those who actually inspired to start a blog and to wish one and all a healthy, happy and prosperous 2011.

FIFA, Russia and Vengeance

Hands up who was terribly surprised we didn't get the World Cup? Has not years of Eurovision not taught you yet that the world generally doesn't like us? That such decisions are made by corrupt political blocs who don't play by the Queensbury Rules?

There is a simple way to stick it to the fuckers, and that is doing our own competition before or after it. Show we can host such an event, show we can handle the hooligan element and show that you don't need FIFA. I'm quite sure a few other nations have taken note of what occurred and wouldn't be averse to joining in.

2017 would represent the 65th year of the current Queens reign, where she will have eclipsed even Queen Victoria's monarchal longevity and that's the sort of thing a nation uses as an excuse to have a celebration. So why not invite the Home Nations, the remainder of the Commonwealth and some select other nations to take place in a tournament? Have some charitable element to it, so FIFA would be seen to be churlish to intervene, get ahold of some sponsorship and off we go.

It could be done, it would 'bring football home' and would possibly be the start of a new competition that could be used to succeed the World Cup.

The Fall of the Libertarian Blogosphere and the Libertarian Idea?

We've lost/sort-of-lost several excellent libertarian bloggers of late - Obo, Constantly Furious, Anna Racoon and Mr Eugenides have all gone (although Obo does occasionally raise himself from the dead), and the Devil himself is considering packing it in.

I can understand why, after all the removal of the cancer that was Labour came as a short lived blessed relief when the coalition proved itself to be almost as cunty and simply a different, slightly less virulent form of cancer.

And therein lies a problem I've mused about - the nature of UK politics - in England at least - is it's two-party problem. We want Labour gone, which means we'll get the Tories, which is always going to be a bitter disappointment to those of us who regard them as a lesser of two evils. It's still an evil we have to live under, and one that propagates the increasing power of the state, albeit at a slower pace than Labour.

And that's going to be the way it is until we get rid of First Past the Post elections. I've generally been against Proportional Representation, but it seems to me the only current possible way of sticking a foot in the electoral door, and perhaps my dislike of it comes from the worry of the new rather than anything really rational. After all the main claims against are it would make government more dysfunctional (not a bad thing right now) and it would sever the constituency link (as opposed to centrally-made decisions, parachuted candidates into safe seats and earning three times the average wage which must keep that link awful strong.)

In addition, whilst I support the LPUK's aims (in the Oldham by-election I'll finally have someone to vote for with a clear conscience) it's not suitable for the current social make-up of the UK and hence is doing a fine job of pissing in the wind and getting precisely nowhere in the larger picture.

Freedom is a concept, and one that is difficult to sell to people being kept in gilded cages - as Pink Floyd sang did you exchange, a walk-on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? And the answer for much of the UK is yes. Tell people who do not feel affected by the state spying on them that you'll stop the spying in exchange for giving them less redistributed money, and all they'll see is you promising to take their cash away for nothing. For a not inconsiderable chunk of the UK the LPUK manifesto reads "vote for us so we can kick you repeatedly in the genital area with big spikey boots", and so - unsurprisingly - they're more likely to vote for Jedward than the LPUK.

We need another option, a party that broadly tends towards libertarian, but without going the whole hog. If Statism is A and Libertarianism is Z, then the UK is hovering around F, and tottering backwards, whilst the LPUK wants to take the nation as a whole to V when we really need to just move forward before even considering tackling the second half of that particular alphabet.

People want lower taxes and better security, they want to spend more and feel safer. Offer them those in exchange for more freedoms and they'll take notice, and that means holding your nose whilst doing the occasional thing against your ideology - taking the occasional step back in order to give yourself the leverage to move two steps forward. It's all good and well saying the ends never justify the means, but when you're sat in a cell for making a drunken and ill-thought out comment on Twitter it probably doesn't feel as meaningful as it did when you were preaching it from your chair (Pink Floyd and Who lyrics today folks!) the night before.

Know thy enemy. And it's the inertia of the British public, the ones who'll more readily vote for X Factor than being free, that is the barrier Libertarian ideology must cross, and it never will do whilst it tackles said barrier by looking at it grumpily rather than finding the necessary tools to bring it down.

Compare and Contrast

Try killing one of us, get 5 years.
Try killing one of them, get life.

Justice is blind? Yeah, right.

The Prisoners Voting Thing

I thought I'd be outraged by the decision to give prisoners voting rights, but really I'm not.

Can anyone explain to me why people like Sylvia Hardy, Donald Allison or Nick Hogan ought to be denied their democratic right to vote when we allow Andrew Griffin, Nathan Marshall and Jack Bolton to retain theirs?

As Gadget points out, on daily basis utter scum are passed through the revolving doors of the justice system. These get to retain their right to vote despite being found guilty of some pretty nasty crimes.

So no, this doesn't outrage me. When we're putting real villains behind bars, not people who have offended the state, my opinion shall change. But right now, given the asinine justice system, let them all vote because there an awful lot of people not in prison who ought to be and vice versa, so stopping prisoners from voting is no longer a reasonable punishment, but an arbitrary line which no longer makes any sense.

Fix the justice system first, then we can discuss if it's reasonable to deny prisoners the vote.

The Things That Happen in Toilets

Last night I was rather fortunate there wasn't any sniffer dogs at the pub I was drinking in.

Having a number 2, two lads entered the cubicle next to me and proceeded to deal in a bit of coke and pills and I had visions of a bust leading to me getting patted down on the street outside, underwear round my ankles and bog roll trailing in the breeze...

And today the Oldham Chron revels in the imprisoning of a drugs gang. Not that much of a victory if the locals are still dealing in blow in the shitters of a Wetherspoons is it?

Mind you, you could tell it was Halloween - the local totty had less make up on than usual.

That Housing/Social Cleansing Pseudorage

I can't help but feel some of the 'oh noes, the unemployed only be given £400 a week to spend on housing' may involve some suspicion that in the pricey areas where the unemployed/unemployable are currently living, crime will decrease as they depart.

Not saying that all of them are criminals, it will likely be a minority (as in 'small number' not 'ethnic origin'), and their departure will mean they'll have a whole new place to shit where they eat.

I also think the government has missed an opportunity here - at a time when the public sector is facing the same pain as private sector, this was something of an opportunity to mitigate union bitching and moaning whilst at the same time ensuring no one could point fingers at the policy without sounding a bit mental. Had they set aside some of the savings to be made from this to help public sector workers afford places in London.

The public have little tolerance for public sector groups whinging about how hard it all is as it is, looking generous shifts the ground underneath the unions that bit more leaving them in a difficult position.

Politics is a lot about making moves in order to wrongfoot your opponent, especially when facing up to having to do some things the public may not like. Do your changes, but ensure they're done in such a manner that your detractors can only paint themselves into corners fighting them.

And in coalitions those detractors may also include your partners...

Gideon and Forehead don't seem to have picked that up properly yet. But then modern politics is more about media massaging than tactical moves, so why fight your enemy with brains when you can just leak information? From The Prince to The Pillocks.