Category Archives: UK Libertarian Party

Jumping ship.

Posted on by
6

Well folks, that looks like it is that.

The Comms Director, Rantin’ Rab, Dick Puddlecote and no doubt many others are reporting the demise of LPUK. According to the official site, it ain’t so. Yet. But let’s face it, it is only the ventilator which is keeping the party alive, why delay the inevitable? Just pull the plug.

It was a noble experiment, but unfortunately it has been undone by inaction, a few swivel eyed loons and what appears to be a con-man or two.

Soooooooo, what now?

I’m with Dick Puddlecote. There are those who counsel a sort of political isolationism, and I understand where they are coming from what with the coalition, the continuing horror show that is the Labour party, the self-important faux-presidential style of Salmond, Cast Iron Dave actually being papier-mache, the Lib-Dems self destructing in an even more spectacular style than LPUK and the general slavish devotion to the EU (this is the biggest issue we have in my opinion), I find it hard to hold much faith in the political parties.

That being said, I feel that I believe in something strongly enough, and I do, that I should do what I can to promote and bring about that change. As a result, I will be joining UKIP.

I have concerns; despite the party’s claim to be Libertarian, I’m not entirely convinced. The whole ban the burqa thing still leaves a bad taste in my mouth. Dictating what someone may or may not wear is decidedly anti-libertarian on pretty much every level you care to consider.

However, I feel it is preferable to be a Libertarian in a Libertarian faction in a party with designs on Libertarianism and have the opportunity to expand the ethos within an established party, than it is to be part of a wholly Libertarian yet dysfunctional, incredible and deeply flawed party.

I’m disappointed, but times of upheaval can result in opportunities not previously identified.

My membership will be taken up with UKIP within the hour. The ironic thing being that all the time I’ve been a Libertarian party member, I’ve voted either UKIP or spoiled my paper if they weren’t on offer (with the exception of Dan Hannan). I never had the opportunity to back a Libertarian Party candidate.

Where do they go from here?

Posted on by
3

I was expecting the LibDems to get a shoeing, but I wasn’t expecting them to be taken out the back and kicked to within an inch of their lives. I find I’m asking myself the question where do the LibDems go from here? This is a disaster of such magnitude for the party that it is difficult to know where to begin.

Clegg is done, of that there can be no doubt, he had his five minutes in the sun during the TV debates, but it soon clouded over. Chris Huhne has run the most appalling campaign for the yes vote, more of which in a moment, Vince Cable shot his bolt with his quite remarkable declaration of war on Murdoch. Who on earth is capable of stepping up to replace Clegg when the inevitable happens?

The LibDems have conjured up a perfect storm and make no mistake, it is all their own fault, no-one has stabbed themselves in the back here, they’ve committed ritual suicide infront of an entire nation. They’ve pulled off a master stroke by being able to alienate their own core support and the support of the non-member voters – they have utterly destroyed their powerbase which was always at the grass roots level.

I think most people who voted LibDem did so because of what they were not, rather than what they were. The most important thing they were not was either of the other two. Then the coalition came and the terrible truth dawned on the public; the LibDems were as grasping, power hungry, unprincipled and opportunistic as Labour and the Conservatives ever were. I said it at the time, the moment they entered into that coalition they had loaded the gun and pressed it to their own temple.

Now they are stuck. They daren’t pull out as the Tories would most likely go to the polls, and their destruction would be complete. They have no cards to play, they are completely reliant on their Tory masters for their oxygen, from where I’m sitting it isn’t the LibDem MPs keeping a coalition government breathing, it is a Tory party with the power of life and death over their junior, subordinate partners keeping the party breathing. I wonder how long it will be before the Tories start kidding on that they’ll pull the plug?

Most of the non-members who voted LibDem did so because they couldn’t stomach the other two, and they’ve now found that they’ve got exactly what they didn’t want.

As for the members, the crushing defeat for the yes campaign is a slap in the face which must sting as much as the results in the locals, Scottish and Welsh polls. The LibDems have been banging on forever about PR, it is the thing their members seemed to desire most, once you factor in the understanding that they’d never get a majority under FPTP in a million years. That was the single biggest thing the LibDems had to bargain with, what their team settled for was the palest of facsimilies that very few people would have backed, it was a complete betrayal of their membership and showed that Clegg and pals would turn their back on their members in an instant for a go on the levers of power. That go on the levers, which cost the goodwill of the membership and the floating voters, has lasted not even a year from the announcement of coalition.

It is a collapse of stunning proportions.

So who are the winners here? Obviously in Scotland it is the SNP, although if they hold a referendum on independence, which they might, at that referendum is defeated, which it will be, one can only ask what the SNP are for, other than not being Labour?

South of the border Labour have made gains, but to be fair they couldn’t have lost any more. The votes and seats they’ve picked up are the least Miliband could have wanted, and the collapse in Scotland shows in England that it is a parade of people from red to blue, blue to red, and so forth. People are voting against what they don’t want, rather than what they do, ironically PR could go some way to solving this, but the LibDems caved in. Cheers, Nick.

No, Labour are no winners here.

A couple of months ago I commented that the LibDems were done, and also pointed out that the BBC were at pains not to tell us who the winners were in that by-election. Over the last couple of days we’ve heard nothing from them at all. They certainly weren’t standing in my ward, I don’t think they put many candidates up at the local level, although they did have candidates on the regional lists in Jockland.

Who? UKIP, that’s who.

This a party that declares itself to be libertarian. Not libertarian enough to satisfy me, but a damn sight more libertarian than any of the other established parties. They are very attractive to frustrated EUro-sceptic Tories, desptie their proclaimed libertariansim, and I’m wondering if the libby tag might prove appealing to the liberal side of the LibDems, despite the obvious anti-EU bias contrasting with the slavish pro-EU stance of the LibDems. But that’s just the members.

The public, the floating voters, those who have been using the LibDems as an effective ‘none of the above’ or ‘screw the reds and the blues’ vote will now put the LibDems squarely on the same ground as the other two. So when election time comes around again, whether it is the Euros or an early general, who will the floaters be looking at thinking ‘I don’t want to vote for those three, but who have I heard of?’

I know as the days tick by since the Anna Raccoon – Andrew Withers affair, it’s now been almost a month without any word from the investigation, that I find myself looking at UKIP with increased warmth, better to be a libertarian component of a functioning party than an exclusively libertarian party which does not function.

UKIP, (and probably the Greens who I can see harvesting a good portion of the Social Democrat side of the LibDems) are probably sitting down feeling quite pleased this evening.

Well, that’s that then.

Posted on by
6

The more eagle eyed amongst you may have noticed that all references to the Libertarian Party have been removed from the blogroll and little clicky bits. Why?

Here’s why.

I’ve only met Anna in passing the once, but she’s had to put up with a whole barrow load of shit. I trust her more than many people for one simple reason; she never asks for anything.

Draw your own conclusions.

Not the worst.

Posted on by
Reply

Come and eat at Wolfers’ Steak and Seafood Restaurant. We’re not the worst eatery in town, we will cook your food the way we think you should have it, not the way you want it, and only some of our customers have gone home with food poisoning. No, we don’t give refunds.

If you saw that as an advert for a restaurant in the local paper, you’d probably take your signficant other to another place in town for that intimate meal, wouldn’t you?

And yet this week we’ve seen the main parties engaging in advertising just like that. Labour are up in arms because Cameron’s communication pixie may or may not have known about phone calls being hacked whilst he was editor of the NOTW.

This is the sort of thing those nasty Tories get up to, they point out, completely ignoring the fact that they wanted access to everyone’s calls, texts, emails and browser history. 

Real questions must be asked about Cameron’s judgement in employing this man.

The LibDems have been furious, furious at the actions of Phil ‘Custard pie’ Woolarse who has now found himself shunted into the gravy train sidings, if not removed from the line completely. Why, I find myself asking, did they not suspend him from the party as soon as the story broke? If I were accused of an illegal act at work, I’d be suspended from the get go, not once the judicial system had had its say. Of course like the other disgraced Labour (former) MPs, he stamping his feet and whining, he’ll fight it every inch of the way. The message is the same, they don’t contest that what they did was wrong, they just believe that because they are who they are, they should escape any punishment for their acts. These people are important, dammit.

Serious questions must be asked about Miliband’s judgement in appointing this man as shadow immigration minister whilst all this was going on.

But of course, the Lib Dems have form in this area. As Guido pointed out in 2006, Simon Hughes, who was so visible in the brooding tutting and shaking of head stakes when the verdict was announced during the week, is not beyond sticking the boot in when the referee’s attention lies elsewhere when he feels like it as well.

The message from the big three? Vote for us, not because we’ve anything to say or offer, but because we’re not as bad as the others.

If only there was a party where you could vote for a candidate who has never been involved in an expenses fiddle, has never twatted some bloke at a karaoke evening, has never told lies about an opponent, has never made snide insinuations about their sexuality, or never hacked into someone’s answerphone.

Oh look, there is. There is a party that will give you something to vote for, rather than pointing out a bogeyman to vote against. And if you’re lucky enough to be one of Phil Woolas’ ex-constituents, you’ll be able to vote for them soon.

The One That Is Looking Through The Cracks. . .

Posted on by
Reply

The usual preface when I start writing about finance: I am no economist. It is highly likely I’ve misunderstood some painfully dull yet hugely important item of detail in this little bunfight. If that is so, then I apologise.

Anyhow, a couple of interesting articles yesterday and today in the Torygraph.

The first details Greece’s efforts to deal with their profligacy of the last decade, and could easily be held up as a mirror to what is going on here. The second is about an attempt by some German academics to stop a shed load of their money heading east to prop up this land of retirement at 61 with a national pension pegged at 95% of earnings.

The first article raises an interesting conundrum:

One option would be to follow the example of Britain, which managed to erode much of its debt by allowing the pound to fall by a quarter. If the powers-that-be in Frankfurt were persuaded to allow the entire euro to fall enough, thus driving up inflation in Germany, they could avoid both Greek default and the break-up of the currency. This would right the balance between the two countries (in Germany prices are too low, in Greece they are too high, and producers too uncompetitive). The problem, again, is the scale: the euro would have to more than halve in value and Germans would have to accept inflation of around 14 per cent for five years to make the adjustment. Not something politically feasible given the country’s history of hyperinflation.

A point occurs to me, aren’t there about two dozen other countries using the Euro beyond Greece and Germany? What do they think about this idea of allowing the value of the currency to fall by up to 50%?

And here is the problem with the EU in general and the Euro in particular, what might suit urbanised and industrial northern Europe is certainly not what is wanted in rural agrarian southern Europe.

What if these German professors manage to get the plug pulled on the Greeks? What if the Portuguese who also seem to be teetering on the brink finally slip into the abyss? What then? The economic weaknesses of two small peripheral economies could drag down the economies in Italy, France, Netherlands and Germany. Millions upon millions of people with savings and pensions wiped out, because of the inefficiencies, and certainly in the case of the Greeks, corruption of one constituent part of the grand project.

Many would argue that is a good case in support of centralised cross-continental economic policy, but heaven knows it is hard enough to deal with the geo-financial inequalities in the UK, let alone those spread over a whole continent.

I can only imagine what the fallout of the collapse of the Euro would be. One thing is for certain, it would be huge blow to the EU project, for a number of reasons. Firstly, the empire builders are determined to create a single pan-continental nation in their own image, we have a flag, an anthem (of sorts), a parliament (of sorts), a President (supposedly) and a currency. If the currency were to wink out of existence then it would make it very hard to continue to persuade people that a single nation is possible and sustainable.

Secondly, such a collapse would most likely lead to a number of the current member states questioning why they are in the project. The public of France, Germany and Italy are quite rightly going to ask why their financial wellbeing has been wiped out by this country that has brought nothing to the party. Unlike in the UK where we just mumble and write letters to The Mail (and blogs), the French and the Italians especially would be out on the streets, demanding change and bringing their countries to a grinding halt until they get the changes they want. The politicians would have no option but to give in. The smaller, less economically secure nations are likely to look at the big players and wonder what the point is if they don’t come to their aid, rather than looking out for themselves.

Those countries not in the Eurozone are well out of it, as it is possible we could be spared the worst, should the worst happen.

One thing is beyond doubt, empires always fall. They always have, they always will. It is only human arrogance and hubris which declares thousand year reichs and the like. They all fall. Whether it is because the empire crumbles because the military muscle isn’t there to keep the regions in line or defended (Romans, Soviet Union) or because it is politically and/or financially impossible to keep it running (British, Soviet Union), they all fall. The EU will be no different, and in my opinion will come to an end sooner rather than later. One can’t help the feeling that critical mass was reached some time ago and that the chain reaction is now well in motion, the result of that is certain.

POST SCRIPT

I’ll take this opportunity to add my voice to the myriad of those expressing their sadness at the revision of the Devil’s Kitchen. I’m not surprised that Brillo took the tack he did, it’s par for the course when a small party gets shoved into the spotlight, it’s normally little more than a freak show where the worldly wise can roll their eyes at the nutter.

The fact that Chris was attacked over his blog, rather than his policy I think speaks volumes about the latter rather than the former. In an election where no-one knows who they want to win, but everyone wants them all to lose, I feel it is important to take the opportunity now to show you are really, properly, different to everyone else. DK’s blog was a fine outlet for that, and it was reading him and Leg-Iron that motivated me to do this blogging lark for myself.

My advice, for what it is worth, should you ever read this Chris, is dare to be different. Show how angry we are. Show we’re not afraid to use the occasional naughty word. Show that we attack people and policy because it is the right thing to do, not the expected thing to do. Attack without mercy and without fear of reprisal. Show that people can look as long and as hard at us as they wish, for we believe in what we say, we do not say what we think people wish to believe.

Polarise opinion, stand out. If people do not agree with us, then that’s fine. The trick is to persuade more people to agree with us than disagree. If we can’t, well, that’s democracy. I’d hate for us and for you to become conformist.

The One That Wants You To Stop Watching "Celebrity" Big Brother. . .

Posted on by
Reply

. . . for just thirty seconds and read this.

My friends,

We are broke. Our country—whatever it may once have been—is now laden with debt. And this isn’t “the government’s debt”: it is our debt.

The government has no money but what it takes—what it extorts—from us.

We have gone beyond consensus politics: if a man were to come to your door, with a gun, and demand half of everything that you earned—on pain of severe punishment, on pain of the total ruination of your life—would you not protest?

For a moment, lay aside those dutiful thoughts of those starving millions beyond your gate, and think, instead, of those within your own household—within your own family: would you not rather protect them first?

Of course you would: they are your kith and kin and you would expect—would you not?—that everyone, like you, would defend theirs against you were you the one holding the gun.

The government has now utterly removed from you the means of protecting yourself and your family against the man with the gun: indeed, you dare not defend yourself because you fear that it is you, not the mugger, who would end up in the dock.

For the government is the man with the gun, demanding tithes from you: the government is here, at your door. But not randomly.

No.

The government has gone out and bought itself nice things—plasma TVs, second homes, duckhouses, moats. And jobs, and votes. All of those things that you could not afford—because it has been here before: at your door, with a gun.

Five years ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those children who were not yours. You paid, because you had no option.

Four years ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those unhealthy who were not yours. You paid, because you had no option.

Three years ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those uneducated who were not yours. You paid, because you had no option.

Two years ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those feckless bankers who were not yours. You paid, because you had no option.

One year ago, it was here—threatening you with prison if you did not pay up—for the sake of all of those MPs who had no duck-houses or second homes or moats. You paid, because you had no option.

And now the government has spent everything that you had to give, and more, on its pet projects—on buying its second homes, on buying its duckhouses, on buying its votes—and none of it benefited you and yours. Not even by one iota.

The government didn’t care that you couldn’t afford to give any more: it didn’t care that you had no money.

The government didn’t care that you had lost your job: the government didn’t care that all of those thousands of pounds it took in National Insurance payments translated into a few hundred when you were in need.

And now, when you are getting back on your feet—back in a job that is not as good as the one the government destroyed, back struggling to look after your family on the pittance you are paid, back paying off your debts—the government, too, is back: it’s back with the gun.

The government is back—demanding half of what you broke your back to earn—because it has more grand schemes, more votes to buy, more trinkets to deliver to its favoured ones.

Will you so willingly hand over the sweat of your brow? Will you so willingly condemn you and yours to penury? Will you capitulate again?

Or will you fight?

Join us—and help us to stop the extortion.

Join us—and understand that providing for you and yours is not a sin.

Join us—and realise that a society that pulls together is a society that stays together.

Join us—and help us fight for a future in which people help each other voluntarily, because it is right and fitting to do so.

Join us—and help to build a future in which men, women and children take back their work, their birthrights, their dignity and their compassion from a government that cares nothing for you.

Join us.

Because—whether the government is Tory, Labour or LibDem—soon you will have nothing left to lose.

Right go back to watching Wotsername from that TV show, and Him from that boy band eating some toast.

The One That Is Reflecting. . .

Posted on by
Reply

As I posted earlier, not a great result. However all is not lost, and it would appear from this entry on the LPUK blog that we have picked up a ready-elected friend on a council.

I posted the following in the comments section, and reproduce it here as I was going to blog on this anyway, and don’t see the point in writing it twice.

Twas always going to be a defeat, although I’m not going to pretend that 0.10% of the share doesn’t sting a little.

However, at leat we had a crack and at least Tom had the cajones to stand up and do it. A few parties of similar size to us didn’t give it a go.

Was Tom’s age a factor? I’m afraid to say it probably was. It shouldn’t have been, but this is politics. I wasn’t exposed to any of the campaigning, but had I been up against us, the first thing I’d have done when asked about our policies would have been to gone, ‘Libertarians? What, the 18 year old?’ Harsh, but that’s the way it works.

One of our greatest strengths; being untainted by the political class, is identitcal to one of our weaknesses, it means we have little experience in running an election campaign. It is only a lesson which can be learned with experience.

The news about a councillor resigning to join us is a very encouraging one, and perhaps give us an indicator of a strategy we should employ. (I’m assuming he’s a councillor formerly with the Lib Dems rather than a former councillor who is leaving the Lib Dems – big difference).

I believe town, city and borough councils are the way to go early on, get good people good names on their own local streets. I would swap 1 MP for 10 Councillors in a heartbeat, as one councillor really can make a difference especially in a close NOC council, a councillor really can be accessible and really can generate a good rep for a party which would then be recognisable on a parliamentary ballot paper.

At the risk of labouring the point, I really do believe that the local level is the most important starting point, a good solid local level base is the foundation that a good MP is built upon. A good councillor will feed into the local MP so s/he really knows what is going on (that is of course on the understanding that a good councillor will actually give a shit what is going on on his/her patch) in their constituency. Strong, local and accountable representation is the best way to emasculate that palace of piggies sat on the Thames.