Deceiving Ourselves

  • Posted on the 13th August 2011

I suspect Colonel Gaddafi may have allowed himself a wry smile considering events of the past week.

Our boneheaded intervention in Libya, which we were told was to prevent violence and killing, was doomed to failure before it began. The enthusiastic approval of military intervention by our gullible MPs now appears even more ridiculous given our own inability to keep order on the streets of London, and prevent the deaths of innocent people across our country and Libya.

We try to throw our weight around on the international stage so our Prime Minister can pretend to be an ‘International Statesman’, and so we can continue to deceive ourselves into believing we remain a world power, and not face up to mounting economic and social problems at home.

But these foreign misadventures are not in our national interest or increasingly in our capability, as we dismantle what is left of our armed forces. Britain long ago ceased to be a major player on the world stage – militarily, economically and morally.

Our sovereignty and hard won freedoms have slowly been ceded by our politicians to the faceless bureaucrats of benevolent European integration. We are no longer a free nation, but a subservient state to a foreign and anti-democratic Empire.

Our economy lies in tatters, labouring under the weight of a bloated welfare state, crippled by government debt and sending millions of young adults to acquire meritless degrees at Universities in subjects that nobody wants.

Our society has been corrupted and atomised, with each passing generation having little in common with the next, and little sense of genuine community or belonging. Respect for others, property and authority have disintegrated after decades of state ‘entitlements’, weak justice and assuring youth that rights come without responsibility.

As we have receded from the public sphere and genuine democratic participation, the state has expanded to fill the gap, making it’s assault on our ancient liberties even easier than before. Thus, our liberties are no longer freedoms, but ‘rights’ given to us by the state – rights which can be amended or taken away should the state so please.

And the process continues. While deeply disturbing, the manner in which our Prime Minister and puppet Parliament righteously clamoured for the blocking of social and media websites during violent outbreaks was almost entirely predictable. Five months previously the same Prime Minister and same Parliament had condemned Gaddafi for doing much the same when attempting to quash the rebellion against his rule.

This is the automatic reaction of politicians who find it so much easier to invent new laws or increase the power of the state. Water cannons and rubber bullets won’t fix generations of neglect. The rot at the heart of British society won’t be undone with a few new laws, and the further encroachment of the state.

If we really want to solve the crisis then, then it will take decades to repair – as long, if not longer, than it took to undermine. But we won’t. Instead, we shall call for the seemingly quick solution, for the heads of the violent thugs rather than those that bred them in the first place. We shall call for the army (what’s left of it) to take to the streets, give the police greater powers and ultimately strengthen the state’s role and weaken ours.

An anti-mob shall arise, as unthinking and destructive as the street mobs they oppose, calling for the reduction of our liberties in order to ensure our safety. It is the rule of the mob, but of a different kind.

This is how liberty dies. Not through violence itself, but in the pursuit of ‘security’.

Killing With Kindness

  • Posted on the 31st July 2011

In the past couple of days, visitors and readers of ConservativeHome have debated whether the death penalty should be reintroduced in Britain.

Today, in a comment article on ConservativeHome, David T Breaker argued that the death penalty was wrong. In the comments, the Conservative MP for North Warwickshire and Bedworth, Dan Byles, agreed, saying that he believed ‘the power to take the lives of its citizens is too awesome a power to trust to the State’.

This remark on capital punishment is particularly interesting in light of the speech he made back in March, duly recorded by Hansard, in which Mr Byles made the following points:

I believe that the House is broadly united, with the possible exception of Mr Winnick, in believing that in the case of Libya, events had reached a stage where committing our military to enforcing the UN resolution is absolutely the right thing to do.

The spectre of Iraq should not prevent us from doing what we believe is right and is ultimately in our national interests…

It is with some regret that I will be voting for the motion, because committing military forces to action anywhere in the world is regrettable. It will lead to dead soldiers, if not British, then Libyan; we must not forget that whichever side wins, there are casualties on the other side.

What we understand by all this is that Mr Byles is perfectly in favour of the State using the ‘awesome power’ of taking life to kill Libyan soldiers and civilians, which is the logical and real consequence of his support for military action in Libya – but he is against the execution of convicted murderers, tried by a jury of their peers (with unanimous verdicts) under an open legal system, with a right to defence and fair trial.

Dan Byles MP is therefore prepared to protect Libyan civilians by dropping bombs on Gaddafi, but if innocent civilians are killed by mistake (and they have been and will be), it is deemed ‘regrettable’ but, in his eyes, acceptable. But he will not allow the hanging of British murderers for their crimes and to protect us.