Don’t get me wrong, for I hold no brief for poor tormented Prince Charles. He talks to his plants: he refers to nanomachines as “grey goo”: he supports the thesis of anthropogenic climate change…..I could go on. Superficially he is not really a mentally tough enough person to be a constitutional Head of State, where the prime libertarian responsibilities of such a man ought to be to take the side of the people, and rip down the enlarging police-apparatus being built behind his and our backs.
On this blog and elsewhere, I have been regularly got at by people who don’t think a British-style constitutional Monarchy is needed if we are to move towards a libertarian or minimal state – if that idea is not an oxymoron. But I think something like what we have got would be the best interim defence against violent reactionary leftist statist forces – and they WILL be violent, just watch – while we undertake the libertarianisation of public life in any society which is fortunate enough to have our services in this task.
This is probably why the “Royals” are coming increasingly under attack. What you have to do each day is see what the lefties are assaulting right now, and decide to do exactly the opposite of what they say.
David Davis
But not content with hauling Prince Harry over the coals (their phrase) “Give Racism the Red Card”, described as a “charity” (I bet it’s a state-funded quango in reality – in fact it’s the PR wing of the British Council! How could I have not guessed!) has a go at Charles: why? Because the affectionate pet-name for one of his oldest friends, a 58-year-old Indian property developer, near neighbour and fellow-Polo-player, is “sooty”.
Ah, I remember Sooty! I wonder, if Sooty (the Indian property magnate, not the teddy bear) has a wife? If she was called “Sweep” in private by Charles and Camilla, because she had long hair or floppy ears, would the News of the World investigate in the public interest, and would the (anti) British Council object? I think we ought to be told!
Here’s a googlesearch on “Give Racism The Red Card“.
We did the Harry thing a couple of days ago.
The left laments its lack of “big” or interesting blogs. (it has just launched “labourlist“…..really catchy title isn’t it…..same old dreary stuff – Tory cuts etc etc etc) This is a classic manifestation of why they’re aren’t many, and why reading what’s there is like chewing unsalted sawdust and rat-droppings – unlike Guido for example, or The Remittance Man. The left, and most illuminatingly the British left, who whine and lament the most, are all humourless totalitarian thought-controlling bastards and c***s; consequently, nobody wants to listen to their whingeings or read their dour drivel. Ordinary humans without dangerous leftist brain-disorders have all got better things to do. (This of course leaves the more midly-mentally-tormented of us, who hold quite opposite views to the fascist left, to blog about them, irrittaing them even more.)
Either this new series of attacks on the Princes is a publicity stunt by the left to get attention, or more sinisterly they really mean it and are gearing up to destroy even more Free Institutions.
Just go read this drivel, it’s soooooooooooo wonderfully replete with all the leftist clichés.
It is a wise and simple rule of thumb that if progressives are against something all prudent people should at the very least give it the benefit of the doubt and consider carefully the arguments for alternative points of view. If one hasn’t heard arguments in favour of whatever it is they are opposing, then one should make the effort to think for oneself to see if one can think of any oneself.
Progressives have rules of thumb too. One of these is that any institution that is not of their own creation must be maligned, attacked, subverted and eventually destroyed.
Progressives don’t need any further plan or objective in order to be against the Monarchy and for its complete destruction. Destroying tried, tested and time honoured institutions is what they do.
Accordingly, we should give the monarchy sympathetic consideration. For a start it is an impediment to their complete destruction of Britain, British culture, Christianity and natural human relationships. It is not intrinsically evil.
All enemies of the progressives should give the monarchy their active support.
Some libertarians are very hostile to the Monarchy. In their enthusiasm for perfection, they are shooting themselves in the foot. I would say to them that in this imperfect world they must remember that the monarchy is our enemies’ enemy.
I agree.
Unlike most libertarian blogs, I talk somewhat regularly about the British Monarchy. This is because its very form and function currently mirrors the limited-statism which the British __had__ , previously, accidentally succeeded in setting up for themselves – until what Otto calles “progressives” began to undermine and degrade this state of affairs.
If I was erecting a libertarian/minimalist state in Britain today, I think I’d want to keep the Monarchy – partly because it probably has majority support among normal British humans, and party because its largely invented but not-entirely-useless traditions associated with it, will be useful tank-traps to hinder or delay more attacks by “progressives”.
I shall have more to say about the Monarchy in due course.
Churchill captured the essence of the rule of thumb about anything the progressives are against in the well known quotation:-
“If Hitler invaded Hell, I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons.”