You Are Stupid

You just can’t be trusted, can you? I mean, when people realise that something isn’t compulsory -even if it’s for their own good!- some of them just won’t do it. The law must be changed to force them to act in their own best interest, that’s what the law’s for!

This is the story on Comrade Beeb this morning. Apparently, since the advent of the road-legal quad bike, riders have realised they are not required to wear a helmet and -shock! horror!- some of them have chosen not to. Cue lengthy segment with free advert for a ‘quad bike safety centre’ (complete with riders riding slowly, in circles in the background wearing helmets and a very attractive, visibly upset young lady in a mini-dress leaving flowers at the scene where her brother would definitely have survived his head on collision with a Land Rover (!) if only he’d a helmet on. Oh, and don’t forget the obligatory Daft Lads Who Don’t Wear Helmets admitting they just don’t wear them because it “looks cool.” Powerful stuff.

So who is it that doesn’t trust YOU, Stupid Citizen, to make a rational decision about your own (nobody elses) safety, and wants to force you at gunpoint to make the correct choice? It’s our old friend: ‘Doctors.’ You know, the guys who used to get paid to fix you when you break down, got sick or had an accident but who have long since stopped regarding you as a customer and now regard you as a ‘drain’ on ‘their resouces’ (YOUR resources. YOU paid for them) and thus have a divine right to interfere in YOUR LIFE to ‘prevent poor health outcomes’ i.e. to stop YOUR money being diverted away from golf clubs and brandy.

You are stupid. You can’t be trusted to make the right choice. Listen to us, it’s for your own good. We are the State. You will be assimilated.



Oh, Dick. Oh!

One half of Dick Cleggerton was on BBC Breakfast this morning attempting to hype up their Great Repeal Bill and it’s associated website. All was going swimmingly until Bill Turnbull asked him:
“So if everybody said for example, ‘get out of Europe,’ the Government would have to do it, right?”
Dick’s answer? “No.”

So what exactly is the point? Apart from the fact that some of the public clearly don’t understand the concept of reducing regulation, so brainwashed are they by the steady drip-drip of increasing State interference (one respondent wanted to get rid of football!) the government have just flat-out admitted on national television they will ignore any suggestions they don’t approve of, so you can forget suggesting they repeal the firearms acts, the European Communities Act or the smoking ban. The concessions you might get included something about grey squirrels and assorted other unimportant things. Oh, and he managed to squeeze in that the Bill was important to “send a message” too.

Now where have we heard those words before?

Ignorant Cu ts

I despair sometimes, I really do.
I think yesterday’s Sun had something in it about ‘painful cuts’ to public spending and how awful it was going to have to be. I was (very uncharacteristically) waving the paper around at work remarking how it wasn’t going to be painful at all for me, and I wasn’t sure what the big deal was.

“Cuts to wages!” they said. “Not our wages,” I said. “Civil Servants, Public Sector workers. We work in the private sector,” I said. “Our wages have already been cut.”

“Cuts in pensions!” They cried. “Not OUR pensions,” I said. “Public Sector Workers Pensions. Besides which, the Brown Gorgon already fleeced OUR pensions.”

It just wasn’t sinking in. People -and these are otherwise intelligent people, some very so- just do not seem to grasp the concept that the money the government spends is their money that’s been taken away from them. They fully believe that it’s magic money that will be taken out of the economy by cuts in government spending. Even when I said that sacking all the civil servants and putting them on the dole would still be cheaper because you’re giving them less money for doing the same job (boom boom!) all I got was blank faces. Crazy.

What high-falutin’ libertarian types like the Samizdatistas would call the ‘meta-context’ is well and truly sewn up by the Keynesian left. Regular, credulous people the country up and down (and I know that this isn’t a scientific survey, but I bet you’d find the same story in tearooms everywhere) are totally bought into the notion that government spending is essential to the economy and the idea that the government and civil service are actually parasitic on the economy is totally alien to them.

What doesn’t help of course is supposedly highbrow programmes like BBC Breakfast (yes, I know) constantly pushing this line. Whether this is by design or just a symptom of the organisation being run by people who are also totally bought into the same idea I’ll leave for another time. This very morning they were discussing Cleggerton’s idea of following the Canadian model and both ‘sides’ of the ‘debate’ were worried that instead of a few hundred thousand people possibly being out of work (like in Canadia) we had several million public sector employees (the figure I think they quoted was 20% of the workforce) and cutting all their wages and/or jobs would be bad for the economy. Nobody saw fit to mention that 20% is an absurdly high figure to start with, nobody saw fit to mention that most of those employees are doing jobs that don’t really need doing (or are in fact completely undesirable for anybody to be doing full stop) and yet again nobody saw fit to mention that paying them JSA instead of £40,000 p.a. would be a hell of a lot cheaper anyway and most importantly nobody saw fit to mention that if they were not doing non-jobs at the other 80% of the populations expense they would be more likely to find work doing actual useful jobs, making products or providing services that other people were willing to pay for. And this from a programme that supposedly ‘well-informed’ people watch. Sheesh.

I feel completely despondent.

Fat, Sugar and Salt. Oh My!

I really should stop watching BBC Breakfast, I’m sure it sets me up for indigestion for the rest of the day.
This morning they are interviewing Dr. David A. Kessler, author of a book entitled “The End Of Overeating. His contention (and he may well be right) is that processed foods filled with fat, sugar and salt stimulate reward centres in our brains and act as some sorts of drug.
Initially, he says, the food industry discovered that processing foods and adding these ingredients increased shelf lives and allowed them to ship foods further, cheaper and safer. This is, surely A Good Thing. Those eeeevil food companies also, however, discovered the compulsive, obsessive effects of their foods and (and I quote) “[put] those foods on every street corner and made them available 24/7.”

Oh dear! Now I can’t walk down the street without being compelled to eat a double cheeseburger with three Mars Bars for dessert. Or maybe three double cheeseburgers… You don’t have to chew so much you see, so your brain makes you want MOOOORE. It’s “Adult baby food.” Except I won’t.

You see, I have this amazing super-power called ‘Self Control.’ I might be ‘bombarded’ with images of processed foods all day long and maybe they do have some sort of effect on my brainwaves (I’m currently not believing in Wh00psian Exceptionalism) but I’m still not going to eat three double cheeseburgers because I know it isn’t good for me. Don’t get me wrong, I do enjoy processed foods (and occasionally I do eat three double cheeseburgers for lunch) but I don’t eat them all the time. There’s no point in blaming advertising and availability for fat people gorging themselves on unhealthy foods, the fault lies in the fat people themselves, a fact that seems to have escaped the good doctor, who “has an empathy for people who can’t control their eating habits” since he did “all his research.”

Take it back to the drug-like effects. In the same way I might fancy a gram of whizz this morning and then a few fat doobies tonight to wind down again. I used to do it all the time, so my brain’s been affected. I don’t any more though, because I have Self Control. See how it works? If the brain is clever enough to control its urges with proper drugs (and there’s plenty of people who’ve even gotten themselves of the really hard drugs who can attest to that) then I’m sure it can manage to eat less cheeseburgers. We used to catch mammoths for tea and avoid sabre-tooths having us for tea, for Christ’s sake.

To be fair to the doctor, he wasn’t suggesting we ban anything, and the nub of his gist seemed to be that people need to change their eating habits. I still don’t agree. If you want to gorge yourself on litres and litres of Ice-Cream, it’s no business of mine. If you can’t control your urges then that’s your problem. Buy his book if you like.

Just don’t expect me to pay for it. I’ve already paid for the 20-minute advert this morning.

Waterloo Road

I don’t know if you watch the series Waterloo Road, but if you don’t then I’ll provide a quick recap. It’s a series on primary propaganda organisation the BBC about a comprehensive school populated by liberal lefty-type teachers and ‘troubled’ (ie normal) teenagers.
In the last series, the school was merged with another school, with a selection of new pupils and teachers. It’s quite similar to that series of Grange Hill, actually. In any case, one of the new teachers (played by that chap who used to be in tea-time hospital programming show Holby City ) is a strict disciplinarian, just the sort of teacher children so badly need these days, to teach them self-discipline and boundaries and that sort of thing. I knew he wouldn’t last!

It started off with him being strict with the children, starting up sporty teamwork clubs for the boys and generally clashing with his horrified comrades colleagues.
As the series has gone on, his character has been seen to lie to the woman that he was sleeping with about his marriage, pitch up at the headmistress’ house and threaten her with violence, practice nepotism with another woman he was sleeping with and generally behave in ways that, while unconnected with his abilities as a teacher would nonetheless get him in hot water in real life.
This deliberately furthers the agenda that wishy-washy lefty teachers are the be all and end all of teaching, despite the evidence to the contrary. There is also somethin more sinister going on. We are led to believe that teachers that believe in discipline and self-reliance (and this is the only such character in the programme) are somehow dangerous and dodgy.

Shut Up Liam (Updated)

Our “Chief Medical Officer” is now advising us not to allow our children to drink at all under the age of 15, and only “once a week and under supervision” from 16 to 18. Oh, and we musn’t drink too much in front of them, either.
The BBC breakfast team arranged a typically lively debate, with a balanced panel including some frump from (fake?) charity DrinkAware and an A&E doctor.
Actually it was more balanced than usual, the A&E doctor didn’t agree at all, taking Bill Turnbull’s anecdotal point that when people get to university age the ones who had never touched a drop that went mental on booze. Susannah also pulled the frump up on her ridiculous analogy that you “wouldn.t put your children under a car to teach them about road safety, would you!!!”
“We’re not teaching children that getting run over is a pleasurable experience though, are we?”
Well done, another attempt to denormalise drink by the Righteous but this time even the shills at the BBC were not playing ball. I think this version of the game is up, although I’m sure we’ll have new balls in the new year.

Update: I knew it was too good to last, by the 8am headlines they were reading from autocue and showing a completely one-sided segment towing the government line. They didn’t show any parts of the interview although an edited version may have been shown after I left the house. Oh, and it’s Sian this morning, not Susannah.

Sometimes I wonder if I’ve fallen through the tv screen in my sleep and woken up in The Running Man.

More Subtle Propaganda In Holby City

Tonight’s episode featured a young woman running her own wedding planning business who, as people do, carried on working from her hospital bed, laptop and mobile phone permanently glued to her hands. Quite right too, as long as she was conscious, people who run their own businesses don’t get sick pay, and her clients needed servicing. A lot of hard work and dedication goes into running your own business, that’s why I don’t do it. Members of my family have, and I worked for them for a while so I’ve seen how difficult it can be.

The subtle subtext screamed (subtly) “difficult patient.” Visiting hours consisted of models in wedding dresses and she was on her phone and working via laptop from her hospital bed despite the funny looks she was getting from both doctors and nurses, which she gaily ignored.

Eventually of course (she had some sort of heart condition I think) she collapsed, whilst on the phone, looking at models.

So what does this suggest? The BBC has long been using it’s dramas to push the establishment agenda, and Holby City is a prime vehicle for this. We know already that small business owners don’t fit, that’s why they are hampered with excessive regulation and tax regimes. It doesn’t fit in with the brave new corporatist world order.

So are they, like smokers, drinkers and fat buggers next to be de-normalized, as they “cost the NHS money?” Despite the lions share of the fruits of their labours going to FUND the state and it’s apparatus?


Hey, like Eric Cartman, “I’m just asking questions here.”