Liberty Alone

Because that’s what some seem to think.

I get the impression that many LibDems think we should vote for Ken Livingstone so we can keep Boris, and by extension, the Tories out of power.

If I was in politics to keep the Tories out of power I’d have joined the Labour Party. That is not my aim however, my aim to to promote liberalism and freedom for the individual. The party I judge to be best positioned to work towards this is the Liberal Democrats.

Frankly, I find the Tories, in general, slightly less odious than the current Labour Party, although I’ll grant you that in some areas the Tories are worse (in my home town they’re both equally despicable and I couldn’t vote for either) and they leave a massive amount to be desired.
True, there are the old Tory snobs and a fair smattering of idiots, but at least their snobbery and idiocy is out there for all to see. The Labour party contains its fair share of such people, but they hide behind being ‘progressive’ and ‘left wing’ which supposedly makes it all okay.

When it comes to the mayoral elections - I believe Brian Paddick would genuinely make the best Mayor - and that’s not just party loyalty speaking. After that however I see the twin horrors of Ken and Boris. Out of the two, I find Boris less objectionable. He at least has some liberal bones in his body unlike Ken who is an enemy of all things liberal and free.
I also rather like inefficient politicians, they’re less likely to get things done, encouraging us to depend less on government and more on individual and community efforts.

Frankly, if the London Mayor has so much power that he could destroy London then he has too much power unfortunately the only way to drive this home would be for someone to abuse that power, perhaps then we can start acting to reducing the power of politicians.

Acknowledging the fact that Brian Paddick is very unlikely to win, I’d rather have Boris with an Assembly which will oppose him than anything else. For me, Boris is just the lesser of two evils.

Tim Worstall points outthis article.

Price controls, forcing banks to lend at a negative interest rate, state theft of farms and banks… Not long until it all collapses now I’m afraid.

All whilst our Dear Leader Mayor is buying cheap oil for one of the richest cities in the world from a poor country.

Our dear leader mayor Ken ‘capitalism kills’ Livingstone and his bosom buddy Hugo ‘I <3 Castro' Chavez are engaging in a bit of wealth redistribution.

Unfortunately they seem to have get a bit confused. They're taking money from poor Venezuela and giving it to rich London.

Chavez also seems to have missed the point at home in Venezuela, inequality is getting worse not better.

Tim Worstall has more details.

I’m sure Pollyfilla would justify it by saying all the foreign aid to London is in fact government money so nothing is coming from the poor.

There is however some good news, the poor people of benighted Venezuela are more economically literate than Livingstone, Chavez or Toynbee - 72% agree that free trade makes most people better off, the highest percentage in Latin America.

I received the LibDem London Assembly group missive yesterday, the first article is full of typical politician idiocy-

It calls for the Mayor and sponsors to withdraw funding from London Fashion Week because of the refusal to ban size zero models. Whatever the merits of the arguments for or against such models being allowed, I have huge problems with the statement.

The two fundamental errors which are made are to assume that the Mayor has a duty to protect the health of londoners - that is not true. Government arguably has a responsibility for general public health issues but there is no responsibility to look after our health, that is up to the individual. The state has no responsibility for my actions - I have responsibility for them, to pretend otherwise is to increase servitude to the state.

The second point is that we should be calling for the Mayor to withdraw funding from the event, but not because of some decision revolving around horribly skinny women, but on the principle that we should not be handing out tax payers money to private concerns like that. Instead of Ken taking our money by force and lavishing it upon events most of us don’t care about, how about reducing taxes and letting us spend our own money on such events if we wish?
The state has no place in funding such events, it has no place funding art or ‘culture’, we should oppose the spending on tax payer’s money on such events on principle.

If you wish to make pronouncements on this issue, by all means do so, but don’t do it in such a way as to undermine individual responsibility.

This is basic, fundamental liberalism. The state forcing its will on others and spending money on private commercial concerns should be opposed on principle. Size zero models are not causing direct harm to others, it is not government’s place to force restrictions upon them - what comes next? Force feeding?
If there is enough public pressure then the sponsors will withdraw sponsorship, interference by politicians tends towards unintended consequences and increased power for those politicians, something which should be resisted at every turn.