Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

November 17th, 2011:

The Workers’ Paradise

The DPR of Korea (North Korea) will become in the next years the most important hub for trading in North-East Asia.

Oddly enough I recently read in Computer Shopper that the eviiilll! Republic of Korea boasts the highest internet speeds in the world and in the DPRK folks are extremely lucky to have a land-line phone.

Lowest labour cost in Asia.

And this is the state allegedly for the workers and peasants? It is beyond parody.

Highly qualified, loyal and motivated personnel. Education, housing and health service is provided free to all citizens. As opposed to other Asian countries, worker’s will not abandon their positions for higher salaries once they are trained.

Isn’t the single most fundamental worker’s right the right to say, “Stuff this for a game of soldiers Mr Dodds! I quit because I’d rather work for Ms Scoggs she has better canteen facilities”? I mean surely!

Lowest taxes scheme in Asia. Especially for high-tech factories.

High-tech? South of the DMZ there is high-tech. I know because I’m currently screwing some of it into a box to build a computer. Not for the first or, I strongly suspect, the last time. And the lowest taxes. I assume this isn’t taxes on workers’s wages pocket money but for whoever is prepared to “invest” in the DPRK in a desperate bid to get the DPRK foreign currency.

Indeed the DPRK even issued 3D stamps to commerate the birth of Prince William (yes, that Prince William). Click and scroll down. Now why do you think the most hardline “communist”* state on the planet did that? Not for DPRK citizenry certainly. It’s for Comrade Kim’s single malts, DVDs**, uranium hexafluoride centrifuges…

Stable. A government with solid security and very stable political system, without corruption. Full diplomatic relations with most EU members and rest of countries.

Well, as to corruption, I’d perhaps agree. In a reasonable polity corruption is pretty much by definition against the law but if the law (which in the context I mean the power) isn’t even a law unto itself then how does one define corruption? And “stability with solid security”? We all know what that means. Well those of us not hanging by our genitals upside-down over the scorpion-pit do.

New market. Many areas of business and exclusive distribution of products (sole-distribution).
Transparent legal work. Legal procedures, intellectual rights, patents and warranties for investors settled.

Well, I guess, the DPRK is a new market for pretty much everything more sophisticated than a pointed stick. As to the rest, God knows, but I’d rather invest in bicarbonate of soda futures with a vinegar storm a-brewin’.

So there you have it. All of this from the website of the KFA (Korean Friendship Association). Now one way of looking at this is that quite literally the Workers’ Party of Korea is advertising for foreign*** help to enslave their own population but that the KFA (the Korean Friendship Association who have this nonsense hosted on a .com TLD – DPRK doesn’t have one itself) can be followed on Facebook. Well, I can, you can but the North Koreans can’t. Of course not.

*The scare quotes are used advisedly. I have a follow-up to this post which shall explain all. I hope!
**He apparently has a veritable Imelda Marcos collection of western (indeed western) movies.
Typical tax exemption for the first two years. No middle agents. All business made directly with the government, state-owned companies. No middle agents.
***And to pile the Ossa of double standards upon the Pelion of hypocrisy the DPRK’s essential base-line concept of Juche is intrinsically nationalistic. It will undoubtedly be incredibly disappointing to you that the DPRK is one (the only?) country in the World you just can’t emigrate to.

British Mendacity Association

A man dies and goes to heaven. He keeps on seeing this person walking around wearing a white robe and a stethoscope. So he asks the nearest archangel who it is.

Gabriel replies: “Oh him. That’s God. He thinks he’s a doctor.”

All smoking in cars should be banned across the UK to protect people from second-hand smoke, doctors say.

The British Medical Association called for the extension of the current ban on smoking in public places after reviewing evidence of the dangers.

It highlighted research showing the levels of toxins in a car can be up to 23 times higher than in a smoky bar.

A smoky bar? How would they know these days…

But a report by a cross-party group of MPs and peers said non-legislative options should be considered as well.

That means jobs for their media buddies to orchestrate a witch-hunt.

The All-Party Parliamentary Group on Smoking and Health even said calling for an immediate ban could be “counterproductive” as consensus needed to be built across society before taking such as step.

Sorry, when I said “witch-hunt” obviously I meant “consensus”. I must report for re-education as my Newspeak is clearly lacking.

The group said there should be a consultation on tackling smoking in cars which could look at whether it would be better to have an outright ban, or if more could be achieved by raising awareness about the dangers through education campaigns.

“Education” is of course Newspeak for “propaganda” but who cares when the advertisers can make a killing!

Meanwhile, in Wales a public awareness campaign has begun highlighting the dangers of smoking in cars. Officials have said if that does not succeed over the next three years, a ban will be introduced.

Words fail. It’s just like various referenda on EU stuff where they’ll keep bringing it back until the voters produce the “right” answer.

Neither England or Scotland are currently considering introducing legislation at the moment.

But the BMA believes tougher action is needed.

The doctors’ union said an outright ban – even if there were no passengers – would be the best way of protecting children as well as non-smoking adults.

Now riddle me this you white-coated mentalists, how do the none existent passengers get harmed? But it’s the children so all rationality goes out the window! 2+2=5 if it’s for the children. It makes me want to put Pudsey’s other fucking eye out – that crapfest is coming on Friday – oh joy! How the bastarding cuntery do I tabbing it in the Corsa harm any children? I don’t have any children, I don’t give lifts to children (you can imagine what they’d call me if I did). For fuck’s sake this is a serious argument advanced by people who at least claim to be scientifically trained. They might as well go back to fucking leeches. Though I doubt most of the demented wankers could even hack invertebrates. These days they seem more into treating the rest of us like fucking annelids. Cunts. Deranged cuntrated to the cunteenth power of buggery cunts.

It said the young were particularly vulnerable from second-hand smoke as they absorbed more pollutants and their immune systems were less developed.

The fucking children again! And am I wrong here about the immune system but doesn’t that just deal with pathogens and not inanimate chemicals?

Research has show that second-hand smoke can increase the risk of a range of conditions, including sudden infant death syndrome and asthma, as well as impairing lung function.

Not just the children but now the bay-bees! Like the ones I don’t have that I am killing!!!

Dr Vivienne Nathanson, head of science at the BMA, admitted introducing a ban would be a “bold and courageous” move.

She added: “The evidence for extending smoke-free legislation is compelling.”

“Bold and courageous” – note not “correct”. And “compelling”. Right. Whatever. Basically the BMA can fuck off. I do not care how they fuck off but if we tolerate this utterly vile redefining our cars as part of the public sphere then God knows what comes next…

What might have been…

Sorted Paul. Here is your post…

One thing that I sometimes think about…….

Would civilization have gone down the toilet anyway – even if the First World War had been avoided?

We live in a period just before collapse (ultra prosperious, by historical standards, but it is a bubble and it is soon to go) so it is easy to think “if only it had not been for the World Wars, our civilization might have gone on – from strength to strength….”, but is that really true?

After all the central ideological assumptions (that government is responsible for the education, old age, income support, health care…. of most people) were already accepted in most major nations (bar the United States – which had only accepted the education bit, and even that only at the local level) before World War One.

Also although the financial system was not the absurd credit bubble it is now (every trace of long term sustainablity has been spent – in order to provide the temporary prosperity we have presently) it was not sound.

After all even in the days of the gold “standard” (it is the word “standard” that is the clue that a con game was being played) a “loan” was often not a transfer of money between real savers and borrowers – but was considered the creation of “new money”, by such corrupt practices as banks “crediting to the accounts” of borrowers (without removing money from the accounts of savers). A classic credit money bubble.

This is why there were booms-and-busts before World War One (as well as after it).

So were we just doomed by the central ideas of our age – with the millions of deaths in both World Wars being all sound and fury, but (in the end) just being “signifying nothing”? I would say NO.

Without the First World War I find it impossible to believe that a bunch of Marxist nonentities (led by a loopy aristocrat, rather like “Tony” Benn, calling himself “Lenin”) would have taken control of the largest country on Earth.

And the global struggle against Marxism “sucked the air out” of proper discussion of the real defects in Western civilization.

As Ludwig Von Mises put it “I set out to be a reformer, but……” a man who clearly (in, for example, his “Theory of Money and Credit” 1912) understood there were basic problems – had to spend his life not reforming anything, but desperatly the defending the status quo (the very status quo he has wanted to change) against Marxiod space monsters – who were responsible for the calculated murder of tens of millions of people and the enslavement of vastly more people.

Without the struggle against Marxism sucking up all their efforts – people might have been able to turn their attention to the basic problems.

Also one must not forget the stuggle against National Socialism.

Again without the First World War I find it impossible to be believe that the ancient monarchies of Germany (Bavaria and so on) could have been replaced by the dictatorship of a nobody.

I doubt Mr Hitler would even have been accepted as a lance corporal in the Bavarian army has it not been for the war (he might well have been sent back to Austria at some point – as a draft dodger, and also a man with no visible means of support) – let alone become absolute dictator of the whole German speaking world, able to send millions of people to the gas chambers and so on.

And then there is something close to Nick’s heart.

War does not stimulate techology – not overall.

It twists technology (for example into making new ways of killing vast numbers of human beings) , but it does not make things better – not overall.

On the contrary wars (especially the World Wars) take vast amounts of wealth (real wealth – not paper wealth) and turns it into ashes – and vast numbers of human beings are turned into ashes also.

Think of the people (the composers, the economists, the natural scientists) who were killed in the World Wars, then think about the unknown people who would have become….. who were killed in the World Wars.

A vast destruction of resources and of people.

Then think what could have been achieved without these wars – even if the basic problems of the West had NOT been solved.

We might very well have financial system problems and Welfare State problems.

But we would also have towns on Mars.

And be building the first interstellar space ships.

And such things as “cancer” might now be unknown.

And people be working on the regeneration of nerve cells – including brain cells.

Not fantasy.

Just a logical guess at where a higher standard of civilization (a civilization that had not been hit by the utter waste of two World Wars) might have brought us by now.

The Great Famine In Ireland – whatever the government was it certainly was NOT “laissez faire”.

Perhaps the the title should read “the mass death of the 1840s” – as people tended to die from sickness rather than actual starvation (although they were weakened by lack of food, or lack of good food) and there had been other mass death events in Irish history. Some people claim that the mass death event of the 1730s, in an Ireland where the war confiscations and post war Penal Laws had done much of their work (and a lot of government action hit nonconformist Protestants as well as Roman Catholics – which is why so many of the “Scots Irish” went to the American colonies – where these Protestant folk took their dislike of the British government with them) actually killed a larger percentage of the Irish population that the crop failures of the 1840s.

However, whatever one calls it – the mass death and emigration event of the 1840s (during which about a million people died before their time) has been used as the great argument against “laissez faire” (leave alone in French – the government staying out and letting people get on with things). This evil ideology, the world is told endlessly, meant that the government stood by and “did nothing” whilst vast numbers of Irish people died.

But what would things have looked like if one had been in Ireland in the 1840s?

Well there were lots of road (and other) construction projects that did not seem to make any economic sense (roads from nowhere to nowhere – and so on) – hard to believe that private companies were paying for them. And in the work camps people were spreading sickness to each other – because of the concentration of population.

Also people were being handed large amounts of Indian Corn (from the United States) that gave them dystentary and killed them. Hard to see why private companies would sell such stuff to consumers – would it not have a bad effect on their commercial reputation with customers?

Then there were these state schools in so many parts of Ireland – in the days of Edmund Burke such places had not existed.

Also one would have seen policemen (in much of England and Wales there still were no government police in rural areas in the 1840s) – and riding round in groups and with firearms on their backs (oh yes – the Royal Irish Police were armed).

These people seemed to spend a lot of their time riding up to farms (and other places) and demanding unpaid “rates” (local property taxes) for such things as the “Poor Law” (which had not existed only a few years before), smashing down doors and waving weapons about. Hard to see how farms (and other enterprises) could take on more employees – when they were being treated like this.

However, one would indeed see a lot of poor tenants being evicted from their homes – the potato crop had failed and they were not given a chance to grow anything else, because they were being kicked off the land.

At last! Evil capitalist bloodsuckers – destroying the poor. Accept…..

Most of those evicted seem to be from holdings under Four Pounds in rateable value. That “rate” thing again – and the little provision that for holdings under Four Pounds in value the landlord was responsible for the rates, for the property tax.

Clue – “greedy capitalists” do not tend to like unoccupied ground. Unless tenants actually cost them money. And many of the “rich” Irish landlords were on the verge of bankruptcy themselves.

“But food was exported during the famine” – so it was (although nothing like the amounts the stories claim – the same story tellers who will tell you that the Ottoman Turks sent relief ships), and so were people – to earn wages to pay for food.

They went to work in (for example) the factories of Britain and in the railways that were linking up the industrial areas of Britain.

But why had not the greedy capitalists built lots of factories in Ireland? It could not have been because of many decades of government regulations could it?

And government regulations (the 18th century Penal Laws) could not have been the reason that most of the people were reduced to uneconomic peasant plots (wildly different from English farming) in the first place. Any more than government confiscations of land had created the class of absantee landlords – many of whom had harldy ever even seen the estates they owned.

In an sane economy if an estate is badly managed other people will come along with money to buy it (believeing they can manage the land better) which is why even if land is handed to useless warlords it will eventually get into the hands of sensible folk. But in much of Ireland (not all of it) few locals seemed to have the money to buy land (even when they were eventually allowed to), almost as if something had being undermining the Irish economy for a long time, such as a large interventionist state…….

Surely not, that could not possibly be true – it would not be “laissez faire”.

Any more than armed men riding all over the place and collecting taxes (by violence and the threat of it) was “laissez faire”. Even in Edmund Burke’s day he had warned that whilst taxes per person were lower in Ireland – if one measured things in relation to size of the Irish economy, taxes were much higher (again – clue, things had not got better in terms of taxation).

But let us shut up about all this (and so much else) – it spoils the nice simple morality play.

So move along people, no state interventionism here. Just “laissez faire”.

%d bloggers like this: