Counting Cats in Zanzibar Rotating Header Image

A palpable hit

There is a bizarre myth that all us libertarians are some sort of uber-capitalist types who are all richer than Bill Gates and rather than travel on the bus are carried everywhere on gilded palanquins by a platoon of semi-tamed Morlocks.

This smug looking bugger tends to think so anyway

These people – who wish to undermine society as we know it and who would end all social security, state pensions, public health services, state education and much more besides – want to overturn society as we know it. As one said recently – we should rely for support on our families churches, synagogues or mosques – but not the state.

Oh… where to start? Well Sikh’s have their temples as well and you know we used to have things called friendly societies. And you know if you end-up down and out the Sally Army doesn’t have a “Christians Only Policy”.

This Victorian concept of grudging charity is what these people promote – with the consequence of a random lottery of survival – and destitution for many.

Now those Victorians were really grudging were they not? I studied at Nottingham (the entire campus was a gift from Jesse Boot), my sister-in-law just got her PhD from Bristol (largely Mr Wills, the tobacco baron). I did an MSc at Queen Mary which started as a charitable institution “The People’s Palace” to yank East End types out of gin lane. The mighty fine university in my home town of Newcastle was at least partially set-up by Lord Armstrong. If building some of the finest universities in the country is a “grudging act of charity” then up with grudging I say!

I do not believe in this callous, self interested view of life. It offends my Christian beliefs that suggest we have a duty as a society to fulfil the instruction – present in all major religions – but not in libertarianism that we love our neighbour as ourselves.

Oh sweet Mary, Mother of God! Just do your Alpha Course already! I am no Christian but I clearly know the gospels better than you do. From the Biblical accounts of Christ I think if you pitched up at one of his meetings and suggested the libertarian “no harm principle” you’d get inducted into the discipleship quicker than you could move your sandals. That (or versions thereof) is our foundational principle. I think it’s a pretty good one. I also think it is entirely in line with mainstream Christianity and a few other religions too (seeing as this and other libertarian sites get read by both rampant atheists and all the rest I think I’m on safe ground here – I mean empirical ground). As Cats recently said (this has to go on the sidebar) the difference between charity and socialism is the difference between sex and rape. Enforced “charity” is extortion. How many folks on the new 50% tax band are likely to be feeling charitable? How many want to give for the poor? They are already forking over beaucoup to the rich be they failed bankers or embezzling politicos.

Those who say otherwise are not offering an alternative within out society – they are suggesting we tear down our society and replace it with another. In doing so they show complete contempt for many, some (most, I suggest, by far)of whom are in the positions they are through no fault at all of their own. One on this blog has called those in need ‘an underclass’.

I make clear I think this as repugnant as racism.

I would reject this language from a racist. I would reject a call from the far left to over throw society.

We are now enemies of “society” because of our views?. Now where have I heard that one before?

Why is it then that this vicious, self interested and, might I suggest inherently socially violent group are allowed to make this sort of contribution – as they do all over so many blogs where those with real concern for society, from across the mainstream political spectrum, seek to discuss issues in an open, rational and respectful fashion?

I would love, for example, to see far-right libertarians thrown off the Guardian bogs as a matter of course – which might improve their appeal to many others as a result.

It is time we named these people for what they are – as being amongst the enemies of civilised society.

I am happy to do that. It would be good if others would do the same – and fight them as we do racists.

Vicious? Anti-social? One of the main concerns of libertarians is the atomization of society that has happened under socialism. I feel denounced and make no mistake this smug cunt, if he got even near the levers of power, would cart me off to the fucking gulag. As to being thrown off the “bogs” at the Guardian. Well evil has it’s own absurdity. I hope they are. They can come here. Or a lot of other places for we are legion (suppresses evil genius cackle).

Note also the profound tit-endery of the conflation of the alleged “far-right” with racism. The “far-right” is the far-left wearing a nationalist hat. Libertarians have nothing to do with racism or the National Socialist “far right”. This is an in your face “far right” libertarian blog and has been read by blacks, whites, browns, Martians, lesbians and gays. Some have even commented (when there was anything worth commenting upon). As long as they have something interesting to say then they are all way more than welcome. There is no way the writership of this blog could be construed as “far right”. We are genuine liberals who believe in genuine liberal values like not coercing people. It must be a bitter pill for these folks to swallow that libertarians are not Roderick Spode’s Brown Shorts. It must really piss in their teapot must it not? I have a good friend who is not only gay but disabled. I had a long-term sexual realtionship with a Jew and am good pals with Sayeed who is the local newsagent so basically fuck off with this “far right” malarkey already. You’ll be sticking people on the tumbrils well before I do.

I am a classical liberal and as I told Samizdata’s Perry De Havilland a couple of years ago. I am stealing the L word back.

NB: Comments from known libertarian abusers will not be allowed on this blog entry, or any other on this site.

I will debate any comer ’till it’s bovine bedtime. He wont. I think we have a hit and a palpable one here. That’s running scared. That’s good.

We are open and honest because we are right. We do not need to finish posts by threatening to shut down the debate because we know we can win the debate. We believe in society. We believe though that is something which emerges from the free interaction of individuals and not something defined from the great, the “good” or the unsufferably smug.

We have won the intellectual debate. All they have left is force but the use of that is what they do best.

And we don’t. Yet.

Tip of the kitty kibbles to RobtE and Tim Worstall for this one.


  1. Daphne says:

    You’re just a bloody anarchist, Nick. ;-)

  2. Daphne says:

    I hate yellow icons.

  3. NickM says:

    No, I is a classical liberal ;-)

  4. JuliaM says:

    He’s a repellent little man. But it’s striking that people like him always believe they will be the ones with the upper hand, and never at the mercy of the rules and laws they create…

  5. I just posted the following on the site. But since there is a statement about not allowing postings from libertarians I suspect mine will also not be allowed :

    What a repugnant piece of socialist shit you are. Just about every word you have written here is vile, bigotted, probably with racial undertones (because you appear to hate white people) and completely without any intelligence. I suppose you are the product of one of our superb inner city comprehensives. and your teachers spent more time indoctrinating you than actually teaching you something worthwhile.

  6. CountingCats says:


    I took a very different approach, maybe a tad less confrontational and abusive:

    It offends my Christian beliefs that suggest we have a duty as a society to fulfil the instruction
    No, as a Christian you have a personal obligation, but Christianity does not preach a societal obligation. Forcibly taking money from a third party in order to perform your personally preferred act of charity is not an act condoned, let alone encouraged, by Christian theology; either Catholic, Orthodox or Protestant.
    You miss the mark in not understanding that libertarianism is about non violence and non coercion. As a libertarian I recognize that I have no right to use violence, or the threat of violence, to impose my viewpoint or preferences on anyone. This is not pacifism, it does not mean that I may not respond if me and mine are threatened with violence, but it does mean that I may not be the one to initiate it.
    Libertarianism, based as it is on the requirements of consent, self ownership, personal responsibility and non violence, is not, and cannot be, what you describe here. Compassion and Christian charity not only are not precluded, but the libertarian view of these is much closer to the message of the Gospels than the violently enforced expropriation which underlies the modern welfare state.
    Contrary to your claim here libertarianism is neither right wing, nor left, and it is both. What it is, is non statist, as opposed to socialism, communism and fascism which are all of them statist – ie, dependent on at least the threat of violence by the State, which is reasonably defined as that body which arrogates to itself the monopoly on the use of violence.

  7. Sam Duncan says:

    Nice one, Cats. As my old dad always says, Christian Socialism is a contradiction in terms. The welfare state is the opposite of Christian charity, not its embodiment. He usually goes on to point out that modern translations of 1 Corinthians 13 (“And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity”) always manage to find some euphemism for “charity”. I, and he, wonder why…

  8. I get into this argument with “Progressive Baptists” (speaking of contradictions in terms, Mr. Duncan !) all the time.

    Can someone please explain to me how giving money to a Chicago Machine politician and his hack cronies can be reconciled with the Christian imperative to “Give unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s, and give unto God that which is God’s”?

    Voluntarily taking care of somebody down on his luck – that’s Christian. Taking money from someone by force, splitting it with an administrative staff, setting the staff up with full time jobs and benefits, and then giving the pitiful remnant to somebody down on his luck – that’s an Obamanation.

  9. RAB says:



  10. [...] From this deeply repugnant blog-post that I commented on previously… [...]

  11. Jock says:

    I see Murphy’s reply to all the nasty horrible commenters was little better. His trackbacks don’t seem to be working either so our own fisking posts will never show up there too.

    An odious man indeed.

  12. Paul Marks says:

    Mutual aid (for example the Friendly Societies that about 80% of British industrial workers were members of in 1911) is left off the “just charity” conception.

    However, there is no real understanding on the left of charity itself – a good look at the lives of such people as Octavia Hill and C.S. Locke might enlighten them.

    As for me – state “educated” (they did not even teach me to read – an old women in a village outside of town did). And I have lived in rented places all my life.

    Jobs – mostly security guard work, my present employment is selling parking tickets at an amusement park.

    As a libertarian (a conservative minded one in my case – indeed I have been a member of the British Conservative party for thirty years) I do not see myself as a plutocrat like the people over at General Electric (some hundred billion Dollars of debt support from the government) and Goldman Sachs (endless subsidies).

    General Electric support the left – look at N.B.C. and MSNBC and so do Goldman Sachs – their top P.R. used to work for Barney Frank.

    “Exceptions that prove the rule” – not exceptions at all. Wall Street types (and the California super rich) gave far more money to both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama than they did to John McCain. And they gave almost nothing at all to any libertarian.

    Big politically connected corporation do not tend to be even conservative – let alone libertarian.

  13. NickM says:

    Of course they are not… Let’s look at a UK example. BAE systems. Back when it was British Aerospace it at least had some dealings with private companies and individuals (they had a 20% stake in Airbus and made small airliners and executive jets) but it is now entirely a defense contractor. It sells stuff to governments which means it has to keep them onside. The Typhoon contract with the Saudis cost ‘em billions in bribes including ones of the flesh (and grand an hour hookers don’t come cheap). The have a massive office in DC (wonder why?) and as they managed to buy up almost the entire British defence industry – tanks, warships the Royal Ordnance Factories, the lot. They now, via British jobs for British workers, have the MoD over a barrel.

    I shall not even mention Capita.

Leave a Reply

%d bloggers like this: