The subject of ‘Tariffs’ like many others, seems to have become something beyond which debate is no longer permissible. But we know from experience, that when any dogma arrives at that status of unchallengeable, the conventional wisdom is nearly always wrong. Usually because no discussion of the subject is permissible in ‘liberal’ company.
Until the early 1980s the ‘Left’ in Britain were not merely in favour of high selective tariffs, but demanded PHYSICAL import controls (but only, of course for unionised and nationalised industries). Anyone who said otherwise was a ‘Thatcherite’ bent on ‘destroying’ British Industry, or, unfashionably ‘Old’ Labour. Continue reading
All in all, the Supreme Court judgement on Brexit is, politically, for the best. The Brexit legislation is now near certain to pass through both Houses of Parliament within the next three weeks, and if it doesn’t there would be a General Election in April or May and both the Labour Party and/or the House of Lords would be obliterated for good. That fall-back position in itself might be a good thing. Continue reading
The common feature of the coalition of voters which came together to support Brexit is that we all want democracy in some form or another. It’s a state of mind. We each have radically different ideas of what ‘democracy’ actually is. Some of us, including other Libertarian Alliance sympathisers, see the other’s definition of ‘democracy’ as ‘fascism and dictatorship’. Others as ‘corporatism or communism’. Yet others, as poimntless ineffective liberalism. Continue reading
Observing the Supreme Court Brexit proceedings confirmed in my mind the minimal skills required to be a ‘lawyer’. The quality of the debate was abysmal and there was little focus on the straightforward actual issue in the case.
There was a definite flavour of what we routinely see in civil court proceedings. There is no proper ‘due process’ whatsoever. There is not and never has been ‘rule of law’ in the UK. We congratulate ourselves on our ‘rule of law’, but that’s just lazy wishful thinking. What we have is rule by judges, which is similar in its fundamental nature to the systems operating in the worst regimes in the world. Continue reading
Censorship: Tech Firms Should Abandon the EU to Its Madness
The European Union has a censorship addiction, and a desire to inflict the costs of indulging that addiction on the world’s top tech companies.
Vera Jourova, the EU’s Commissioner for Justice, Consumers and Gender Equality, complains that Facebook, Twitter, Google and Microsoft respond too slowly to demands that they delete posts deemed “hate speech” from their platforms. Continue reading
[The philosopher A.C. Grayling has demanded that Parliament should ignore the result of the Referendum on Membership of the European Union.]
The aim of the EU was to destroy the UK, so pulling out of the EU is dodging UK suicide.
If I favoured the warmongering EU [which I never did but always held it in hatred] I would never say it was good for the UK as that is very clearly false. Its aim is a new nation where the UK is broken up as zones of the new super-state. Continue reading
Prerogative Powers and the European Union
By Sean Gabb
(3rd November 2016)
Because I have other business today, and because the comment I have to make is most relevant for today, this will need to be a short essay.
I have read the Judgment of the High Court in the case of R (Miller) Secretary of State for Exiting the EU. So far as I understand, the Government claims that it may give notice to leave the European Union as a matter of prerogative power. The European Treaties are international agreements. These are not a matter for Parliament, though Parliament may be consulted for the sake of politeness, and must be asked for any change of domestic law for bringing a treaty into effect. But it is for the Crown alone to decide whether to make or withdraw from a treaty. Continue reading