A green revolution?

 activism, Drinking, economics, politics, taxes  No Responses »
Jan 222012
 

Revolution in suburbia A recent post by Fausty reminded me that I’d written this a while back, so… enjoy.

As many people have observed one of the best ways for an individual to very quietly combat the creeping power of the state is to “starve the beast”, don’t give it any money you don’t have to. Now this doesn’t need to mean doing anything illegal, in fact you could even say you’re just following their advice. Follow the example of those early radicals pictured at the top of this article and grow your own, and if you can’t do that just spend less ask yourself:
“Do I need that enough to give this government 20% of the price?“

If we buy less we reduce our carbon footprints, if we grow our own we reduce our food miles, if we do our own repairs and help each other out for free we’re taking part in the big society – see we’re just doing what the Government wants. We can kill it by just following it’s own advice. Though of course they already worrying about (though not yet for tax reasons) the radical actions of picking wild berries. Really annoy them and Brew your own not only do they not get their double hit of taxes but you screw up their statistics as well. By preparing more of your own food you might even be able to avoid the fat tax if it makes it over here.

No single huge act that raises any of us from the crowd or attracts unwelcome attention, just hundred of small acts of refusal, starving the Government by a thousand cuts.

Become a dissident:

“Say no to government in any way you can, in the workplace, among friends, on the internet. There are a hundred little soapboxes to climb onto. Don’t be quite so concerned that you think left-wing bloggers are chuckleheads or right-wing bloggers are evil Tories. If you are not an apparatchik, you’re little people and you’re all the same to the ruling class, who went from being public servants to being autocrats in a remarkably small space of time.”

Become part of a clever revolution, we only need to convince 10% of the people.

 Posted by Giolla at 15:13  Tagged with: , , ,

Internet black out

 Free Speach, internet, laws  No Responses »
Jan 182012
 

Stop SOPA
I didn’t take part in the Internet blackout today, as I’m a lazy sod and also I’m just back at work after a very hard weeks drinking. However I would note that as many many people have observed:

  1. This is very similar to our RIPA act, but from a country with more power to break stuff
  2. It’s utterly pointless, and won’t stop serious piracy in anyway
  3. It will result in an awful lot of collateral damage
  4. It will have a chilling effect and be trivial to be misused

I’d also predict that if it did come to pass then it wouldn’t be applied in the reverse direction to take off line large companies that steal content from smaller on-line artists and content providers. As one of the fundamental shifts which big media is fighting is that anyone can now be a content provider and they’ve actually got to compete on quality*

However unless this move is protested and every move like it sooner or later this sort of censorship at the behest of large media will come to pass and we’ll all be back to the walled garden days of AOL and the internet as a creative environment, medium for the free exchange of ideas and innovative business will cease to be (in the US at least). The problem with the US proposals is the same as we had with RIPA in that it allows for the blocking and removal of content before any proof of infringement, instead the blocked site has to prove it didn’t infringe (roughly speaking).

For far better summations of what the problem is with the legislation, let me pass you over to providers of original content over on the other side of the pond where they’re proposing this stuff Wondermark:
“What’s likely to happen?

• What burglars there are, will take another route. (SOPA/PIPA do not target pirates, but rather sites that link to alleged piracy. Real pirates can easily sidestep the restrictions.)

• Law-abiding business trucks, scared of the dynamite, will ALSO take another route. (The huge legal and financial burden of compliance with the new law will discourage startups, stifling independent businesses based in the United States.)
br/>• The dynamite is likely to go off whenever the trigger person sees anybody who looks slightly suspicious — burglar or not. (Claims of “piracy” could be used as a weapon against websites to silence them for competitive or political reasons.)

Despite the fact that nobody in Congress can agree on health care, the budget, or anything else, bought-and-paid-for politicians from both sides of the aisle have lined up to defend these bills. It’s pretty disgusting. Movie piracy is simply not more important than the safety and integrity of the entire Internet, which is my whole livelihood.”

Also in case you needed more convincing even Hitler is against it!**

Actually even more convincing than Hitler the MPAA oppose the SOPA protests and support the legislation.

* lets face it look how many remakes and re-imaginings etc. there are in the mainstream media, they’re churning out the same level of rip off’s as the internet but on a bigger budget.
** That mashup could result in the whole on YouTube being taken down under the proposed SOPA/PIPA laws.

 Posted by Giolla at 23:07  Tagged with: , , ,

Sneaky, sneaky very sneaky!

 activism, anonymity, bloggers, Civil Liberties, Free Speach, laws, police  5 Responses »
Jan 122012
 

Once again a significant “consultation” that no body new about. It would seem that to they’d like to give the police yet more power:
“This three-part consultation seeks your views on the areas of police powers which the government is committed to reviewing:
– the relevance of the word ‘insulting‘ in section 5 of the Public Order Act 1986
– new powers to request removal of face coverings
– new powers to impose curfews”

And as they’ve had a consultation, which ends tomorrow they’ll claim public support. ArchbishopCranmber and Old Holborn have more details, but if you’d like to once more be able to call me a smegging idiot without risking arrest. The powers that be, seem to currently take the stand that as long as you only get arrested, charged and suffer loss of time, money and distress with the whole process as long as you don’t actually go to court and get found guilty it’s all ok. Their test is are people actually getting found guilty unreasonably, not are people suffering from the impact of the law and likewise they have no concern over it’s chilling effects. See Olly Cromwell’s blog for a prime example of abuse of this sort of power.

I would point out that the police can already ask you to remove face coverings if they genuinely believe you intend to commit an offence, so that those rioting last summer wore face coverings is already covered by existing powers – and lets face it it’s not as if you’re going to comply with a request to uncover your face if you already rioting. The new power would let them remove face coverings at any time if they felt there was “reasonable suspicion of criminal activity” – of course remember that this is the same police force that despite being told numerous times still think it’s illegal to take photographs.

Finally curfews, the police can already force people to disperse, as people who remember the rave scene at all are well aware, and they can since 2003 request a dispersal zone be designated where people won’t be allowed to gather – this apparently takes too long and has too much paper work so they’d like a new law. Of course they’re once more citing the summer looting, ignoring the option of the riot act and that there was clear criminal behaviour taking place so would the looters really have gone home because they were in a dispersal zone? What they’d like instead is:
“The aim of a general police curfew power would be to give the police an operational tool to keep members of the public off the streets in a given location, for a given period, in order to prevent or address serious disorder.”
Now that looks like it’s just begging for feature creep to me, and is if it could be used in very lazy and Stalinist ways. Though I do tend to take the view that if a law can be abused it probably will be. They say that being outside during a curfew wouldn’t be a criminal offence, so just how would they enforce it? A fine, or a going out door tax as it might be known?

So go have your say whilst you can!

 Posted by Giolla at 14:43  Tagged with: , , , , , , ,

It may be beer is best

 activism, Campaign, Civil Liberties, Drinking, smoking  4 Responses »
Dec 282011
 

New Cavaliers Given our Glorious leaders recent warming up of an oft mooted idea to introduce Alchohol price fixing I thought I’d revisit a bunch of articles I’ve had sat open for months now, after of course first observing that such price fixing is verbotten by his masters in the EU as numerous bloggers have observed every time the idea is returned to. They’ll just have to resort to increasing tax (already about a third of the cost of a pint) and ever more dire warnings on bottles as they did for smokers. This re-use of the same tactics is something that other commentators have mentioned time and time again, and every time it gets mentioned the list of places where the same processes can be seen grows longer. If any of this was really for health reasons they’d just ban things out right, rather than forcing simple pleasures (like meat) out of the reach of the 99%*. The way that it’s not just what we imbibe or inhale that gets clamped down on but all manner of expression of free thinking association and fun does rather suggest that the state has once more got a bad case of the puritans.

Sticking mainly to beer and drinking which is a subject close to my heart and even closer to my liver, I’ll observe as many other have the way the age limits in supermarkets has crept up? Remember you can legally buy your own booze at 18 but supermarkets now ant you to be 21 or 25 (has anyone seen higher?). Pubs reportedly now balk at selling a drink to people accompanied by children. Even that CAB article I linked to claims you have to be over 14 to have a drink with a meal, which is odd as I’m sure that I had the odd small drink when out at the restaurant with my family at a far more tender age. Has my memory failed me with advancing years, or has that law been changed quietly whilst I wasn’t looking?

That’s the problem really so many of these changes that whittle away at merry England are done on advice or un-remarked changes to minor regulations. Look at the salami slicing that resulted in smoking being banned almost everywhere and they’re working on the few remaining places. Of course given we spend almost £60,000 on booze in a lifetime that’s a fair chunk of tax they want to keep. So get yourself a home brew kit (works out at about 50p a pint after initial costs or less – even with start up costs it’s only £1.50 a pint) and break out the speak easy signs. If we’re making our own booze (and tobacco) that’s less tax they’ll have to stop us enjoying other things, and they’ll be happy as their figures will show fewer people drinking and smoking. At least until they notice and try to work out how to stop us making our own fun, which judging by human history to date would be a task more futile than King Cnuts.

Perhaps 2012 may be the year for the rise of the New Cavaliers, the outfits are better and it’s more fun than puritanism. Save money, fight the state and have fun all from the comfort of a warm seat and a foaming brew. Being as self sufficient as you can has become a radical act, it deprives the state of revenue, and weakens their control on us. Mind be careful if you swap your own brew with friends as the taxman wants his share from barter as well. So answer the call to arms for New Cavaliers, drink up in the struggle against Islamism and consider it may be beer is best.

* Sorry couldn’t resist that.

 Posted by Giolla at 22:37  Tagged with: , , , ,

No salt, no smokes, no booze, no…

 Drinking, smoking  No Responses »
Nov 162011
 

For a very long time many people have been pointing out that the prohibitionists are coming after everything they can now they’ve seen how well the tobacco ban is going. Well now apparently the smoking ban has been declared a success, so will they come after the next targets with more vigour? Well for those that haven’t noticed they already are:
Having removed smoking in films they want drink free movies,
Tighter drinking controls,
increasing numbers of warnings on packaging,
higher taxes
Or a “new” one this time round rationing
Those tried and tested methods used for smoking, and being applied to drinking are already being lined up for fast food, soft drinks or salt (and salt in food generally)

Of course you can upset them by brewing your own amongst many other things.

(Sorry of this isn’t up to my usual low standards I’m operating on a confused body clock at present)

 Posted by Giolla at 04:59  Tagged with: , ,

A new bill of rights?

 Betrayal, laws, Magna Carta  No Responses »
Nov 092011
 

Friday see’s the end of the consultation period for our new bill of rights, or as Mr Cameron would have it our bill of rights, as he seems to be unaware of the existing documents which form our constitution (H/T Captain Ranty):

Our rights can be found in the Magna Carta of 1215, 1229, 1297, the Declaration of Arbroath 1320, the Bill of Rights 1688, for Scotland we have the Claim of Right 1689, the Act of Settlement 1701, the Act of Union 1707, the Human Rights Act 1998 and several international and European Acts also provide some protection.

Given that our Parliament as currently formed can not bind successive Parliaments any Bill of rights they come up with won’t be worth much, unlike our existing bill of rights

The Devils Kitchen is minded that most of these charters have been eroded to next to nothing already, though many would argue that this isn’t possible we’ve just been tricked into thinking they have – and it’s quite within our grasp to reassert them. However his point that a written constitution as would be constructed by our current incumbents would be a terrible thing is one that’s hard to argue with. Given the degree with which they are enamoured with the EU the chances that it’s move us more towards the view that everything not allowed is forbidden (rather than the current everything not forbidden is allowed) would seem quite likely.

The question I find niggling at the back of my mind with this move to create a new bill of rights happening at the same time as they want to tinker with the Act of settlement and everything that’s tied into. As His Grace observes most people don’t care about this, and playing jenga with the foundations of our Parliament and laws is only likely to cause the whole edifice to come crashing down. Usually I take the view that one shouldn’t attribute to malice what can be explained by ignorance, but the Government have advisor’s, and lawyers and other such that are notionally wise in these matters. Which makes ignorance less likely, though malice is a scarier idea and one that has me reaching or my tin foil hat. In the unlikely event we get asked (they’ve done so well with referenda so far)if we want these ancient laws changed I doubt the significance will be explained, we’ll just awake to find we’ve abandoned hard one rights and removed what scant limits there are on our Government. Our Government seems determined to tug at the threads that hold the land together, and bind their hands however loosely but once they’ve unravelled the Union of this land who’ll stitch it back together? The EU?

There’s still to join in that consultation.

Update My late submission to them below the line:
Continue reading »

 Posted by Giolla at 18:51  Tagged with: , , , , ,

Best walk so far

 activism, anonymity, bloggers, Civil Liberties, conformity, Cuts, Drinking, economics, Free Speach, London, photography, police, Video  3 Responses »
Nov 072011
 

All activities monitored by video camera Another November the 5th gone and another “quiet” walk around London with the indomitable Old Holborn, Olly Cromwell, Katabasis and others whose presence has been erased by alcohol (remind me if you want) – which was an utter blast. As has become our want we met in the pleasing environs of Chandos to exchange niceties, don costumes and imbibe a bracing drink before braving the autumnal air. Our dapper and well presented crew headed off down Whitehall, pausing to admire the security in place at that bastion of democracy that is Downing street. Setting the theme for the day they didn’t seem pleased to see us, undeterred we continued unto the very doors of the palace of Westminster where some terribly nice people told us that as the politicans don’t work on a Saturday it’d cost us 15 quid a head to get in:
Continue reading »

 Posted by Giolla at 20:25  Tagged with: , , , , , , ,

Walkies

 activism, Civil Liberties, London  No Responses »
Oct 102011
 

Following in from my recent post about the joys of a bracing walk in early November, I’m delighted to report that Old Holborn will be chaperoning like minded people around Westminster.

Details over on FaceBook

“It would be a shame to let a November 5th pass without protest at that most sacred of institutions, the Royal Palace of Westminster, so I have decided that this years protest WILL take place.

For those who are unaccustomed to my November 5th walks, it involves large amounts of beer, Guy Fawkes costumes, a great deal of humour and a willingness to poke the great and the good on their own turf. no one usually gets arrested, although we all usually get stopped and searched, giving us all the perfect opportunity to show that we know our rights and tell those who would usurp them where to get off – “no officer, you may not detain me”.

Past walks have been a great chance for likeminded Libertarian or anarchist individuals to meet up and of course, as this time it falls on a Saturday, you’ll have no excuse to confuse tourists, test your law skills, upset the ground staff at Hogwarts, get in the paper and on the tellybox and show that you care a little for the abuse of our rights and freedoms by the 650 idiots who pretend to act in our name and with our mandate.

So it’s time to dig out the V for Vendetta masks (or a Burqa – try removing that, Constable) and meet up with me to discuss how we continue to be the thorn in side of those who would be our masters, using money taken by force from us, the people.

Meet Saturday November 5th, 11am, Chandos Pub (cheap ale), Trafalgar Square, London.”

Hope to see you there.

 Posted by Giolla at 18:20  Tagged with: , , , ,

The good the bad and the soggy

 activism, Civil Liberties, smoking  2 Responses »
Jul 182011
 

Stop the nany state
Not going to say much about the recent protest in Stony Stratford as Dick Puddlecote has said pretty much everything that needed to be said. The turnout seemed to be predominantly local – though the record for furthest travelled must got to a chap over from Russia. The anger both at the proposed ban and the councillor in question was quite pronounced. For a very sodden Saturday morning the turnout seemed really quite respectable, and the atmosphere was very friendly and sociable. The general message did seem to encompass more than just the local ban, and reflect a growing dislike of the restriction of civil liberties, but then again it was a very self selecting group.

I’ve a few photo’s up on Flickr. Due to unfamiliarity with my little video camera I’ve caught neither all of the speeches nor all of the speeches I did capture. However for what it’s worth what I did get can be found here:
Patrick Hayes:

Roger Helmer:

David Odell:

BBC interviewing Nigel Farage:

Nigel Farage:

As ever was good to meet up with the usual rag tag crew of malcontents that seem to frequent these things.

 Posted by Giolla at 00:01  Tagged with: , ,

Bun fight at the OK tea rooms

 activism, Civil Liberties, Drinking, smoking  No Responses »
Jul 152011
 

Well more freedom demo at the Vaults bar in Stony Stratford, but given Councillor Bartlett’s behaviour so far it does look like we’re dealing with an intellectually unarmed man. Realistically the chance of Mr Bartletts proposals “to ban smoking outside” going through even without a demo are very very slim – but of course we’ve seen that before many times. The first time a ban is proposed it’s laughed at an ignored, so next time round the lack of protest is cited as evidence that people don’t mind. This gets repeated a few times till a ban is brought quietly in somewhere and then other places cite that as evidence that it’s reasonable and that something must be done and then whilst most people are still going “nah, you being daft” the bans spread and is being happily enforced by puritans everywhere. Just consider how many places you can no longer sit quietly enjoying a quiet drink as drinking’s been banned in public places. That there are already laws to deal with anti-social behaviour (what ever that may be) littering and all sorts of other things that are the actual problem doesn’t stop further bans being called for. Much easier to be seen doing something and have a ban that affects everyone rather than enforce existing laws.

So even if you don’t smoke this is important, as do we really want such blanket bans of legal behaviour being introduced by councils? Do you really think that a bit of smoke in the open air by a road side is a problem? There’s even some evidence that smoking may have some health benefits (H/T Dick Puddlecote). So if you’re at all able to come along to Stony Stratford to protest the proposed ban and of course have a drink (before they try banning that again as well).

If you don’t see the thin end of this wedge consider that they’re no claiming that there’s no safe level of alcohol, water is bad for you and salt’s bad as well. All ludicrous but all things that keep coming round and around in the same way previous bans and restrictions have – so lets start fighting the battles earlier rather than waiting till the bans, taxes and restrictions are already in place. Looks like Stony Stratford is the place to say enough already.

See you there?

 Posted by Giolla at 11:04  Tagged with: , , ,
 Older Entries
© 2011 Anonymong Suffusion theme by Sayontan Sinha