I am embarrassed to have the world see us this way
Friday, January 24, 2014
Can a Tweet Put You in Prison? It Certainly Will in the UK - The Daily Beast.
The Saxon is not like us Normans. His manners are not so polite.
But he never means anything serious till he talks about justice and right.
When he stands like an ox in the furrow – with his sullen set eyes on your own,
And grumbles, 'This isn't fair dealing,' my son, leave the Saxon alone.
You can horsewhip your Gascony archers, or torture your Picardy spears;
But don't try that game on the Saxon; you'll have the whole brood round your ears.
From the richest old Thane in the county to the poorest chained serf in the field,
They'll be at you and on you like hornets, and, if you are wise, you will yield.
For most of our history, the greatest threat to our liberty was the Crown and we looked to Parliament to defend us. It did so pretty robustly at times, defining the constitutionality of our monarchy by the practical method of killing a King who insisted on his Divine Right. The monarch having been firmly put in his box, we seem to have taken our eye off the ball. In the end our protector has oppressed us as even the Normans couldn't.
As a young man, I recall reading of a Conservative MP out canvassing being asked by an elector whether permission was needed to cut down a tree in his garden. The MP reacted angrily; "It's your bloody garden man! It's your bloody tree!! Why the hell are you asking me?!" Can you imagine a politician daring, in these days of invasive busybodies, to say such thing now? Our land is built upon as the state directs. Our homes are heated, lighted and our sewage flushed, as the state directs. However competent we may be, we are not to do our own electrical work, by order of the state.
Even those of us who take a particular interest in these matters have lost count of how many state employees (and not just those with responsibility for law enforcement or fire-fighting) have the right come into our homes without our consent or that of a judge. I was not permitted to put security blinds (common in Continental Europe) on the windows of my former house in Chester because the state thought it would make our area look as though it had a high crime rate (it did). My late wife had to worry when druggie louts who had already tried to break in were about, because our political masters wanted to massage reality for electoral advantage. And of course she could not have a firearm to defend herself if they succeeded in breaking in the next time.
Yes, the USA is materially better off because of its Constitution. The Prevention of Terrorism Act is good law in the legal sense, but bad law in the moral sense. Under our three word constitution ("Parliament is sovereign") it is now - unarguably - the law.
The vilely-named and worse conceived Patriot Act is - IMHO - bad law in *both* senses of the word, because unconstitutional. It just needs a US citizen with money and patience to appeal to SCOTUS and - given the specific provision of the Constitution that habeas corpus shall not be repealed - it will fail at least in part.
We missed a big opportunity at the height of the Age of Enlightenment to create a constitution that would protect our liberties. It's too late now because a modern British written constitution would be clogged up with garbage about entirely imaginary "rights" to work, be respected, be supported in idleness, be equal (other than before a court of law) etc.
Posted by: Tom | Tuesday, January 28, 2014 at 03:23 PM
And is the USA really any better off despite its written Constitution being perennially reinterpreted by political appointees on the Supreme Court, bypassed by an Imperial President who has made it a crime not to buy health insurance, whose stated aim is to bankrupt energy suppliers and put energy prices beyond the reach of the citizenry and who makes Charles I look liberal, a Government using its agencies to harass political opponents and spy on everyone?
Forget ye not... most of what we now see in the UK originated in the US... the British elites, knowing a good thing when they see it, have just embellished it all.
Posted by: John B | Tuesday, January 28, 2014 at 10:48 AM
The problem will only get worse.
As these rules become entrenched, right minded people who might otherwise consider joining the Police, the CPS or the Judiciary will exclude themselves, leaving the field open to precisely the kind of people who should not be allowed within a mile of such roles.
Posted by: Diogenes | Friday, January 24, 2014 at 06:18 PM
As the UK is now a dependency and entitlement state through the wholesale redistribution of wealth then it's citizens that benefit from the largess of the state(which there are many from those in the public sector and work for the state through to the recipients of child benefit)have a vested interest in having it remain as you describe. Worse as those that give become fewer and less able and those that receive become evermore voracious in their appetite to receive the state will become even more powerful. This is an opinion that I long harboured but reading something of Ludwig Von Mises has confirmed it as far as I am concerned. Although lefties, prodnoses and other assorted loons would dismiss it as nonsense because in this and most other things they are totally blind to the obvious and do not even see the terrible dangers that society faces economically, politically and to democracy that continuing along this path in the name of being progressive with it's accompanying social engineering is.
Posted by: Antisthenes | Friday, January 24, 2014 at 06:04 PM
45% to HMRC on your demise?
Time to make Potentially Exempt Transfers to the Misses Paine, I suspect.
Long life to you.
Posted by: Chromatistes | Friday, January 24, 2014 at 04:08 PM