the story of the homeless blogger

1 Mar

(please forgive the horrible masturbatory nature of this self-indulgent post)

I have always been identified as a Labour Blogger. I have even, on occasion, identified myself as such. I have also been an on-off member of the Labour Party – I’m politically motivated, and I want to be involved. However, I am not a tribal blogger. I don’t feel I’m a Labour Blogger, not really.

You see, I can’t identify myself with the Labour Party. In fact, I can’t really identify myself with any party.

I consider myself fairly leftwing, but I’m not a big-state leftie. I believe taxes should be kept low, and that the public should demand value for money. Private enterprise should be encouraged, but I accept that critical infrastructure, limited healthcare, and a basic education be guaranteed by the state.

I also believe that smart – but limited – regulation is necessary to ensure markets remain competitive. I see little difference between a monopolistic market and a state-dominated system. Market economics work when competition exists.

I also believe in a flat tax.

You can probably see now why I don’t feel at home in the Labour Party. But at the same time I’m far too tolerant to be a Tory, and anyway, isn’t Cameron just trying to out-Blair Blair? Of course then there are the Lib Dems, but it’s hard to be a Liberal Democrat when even they don’t seem to know who they are.

The Greens? Pah! A bunch of hippies disconnected from reality. If they ever gained power, the country would grind to a halt within a fortnight. Let’s get one thing straight; there will not be a drop of oil left in the ground, so the quicker we use it, the sooner the bunnie-huggers will stop lecturing.

I guess that leaves me The Libertarians. But they can be so very nasty at times – and, ideologically, they’re so fucked up. Seriously, how come so many supported the war in Iraq? Isn’t imperialism and powerful unaccountable state authority supposed to be an anathema to libertarians? Bush, Cheney, et al. are surely a libertarian’s nightmare? A Nixonian power grab has always been on Cheney’s agenda.

So, I’m against big government. I’m against a corporatocricy and economic imperialism. I’m for a limited safety net, but overwhelmingly market orientated. I’m against any sort of intolerance – including misguided positive discrimination and the excessive politicisation of everyday life. Oh, and I absolutely detest this country’s decent into a surveillance state.

So seriously, where is my home?

Advertisements

58 Responses to “the story of the homeless blogger”

  1. bunnyhugger@hotmail.co.uk March 1, 2008 at 9:18 pm #

    Do you even know what the Green party’s policies are? Have you bothered to read their manifesto? I strongly supsect you haven’t. Why else would you be so bloody insulting? The Green party has made much positive progress, not only does it concern itself with the environment and climate change but it also tirelessly fights for social justice, equality and peace. As for the silly oil comment – it’s the burning of fossil fuels that has pretty much got us into this mess. Using it up just because it’s there is a pretty bloody reckless suggestion. Let’s leave the remainder in the ground. Or did you want the oil giants and the rich tyrannical leaders to get even richer? That’s a bit right-wing isn’t it? The Green party doesn’t want your kind. But just be grateful that you have the Greens to back you up. Also, could you elaborate on what you mean by ‘limited healthcare’? Sounds pretty much like more Tory policy to me.

  2. bunnyhugger@hotmail.co.uk March 1, 2008 at 9:18 pm #

    Do you even know what the Green party’s policies are? Have you bothered to read their manifesto? I strongly supsect you haven’t. Why else would you be so bloody insulting? The Green party has made much positive progress, not only does it concern itself with the environment and climate change but it also tirelessly fights for social justice, equality and peace. As for the silly oil comment – it’s the burning of fossil fuels that has pretty much got us into this mess. Using it up just because it’s there is a pretty bloody reckless suggestion. Let’s leave the remainder in the ground. Or did you want the oil giants and the rich tyrannical leaders to get even richer? That’s a bit right-wing isn’t it? The Green party doesn’t want your kind. But just be grateful that you have the Greens to back you up. Also, could you elaborate on what you mean by ‘limited healthcare’? Sounds pretty much like more Tory policy to me.

  3. mike@mikepower.net March 1, 2008 at 11:45 pm #

    It’s obvious. You’re a Tygerian, (old school, of course)!

  4. mike@mikepower.net March 1, 2008 at 11:45 pm #

    It’s obvious. You’re a Tygerian, (old school, of course)!

  5. aaronsheath@gmail.com March 2, 2008 at 5:14 am #

    Hello Bunny-hugger,No I haven’t read your manifesto, I merely refer to the statements made by your leader(s) (although I understand you only have the one now).I actually think that the measure of mankind will not be how quick the oil is used, but how much we do indeed leave underground. But they’ll still be fighting wars over oil in 50 years, and possibly a hundred years. I’m a realist. But I commend your passion. I do feel that patronising car drivers and pricing poor families off the road is unfair, when so many other countries subsidise petrol and car growth is exponential.As for the oil companies? I could lecture you all day on their impact in South America, the ME, and elsewhere.Limited healthcare? If you’re sick – you get treated. But if you take the piss, you don’t. The NHS, while honourable in intention, is massively unwieldy and unresponsive to reform.Mike,Ha! I like it. Wanna be Home Secretary? Liberalise, liberalise, LIBERALISE!

  6. aaronsheath@gmail.com March 2, 2008 at 5:14 am #

    Hello Bunny-hugger,No I haven’t read your manifesto, I merely refer to the statements made by your leader(s) (although I understand you only have the one now).I actually think that the measure of mankind will not be how quick the oil is used, but how much we do indeed leave underground. But they’ll still be fighting wars over oil in 50 years, and possibly a hundred years. I’m a realist. But I commend your passion. I do feel that patronising car drivers and pricing poor families off the road is unfair, when so many other countries subsidise petrol and car growth is exponential.As for the oil companies? I could lecture you all day on their impact in South America, the ME, and elsewhere.Limited healthcare? If you’re sick – you get treated. But if you take the piss, you don’t. The NHS, while honourable in intention, is massively unwieldy and unresponsive to reform.Mike,Ha! I like it. Wanna be Home Secretary? Liberalise, liberalise, LIBERALISE!

  7. blog@davecole.org March 2, 2008 at 4:47 pm #

    Relaunch the Whig party?

  8. blog@davecole.org March 2, 2008 at 4:47 pm #

    Relaunch the Whig party?

  9. mike@mikepower.net March 2, 2008 at 7:11 pm #

    Seriously though, you are in the same position as a great many others, including, I’m sure, some political bloggers, who hold a range of views, beliefs and opinions which can’t be neatly pigeonholed. I think it’s an inevitable result of political maturity and life experience. Depending on the subject I range all the way from Atilla the Hun to Baby Jesus meek and mild! So there is no hope of me finding a party. I could always start my own one I suppose. Let me think… I’ll start with a book…’My Struggle’…yes, that sounds good…PS: Sorry to say this but I don’t think you’d feel too out of place as a left-leaning Tory. No offence!

  10. mike@mikepower.net March 2, 2008 at 7:11 pm #

    Seriously though, you are in the same position as a great many others, including, I’m sure, some political bloggers, who hold a range of views, beliefs and opinions which can’t be neatly pigeonholed. I think it’s an inevitable result of political maturity and life experience. Depending on the subject I range all the way from Atilla the Hun to Baby Jesus meek and mild! So there is no hope of me finding a party. I could always start my own one I suppose. Let me think… I’ll start with a book…’My Struggle’…yes, that sounds good…PS: Sorry to say this but I don’t think you’d feel too out of place as a left-leaning Tory. No offence!

  11. anticant@hotmail.co.uk March 2, 2008 at 11:18 pm #

    Poor little Tyger,Out in the political cold!Tribalism is no use; it’s better to be bold.Declare your independence from creeds and groups and –isms- That way you’ll grow a stronger mind and may live to be old.

  12. anticant@hotmail.co.uk March 2, 2008 at 11:18 pm #

    Poor little Tyger,Out in the political cold!Tribalism is no use; it’s better to be bold.Declare your independence from creeds and groups and –isms- That way you’ll grow a stronger mind and may live to be old.

  13. chris_baldwinn@hotmail.com March 2, 2008 at 11:35 pm #

    Er, the Democratic Party?

  14. chris_baldwinn@hotmail.com March 2, 2008 at 11:35 pm #

    Er, the Democratic Party?

  15. Jherad@hotmail.com March 3, 2008 at 1:01 pm #

    Good post Tyger. I’m not sure I’m quite with you on the economics, but I certainly feel your pain. I consider myself a left-wing liberal, but with MUCH more emphasis on the liberal than the left. I’m no statist.Ended up joining the lib-dems. We need electoral reform. I’d rather pluck my eyeballs out than vote new labour with their march towards totalitarianism, and the tories are still, without doubt, the nasty party.

  16. Jherad@hotmail.com March 3, 2008 at 1:01 pm #

    Good post Tyger. I’m not sure I’m quite with you on the economics, but I certainly feel your pain. I consider myself a left-wing liberal, but with MUCH more emphasis on the liberal than the left. I’m no statist.Ended up joining the lib-dems. We need electoral reform. I’d rather pluck my eyeballs out than vote new labour with their march towards totalitarianism, and the tories are still, without doubt, the nasty party.

  17. jennie.rigg@googlemail.com March 3, 2008 at 2:00 pm #

    If you find one, let me know. Mat keeps insisting I should join the Lib Dems as the least awful option and then try to mould them to my views…

  18. jennie.rigg@googlemail.com March 3, 2008 at 2:00 pm #

    If you find one, let me know. Mat keeps insisting I should join the Lib Dems as the least awful option and then try to mould them to my views…

  19. aaronsheath@gmail.com March 3, 2008 at 2:27 pm #

    Jennie,Join the Lib Dems? Hmmmm. Doesn’t quite feel right. Maybe if they were just the Liberals again?

  20. aaronsheath@gmail.com March 3, 2008 at 2:27 pm #

    Jennie,Join the Lib Dems? Hmmmm. Doesn’t quite feel right. Maybe if they were just the Liberals again?

  21. sunnyh@liberalconspiracy.org March 3, 2008 at 2:31 pm #

    I’m with you politically, though I think you may be being a tad bit harsh on the Greens. They do attract a lot of anarchist and hardcore socialist types but I don’t think the party generally is that bad.

  22. sunnyh@liberalconspiracy.org March 3, 2008 at 2:31 pm #

    I’m with you politically, though I think you may be being a tad bit harsh on the Greens. They do attract a lot of anarchist and hardcore socialist types but I don’t think the party generally is that bad.

  23. aaronsheath@gmail.com March 3, 2008 at 2:38 pm #

    Sunny,I was maybe being a tad polemic there. I have (had?) a few greenie friends, who I’m sure will be along soon to kick me in the gonads…

  24. aaronsheath@gmail.com March 3, 2008 at 2:38 pm #

    Sunny,I was maybe being a tad polemic there. I have (had?) a few greenie friends, who I’m sure will be along soon to kick me in the gonads…

  25. la_grief@hotmail.com March 3, 2008 at 3:07 pm #

    Have to say I feel much the same. It’s why come election time I never support parties I support candidates. If it’s a Lib Dem (usually is) that is closest to my personal wishes on a range of issues he/she gets my vote. If it were a Tory or UKIP member that was closest to my views then they’d get my vote.It’s clear enough to me that following party politics is a fools game as even outside the Lib Dems all the parties are going through a crisis of identity.

  26. la_grief@hotmail.com March 3, 2008 at 3:07 pm #

    Have to say I feel much the same. It’s why come election time I never support parties I support candidates. If it’s a Lib Dem (usually is) that is closest to my personal wishes on a range of issues he/she gets my vote. If it were a Tory or UKIP member that was closest to my views then they’d get my vote.It’s clear enough to me that following party politics is a fools game as even outside the Lib Dems all the parties are going through a crisis of identity.

  27. nhpud@hotmail.com March 3, 2008 at 3:18 pm #

    Tyger, like me, you like to speak your mind. Party politics (even single issue campaigning) can be so limiting (in theory).I think bollocks to all that. I speak my mind and chose the Labour party anyway. I form my views and then make a decision which party is the best to achieve them – not the other way round as some tribal idiots do. I couldn’t give a fig whether it is Labour, Tory or the Libertarian party – I make my mind up independent of them all – a party is just a vehicle to get somewhere – it is where you want to go that matters – when I say I am a Labour man – it means I use the party to get what I want not the other way round. There is no-one more outspoken than Ken Livingstone (a hero of mine) and as he has shown, the Labour party is still THE party of the left that matters when you want to get things done.I suppose as someone who cannot make up his mind – that points you towards the Lib Dems – but if it’s electoral reform you want, it is the Labour party that will ultimately deliver that as well. There will be no change in the electoral system without agreement from at least one of the two big parties. You might as well wait for hell to freeze over for the Tories to come round, so it is Labour or nothing. We got so close in 1997-2001, but Labour can still be won round. Neither is a hung parliament any use to us – it just means more Tories united in their opposition to PR, and having to persuade even more of the die hard Labour tribalists – no chance!As for the Greens – it doesn’t really matter what they stand for, as a minor party under this system – all they will ever do is split the left vote and let the Tories in.

  28. nhpud@hotmail.com March 3, 2008 at 3:18 pm #

    Tyger, like me, you like to speak your mind. Party politics (even single issue campaigning) can be so limiting (in theory).I think bollocks to all that. I speak my mind and chose the Labour party anyway. I form my views and then make a decision which party is the best to achieve them – not the other way round as some tribal idiots do. I couldn’t give a fig whether it is Labour, Tory or the Libertarian party – I make my mind up independent of them all – a party is just a vehicle to get somewhere – it is where you want to go that matters – when I say I am a Labour man – it means I use the party to get what I want not the other way round. There is no-one more outspoken than Ken Livingstone (a hero of mine) and as he has shown, the Labour party is still THE party of the left that matters when you want to get things done.I suppose as someone who cannot make up his mind – that points you towards the Lib Dems – but if it’s electoral reform you want, it is the Labour party that will ultimately deliver that as well. There will be no change in the electoral system without agreement from at least one of the two big parties. You might as well wait for hell to freeze over for the Tories to come round, so it is Labour or nothing. We got so close in 1997-2001, but Labour can still be won round. Neither is a hung parliament any use to us – it just means more Tories united in their opposition to PR, and having to persuade even more of the die hard Labour tribalists – no chance!As for the Greens – it doesn’t really matter what they stand for, as a minor party under this system – all they will ever do is split the left vote and let the Tories in.

  29. aemortimer@hotmail.com March 3, 2008 at 8:25 pm #

    Hm, I’m sorry to sound like the simple rude mechanical amid all this languid lord-what-fools-these-mortals-be talk, and I’d certainly agree with Lee insofar as I don’t love every Lib Dem policy to bits by any means, but I really don’t get this recurring bad joke about the Lib Dems not knowing who they are. There’s a whole website choked with policy documents telling you exactly who they are (to a fault, indeed).Fair enough, don’t vote Lib Dem if you don’t care to (though if you’re left-wing but anti-state, socially liberal, economically libertarian-with-social-conscience, pro-electoral reform and pro-low taxes, it’s a bit of a no-brainer, quite frankly) but please don’t perpetuate that lazy media one-liner either. It suits Labour and the Tories to use it, especially when their own identities leave quite a lot to be desired – and that means a weakened opposition to the ruling consensus, which is a Bad Thing for all.

  30. aemortimer@hotmail.com March 3, 2008 at 8:25 pm #

    Hm, I’m sorry to sound like the simple rude mechanical amid all this languid lord-what-fools-these-mortals-be talk, and I’d certainly agree with Lee insofar as I don’t love every Lib Dem policy to bits by any means, but I really don’t get this recurring bad joke about the Lib Dems not knowing who they are. There’s a whole website choked with policy documents telling you exactly who they are (to a fault, indeed).Fair enough, don’t vote Lib Dem if you don’t care to (though if you’re left-wing but anti-state, socially liberal, economically libertarian-with-social-conscience, pro-electoral reform and pro-low taxes, it’s a bit of a no-brainer, quite frankly) but please don’t perpetuate that lazy media one-liner either. It suits Labour and the Tories to use it, especially when their own identities leave quite a lot to be desired – and that means a weakened opposition to the ruling consensus, which is a Bad Thing for all.

  31. aaronsheath@gmail.com March 3, 2008 at 8:35 pm #

    Alix, but I really don’t get this recurring bad joke about the Lib Dems not knowing who they are.Really, may I refer you <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Orange_Book:_Reclaiming_Liberalism“ rel=”nofollow”>Exhibit A ?

  32. aaronsheath@gmail.com March 3, 2008 at 8:35 pm #

    Alix, but I really don’t get this recurring bad joke about the Lib Dems not knowing who they are.Really, may I refer you <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Orange_Book:_Reclaiming_Liberalism“ rel=”nofollow”>Exhibit A ?

  33. anticant@hotmail.co.uk March 3, 2008 at 8:58 pm #

    Vote for the best candidate, regardless of party. As a temperamental liberal, I incline towards the LibDems without being wildly enthusiastic about the party as a whole. Fortunately, I’ve no dilemma at the next election, because my LibDem MP, Sarah Teather, is the most dedicated, hard working and helpful constituency MP I’ve ever known in 60 years of political involvement, and for that she would get my vote whichever party she belonged to.

  34. anticant@hotmail.co.uk March 3, 2008 at 8:58 pm #

    Vote for the best candidate, regardless of party. As a temperamental liberal, I incline towards the LibDems without being wildly enthusiastic about the party as a whole. Fortunately, I’ve no dilemma at the next election, because my LibDem MP, Sarah Teather, is the most dedicated, hard working and helpful constituency MP I’ve ever known in 60 years of political involvement, and for that she would get my vote whichever party she belonged to.

  35. questionthatblog@gmail.com March 3, 2008 at 9:27 pm #

    You sound quite a lot like me. In fact – despite some of my blogging – I’d consider myself slightly further to the left if anything. (I don’t think a flat tax is the way to go, for instance). You were right first time regarding the Green Party. Take a look at Samizdata on the subject:http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/2008/02/vote_green_go_b.htmlhttp://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/2008/02/vote_green_go_b.htmlAnd also my post on SWP entryism within the Green party:http://questionthat.me.uk/2008/02/making-greens-redder.htmlI call myself a “thoughtful libertarian”, but in real world politics I lean slightly towards the Lib Dems (The new Libertarian Party is interesting but just too right-wing as things stand). I just wish the LDs would make their mind up on the EU and stand up for a referendum.

  36. questionthatblog@gmail.com March 3, 2008 at 9:27 pm #

    You sound quite a lot like me. In fact – despite some of my blogging – I’d consider myself slightly further to the left if anything. (I don’t think a flat tax is the way to go, for instance). You were right first time regarding the Green Party. Take a look at Samizdata on the subject:http://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/2008/02/vote_green_go_b.htmlhttp://www.samizdata.net/blog/archives/2008/02/vote_green_go_b.htmlAnd also my post on SWP entryism within the Green party:http://questionthat.me.uk/2008/02/making-greens-redder.htmlI call myself a “thoughtful libertarian”, but in real world politics I lean slightly towards the Lib Dems (The new Libertarian Party is interesting but just too right-wing as things stand). I just wish the LDs would make their mind up on the EU and stand up for a referendum.

  37. bob.piper@gmail.com March 3, 2008 at 10:08 pm #

    Actually, Tyger, you sound very New Labour to me…. sadly. Personally, I’m a socialist but I’ve stopped in the party and put up with all that low tax private enterprise crap.

  38. bob.piper@gmail.com March 3, 2008 at 10:08 pm #

    Actually, Tyger, you sound very New Labour to me…. sadly. Personally, I’m a socialist but I’ve stopped in the party and put up with all that low tax private enterprise crap.

  39. felixthecat1@btinternet.com March 4, 2008 at 7:07 am #

    Tyger.I think you’ve seen this befor, but….The party tent…Reason 1..It’s better to be inside the tent urinating out, than the outside of the tent urinating in. As there is a piece of urine the proof material between you and those you wish to urinate on inside. With that piece of material between you and them, they don’t care how much you urinate.and the chances are that your feet get wet. Reason 2.. Go find another tent to urinate out of. Although now you have two layers of urine proof material between you and those you originally wished to urinate on, and the chances are that when you look around in that tent you want to urinate on its occupants even more than the occupants of the first tent you were in . Reason 3.. Urinate off completely, and no one will give a defecation where you urinate.moral.. Stay in the first tentI live in Libdem Cornwall….It’s hell.

  40. felixthecat1@btinternet.com March 4, 2008 at 7:07 am #

    Tyger.I think you’ve seen this befor, but….The party tent…Reason 1..It’s better to be inside the tent urinating out, than the outside of the tent urinating in. As there is a piece of urine the proof material between you and those you wish to urinate on inside. With that piece of material between you and them, they don’t care how much you urinate.and the chances are that your feet get wet. Reason 2.. Go find another tent to urinate out of. Although now you have two layers of urine proof material between you and those you originally wished to urinate on, and the chances are that when you look around in that tent you want to urinate on its occupants even more than the occupants of the first tent you were in . Reason 3.. Urinate off completely, and no one will give a defecation where you urinate.moral.. Stay in the first tentI live in Libdem Cornwall….It’s hell.

  41. la_grief@hotmail.com March 4, 2008 at 2:07 pm #

    Ian: That stuff on Samizdata is a load of bollocks. The Greens have their issues but making inconsistent logical leaps of faith to try and tie the greens up against the BNP is poor form really.Brod: Lib Dem Cornwall hell isn’t necessarily caused by the party overarching it though. Cornwall is plagued with bureaucratic busy bodies and people only interested in keeping jobs for the boys. It’s ironically the perfect example of how power devolved away from the party councillors and party members claim to be a part of can be counter-productive.

  42. la_grief@hotmail.com March 4, 2008 at 2:07 pm #

    Ian: That stuff on Samizdata is a load of bollocks. The Greens have their issues but making inconsistent logical leaps of faith to try and tie the greens up against the BNP is poor form really.Brod: Lib Dem Cornwall hell isn’t necessarily caused by the party overarching it though. Cornwall is plagued with bureaucratic busy bodies and people only interested in keeping jobs for the boys. It’s ironically the perfect example of how power devolved away from the party councillors and party members claim to be a part of can be counter-productive.

  43. questionthatblog@gmail.com March 4, 2008 at 4:19 pm #

    Lee: Perry of Samizdata said this in response to someone else in the comments thread of the post I linked to, but I think it is relevant to your objection as well:[i]”Perhaps you have missed the main point of the article, [Lee]. It is that the consequences of Green policies are the same as the BNP, not that they overtly want the same things as the BNP.”[/i]With that in mind, it’d be good to know what it is about the article that you think is a “load of bollocks”.

  44. questionthatblog@gmail.com March 4, 2008 at 4:19 pm #

    Lee: Perry of Samizdata said this in response to someone else in the comments thread of the post I linked to, but I think it is relevant to your objection as well:[i]”Perhaps you have missed the main point of the article, [Lee]. It is that the consequences of Green policies are the same as the BNP, not that they overtly want the same things as the BNP.”[/i]With that in mind, it’d be good to know what it is about the article that you think is a “load of bollocks”.

  45. la_grief@hotmail.com March 5, 2008 at 1:45 am #

    What is bollocks is the tone of the article trying to suggest that because the outcomes COULD (not would) be the same in some instances and areas as BNP policy that the green party are as reprehensible as the BNP. The two simply don’t have to follow each other.But, for thought…”Boycott food grown by black farmers and subsidise crops grown by whites” is one headline given by Samizdata. The reality is that the Greens prefer local sustainable and organic farming due to their opinion on carbon footprints. Why is it acceptable to try and claim that a circumstantial outcome of a policy based on a certain ordering of liberties is the boycotting of black farmers?I’m not denying the manifesto is kooky, that it is ill thought out in places, and that it occasionally has things that feel like regressive policies (which are also shared one way or another by the big three between them I find)…but to compare them at any point to the BNP is just…well…bollocks. 😛

  46. la_grief@hotmail.com March 5, 2008 at 1:45 am #

    What is bollocks is the tone of the article trying to suggest that because the outcomes COULD (not would) be the same in some instances and areas as BNP policy that the green party are as reprehensible as the BNP. The two simply don’t have to follow each other.But, for thought…”Boycott food grown by black farmers and subsidise crops grown by whites” is one headline given by Samizdata. The reality is that the Greens prefer local sustainable and organic farming due to their opinion on carbon footprints. Why is it acceptable to try and claim that a circumstantial outcome of a policy based on a certain ordering of liberties is the boycotting of black farmers?I’m not denying the manifesto is kooky, that it is ill thought out in places, and that it occasionally has things that feel like regressive policies (which are also shared one way or another by the big three between them I find)…but to compare them at any point to the BNP is just…well…bollocks. 😛

  47. elvie@hotmail.co.uk March 6, 2008 at 3:13 pm #

    No. 3: The Greens are not trying to price poorer families off the road. They would make it more costly for people to run the big, high-powered gas-guzzlers, the 4×4’s and the sporty cars. If poor families are using those types of vehicles then they’re really not that poor.The Samizdata anti-green agenda. It’s grossly misleading and dishonest to compare the BNP policies with the Green’s even if it’s just the “consequences” that are being pointed out. The green party’s policies on race, equality and social justice are in direct contrast to those of the BNP whose green policies, incidentally are clearly a cover-up for their anti-immigration stance. The BNP and Migration Watch use the green issue to hide their real and very racist agenda.

  48. elvie@hotmail.co.uk March 6, 2008 at 3:13 pm #

    No. 3: The Greens are not trying to price poorer families off the road. They would make it more costly for people to run the big, high-powered gas-guzzlers, the 4×4’s and the sporty cars. If poor families are using those types of vehicles then they’re really not that poor.The Samizdata anti-green agenda. It’s grossly misleading and dishonest to compare the BNP policies with the Green’s even if it’s just the “consequences” that are being pointed out. The green party’s policies on race, equality and social justice are in direct contrast to those of the BNP whose green policies, incidentally are clearly a cover-up for their anti-immigration stance. The BNP and Migration Watch use the green issue to hide their real and very racist agenda.

  49. la_grief@hotmail.com March 8, 2008 at 2:44 am #

    26. It’s unfair to assume a person with a “gas guzzling” 4X4 is any more well off than anyone else, and also to assume they are any more reckless with the environment. While you could be happily buying fruit and veg from Spain and Venezuela while taking yearly long haul holidays and leaving your computer on all night, just because you own a smart car doesn’t make you a) less well off or b) causing less of an impact on a family that owns that 4X4 but never does holidays out of Britain, barely drives that 4X4, turns off all their appliances and only uses locally sourced food.The environmental debate is so much more complex than the symbols of “bad carbon footprints” and I wish those interested in green issues would stop assuming that those with one “bad” tendency towards the environment don’t offset that footprint as is their right and responsibility to do so.

  50. la_grief@hotmail.com March 8, 2008 at 2:44 am #

    26. It’s unfair to assume a person with a “gas guzzling” 4X4 is any more well off than anyone else, and also to assume they are any more reckless with the environment. While you could be happily buying fruit and veg from Spain and Venezuela while taking yearly long haul holidays and leaving your computer on all night, just because you own a smart car doesn’t make you a) less well off or b) causing less of an impact on a family that owns that 4X4 but never does holidays out of Britain, barely drives that 4X4, turns off all their appliances and only uses locally sourced food.The environmental debate is so much more complex than the symbols of “bad carbon footprints” and I wish those interested in green issues would stop assuming that those with one “bad” tendency towards the environment don’t offset that footprint as is their right and responsibility to do so.

  51. bunnyhugger@hotmail.co.uk March 8, 2008 at 12:23 pm #

    I was merely responding to tyger’s point about poor families being priced off the road. 4×4’s cost more to run so it stands to reason that, generally speaking, those poor families will run smaller cars that have cheaper running costs.I agree that owning a small ‘green’ car is not nearly enough on its own and that it shouldn’t be assumed that people who have one bad tendency towards the environment are neglectful in all other areas. But there are more issues regarding the urban 4×4’s than just their emissions. Apart from the non-logic of driving around town in an off-roader that has only ever driven ON the road, I’m thinking of the safety of other road-users here.Offsetting is a whole other issue that I am dubious about, not least because the offsetting industry encourages you to emit more. I worry that it’s little more than a guilt-relieving industry. How can we make the carbon that we’ve already emitted disappear? I know this sounds a bit complex but the only way we can reduce our carbon emissions is to, well, reduce our carbon emissions.That said, individually, we can make some progress but I think the main responsibility lies with big business and governments.

  52. bunnyhugger@hotmail.co.uk March 8, 2008 at 12:23 pm #

    I was merely responding to tyger’s point about poor families being priced off the road. 4×4’s cost more to run so it stands to reason that, generally speaking, those poor families will run smaller cars that have cheaper running costs.I agree that owning a small ‘green’ car is not nearly enough on its own and that it shouldn’t be assumed that people who have one bad tendency towards the environment are neglectful in all other areas. But there are more issues regarding the urban 4×4’s than just their emissions. Apart from the non-logic of driving around town in an off-roader that has only ever driven ON the road, I’m thinking of the safety of other road-users here.Offsetting is a whole other issue that I am dubious about, not least because the offsetting industry encourages you to emit more. I worry that it’s little more than a guilt-relieving industry. How can we make the carbon that we’ve already emitted disappear? I know this sounds a bit complex but the only way we can reduce our carbon emissions is to, well, reduce our carbon emissions.That said, individually, we can make some progress but I think the main responsibility lies with big business and governments.

  53. ashoksoni@hotmail.com March 19, 2008 at 5:14 pm #

    .So seriously, where is my home?….the world of spirituality. clearly!….hope all is well.

  54. ashoksoni@hotmail.com March 19, 2008 at 5:14 pm #

    .So seriously, where is my home?….the world of spirituality. clearly!….hope all is well.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s