Blog description.

Accentuating the Liberal in Classical Liberal: Advocating Ascendency of the Individual & a Politick & Literature to Fight the Rise & Rise of the Tax Surveillance State. 'Illigitum non carborundum'.

Liberty and freedom are two proud words that have been executed from the political lexicon: they were frog marched and stood before a wall of blank minds, then forcibly blindfolded, and shot, with the whimpering staccato of ‘equality’ and ‘fairness’ resounding over and over. And not only did this atrocity go unreported by journalists in the mainstream media, they were in the firing squad.

The premise of this blog is simple: the Soviets thought they had equality, and welfare from cradle to grave, until the illusory free lunch of redistribution took its inevitable course, and cost them everything they had. First to go was their privacy, after that their freedom, then on being ground down to an equality of poverty only, for many of them their lives as they tried to escape a life behind the Iron Curtain. In the state-enforced common good, was found only slavery to the prison of each other's mind; instead of the caring state, they had imposed the surveillance state to keep them in line. So why are we accumulating a national debt to build the slave state again in the West? Where is the contrarian, uncomfortable literature to put the state experiment finally to rest?

Comments Policy: I'm not moderating comments, so keep it sane and go away with the spam. Government officials please read disclaimer at bottom of page.

Friday, August 2, 2013

GCSB & Fat Tax Redux: Both Sux. Plus I Mention The War.

Here’s the problem.

Two of the current main players in the privacy debate in New Zealand are the man who's single vote is going to put the GCSB Bill into law, Peter Dunne, and leading the inquiry into the leak of Rebecca Kitteridge’s report, the man who has just jackbooted all over the freedom of the fourth estate, David Henry.

Look at the careers of these two men:

Dunne is the ex-Minister of Revenue: Henry the ex-Commissioner of Inland Revenue. Both men have dedicated some great deal of their career to ensuring their tax department is so powerful we have no right to be left alone, no right to privacy, in order the state can take our property and our effort to fund a planned society some few of us have no philosophical agreement with. A state so powerful that in the tax field it can enact and apply retrospective legislation to re-write a taxpayer's history at the whim of bureaucrats - it's not a Godwin to say the same as the Soviets did, it's merely fact: indeed a practice so prevalent there are now professional continuing education courses in how to survive retrospective tax enactment. Neither man could possibly understand what the concept of privacy entails. Of course Henry asked for Vance’s phone records: given his tax department background he would have simply thought this normal and routine; that's the culture of IRD, that there is no private part of you free from their purview, they own you. And as for Dunne: well he’s just contemptible. After being destroyed via the invasion of his privacy, he is still going to vote for every Kiwi to be spied on by GCSB. This man is living through a mid-life crisis that has turned him into the definition of contradiction, and unfortunately we are paying the price for this with our liberty, as will beagles in laboratories.

If there had been a Libertarianz member in Parliament in place of Mr Dunne, and a libertarian minded person who understood the principle tenets of classical liberalism running the enquiry of Mr Henry, the GCSB Bill would not be about to become law, nor would  Andrea Vance, and via her our fourth estate, have been compromised. We could’ve all – if we took enough drugs to pretend IRD can’t frog march every single one of us to interview room 101 whenever they want with no legal recourse – pretended this was the free society millions of men and women died fighting a major world war for. Why was Henry put up to head that inquiry when he had no philosophical qualifications (academic or experience-based) for that post?

It’s a travesty. But I knew that, because as the byline of this blog states, civilisation is the movement toward privacy, the police state the opposite, and tax legislation, particularly tax administration, has become the legislation and administration of the surveillance state.

And while I’m looking into this boiled egg before me, well-salted teaspoon in hand – I write these posts over breakfast - regarding the fat tax promotion, yet again. The free society’s perspective simply stated:

A fat tax is a tax on food choice.

A tax on food choice is a tax on choice, period.

A tax on choice is a tax on our freedom.

The topic of fat taxes does not take place in the health vote, it’s a philosophical issue.

. ... I'm getting sick of writing this entire post over and over. Hopefully next post I’ll have time to finish my take-take on the Clifford Bay ferry terminal. The bureaucrats are mucking up that one also.

But lastly, as I’ve mentioned the war, what those men and women were fighting for.

No comments:

Post a Comment