Libertarian dilemma

article-1220579-06CA01B2000005DC-894_468x431

Stephen R. Brown is 62 years old and lives in a historic neighbourhood in Georgetown. He couldn’t sleep at night because drunken students, with their “modern” behaviour, sprawled into his residential section of the neighbourhood and made it impossible.

He posted photos of their drunken rampages on a website drunkengeorgetownstudents. Students complained that they’d been caught out in the personas they’d prefer people not to see and some complained to his internet provider who promptly took down his site.

He then went to his own hosting and set up a new site.  The students hit back with a site called Creepyoldguy, the premise being that he takes photos of them and he’s old [he’s actually a professional photographer].  Naturally, the people who should have stepped in to help Stephen Brown, such as  Citizens Association of Georgetown President Jennifer Altemus, did nothing of the kind, saying in the sweetest PC way, that “Brown’s Web site is “just a little bit too dramatic.”

“I know it can be frustrating to not be able to sleep in your own house,” she said, but the neighborhood association “would certainly like to operate through traditional channels of communication.”

Does she?  Does she know what it’s like?  Has she had it happen to her?

And isn’t there some kind of law regarding noise and drunk and disorderly?  Isn’t there such a thing as rights of residents not to have this imposed on them after a certain hour?  Isn’t there some sort of rule about 11 p.m. and noise in a residential suburb?  If he lived next door to the campus union building where the party was being held, well, they’d have some case.

Isn’t there some sort of right of a single citizen not to be set upon by an entire campus?

Then we come to the sort of behaviour seen everywhere now.

Bacchanalia

Between 17 and maybe 23/4, your [not so] humble blogger would party and get fairly cheerful.  I’m now trying to think back to whether we threw up [yes] and had sex in neighbour’s gardens on a nightly basis [no – we went to the beach].

You can call it age and one doesn’t want to be hypocritical but I see some differences, which come down to self-respect.  There was a London suburb where I lived, having come down from oop north and one night, about fifteen years ago, being part of a group who were, let’s say, “convivial”, I remember being shocked at seeing something out of a dystopic movie.

It was a week night and there were bodies in various states of intoxication, undress and intercourse, numbering, I don’t know – maybe two or three hundred, spread over footpaths, over the green, over low walls of houses, in people’s gardens, in the gutter, many aggressive, the girls beyond control and what amazed me was how they could get away with it, given the draconian police in this land.

This would not have been out of place as a description:

There was no crime, no deed of shame, wanting. More uncleanness was committed by men with men than with women. Whoever would not submit to defilement, or shrank from violating others, was sacrificed as a victim. To regard nothing as impious or criminal was the sum total of their religion.

The men, as though seized with madness and with frenzied distortions of their bodies, shrieked out prophecies; the matrons, dressed as Bacchae, their hair disheveled, rushed down to the Tiber River with burning torches … men were fastened to a machine and hurried off to hidden caves – these were the men who refused to … take part in their crimes or submit to their pollution.

There’s more than a little Sodom and Gomorrah going down here and though I’m not averse to nooky in the least, I don’t want it to be by the peer pressure of an out of control mob and this comes back to blog posts, for example here and here and here, on kids being dragged into this lifestyle they never asked for and are far too young to get into.

There’s always been a partying set but not every single young person in a community was dragged into it; there’s always been underage sex but not condoms handed to children by teachers who say to their classes, “Better be safe than sorry, enjoy it.”  There’s always been drunkenness from about 17 onwards but not from 13 onwards and lying about in huge numbers in public places at night.

Both Tory and Labour leaderships are culpable in this and parents/teachers are complicit.

It’s the sheer numbers and the lowering of the age which suggests to me that we’re heading for some sort of mindless mini-apocalypse.  The stupidity of young people today, which allows such mindlessness, is attested in the necessity to lower GSCE standards and commenter Ivan says:

One thing I should have added is that if we allow the decline in educational standards and the paying teen mums to have babies then we are headed in the direction of the film ‘Idiocracy’ http://www.metacafe.com/watch/yt-u8yoSAiwY18/idiocracy_my_fave_part/

Little wonder that the kids are drafted into abandoning self-respect when parents have faded into obscurity and refuse to take a stand, when schools aid and abet it, when the State, its leaders so corrupt and partying themselves in the same unrestrained way, would hardly pay it more than lip service – the historical parallels are many.

Any state in which the leaders oppress the people, where the adults refuse to protect the children from harm, both moral and physical and where the prevailing culture, atmosphere, ambience if you like, is tribal, primaeval and voodoo, where large numbers of people start scarring and mutilating their bodies as a result of social pressure and the dearth of decent role models they’d accept as credible, where the code of conduct the society once adhered to is abandoned – then that society is going the way of Lord of the Flies.

There is no protection for you in such a society and the opposite solution offered by the globalists – sell yourself to the State and we’ll protect you, produces Ceaucescus and Politburos and we all know where those lead to.

The solution

Rule of law, not rule of laws, the Christian ethical code [with the word Christian removed if that’s offensive to you] and a strong leader who tends not to megalomania [count our current Big Three out], to remind people how to act once again … not unlike when the little savages in Lord of the Flies chase the last moral kid who represents the values of sanity, in order to murder him and come up against an adult in the form of a naval officer who looks down on the scene and wonders what the hell had been going on.

Here’s that scene, which says it better than my words can.

Where is our deus ex machina?

3 comments for “Libertarian dilemma

  1. ivan
    May 1, 2010 at 11:19

    The problem today is that students get everything too easy. When I went to university my grant was £35 a year – I had to work for anything else. Up at 5:30 every day during term time to work in an hotel kitchen – summer holidays were spent working on a building site.

    The one big advantage, actually two – I got a good education and I got to explore the government surplus shops on Tottenham Court and Edgware roads.

    Unfortunately today, we have a culture of ‘equality’ – we must allow an equal number of yobs to go to university. It is these yobs that give all students a bad name and lower the standards.

    We need to get back to an education system that selects the best and pushes them further than they thought possible, but there is no political party that has the guts to do anything like that which is needed.

  2. May 1, 2010 at 13:37

    Ivan, it’s not just the guts, though I do agree with you. It is more than guts – it is agendas. There are particular sociological and ideological reasons for things to have gone as they have and people like Cameron and Clegg are clearly in the pocket but secretly so. Brown at least comes out and admits he’s a rabid red – in a sense he’s more honest.

    The reason the U.S. curriculum went the way it did can substantially be laid at the door of the people behind the Lincoln School, whence modern curriculum research stemmed. A glance at who those people were and the money behind them and where that money came from and how educators were only admitted if they embraced the philosophy, makes it very difficult to achieve what you said and which it is, of course, agreed we need:

    “We need to get back to an education system that selects the best and pushes them further than they thought possible.”

    http://nourishingobscurity.com/2009/11/06/the-historical-roots-of-the-dumbing-down/

    http://nourishingobscurity.blogspot.com/2009/05/education-destroyed-2-issue-of-research.html

    http://www.sntp.net/education/leipzig_connection_9.htm

    [http://www.sntp.net/education/leipzig_connection.htm – starts here]


    Here too.

  3. JD
    May 1, 2010 at 14:13

    “Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the law”
    This is what people have been encouraged to believe. I have said it here before; the fool Roy Jenkins declared that the permissive society is a civilized society.
    Permanent adolescence is the inevitable result.

Comments are closed.