The uglification of England
Wednesday, May 16, 2007 
The "uglification of England" that David Hockney refers to and Barry Goodman describes in practise (below) is reflected by some of the emails that are flying into our inbox. Today, we received the following (this is the edited version!):
"Hello Mr Simon Clark of FOREST, I am 'THE ANTI SMOKER'. On 1st July 2007 Smoking WILL be totally banned in ALL PUBLIC PLACES. This will be permanent and there is NOTHING you will be able to do about it! Then your Pro-Smoking Club will be declared illegal and people will give up smoking in their droves like in Southern Ireland which is now a 'Non-Smokers Paradise'. Yes, Mr Clark, come and have a nice chat with me. I'd eat you alive (verbally I mean). You don't want me inside your head, you'd have a nervous breakdown. Goodbye Mr Clark."
OK, he's barking mad. But there's plenty more where that came from. Other emails include:
"Smoking in public is obnoxious and always has been. Next you will be suggesting that the slave trade was perfectly acceptable, or maybe that paedophile's [sic] are robbed of their human rights."
"No more medical treatment for smokers. Let them die slowly and in agony. They all scum [sic] especially FOREST members."
"Smokers are ignorant, abhorrant and arrogant little twats who couldn't give a shit about anyone but
themselves. They are fucking idiots and I hate them.""You people are SCUM. Hope you all get cancer and die a slow death you evil bastards."
"Smokers are a dying breed of smelly individuals with little willpower, even less self esteem and probably no common sense. Have fun and die happy in an oxygen tent :-)"
You might think these people are all nutters (or, as we now say, not fit for purpose) but you'd be wrong. Two years ago a local councillor returned a letter Forest had sent to thousands of councillors throughout Britain. Across the top he had scrawled, "I hope you get cancer and die." When we mentioned this to the local paper, the news editor laughed and said, "Oh, he's quite a character!", and ignored it.
The smoking debate has long been characterised by extremism on both sides. But the level of abuse from anti-smokers is definitely getting worse and, interestingly, it has got worse since MPs voted to ban smoking in enclosed public places. Encouraged by our elected representatives, and the government's increasingly radical anti-smoking campaigns, some people clearly feel they have been given the green light to say (and do) whatever they like if it involves smokers. How far this will go remains to be seen. I'll keep you posted - if I haven't been eaten alive.
Reader Comments (55)
Cleone, have you ever tried putting a dissenting voice on an ASH forum? They don't allow it. Verboten. But it is quite fun to go into anti-land sometimes and watch 'em squeal when asked to justify their convictions. Try the BBC.
Excellent points, Peter. This legislation, and the demonisation-drive behind it, is designed to be divisive. Designed to exert peer-pressure on us unreconstructed naughty children. Designed to make us feel guilty and ashamed. It will be one of the famous "unintended consequences" when the violence kicks off.
Thank you Mr Brown, I agree with you. These same idiots are the people who told us that making drink more easily available, and allowing around the clock drinking, would encourage a "continental" type culture here in Britain. If a continental type culture involves beating the living daylights out of your fellow drinkers, and smashing up your local town centres then I say bring back "British culture" instead.
These are also the same idiots who told the young and vulnerable that drug taking was a safe pastime, need I say more about this one? Their endless lists of failed policies and U-turns should be enough for anyone to realise that they cannot be believed or trusted on anything they say, so why aren't the Conservatives doing something to overturn this ghastly bunch of left wing idiots and their nanny policies now before, as you so rightly say, the violence really starts?
Luke,
I have only just managed to get back into the discussion. No offence was taken about your earlier posting.
I will say I do try to keep a sense of humour about all of this while deep down I am becoming more angry and depressed as the ban looms up.
What really gets me is that the Blair & Co. so heavily rely on medical evidence from all of these so called experts only to find out that even "experts" can be wrong.
One case scenario I can think of was Dr. Marietta Higgs of Humberside who in the 1980s was so obsessed with child abuse that hundreds of chlidren were wrenched away from their parents and put with foster parents as a result of her so called judgment. She found abuse where it did not exist and seemed to geta kick out of the physical examinations she undertook.
Another more recent case was the so called expert (I can't remember his name) but he believed in the theory of a mother deliberately injuring her child to get attention and two or three women were put in jail only to be released when it was found his evidence was unsafe.
The couple in Essex who had their children taken away when "experts" thought they were not intelligent enough to look after their children. The mother was said to be too slow and even though the children were happy and well looked after the High Court ruled in favour of Social Services and have had those children adopted. What kind of country are we now living in where you have to pass a test to have children.
I will probably be pilloried for saying this but also the McCanns (Doctors again!) who probably have influenced the lives of other people who bleat that they "were only 50 yards away at the Tapas bar while their children were asleep in their holiday apartment when Maddie was snatched? wandered off? These are the kind of people the government would hold up as an example to the rest of us and rely on their judgment and surely in their jobs they come across risk assessments daily but it was not that intelligent to leave three very young children on their own in a strange apartment in a strange country and I am surprised that the "experts" from Leicestershire Social Services were not on the next flight to Portugal to take the baby twins into care. If it were you or I, we would be in Court by now. Don't get me wrong it is a terrible thing to happen to any couple and I do have some sympathy but I am just trying to demonstrate that even so-called experts can get things gravely wrong.
We seem to be ruled by the Medical profession.
On a more sinister note which nobody seems to have picked up on this week is that Doctors (again) are to be given special powers to "section" anyone whom they think might be a risk to the public or commit a crime, even though they may have committed no crime. Does this mean if you disagree with the government on any subject or say you'd like to throttle one of them (Blair, Brown, Reid - take your pick) they can now lock you up indefinitely in a funny farm without trial. So you can now be locked up for thought crime. So when the ban comes in and you can't have a fag, watch where you drop your illicit dog ends and for God's sake don't whatever you do lose your temper in a public place.
Sylvia has brought up a good point about these so-called experts.
Near where I live there was a company called Rechem. It was a company dealing with PCB boards and other toxic waste. These experts suspected that an increase in cancer patients in the area was a consequence of this comapny. It was well reported in the media. However, when local boffins spent 3 months studying the area, they then found out it was caused by a nearby Crematorium. Strangely, this was never reported by the media. Since then all such buildings have increased the heat across the UK. Again conveniently missed by the press.
Another one was the culls of radioactive sheep Wales a in North Wales a few years ago. This was blamed on the fallout from Chernoble. 1000 miles and many countries to cross when Sellafield was only 40 - 50 miles across the water. How can any intelligent person believe these so-called experts.
Sylvia -
Welcome back. Re your comment that "We seem to be ruled by the Medical profession" - quite right !
However - and at the risk of treading on a few toes - you might also include all those publicly-funded 'scientists' who seek to scare us into unquestioning compliance in certain other areas - and who (in a shamefully UN-scientific way) will brook no dissent at any price (lest it jeopardise their generous funding from gutless politicians, and a gormless electorate).
To anyone who doubts: just have a look at Channel Four's excellent (and VERY 'scientific') programme, "The Great Global Warming Swindle", and you'll see what I mean. It's a PERFECT parallel with The Great Passive Smoking Scam: everyone KNOWS that 'secondhand smoke' kills by the thousand - don't they ?
And now, 'everyone' also KNOWS that if you fail to switch off a lightbulb or two, polar bears will fry, and the seas will rise thirty feet (at least).
Despite our much-vaunted 'modernity', there seems to be a quasi-religious medievalism creeping back into our public discourse: and if we don't do what the (new) priests tell us, then we will ALL be punished by God.
If I were a Californian, I might almost suspect the existence of a Great Conspiracy. Now what an idiotic thought THAT would be............I mean, who could POSSIBLY benefit ?
Well - as our American cousins say - go figure !
And, on this D-Day anniversary, isn't it encouraging to note that there is still plenty of life left in the Big Lie (whatever form it takes, and whoever speaks it)?