Think, damn you
Wednesday, February 3, 2010 We're relaunching The Free Society website this week. We have a new editor, Karen McTigue, and over the next few weeks we will be welcoming new writers including Alex Deane (Big Brother Watch), Chris Snowdon (Velvet Glove Iron Fist) and Rose Whiteley (of this parish).
Other contributors will include Simon Hills (associate editor of The Times Magazine), Eamonn Butler (Adam Smith Institute) and writer and journalist Suzy Dean.
I expect the site to be updated several times a week with news and comment. Simon Hills, for example, will be contributing a series of articles entitled "Reflections on a free society". Today, he writes:
We’re told too not to be sexist, racist, homophobic. Not once, every day. Much of a child’s geography schoolwork now consists of being told that naughty, naughty loggers are chopping down trees in the rain forest, an inhospitable region full of things that will kill you they’re told would be paradise, were it not for us (adopt tone of contempt here) greedy Westerners.
None of this has anything to do with thinking. This is to do with bossing us about. Patronising us. The exhortation Think! is letting you know that as far as the authorities are concerned you’re going about your life in some sort of gormless Neanderthal stupor that requires someone of greater intelligence and sensibility (theirs) to pull you out of.
But thinking is based upon drawing on an aggregation of facts and acting upon them. It’s called growing up. In a free society, we educate our children by giving them the tools with which to think and then put them out into the world to become responsible adults.
Full article HERE.
Note: to register your support for The Free Society campaign, click HERE. You will receive an occasional e-bulletin with updates about articles and events.
Reader Comments (6)
True the crazy thing about their attitude is when it actually comes to being gormless and stupid they do it with olympian skill.
Oh and they are corrupt too, morally and spiritually.
Well done Simon this could be one of THE libertarian blogs in the UK with such an impressive line up of writers. Simon is off to a great start too.
The concerted dumbing-down of our Education System is one of the greatest Crimes Against Humanity IMHO.
Just ask ANY Professor of Retailing Studies...........
I am sorry to say this but the name 'The Free Society' is awful. It is almost as awful as 'Forest'.
How could anyone associate the word 'Forest' with the enjoyment of tobacco? The word 'Forest' sounds like a group of tree huggers. it may have been OK 20 years ago, but it is not OK today.
One's initial thought on hearing the words 'free society', as a smoker, is to associate the words with 'freedom to smoke'. But what would a person not associated with smoking think? Such a person might very possibly think that this Society wants to be free of smoking. The word 'society' could mean a little group of people (eg, The Jane Ayre Appreciation Society) or it could mean society (the people) in a general way.
I think that it is a mistake to try to resuscitate 'The Free Society'. Be cleverer. Call the website 'Freedom' or 'Liberty' - anything but 'society'.
Come on, Simon, the name 'Forest' is awful! Rename the organisation - everyone is laughing at you.
Burnham's statement has clearly indicated that the smoking issue is no longer a matter of health. The original justification for the smoking ban in enclosed public places was the protection of workers' health. When we go outside to smoke, there is no longer a health issue at all since workers in enclosed places are, by definition, not outside. The possibility that tobacco smoke could possibly drift inside a place is irrelevant since the Health Act only proscribes THE ACT OF SMOKING in enclosed areas.
By virtue of Burnham's statement, it is clear that he (the government) is no longer interested in protecting workers; he is untested only in denying us our God-given right to be individuals; that is, to engage in risky activities if we want to, even if these activities are not very risky anyway.
Forest - Grow up!
Junican, I agree about the outside smoking comment and about smoke drifting into buildings - lets face it, if health was, in any way, shape or form, the reason behind this ban, then all windows would be sealed closed and air filtration installed instead and masks of some discription handed out for when outside, purely because of the vehicle fumes that are far more deadly and cause far more complaints such as asthma, than any number of people smoking or any amount of cigarette smoke could ever do!
I would like to see a photo of the journalist writing the article...it would feel more personal that way...and where is the feed-back for comments.