Skip to main content

Boris Johnson and the Tower of London

Boris Johnson, an anti-war Libertarian, has been elected Mayor of London.

To some extent the election was--kind of like Arnold Schwarzenegger's original victory in the Grey Davis recall or Jesse Ventura's win in Minnesota--more of a testament to the unpopularity of incumbent Ken Livingston than

Two of Boris's more widely quoted positions:

"I'm a libertarian. I think people should get on with their lives as far as possible independently of bossiness and intrusion of all kinds."

“Voting Tory will cause your wife to have bigger breasts and increase your chances of owning a BMW M3.”


This will be an interesting challenge for British Libertarians, as Boris will actually have to (a) govern and (b) overcome some of his own foot-in-mouth statements.

That second part bothers me the most, and will bear the most watching.

Like American Libertarian presidential sort-of-wannabe Bob Barr, Boris has problems with gay people:

‘Labour's appalling agenda, encouraging the teaching of homosexuality in schools, and all the rest of it.’ (The Spectator 15 April 2000) ‘

The essence of that Tory case is unchanged… it is more sensitive to spare parents' anxieties, than to allow Leftwing local authorities to waste taxpayers' money on idiotic and irrelevant homosexual instruction.’ (Daily Telegraph 3 August 2000)

‘Slowly Labour is winning the battle it really cares about, the Kulturkampf, adjusting what can be said, and what cannot be said… Homosexuality is to be taught in schools.’ (The Spectator 29 April 2000)

'If gay marriage was OK – and I was uncertain on the issue – then I saw no reason in principle why a union should not be consecrated between three men, as well as two men; or indeed three men and a dog.' (Friends, Voters, Countrymen p96)


His description of political enemy Tony Blair arriving in Africa have struck some as distinctly racist:

They say he is shortly off to the Congo. No doubt the AK47s will fall silent, and the pangas will stop their hacking of human flesh, and the tribal warriors will all break out in watermelon smiles to see the big white chief touch down in his big white British taxpayer-funded bird.


And I also have to wonder if his appeal to Conservative voters is more based on his position on Muslims than on Libertarianism:

If we were Israelis, we would by now be doing a standard thing to that white semi-detached pebbledash house at 51 Colwyn Road, Beeston. Having given due warning, we would dispatch an American-built ground-assault helicopter and blow the place to bits. Then we would send in bulldozers to scrape over the remains, and we would do the same to all the other houses in the area thought to have been the temporary or permanent addresses of the suicide bombers and their families.

After decades of deranged attacks the Israelis have come to the conclusion that this is the best way to deter Palestinian families from nurturing these vipers in their bosoms, and also the best way of explaining to the death-hungry narcissists that they may get the 72 black-eyed virgins of scripture, but their family gets the bulldozer.


You have to wonder, if a key tenet of Libertarianism is the non-initiation of force or coercion, exactly how Boris justifies pursuing the Israeli scorched-Earth policy that has been so successful in achieving peace with the Palestinians.

My intention is not to bury Boris Johnson, but to hold him to the same standards as I would expect any other elected official to meet.

If I criticize Barack Obama for wrapping himself up in Change We Can Believe In while cozying up to defense lobbyists to whom he has promised massive increases in the military budget, then I have to be as rough on people who share my own political label.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

A Libertarian Martin Luther King Jr. Day post

In which we travel into interesting waters . . . (for a fairly long trip, so be prepared) Dr. King's 1968 book, Where do we go from here:  chaos or community? , is profound in that it criticizes anti-poverty programs for their piecemeal approach, as John Schlosberg of the Center for a Stateless Society  [C4SS] observes: King noted that the antipoverty programs of the time “proceeded from a premise that poverty is a consequence of multiple evils,” with separate programs each dedicated to individual issues such as education and housing. Though in his view “none of these remedies in itself is unsound,” they “all have a fatal disadvantage” of being “piecemeal,” with their implementation having “fluctuated at the whims of legislative bodies” or been “entangled in bureaucratic stalling.”   The result is that “fragmentary and spasmodic reforms have failed to reach down to the profoundest needs of the poor.” Such single-issue approaches also have “another common failing — ...

More of This, Please

Or perhaps I should say, "Less of this one, please." Or how about just, "None of them. Ever again. Please....For the Love of God." Sunshine State Poll: Grayson In Trouble The latest Sunshine State/VSS poll shows controversial Democratic incumbent Alan Grayson trailing former state Senator Dan Webster by seven points, 43 percent to 36 percent. A majority of respondents -- 51 percent -- disapprove of the job that Grayson is doing. Independents have an unfavorable view of him as well, by a 36/47 margin. Grayson has ignored the conventional wisdom that a freshman should be a quiet member who carefully tends to the home fires. The latest controversy involves his " Taliban Dan " advertisement, where he explicitly compares his opponent to the Taliban, and shows a clip of Webster paraphrasing Ephesians 5:22 -- "wives, submit to your husbands." An unedited version of the clip shows that Webster was actually suggesting that husba...

A reply to Salon's R. J. Eskrow, and his 11 stupid questions about Libertarians

Posts here have been in short supply as I have been living life and trying to get a campaign off the ground. But "11 questions to see if Libertarians are hypocrites" by R. J. Eskrow, picked up at Salon , was just so freaking lame that I spent half an hour answering them. In the end (but I'll leave it to your judgment), it is not that Libertarians or Libertarian theory looks hypocritical, but that the best that can be said for Mr. Eskrow is that he doesn't have the faintest clue what he's talking about. That's ok, because even ill-informed attacks by people like this make an important point:  Libertarian ideas (as opposed to Conservative ideas, which are completely different) are making a comeback as the dynamic counterpoint to "politics as usual," and so every hack you can imagine must be dragged out to refute them. Ergo:  Mr. Eskrow's 11 questions, with answers: 1.       Are unions, political parties, elections, and ...