Wednesday, 27 April 2011

The Census, Part 2.

A letter has arrived at Fort Thornhill.

It is addressed to "The Occupier", but begins with "Dear Householder".

These two people are not the same. My hamster is an Occupier, but is not yet the Householder.

If I gave the letter to him, I think he would make very good use of it - probably better use of it than most of these letters sent out. Very good advice too - he'll sleep on it*.

What is interesting is the language used.

They "ask" for the Census to be completed, yet threaten one with a fine for non-completion. Why don't they just admit their aggression? No, that would not be the Fabian way. It would be more honest to just send a letter with "WHERE IS IT!!!?" in big bold letters. That would match their intent. "HAND IT OVER OR WE TAKE YOUR STUFF".

The letter then outlines various statutes that give this activity the veneer of legitimacy. Any despotic regime can get laws passed to suit its purpose.

Next is a variation on the disingenuous Fabian mumble-swerve that The Ministry is pumping out at our expense -

"Census information is important and is used to help plan and fund the services that you, your family and your community will need in the years ahead"

Now, first off, "important and...". Note it is "important" AND it is used to "help plan...". It is not important TO plan, no. It is "important", full stop. Of course it is "important" to G Watson, 2011 Census Director, for it is his/her rice-bowl. He/she has a vested interest in making this exercise appear as "important" as possible. It might be "important" to those who want to sell on the data. It might be "important" to those prod-noses who have the utter conceit to think they, and they alone, can steer, mould, direct the lives of others. Yes, The Lives of Others. The wise and renowned Sir John James Cowperthwaite KBE CMG, Financial Secretary to Hong Kong, 1961-71, made a point of NOT collecting statistics, because he knew, once collected, the Administration would then begin to INTERFERE. This Census is a massive Bureaucratic, Fabian Masturbation. It is stat-Pr0n of priapic proportions. It will be used to justify an endless stream of social engineering projects. That in itself is reason enough not to comply.

The information, we are told, will "help plan". If it will "help", is it therefore necessary to threaten me for that "help"? What does it "help plan", then?

"Services like schools, public transport and hospitals".

Schools are currently part of a de facto State monopoly, but that should not be the case. It has no business being a monopoly. When it is not, then the reasons for State planning goes away. The State can barely respond as it is. Hospitals are they key to the information about schools, as they record most births. There is no need to know WHO a 4 year old is to provide them with a school place. There is no guarantee that that child will be in the same Borough in four years time. All the children who will be handled by a school, the school will know when they get applications. Before then it is vague guesswork. Do you think the modelling will be improved by the Census over collecting anonymous births+postcode? I very much doubt it. Hospital records update every day, whereas the Census is once every decade. It is almost USELESS for the purpose of school management. FAIL.

Hospitals might benefit from knowing demographics, but all that information should be easily collected and bang up to date via the local GPs. Again, this can be anonymous when used for planning and can be enforced by the GP-Patient bond of trust. FAIL.

Public transport takes decades to install. Voter records, vehicle registrations at the DVLA and other sources of information can be used to "help plan". A once in 10 years snapshot is not going to cut it, now, is it? Not unless you start asking damn fool intrusive questions, it will not! FAIL.

So, the three examples of why this will "help plan" - note that even their own letter does not say it is actually "important" for this process, just that it will "help plan" - shows that the Census is, at best, not much use, will immediately be out of date and is hardly justified to threaten people over. In fact, it is probably worse than useless. It will be misleading. It will give false value to crock.

Next up

"Your personal information is protected by law and is kept confidential for 100 years"

Seeing as HMG have contracted the processing of the data to an entity that is legally bound in its own country to hand over any or all information without delay or right of appeal to the US Government, the concept of "confidential" used here is very much different from mine. HMG must be aware of the status of that entity, so cannot complain to it when it has to fulfil its obligations. HMG would therefore be party to any disclosure and responsible for it. Further, the statutes enable HMG to hand over the information to various, unnamed, and as yet determined, third parties who will promise never never ever, cross their heart and hope to die, to blab it to others or to enable people, in exchange for a padded brown envelope, gain access to the data. It is a joke. Probably "confidential" means that the USE of it will be kept confidential...from us, for they do not aim to tell me when or who, let alone ASK me if I want the information divulged.

The Census is being operated without my consent. It is unnecessary for the pathetic reasons they think we will believe that it is essential. It is being operated with covert threats and coercion. It will almost certainly increase State interference in our lives and entrench monopolies that are funded by coercion and threats.

When one is threatened to act, that action is not "help", but at best servitude, but more serfdom approaching if not reaching slavery.

I am not livestock to be tagged. As I said in my previous post on this topic, we should have an audit of THEM. They are ours, not the other way around.

* do not worry, Hamster fans, I fear for the inks in the paper, so would not risk the health of said occupier.

Thursday, 14 April 2011

Rule of Law

It is at times like this we see who really believes in Rule of Law or not. Who gives it lip service or who actually wants to see it upheld and, for even those who appear as the enemy, that due process take place.

Rule of Law cuts both ways and must apply to all, big or small, without fear or favour.

My Libertarianism is centred around Rule of Law, which should come as no surprise to anyone who follows my witterings and twitterings.