<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/plusone.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar.g?targetBlogID\x3d14058325\x26blogName\x3dChiswickite++-+formerly+The+Croydonian\x26publishMode\x3dPUBLISH_MODE_BLOGSPOT\x26navbarType\x3dBLUE\x26layoutType\x3dCLASSIC\x26searchRoot\x3dhttp://croydonian.blogspot.com/search\x26blogLocale\x3den_GB\x26v\x3d2\x26homepageUrl\x3dhttp://croydonian.blogspot.com/\x26vt\x3d2605630255414466250', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>

We will all be bowing down to Moloch

Never being one to shun the occasional necessity to wade through the open sewer that is the Government's propaganda output, I have just been reading 'Strategic Priorities for the UK: The Policy Review'.

In among the dodgy use of statistics, back slapping, selective use of data and so forth I found this paragraph, for which one would need anti-freeze for blood not to be chilled by:

Contract between citizen and state

How can we develop a new account of the contract between state and citizen based on rights and responsibilities? How is this contract expressed at present in a variety of public services both here and elsewhere? Should we be aiming for a more explicit statement of the contract that covers both the service offered by the public sector (what is in and what is not) and what is expected from citizens (beyond paying taxes and obeying the law). Could we move from an implicit one-way contract based on outputs to one based on explicit mutually agreed outcomes - how might this work in key areas like healthcare, schooling, policing and family support? Could more explicit and binding contracts work not just for individuals but for communities (Sic – no question mark in the original)

(My emphases).

The entire concept of a social contract between state and individual is at best a pious fraud, as few if any of the elements of contract, in a legal definition, actually exist. However, I accept the implicit deal that in return for taxation and obeying the law, I will get something in return, although whether it is much of a bargain is open to debate. The idea that you or I shoud be serving the state beyond that, and you can bet your last euro it will be enforced by legal sanction, is a monstrosity.

Thoughts, comments, 'death threats' please.


« Home | Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »
| Next »

Anonymous newmania said... 12:35 pm

Chilling isn`t it , I wonder if the writer really thinks that way. Its possible that if all you ever knew was Blair the state and the "people" might not be clearly seperated .
I see this person as a well scrubbed and enthusuastic member of the Hitler Youth

Tommorow may well belong to him  



Blogger Peter Hitchens said... 12:54 pm

How I pine for lady thatcher and lord tebbit , what are we being offered as an alternative to labour?
A potato that was educated at Eton leading a group of dykes and darkies , none of whom have ever held down a real job.  



Anonymous La Vie Est Belge said... 1:32 pm

It's been a while since i read any of the social contracts... but i'm fairly sure that Messers Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau will be turning in their graves...

As usual, NuLab have got it arse about tit - any social contract is initiated by the citizens granting certain responsibilities to the State, not t'other way round!  



Blogger Croydonian said... 1:47 pm

We live in dark and terrible times, and I am fearful of quite what the New Labour thousand year reign would end up doing to us.  



Anonymous verity said... 2:09 pm

I foresaw all this - not in minute detail, of course, but an overview of the whole map - when Blair got in 10 years ago. There was just something deeply evil and unsettling about him. I was so disturbed by the evil surrounding him that I sold my house and left rather than be subjected to what I was sure would be manifested. I have watched,with horror and sadness, from afar.  



Anonymous verity said... 2:12 pm

La Vie Est Belge says: "As usual, NuLab have got it arse about tit"

You don't get it, do you? It's not a mistake.  



Anonymous Anonymous said... 5:34 pm

No doubt we will all have to sign the contract in room 101.

What worries me is that any government that takes over after NuLab have gone will maintain such laws and contracts rather than repealing them.  



Anonymous verity said... 6:08 pm

Buster George - Yes. And the minds behind the NuLabour project know this.

That's why someone has to say that every one of the over 700 new laws these people have papered Britain with will have to be scrutinised and if necessary repealed. This should be undertaken with some urgency.  



» Post a Comment