I thought the day would never come.. but here we are. The Daily Mail is commending a socialist regime:
Yet for all this orchestrated wailing, is it not possible that China is right to put Shaikh to death?
No, no it isn’t…
Indeed, I would argue that Britain’s enfeebled, self-destructive approach to narcotics has been graphically highlighted by China’s ruthlessness in tackling drug pushers.
In contrast to New Labour’s policy of appeasement and surrender, the Chinese Government acts vigorously to defend its people from the misery caused by the drugs trade.
My regret is not over tough action by Beijing, but the fact that we in this country do not possess the moral clarity or strength of purpose to deal ruthlessly with drug peddlers and other enemies of our society.
I beg your pardon? A policy of appeasement and surrender is exactly what we don’t have. We have prohibition. A factor that augments the misery caused by drugs by not acknowledging the fact that people take drugs because they want too. Britain’s current policies on drugs create and empower “the enemies of society” in the same way Al Capone was created and empowered by prohibition in the 1920s.
Vacuous supermodel Kate Moss was caught using cocaine by undercover reporters, most of the fashion world rallied behind her with a sense of moral indignation, protecting her lucrative contracts and behaving as though she were a victim.
But Kate Moss was a victim. She is an adult and was impeding no one else’s individual sovereignty. Her privacy was grotesquely violated.
British officialdom now adopts a simpering indulgence towards drug abuse. Politicians line up to boast how much cannabis they smoked in their youth and downgrade the criminal classification of substances.
That’s exactly what isn’t happening. Alan Duncan had the passage about drug prohibition removed from the second edition of Saturn’s Children. And let’s not forget that David Nutt was sacked for arguing that the scientific evidence showed Cannabis to be a Class C drug is contradiction with it being re-classified as a Class B drug.
Public funds are lavished on rehabilitation schemes, all of which have failed to prevent a dramatic rise in abuse.
Unlike China with its firing squads, the only ‘shooting galleries’ we have in Britain are state-run needle exchanges for junkies.
There’s one hell of a sentence! Especially since shooting galleries have reduced crime. In lieu of drugs being fully decriminalised shooting galleries save the tax payer money. About £15,000 a year per addict, in fact.
The British government, with its prattle about human rights, likes to think a refusal to use capital punishment is a badge of a civilised society. The truth is the willingness to execute dangerous criminals is a sign of compassion. It means a government is determined to protect the vulnerable and maintain morality.
A civilised society also knows that the Law isn’t a science, it is an art and can get it badly, badly wrong. A civilised society does not risk executing innocent people either. And as for “maintain morality,” well, I think drug taking is a moral act. If it does not violate another individuals sovereignty and is the partake of consenting adults then the use of my tax pennies being used to stop it is immoral, quite frankly.
It is no coincidence Britain was at its most peaceful and crime-free in the Forties and Fifties, when we still had the death penalty.
But it’s not quite so simple is it, Leo?! In Victorian London there was the death penalty and crime and vice were rampant. Gin palaces, whore houses, Jack the Ripper you name it…
Since murderers could no longer be hanged, sentences for all other crimes had to be lowered commensurately. The result is the near-anarchy we see today, where serial offenders continually escape custody and rates of violent crime soar.
We have no-where near anything like anarchy. We have the most authoritarian state since World War II. Where is the Daily Mail to defend us from this nannying entity?! Oh, no, wait..
The drug-fuelled, crime-ridden, welfare-dependent, fear-filled inner city housing estate in modern Britain is far more savage than any place of execution in China for a trafficker of human misery.
Well, let’s just execute everyone in the inner cities shall we. That’ll bode well for much human happiness. In other news if it hadn’t been for the Holodomor, Stalin’s policies would have been great… Well done, Leo McKinstry, you’re the new Jan Moir!
December 29th, 2009 at 4:46 pm
I do not understand neocons. They claim to want freedom only on their terms, yet don’t quite recognise or deal with that inconsistency.
Maybe I’m attributing some kind of undeserving higher intelligence to Daily Mail writers.
I’ll lower my expectations…
December 29th, 2009 at 6:28 pm
1, 2, 3…7, since I last visited this thing has morphed into scarlett-vision.org! I’m not complaining you understand. Well done on the LDV #7, that was my favourite post of the year, especially as it seems to have served as an eye-opener to some.
December 29th, 2009 at 10:44 pm
[...] The Daily Mail thinks communist China has got it right, Sara Scarlett disagrees [...]
December 30th, 2009 at 12:15 am
Well said Sara
December 30th, 2009 at 10:25 am
[...] crud streaming forth from the piece, I leave you with a fisking by Sara Scarlett at Liberal Vision: Should we execute Kate Moss? A civilised society also knows that the Law isn’t a science, it is an art and can get it badly, [...]
December 30th, 2009 at 12:15 pm
The measure of a society the way it responds to dissent.
By the Daily Mail’s measure the government should ban the Daily Mail and execute its’ writing staff.
Would they be applauding that stance as they climbed the steps to the gallows? I wonder…
December 30th, 2009 at 2:25 pm
[...] It is the height of hypocrisy for the Labour government, the human rights brigade and celebrity loudmouths to lecture China when Britain’s own strategy has failed so disastrously. If you’d like to see McKinstry’s facile arguments totally dismembered then go here and here. [...]