On Freedom Again (Part 2)

We assume that the law is based on principles that do not exist, in the sense that they are not generally accepted by society as the basis of law, and are rarely if ever directly acknowledged in law (the first amendment to the US Constitution is unusual not only because it exists, but also because it is still interpreted by courts to mean what it appears to say. Perhaps because this is so well known in the free world, people in other countries tend to assume that their governments recognise and respect that right, and that the law in these areas takes it into account as a basic principle. Most do no such thing. In Britain there is no such principle governing the law, and no such principle has ever existed socially or culturally.

The Lisbon Treaty (The EU Constitution forced upon us to replace the one they couldn’t make us swallow) incorporates the Charter of Rights of the EU, which says this:

Article 11

Freedom of expression and information

1. Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers.

Which seems clear-except the last part- but is routinely ignored, and is no guarantee of anything.

The Spanish Constitution says:

Art. 20. 1. Se reconocen y protegen los derechos:

a) A expresar y difundir libremente los pensamientos, ideas y opiniones

mediante la palabra, el escrito o cualquier otro medio de reproducción.

b) A la producción y creación literaria, artística, científica y técnica.

c) A la libertad de cátedra.

d) A comunicar o recibir libremente información veraz por cualquier

medio de difusión. La ley regulará el derecho a la cláusula de

conciencia y al secreto profesional en el ejercicio de estas libertades.

2. El ejercicio de estos derechos no puede restringirse mediante ningún

tipo de censura previa.

4. Estas libertades tienen su límite en el respeto a los derechos

reconocidos en este Título, en los preceptos de las leyes que lo

desarrollen y, especialmente, en el derecho al honor, a la intimidad, a

la propia imagen y a la protección de la juventud y de la infancia.

Which is fine, but has it ever been truly tested? In fact, I can’t think- offhand- of any case here like those which are regularly highlighted in England, where people are jailed for making tasteless jokes or wearing t-shirts or unfashionable opinion on facebook.

The point is that in Spain the principle is recognised in the Constitution, and is respected by the courts and governments (yes, Lord Copper, your friend’s qualification is appropriate). While in Britain there is no law and no social agreement on the matter, and the EU despises freedom and ignores its own rules on the subject.

Having said that, one of the things I often argue about with people here is the illegalization of the Basque separatist party Herri Batasuna/Euskal Herritarok/Batasuna. They are, more or less, the Sinn Fein of the Basque Country (except that it has always seemed to me that Adams and co. are the dog, whereas Batasuna are the tail). This group is, among other things, the voice of Eta, and most of its leaders, and quite a few of its supporters, clearly take pleasure in the murder of innocent people that is done in the name of their ideas. But it is the murderers you lock up, and possibly those who deliberately make the murders possible, but not those who support their ideas without committing crimes. Left-wing supporters of Basque independence, even those who treat the lives of their opponents with contempt, are entitled to hold, express and defend their opinions, to associate with others who share them, vote for representatives who share them and attempt to persuade others to share them, as is anyone else.

When I am supreme ruler and universal tyrant, there will be no freedom but mine, because I shan't need other people's freedom. Until that moment arrives, I will defend their freedom as I defend my own, because their freedom is my freedom.

Nimbyism in New York

A lot of people are greatly exercised at the thought of a mosque occupying a part of the site of the old Twin Towers in New York. Most of them don’t seem to have a clue what they’re talking about, and many see Osama Bin Laden behind every bushy beard. It has been pointed out (correctly or not) that the leader of the group is a man of peace and practices ecumenism. The name is not well chosen, smacking of Islamic imperialism, and it is certainly true that it would be seen by many violent thugs around the world as a symbolic victory, but that, I would suggest, is neither here nor there. It’s not relevant to the case.

We have heard infantile suggestions of opening a gay bar opposite said mosque (go ahead, what’s stopping you?) and so on, but the general argument seems to be ‘I disapprove of this, therefore someone must stop it happening.’ It’s Nimbyism, combined with the Guardianista idea that everything really belongs to them.

I don’t know what I’m talking about either, but I offer the following thoughts:

I’m not American and I don’t know anyone who was killed, but the values that were attacked that day were mine too. And those values aren’t just vague ideals espoused to help me feel good about myself; they are what allows me, and hundreds of millions of other lucky people, to live a free and prosperous existence. They are worth defending, not for abstract motives of rightness, but because the fact that our lives are worth living depends upon them.

It seems to me that, deeply and viscerally symbolic though that site is to Americans, it doesn’t actually belong to them. It belongs to a group of individuals who, in accordance with the principles of liberty, will dispose of it as they see fit. And if they choose to rent it or sell it to a group of people who will use it to practice their religious faith, that is also fully in accordance with the principles of liberty that we defend. The US Constitution is so beautifully clear, transparent and unambiguous on these points that US governments find it extremely difficult to ignore them, unlike our governments at Westminster and Brussels, who can always wriggle out of anything, even the Magna Carta.*

Behind that visceral sense that the site of the towers is public property is a moral laziness that is very damaging to the freedom that that place has come to represent. If the objectors wish to stop a particular use of the place they have a way to do it, fully compatible with that freedom; they should club together and buy it. There are a lot of them, it wouldn’t cost them much each, and then they could legitimately dispose of the land as they wished. Otherwise, however they feel about it, however strongly, and however rightly, it isn’t up to them (or to Obama).

Incidentally, I wonder if Polly Toynbee and her fellow Guardian columnists have realised that, if the revolution they claim to desire ever comes about, they, as well-fed, privileged agents of a bourgeois state, who do no useful work, would be the first against the wall. Could it be that they know they can spout pretentious claptrap in exchange for large sums of money, confident that their salaries and quality of life are not really in danger? Do they not, in fact, believe what they say?**


*The charter of fundamental rights of the EU is largely meaningless waffle, intended to allow it to be interpreted in any way that may be convenient to the ECJ, the Commission or the national governments. It recognises the right to hold opinions, to free expression and to exchange information and ideas, but in some member countries the expression of certain ideas is explicitly forbidden and punished by law. They simply ignore the charter.

**I don’t have any objection to a private organisation paying anyone what it wants to, but I can challenge their ideas, and the coherence of their position.

Results Just in from Havana

Fidel Castro and his gang are going through that regular farce they call free and democratic elections. I don't suppose you've noticed, because it won't change anything whatever about the government of Cuba, and there won't be rioting on the streets. No one in Cuba cares except the propagandists, and no one outside Cuba cares because the media thinks it's far more fun to denounce as fraudulent eclections in certain other countries, where they might well be, or even when they are genuinely democratic but the wrong person wins.

Even a megalomaniac like Fidel can't control everything by himself, so there is a National Assembly made up of delegates from all the regions which notionally has both legislative and executive power. This is Fidel's democratic fig-leaf.*

The candidates are not all overtly Friends of Fidel, though the majority invariably are party members of proven loyalty. In any case, only the Communist Party is allowed to campaign, and any candidate who deviates from the basic message may find they have problems not only getting elected, but also getting work or housing, and is likely to find all kinds of social problems arising around them.

The government dosen't take chances, even after controlling very carefully the selection of all but a small minority of the delegates to the National Assembly. It still retains the power to ignore its decisions and rule directly by decree, which is how most things are done in practice.

We are informed by the electoral commision that over 8m people voted, representing 95% of the electorate, and that turnout was over 92% in every province. We can already begin to smell the rotting fish. These numbers already have the rotten smell of tractor stats.

In a few days another assembly will be formed and the long-suffering Cuban people will have the pleasure of knowing that, not only are they paying for this farse, but they will be told repeatedly that when the assembly rubber-stamps the decrees of the government, it is freely expressing the will of the people, and they will have to accept that that is their will or there will be trouble. Cubans who have escaped say the same as those who were finally released from tyranny in Western Europe used to say, that psychologically one of the worst things for normal people was having to pretend that every act of government repression, designed only to further its own ends and increase its domination, was in fact your will and in your best interests, and having to say this out loud to some apparatchik who knew it was cobblers and who knew that you knew it too.

Anyhow, there have been elections in Cuba, in accordance with its constitution, which we will have a closer look at some day.

*Although tentative comparisons can be made here with the EU Parliament, in the case of the EU the fig-leaf has a real function, in that waving it in the direction of the people really does serve to make the whole thng look a bit more democratic. In the case of Cuba, the rest of the world barely knows it exists, and doesn't care, and the people it is supposed to represent and defend know perfectly well that it is not on their side.

Found Poetry in the North Korean Constitution

Regular readers will know that I am a bit of a fan of the language of Constitutions. Here we have some great lines from the Constitution of North Korea (1998; there has been a change since then, replacing the last references to 'communism' with 'Juche*' the late eternal leader's own interpretation of Marx which emphasizes how they are alone against the world. It means self-reliance or some such thing, like Sinn Fein and similar groups of crazed obsessives who think they're the only ones going in the right direction up the motorway. Socialism still gets mentioned repeatedly, though; I don't know how Christopher Hitchens would explain that away). I am sure the enslaved and tyrannized people of that great paradise are delighted to know that their lives are governed by such deathless prose. Of course, most of it doesn't really mean anything, and much of the rest is not such as would make the heart of the simple citizen jump with joy. I wouldn't count on making it stand up in court, either. It's largely a hymn of praise to the great leader and eternal president, and is of no use whatsoever to the oppressed serf whose country and life has been stolen by these miserable scum.

*The concept of Juche is discussed here, with what precision I couldn't say, and, though it's not strictly relevant to the subject, Spanish speakers may find this bunch of nutters interesting.

The Democratic People's Republic of Korea is a socialist fatherland of Juche which embodies the idea of and guidance by the great leader Comrade Kim Il Sung.

Comrade Kim Il Sung founded the immortal Juche idea, organized and guided an anti-Japanese revolutionary struggle under its banner, created revolutionary tradition, attained the historical cause of the national liberation, and founded the DPRK, wisely guided the social revolution and construction at various levels, strengthened and developed the Republic into a people-centered socialist country and a socialist state of independence, self-sustenance, and self-defense.

Comrade Kim Il Sung clarified the fundamental principle of State building and activities, established the most superior state social system and political method, and social management system and method, and provided a firm basis for the prosperous and powerful socialist fatherland and the continuation of the task of completing the Juche revolutionary cause.

Comrade Kim Il Sung regarded "believing in the people as in heaven" as his motto, was always with the people, devoted his whole life to them, took care of and guided them with a noble politics of benevolence, and turned the whole society into one big and united family.

The great leader Comrade Kim Il Sung is the sun of the nation and the lodestar of the reunification of the fatherland. Comrade Kim Il Sung set the reunification of the country as the nation 's supreme task, and devoted all his work and endeavors entirely to its realization.

Comrade Kim Il Sung, while turning the Republic into a mighty fortress for national reunification, indicated fundamental principles and methods for national reunification, developed the national reunification movement into a pan-national movement, and opened up a way for that cause, to be attained by the united strength of the entire nation.

Comrade Kim Il Sung was a genius ideological theoretician and a genius art leader, an ever-victorious, iron-willed brilliant commander, a great revolutionary and politician, and a great human being.

The DPRK and the entire Korean people will uphold the great leader Comrade Kim Il Sung as the eternal President of the Republic, defend and carry forward his ideas and exploits and complete the Juche revolution under the leadership of the Workers ' Party of Korea.

...

Article 1

The Democratic People 's Republic of Korea is an independent socialist state representing the interests of all the Korean people.

Article 2

The DPRK is a revolutionary state which has inherited brilliant traditions formed during the glorious revolutionary struggle against the imperialist aggressors, in the struggle to achieve the liberation of the homeland and the freedom and well-being of the people.

...

Article 18

The law of the DPRK reflects the wishes and interests of the working people and is a basic instrument for State administration.

Respect for the law and its strict adherence and execution is the duty of all institutions, enterprises, organizations and citizens.

The State shall perfect the system of socialist law and promote the socialist law-abiding life.

...

Article 79

Citizens are guaranteed inviolability of the person and the home and privacy of correspondence.

No citizens can be placed under control or be arrested nor can their homes be searched without a legal warrant.

Article 156

The court has the duties to:

1. protect through judicial procedure the State power and the socialist system established in the DPRK, the property of the State and social, cooperative organizations, personal rights as guaranteed by the Constitution, and the lives and property of citizens,

2. ensure that all institutions, enterprises, organizations and citizens abide strictly by State laws and staunchly combat class enemies and all law-breakers

It goes on and on, and gets worse and worse. Quiet unrelated to any reality, and much less the reality of North Korea. Badly translated, aspirational stuff, ignored by the leaders, but fawned over by apologists and fellow travellers who point out that it guarantees (how? it's only a piece of paper, and the twisted midget who's in charge has a large army awaiting his whim) the rights of women, foreigners and the old, and guarantees free universal health care and education. Much like in Cuba, which has higher literacy and longevity than almost anywhere in the world, according to the figures that Fidel makes up and which too many people take at face value.

Follow the link and read the constitution in all its cynical, tawdry, semi-literate glory, and be thankful you live in a better place. If you can read this, at all you are at least not in that obscene communist hell-hole, forced to live out a script excreted by some demented troglodyte.