Brian Monteith appointed editor of The Free Society
Wednesday, August 21, 2013 at 0:47 I am pleased to report that Forest has appointed political commentator and former member of the Scottish Parliament, Brian Monteith, as the new editor of the Free Society website.
The Free Society was founded in 2007. One of the first events, organised in conjunction with Forest, was a party at Boisdale of Belgravia to celebrate the publication of Scared To Death by Christopher Booker and Richard North.
The website was launched in February 2008 to provide commentary on the threats to individual freedoms and lifestyles from public health officials, the surveillance state, health and safety bureaucrats and authoritarian politicians.
In 2010 and 2011, under The Free Society banner, we organised a series of debates at the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) entitled Voices of Freedom. Each debate was co-hosted with another party – among them the IEA, Adam Smith Institute, Manifesto Club, Privacy International, Big Brother Watch and Liberal Vision – with a view to developing a loose coalition of libertarian leaning groups and organisations.
The Free Society has also hosted a variety of events at the main party conferences. They include 'Libertarian Paternalism and the Nanny State', 'You Can’t Do That! The Anti-Social Regulation of Public Space', 'Freedom and the Internet' and 'How liberal are the Liberal Democrats?'.
Brian succeeds Tom Miers who took up a new job in Brussels earlier this year.
As well as writing a weekly column, Brian will log examples of nannying and bullying by governments worldwide (Bullies Bulletin). He will also publish a weekly round-up of pertinent blog posts, as well as commissioning articles and features from guest contributors.
As it happens Brian and I go back a long way – to when we were students in Scotland, in fact. Brian was at Heriot Watt in Edinburgh, I was at Aberdeen.
Brian edited a magazine called Armageddon. I edited a magazine called Campus. Brian, however, was far more politically active than me. He was a leading light in the Federation of Conservative Students (FCS), becoming national chairman in the early Eighties.
My first job after leaving university was with Michael Forsyth, later Secretary of State for Scotland, now Lord Forsyth of Drumlean. Brian's first job, after his year as FCS chairman, was with ... Michael Forsyth.
In Edinburgh in the Nineties we shared an office in Leith. At the time Brian was Scottish spokesman for ... Forest. (It was because of that that I later became director of Forest.)
In 1997 Brian ran the No to devolution campaign in Scotland. Two years later he was elected as a member of the Scottish Parliament!
Anyway, I'm delighted to have him on board. Let's see where this latest association takes us. Visit The Free Society.
Simon Clark
Brian says:
"I'm delighted to be taking up this important editorial role that allows me to warn people of the many threats to their hard won freedoms.
"We will also highlight how the underhand and bullying methods that have been used against smokers are now being recycled to demonise the enjoyment of alcohol, soft drinks, savoury snacks and popular foods.
"Back in 2010 The Free Society published my book The Bully State and, as I warned then, our politicians have not only failed to protect our freedoms but have often led the assault on them.
"Fortunately there have been some victories for freedom and The Free Society will seek to promote those and any campaigns that can help us build an open and liberal society."
Recent – and relevant – articles by Brian include Will the persecution of smokers ever stop under [the] Conservatives? (Conservative Home), The thin veneer of mock outrage (Scotsman) and David Cameron will need his iPad on holiday (Think Scotland).
Recent articles for The Free Society include Smoking in the home is next target after cars and Whatever happened to the "friendly games"?, the latter about the ban on smoking at the 2014 Commonwealth Games in Glasgow.
Reader Comments (6)
All very worthy, no doubt.
But can ANYONE point out ONE single concession made by 'government' to ANY of these campaigns ?
For God's sake, it should be obvious to everyone with an intellectual capacity above that of the average State-educated amoeba, that we're NOT living in some Fantasy Democracy (widely promoted as an Undeniable Reality in school books and the controlled media), but under one of the subtler forms of oligarchical dictatorship.
(We can safely leave the LESS 'subtle' forms of dictatorial nastiness to the Lesser Breeds Without The Law - especially those of the brown- or yellow-skinned variety).
And the term 'Nanny State' (zzzzzzzzz) merely serves as a comforting sticking plaster over the festering, toxic sore upon the Body Politic known as 'government'.
To put it bluntly - THEY don't give a Flying Fuck what arguments we adduce, no matter how high-minded, how indefeasibly rational, how commendably libertarian.
It's a political formula of exquisite simplicity:
THEY say.
YOU obey.
And, you know something ?
That suits about 90% of the Population just fine.
Barbara Woodhouse (google if you're under 50) would have been proud.
The Obedience Training has worked a treat !
Must say I fell the same as Martin V totally biting mad and depressed with our commanders that we call govt nowadays.
With all the rules and restrictions that are forced on us we might as well be in jail.
Only difference is we pay for our life sentence.
And 90% ARE robotic glad to obey their master voice because they think they're being looked after and protected and it makes them feel safe.
Martin,
'But can ANYONE point out ONE single concession made by 'government' to ANY of these campaigns?'
Yes, the 'Hand off Our Packs' campaign.
Cameron didn't implement so called standardised packaging because part of the campaign that allowed ordinary people unconnected with any lobby group to vote, voted better than two to one against. His excuse was that he wants to see what happens in Australia, why do that...he could bring this in at any time despite what happens over there.
The government couldn't very well ask the public to vote through their own campaigns and then simply ignore the results. Even he still understands the meaning of democracy.
Besides, what's the alternative...doing nothing? Just what the antis want. I for one would be tearing my hair out at the thought that no one is doing anything to try and protect my civil liberties. Organisations like ASH and their ilk have had decades to hone their crusade down to a fine art, you must remember we haven't. We don't have some well oiled, well funded by the taxpayer machine riding roughshod.
In fact...besides Forest I can't think of anywhere else I can go where I feel like I belong...can you?
Our only sanctuary is Forest where we can meet and give each other support...and you know what Martin...right now that's a hell of a lot.
Well said, Martin (and how good to hear from you - your posts were always worth reading).
I used to think that the UK government was well-meaning, if bumbling. Perhaps it never was and it's only due to my relatively recent interest in politics/current affairs, coupled with the internet that my suspicions have been alerted. Or perhaps, in recent times the interference of supra-national bodies whose powers transcend national governments, has resulted in uber-governance. Whatever - I think that there's something very, very wrong nowdays in the UK and that, at the risk of sounding melodramatic, Society is breaking down whilst our politicians seem to be in denial. 90% of the rest of the population is engrossed in soaps.
Wonder what would happen in the UK if the populace took to the streets in mass rioting?
Dennis -
The question HAS to be asked - after all these years !
I'm a great supporter of FOREST and ALL intelligent and right-minded libertarian groups and organisations (I refer, naturally, to those 'libertarian' groups which are not simply part of the Gang/Counter-Gang aspect of modern - and not so modern - governmental practise and control).
And I could bore on at great length about what one means by 'Democracy'.
One thing it should surely NOT mean, however, is yielding to some tuppeny-ha'penny (but taxpayer-funded) cabal of self-important jerks like Arnott and the RCP control-freaks - in DEFIANCE of what was clearly the Popular Will on a total smoking ban.
Cameron did. Some 'democrat', that !
But 'Democracy' is also (so I've always thought) about something more than a crude Majoritarianism. It is also about Principle.
And where, exactly, WAS the Principle in Cameron's refusal (as I predicted) to implement the decision of his party (effectively) to oppose the Ban, when in opposition - by reversing it IMMEDIATELY he became PM ?
After all, you'd think that a man who could enthusiastically participate in the willful, wanton, and murderous destruction of a prosperous and relatively peaceful country such a Libya would have few qualms about facing down a few hysterics in the Medical Establishment - wouldn't you ?
After all, how much oil does the Health Lobby have ?
And that's the point, you see: there's no profit (in any sense) for Cameron in defending OUR freedoms.
The man is just an oily, upper-class version of the Used-Car Salesman of popular imagination. Albeit one unburdened by that gentleman's Ethical Sensibilities or Philosophical High-Mindedeness.
What Cameron DOES 'understand' is AN idea of 'Democracy' - the sort that he and Obama are now busily trying to export to the rest of the World.
And the poor old World will get it - whether it wants it or not !
(Whatever the packaging)
Joyce -
And greetings (from the Past) to YOU !
Many thanks for your kind comments.
Glad to see (despite some sensible earlier scepticism on your part) that you are continuing your researches into the Reality behind the Matrix. Always knew that YOU would get there ( a steep climb, though - isn't it ?) sooner or later.
Welcome to the Resistance, Cara Mia !
Recently, I've had to review my take on the 'Bumbling Government' defence - especially in the UK context. Whether deliberately contrived or not, it seems pretty clear to me now that the Sham Amateurism of OUR senior politicians masks a much deeper, and nastier reality: the purposeful pursuit of an agenda largely hidden from the public gaze, and masked behind the soap-operatics of what purports to be genuine Political Discourse (as seen on 'Newsnight' - and similar Playstation programmes).
'We' didn't, after all, get to create (and keep) the greatest empire in world history MERELY by inventing Cricket, Cream Teas, and Country House Murders !
I find it hard, for example (and there are hundreds), to square the sale of thousands of tonnes of chemical and biological agents to Saddam Hussein with short-sighted Bumbling Benignity ("I say, Carstairs - the chap's turned out to be something of a rotter, don't you know !") .
As for Tobacco, I'm STILL mystified as to the REAL purpose here, however (it clearly has nowt to do with 'health').
All I DO know, is that if Big Pharma had taken control of the tobacco industry several decades ago, it would probably now be practically COMPULSORY to 'use' it in some form or other - largely on 'health' grounds.
And the ONLY 'debate' then would be between 'organic' tobacco (the best being hand-picked by natives in the Amazonian rain forests) and Monsanto's 'new-and-improved' GMO version.
I wonder where Mr Cameron would stand on THAT one ?
(Which is to say: I wonder what his INSTRUCTIONS would be then)
Tricky one !