19 thoughts on “Phillip Blond – on Ideology for the 21st Century

  1. He is mistaken. Mixed markets and moralistic statism have been tried; fascism is not the solution for the 21st century. We do not have free markets within the bounds of natural rights, so it's ridiculous to blame them for economically wrong with the world. There are market failures and government failures, but the market can usually find innovative ways to address its own failures, which are typically not as large or as costly.

    I don't look out on an infinite sea of state-granted privilege and think, "Too much liberty is the problem. We need more political centralization, more collusion with the banking sector, more taxation punishing positive economic activity, more regulations full of loopholes for corporate lawyers to find and exploit while small businesses suffer, more interference and coercion by government agencies." That is an ideal excuse for the ruling classes to seize more power and further enrich themselves while assuring us it's for the common good.

  2. We dont need a ideology we need a moral.

    Economic theoreis is not needed any longer because we can predict the future better with simulation than with what basically is a economical priesthood.

  3. @AdversusHaereses
    The Tories view on society as a whole, does not work. History proves that. The party is riddled, negative, divisive class- its prime tool. It supports a ruling strata of public school/Oxbridge, etc. They think the trickle down effect works, when history proves it does not.

    Most of those i know who vote for them do so out of prejudice – some bee in their bonnet about, blacks, the local council estate, etc. The intelligent and worldly people I know give them a wide berth.

  4. @NearAbbeyRoad I don't take the Tories of today seriously. I would whole heartedly agree with you, but historically they have been truly about society as a whole.

  5. @AdversusHaereses
    "One Nation Conservatism"

    This is a contradiction in terms. The Tories promote class divisions. They have an odd view of what one nation is.

  6. @AdversusHaereses
    Factors of production:
    LAND
    CAPITAL
    LABOUR

    The Tories want a poverty level to keep wages down – rigging LABOUR. That is a part of their rigging the free-market. The Tories rig LAND as well.

    They preach the free-market which a big con-trick, as they are the biggest riggers of the free-market.

    How anyone takes this party seriously in this day and age and when looking at their record is beyond me.

  7. @AdversusHaereses
    Tories only paper over the cracks of poverty. They know that once they are fed have a very small roof over their heads, football & beer they are OK and no revolution will come about. They keep the poor calm rather than eliminate grinding poverty. Geoist economics will drag the poor out of permanent poverty with Land Value Tax at its core. The Tories oppose any LVT – wondered why? The 1909 Commons vs Lords conflict was that LVT was to be introduced. Tories are an anachronism

  8. @NearAbbeyRoad I just stated that it was only after Thatcher that the dissatisfaction and riots began. She was the one who lead to the outsourcing of the British economy and eventually destroyed our infrastructure. However, Harold Macmillan and Benjamin Disraeli are clear examples of what Red Toryism or One Nation Conservatism is all about. Disraeli created the Young England group specifically to tackle the exploitation of the poor from the aristocrats.

  9. @AdversusHaereses
    Tories never understood the poor. Any regard for the poor they had was scant. Most of them knew why poverty came about but chose to ignore it – their greed overtook them. The grinding poverty that came because of the industrial revolution is always made worse under them. No social reform came from them. ln fact they always opposed it. Cameron opposed getting rid of hereditary peers. Economic riots are always under the Tories:1981.1985, miners, students, poll tax, 2011

  10. @NearAbbeyRoad Well historically the Tories have had a regard for the poor which can be traced back to before the Labour Party's creation. Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli was a Conservative, yet he still knew the importance of helping the poor of Britain. The same can be said of Harold Macmillan. The conservative party only had a drastic change to this more classical liberal ideology after Thatcher became Prime Minister and outsourcing in the UK lead to more economic individualism.

  11. Blond grew up in Liverpool saying he was deeply affected by the systematic Thatcher destruction of the city. So he turned to the TORIES! Duh! He is the architect behind the confusing Tory "Big Society". Liverpool's Labour Council said they would have ago and dropped it as no one knew what it really was.

    One thing is clear, turning to the backward, anachronistic Tories will not deliver what he wants.

    He needs to "fully" understand Geoism and how that can be the vehicle of his aims and desires

  12. What we need is distributism. Neither Socialism nor Capitalism. We need true mutualism and co-ownership. Not collectivism nor individualism but communitarianism. Aristotle > John Locke & Marx

  13. @skunkwerksrc

    1. Maintaining the free-market ensuring no rigging, which it is, & eliminating monopolies is the role of the state. It now does neither.

    2. Eliminate speculation on LAND and its RESOURCES (i.e no copper derivatives)

    3. Use Land Valuation Taxation (this will vastly reduce speculation on LAND)

    4. Use no Income Tax

    The above would make his dream work

    a) Welfare state can be retained
    b) Enterprise will flourish
    c) Elimination of boom & busts (1929 & 2008 were land fueled)

  14. So basically the guy is advocating a mixed economy that does not provide welfare i.e., fascism. Nothing new. How about we simply get rid of the socialistic aspects of the present state, such as the monetary system? Shifting around the role of the state is a naive approach.

  15. What, you dismiss the Free Market? Why dismiss something that has NEVER been tried, this past 3 centuries?

    Another collectivist wanting to create a "newer, better, State".

    There's never any shortage of these people.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *