The Shotgun Blog
« Simple instructions on how to win a Peace Prize | Main | Andrew Coyne is right, but Ignatieff is not the new hope »
Friday, October 16, 2009
Mother of the Free
It's as if one day, circa 1960, the British woke up and decided to junk it. Junk everything that once made them the envy of the world. The rest of the world still views Britain though the lens of BritComs and BBC dramas. In some corner of some Prague sound studio, is a drawing room that is forever England. The place itself, well I'll let the Steyn explain:
It’s hardly surprising that a coarsened world produces a coarsened culture, or even that the fruits of heavy-handed feminism and political correctness should be a nation of 12-year- old booze-sodden tarts and middle-aged blokes jerking off at BBC licence-payer expense. I wrote a few weeks back that an increase in sexual liberty had provided a cover for the shrinking of all other kinds. Likewise, if you can make jokes about the Queen’s pussy, why surely you are freer than your forebears. And it’s true that, say, a North Korean stand-up would be ill-advised to proffer jests about Kim Jong-Il’s meat-and-two-veg. But licence is not the same as liberty. And the British nanny state’s rearing of a generation of snarling, brutish, eternally arrested adolescents slumped in Hogarthian depravity seems not an unfortunate side effect but an all too foreseeable consequence. The BBC’s motto is “Nation shall speak peace unto nation.” Not in prime time. As David Cameron might say, nation shall speak pissed unto nation.
Posted by Richard Anderson on October 16, 2009 | Permalink
Comments
Booze makes idiots of everyone. Imagine a family that sobers up one day, and realizes they've pissed away the family fortune. Now imagine a country that does the same thing. Who do they blame?
I predict a temperence movement, that might get some traction.
Posted by: dp | 2009-10-16 8:39:25 AM
Great Britain and the English speaking people across the world once enjoyed more freedom, especially individual freedom, than any other and yet have decided to trash this inheritance makes one question human intelligence. Steyn is correct that licence is not liberty nor freedom. Liberty and freedom come with responsibilities, but many in the West now reject, and even revolt against, the concept of responsibility. We no longer hold people accountable and responsible for their actions and behaviour, not even criminals and especially not our enemies in a time of war. If this is not a confirmation of the eclipse of the West, then I do not know what else one could say.
Posted by: Alain | 2009-10-16 11:18:51 AM
dp
On this subject, Booze is a pacifier / distraction not the cause. The Nanny State and the human ballast that tolerate and support it is the problem.
Overindulgence of alcohol, or any other substances, while not downplaying the damage caused, is generally a symptom of numerous other serious underlying issues.
Posted by: John Chittick | 2009-10-16 11:27:48 AM
John- That's what I told myself for decades, as my brothers slowly drank themselves to death. It just isn't true. The underlying issue is alcoholism, plain & simple. It can't be cured, it has to be prevented, like any other addiction. There are probably fewer than 1 in 100 who can actually control the affliction. That leaves an awfully big group to deal with.
The only underlying factors are opportunity, and availability. In Canada, availability is much more restricted. I dare anyone to vomit and pass out on the street, in any Canadian city. It won't take long til you're in the slammer. Opportunity is also restricted. Most Canadians work twice as much as the average Brit. We have very strict driving & drinking laws. We only get to drink after work, and most bars cut you off if you get too loaded. Plus, it's too cold to hang out in parks, etc.
Posted by: dp | 2009-10-16 11:56:38 AM
I predict a temperence movement, that might get some traction.
All too possible, dp. The salooning and opium-eating of the 19th century gave rise to Prohibition in the 20th. Georgian licentiousness in the 18th century (think the movie Amadeus) gave way to Victorian prudery in the 19th. In one generation excess, in another sobriety. And so the pendulum swings back and forth.
Neither extreme is particularly palatable, I must admit, but if I had to choose one, I'd pick the one that didn't feature schoolchildren passing out drunk or stoned or worse in doorways and alleys.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-16 12:26:27 PM
And lest anyone declare the American experiment with Prohibition a failure, consider this: Alcohol-related deaths dropped. By half.
I enjoy a drink as much as the next guy, but if it's outlawed, or more likely merely banished from public places like tobacco, I won't be dreadfully cut up about it. And I certainly won't break the law to buy it. There's life beyond the bottle, and who sinks too deep in it, courts death.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-16 12:33:11 PM
Shane- I believe Canada has a well balanced approach to alcohol. Limit advertising, enforce age limits, discourage binge drinking, punish drunk drivers, and also punish adults who give booze to kids. Putting responsibility on bar owners for the consequences of allowing overindulgence was a step in the right direction.
As long as we stay on this path, there's no reason guys like yourself can't enjoy a little diversion now and then. I'm around alcohol all the time, and I never get upset until someone loses control.
Posted by: dp | 2009-10-16 12:56:51 PM
John Chittick is correct. Alcoholism is a symptom not the cause. Overindulgence in anything becomes a problem. People with a good sense of responsibility are able to indulge with moderation while others seeking escape from suffering (usually mental and/or emotional) feel no such responsibility. In fact they most often perceive themselves as victims of something or someone. Not surprising in that we have created a cult of victimhood. Everyone claims to be a victim of family, upbringing, spouse/ex-spouse, society, school or whatever.
As for alcoholics anyone who has had experience with them knows that unless and until they recognise their problem, no one can help them. Nor can anyone prevent it in spite of the best of intentions.
Posted by: Alain | 2009-10-16 1:12:40 PM
As for alcoholics anyone who has had experience with them knows that unless and until they recognise their problem, no one can help them.
Alas, true. For any addiction. However, it is not beyond our power to get them to recognize it, and until they do, we can take steps to keep society relatively safe from them, even if it means infringing on the addict's liberties somewhat. Liberty brings with it responsibility—and addicts in general don't take it.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-16 1:18:35 PM
The coarsening of society...yes, how did that arise?
Betty Friedan...feminism.
The Franfurt School...political correctness, the culture of critique.
Hirschfeld and Marcuse...championing the homosexual cause.
Mock the Week...Patterson and Leveson.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aaP9OEBqGXo
Posted by: amalek | 2009-10-16 1:52:18 PM
Regarding Alcoholism, this may sound odd coming from an atheist, but a good (alcoholic) friend of mine, who, thanks to his Christianity and AA, and was clean for the last 25 years of his life, called it a spiritual disease. Who am I to argue as in his case he was likely correct. For other folks that probably isn't the answer. People in my family were / are certainly alcoholic but for the most part, functional, and like Alain has stated above, until they recognize the problem.......
Posted by: John Chittick | 2009-10-16 5:05:49 PM
No country had more alcoholics than Russia in the former Soviet Union. It was their only route to any kind of freedom, even if only freedom from the chains of Socialism.
Free people have much more to live for and to stay sober for. Free from personal responsibility Socialism breeds escapist alcoholism. Same for drugs.
It is human nature to desire freedom if one is brainwashed by the socialists. The desire is there even though it may not be recognized. That desire often morphs into the desire to restrict the freedoms of others ... perhaps a consolation.
Now that is a disease. Canad has it and the USA is getting it from the Obama Administration at this very moment.
The new dark age is near.
Posted by: Momar | 2009-10-16 5:38:17 PM
Publius policy positions make him, on the whole, libertarian. But the reasons given and the thought from which they issue are always conservative.
As such, in the long-term, Publius will find himself becoming more conservative and less libertarian.
Posted by: Robert Seymour | 2009-10-16 6:15:47 PM
Well Robert, I've always defined myself as a classical liberal. Some people call classical liberalism libertarianism with conservative instincts. Make what you will of it.
Posted by: Publius | 2009-10-16 6:39:08 PM
Momar
I agree 100% and would add that the Congress as well as the Administration is a full partner in the spread of this pathology.
Posted by: John Chittick | 2009-10-16 7:04:23 PM
As such, in the long-term, Publius will find himself becoming more conservative and less libertarian.
And, as such, much more electable.
Posted by: Shane Matthews | 2009-10-16 7:07:35 PM
The Islamic Republik of Britain.
Posted by: Philanthropist | 2009-10-17 12:17:58 PM
The world does view British media through it's best examples. We only get the best stuff, of course. But it's ironic that more often than not these days the best stuff out of Britain is not originating from the BBC. The only popular BBC export that I can think of immediately is Doctor Who. The other current and semi-current stuff coming across the pond originates from ITV or Channel 4, or is produced independently (Canada was airing The Tudors BEFORE the BBC was, and the BBC didn't help produce it). Ok, The Office and Extras were BBC. There, I threw them a bone.
Posted by: Anonymouse | 2009-10-20 8:13:44 AM
Oh yes, I forgot to mention all the good movies coming out of Film4, including a Canadian co-production or two. And yet the BBC gets most international recognition, thanks to their cable and satellite reach.
Posted by: Anonymouse | 2009-10-20 8:18:27 AM
The comments to this entry are closed.