Media lefties and bias

It was one of the producers of Jeremy Vine (@thejeremyvine) on BBC Radio 2.

He mumbled something about we’ve already got a guest saying similar to you. Yeah, right.

Question the great BBC or its people including the vast salaries and perks to BBC people and you are obviously a fascist and lunatic.  So why did you call me?

That’s the last time I get asked on there then.

What ever happened to no bias?  As if that was ever there.

It’s an apocryphal story that the morning after Tony Bliar and Gordon Clown were elected in May 1997, the corridors were full of empty champagne bottles.  Clearly, they were right to party, as they did for the next 13 years under the arch Socialists.

As Lord Grade said on Newsnight a few weeks ago – The people in the BBC have forgotten the value of money.  Of course, all Socialists and those who directly benefit from Socialism forget the value of money:

A. They don’t have to earn money

B. It’s not theirs that they spend


“The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people’s money.” Margaret Thatcher 1925 – 2013

Oi, Maggie, no split infinitives please!

Of course, that wasn’t even my point.  The point was high earners are not normally entrepreneurs.  They are those listed in the tweet.

The real wealthy – paying little tax – are those gaining vast capital gains on property and shares in multinationals which pay no tax, as I also told him.  He didn’t want to know.

What’s this blog called?

Follow the blog (by clicking on the right on the Home page) and you will be emailed each time a new post is written (a few times a week).  Show your support and hope for a move to Capitalism and Libertarianism.

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

42 Responses to Media lefties and bias

  1. Oldgittom says:

    Mr Davis, plainly, you haven’t grasped the fundamentally distinct natures of capitalism & socialism/communism – like your numerous co-thinkers across the Atlantic. Altho I agree with your rejection of the left solutions, there can be no ‘return’ to capitalism. Unless, that is, you have a time machine (o/wise, ‘we’, time & history only go one way). And even in that case, what phase of capitalism would you return to? Be a brave chap (intellectually) & face it. Capitalism was fine for a (short) time, but it had its day, then died, as all things do. Its replacement is corporatism, also falling off its temporary perch as we write.
    So what’s the answer? NO economics-based ‘ism’; that’s all antique crapola from at least 150 years back. We must go forward to direct democracy, where what is deemed good, healthy & profitable to one & all is decided by the people, bottom-up fashion: NOT top-down style by state or bloated multinationals (moonlighting as global gov). Eg., if entrepreneurs can invent & make better widgets, they would make money. But if they got fat & sassy, then opened a bank which loaned out at compound interest (usury-disease), they would be slapped down by people-power. No state or organ can be trusted with this power.
    The free market is the most efficent economic tool known. With direct democracy, e/body would be a political consumer, free to accept, reject or modify society’s mechanisms, like good versus sh*te products. IT makes this possible for the first time in history. Gov & bureaucracies would receive sheaves of redundancy notices, I have no doubt.
    Note: capitalism is where money is ‘sold’ in large lumps, interest being the price. Banks are shops that sell debt, not money. They are the only shops legally allowed to sell what they don’t have. S/thing fishy there. surely (tho doubtless you’ve heard all this before, & marked me down as a raving ‘Marxist’)?

    • I equate real democracy with libertarianism with capitalism. I think we are broadly in agreement.

      What we have is anything but capitalism. Thx for Following

      • Anonymous says:

        i agree with tom again.

        and i can agree with you that what we have now isn’t capitalism, unless it is “late capitalism” as described by marxists. or perhaps “oligarchical collectivism” as described by orwell in 1984.

        i thought libertarians thought democracy was “the god that failed”, though? not read hans herman hoppe? there are hundreds of articles on the von mises institute website (alongside articles praising pre-crash iceland and ireland) talking about the evils of democracy and the “tyranny of the 51%”.

        i’ll take the tyranny of the 51% over the tyranny of the 0.1%, given the choice.

      • I think the issue with democracy is that it all too easily results in what we have.

        What else is there that could work? But sure it has its faults. Come up with a better one? How about I don;t know – #Capitalism

  2. Anonymous says:

    good stuff, tom

  3. Anonymous says:

    and you can never have libertarianism in a democracy – as peter thiel, the transumanist futurist admitted – women will never vote for it. you will never get it democratically in scotland for a million years.

    • Maybe. 2016 is looking interesting for US

      • Anonymous says:

        who’s funding the republicans? – the koch brothers, with their trust fund earned from daddy’s dodgy dealings with stalin, vulture capitalist and distressed debt troll, peter singer and transhumanist futurists peter thiel and elon musk.

        good luck in your libertarian utopia, because the whole premise is funded by malfeasant monopolists.

      • No, Wall St and the lawyers and arms companies and of course insurance and medical companies (AKA hospitals) are funding democrats and republicans

        The tea party gets much of its money from real people and yes rich folk who can;t stand what is going on in the ‘land of the free’. I’m with them.

      • Anonymous says:

        the TP has been hijacked by the kochs and singer in a “astroturf” fake grass roots scam in the same way that green, left and LGBT groups have been hijacked by soros. also there are some very unsavoury types on the fringes like the john birchers and the scary racist neo-confederate movement.

  4. Anonymous says:

    the only countries in the world that are actually getting more left wing are in latin america.

    the least grim countries have a balance of public and private interests and are the most democratic, like iceland and switzerland.

    instead of a big or small government, how about a democratic, medium stized government?

    • Rubbish. The EU and US have been increasingly socialist / marxist for years/decades.
      Smaller govt is one of the panacea

      • Anonymous says:

        can you, as well as the marxists keep your utopian panaceas to yourself – most of us live in the real wolrd where there are myriad shades of grey.

        the EU is not becoming more socialist – every country is privatising every decent public asset for tuppence. the only thing we are socialising are private debts.

        and you have never read any marx, so you are in no position to judge weather the EU is getting more marxist.

      • if you don’t like it don;’t read it. stay away.

        Socialism / fascism – technically there are differences to the chatterati. In practice there is no difference to the people. A group gets all the money and power.

        Yes, #banbankbailouts by #bringbackcapitalism

      • Anonymous says:

        having lived in many countries and travelled widely, i have come to the conclusion that panaceas and utopias can not exist in a world of flawed humans.

        there is a great deal of difference being a citizen living in a mixed, social market economy like denmark or norway to living under fascism, or indeed to living under neo-feudalism like in the UK.

        things like a liveable minimum wage make it much lesws stressful living in northern europe compared to the UK or US. of course, with the race to the bottom in progress, the qualityof life our parents enjoyed under social democracy will be denied to future generations.

  5. Anonymous says:

    he didn’t boost the public sector – he handed the keys to the private sector via PFIs at wonga interest rates and now we pay through the nose for those services for the benefit of offshore carpetbaggers like richard branson.

    i don’t think you have ever read marx, have you? do you actually know what socialism is? have you ever been to germany, scandinavia or the netherlands? there are shades of grey, between lassaiz faire and stalinism, surely?

    the problem with libertarianism is that it is some sort of perverse inverted marxism (and many nutjobs like walter block were ex marxists) where there are no shades of grey – that the private property rights of rich white people are the key to prosperity for all.

    and, like marxists, when it goes wrong it is because the policies weren’t pure enough.

    in real life, they are greedy pragmatists – like when embezzling murderer pinochet collaberated with the nazi pedo cult colonia dignidad who trained dogs to rape trade unionist women in foront of their children. thats what happens with the non-aggression princicple in reality.

    • Rubbish beyond belief. Literally.

      • Anonymous says:

        it’s all true re pinochet – google it and weep.
        hayek was one of the mont pelerin mafia with otto von habsburg, von mises, friedman and the other trustafarian nutcases that eugenecist and monopolist david rockefeller funded.

      • so they took money from a eugenicist. Circumstantial

      • Anonymous says:

        none of them ever had a proper job in their life, inheriting wealth and titles and living on rockefeller and ford grants, despite anointing themselves “natural elites” and when they did (see austrofascist austria and pinochet’s chile) the results were disasterous, bloody and very rapey

        it is all true and a matter of public record – google it.

      • Anonymous says:

        just so you know – your neo-classical austrian religion (as it is based on erroneous axiomatic principles of human nature, not statistics or research) is and has always been funded exclusively by monopolists, eugenecists and aristocrats. do you think they really want a free market?

      • However Hayek was funded is not the issue

      • Oldgittom says:

        No, Mr Davis, Anonymous is correct. You are arguing from a very shallow knowledge base. There is no ‘pure’ capitalism, such as libertarians fantasize about. Capitalism was impossible until the strong, centralized state appeared. They grew together. If you can name one one counter-example, I will stand corrected.
        British capitalsim got into its stride at the end of the 17C, with the Bank of England & East India Co – both were semi-state hotenannies.
        W/out state protection from Brit competition, US industry could never have been born. The US state propped up capitalism after that. Various regimes were brutally overthrown in S America to make the land exploitable by United Fruit, US oil, copper & mineral corps. Read ex-Marine Gen Smedley Butler on this topic. Post-WWII, leftist Euro leaders like Olaf Palme & Aldo Moro were murdered by covert arms of the US state. Gen de Gaulle of France escaped several assassination attempts of the CIA. They all resisted US-dictated foreign & commercial policies.
        Like Col. Gaddafi, who tried to sell his own nation’s oil, NOT trading in dollars. The poor devil was a b*****d, but he was butchered like a pig.
        To be a libertarian, you have to be ignorant about an awful lot of history. And by the way, ‘gurus’ Von Mises & Ayn Rand were very right-wing, ignorant ideologues.

      • Right wing / left wing. It’s all a circle.

        Agreed – a limited knowledge

        But we are heading towards fascism. Need massive shake up. #capitalism as opposed to the cronyism we have

      • Anonymous says:

        hayek – brought to the US by koch – as soon as he was entitled to social security!

        koch, and his trustafarian progeny are the epitome of monopolists.

        why do they and other monopolists fund “intellectuals” like hayek and von mises?

        why do “free marketers” like elon musk suck on the government teat so much?

      • bcos they can

        who cares who funded hayek?
        was he right or wrong?

        more to the point – what do we need NOW???

        #capitalism not cronyism
        free mkt rates
        free press

      • Anonymous says:

        another excellent post, tom.

        one could make the same comments about communism that we hear about libertarianism and free markets – “well we only got to the state capitalism phase – another couple of decades and a bit more ideological purity and everything would have been marvellous!”

        as for free markets – they are a sensible idea among equals. if you live in maastricht, why should you have to jump through hoops to trade with germany and belgium when they are only a bike ride away?

        on the other hand, only a submissive masochist would wish to have free trade with countries who use child labour, forced lablour, make no attempts to protect their environment and like china, use communist party organs to “compete” in a supposedly free market, buying up the state assets of other countries, including strategic ports.

        also, while a free market in some things might well be highly advantageous, do we really want a free market in fresh, perishable food, where speculators puch up prices of fish quota from their comfortable offices in london and new york?

  6. Which is the same as marxism – AKA socialism – AKA crony capitalism – AKA corporatism – AKA fascism

    Media lefties and bias should be (lame) mainstream media fake lefties, fake righties and bias.

    Nice blog anyway, 😀

  7. Anonymous says:

    apart from bringing in the lowest minimum wage in northern europe, what remotely socialist policies did blair undertake?

  8. Oldgittom says:

    Your views seem to be widespread in the USA, with people who don’t know what lefties, socialists or communists are (& I’m not in the trio). The BBC is a bastion of the conservative (small ‘c’) Brit Establishment. State corporatism evolved from capitalism, with the interlocking of multinationals, largely ending competition & the autonomy of nation-states. That had nothing to do with ‘lefties’. If you disbelieve me, read Lenin’s ‘State & Revolution” – how it began – & spot one word of approval. There can be no going back in a political time machine to classic capitalism. Its days have passed. History & time go one way. And, please don’t conflate top-down, command economies with leftism. That’s how Stalin’s Russia was run, becoz it was the same old Tsarist system in modernist drag. Political systems based purely on economistic ‘isms’ are as good as their level of democracy. If the mass of people are in control (bottom-up), almost a/thing can work agreeably.

  9. Pat Pending says:

    Its a fair point Jon. Would like to see the BBC to draw their staff from a larger gene pool. The new editor of Newsnight (Ian Katz) is yet another recruit from the Guardian. (Groan)

    If they drew more staff in from business or even other parts of the media it would vastly improve the organisation.

  10. mijj says:

    fuck capitalism – the mindset that corrupts everything

  11. Anonymous says:

    tony blair a socialist? thatcher said he was her greatest legacy.

    both did what the banks, CFR, trilaterals wanted to the letter.

    and thatcher only survived because she gladly hosed up the wall all of our north sea oil revenue on unemployment benefits.

    • What do you think raising household debt some 100-150% in 1o years is? What do you think earning £50m from JP Morgan is?

      Politically, he was. Not economically.

      • Oldgittom says:

        ‘Anonymous’ is right, tho. Blair was a loyal servant of international corporatism, same as Thatcher, Lyndon Johnson, or Dubya. Blair helped ‘sell’ the Iraq War, which was jolly good business for the global industrial-military complex. He’s now reaping his rich rewards (the filthy b******d).

      • Which is the same as marxism – AKA socialism

  12. Pingback: Media lefties and bias | peoples trust toronto

Comments are closed.