The fall of the Libertarian party leader
Call it Schadenfreude if you must. Hell, it most definitely is, given that Chris Mounsey has tried to smear me several times in the past. I’m no fan of climate-change-denier Andrew Neil but this video is definitely one of the best pieces of political theatre in ages.
To repeat what I said over at Libcon: The issue here is whether people will judge you for what you say online. To think that you can go around calling for people’s deaths or smear others while being the leader of a party isn’t happening. The vast majority of Britons would find that content offensive. And that’s not the nature of politics – that is simply human nature. Libertarians may want to try and get closer to that a bit.
Of course that doesn’t mean he should be censored or stopped from writing the tinfoil-hat rubbish that he does. But it won’t get you elected because most people will think you’re a lunatic. Yes, let’s have more diversity of opinion in Parliament and in politics. But if I wanted to read sensible and intelligent libertarians I’d go for Alex Massie instead; he helps the libertarian cause more than Mounsey ever did.
More commentary by: Paul Sagar, Tim Fenton and Tory Landlord. Disagree with Chris Dillow though.
Also: if Mounsey really believed in what he said, he’d keep his blog as it was. But he finally realised he was being a naive idiot and no one with half a brain would elect him or come near him in real life if they read what he wrote.
| Post to del.icio.us |
Filed in: Humour
Never knew Andrew Neil was so prim.
I guess “arise, Lord Hundal” is getting less likely!
Though this seems a more adult response.
http://stumblingandmumbling.typepad.com/stumbling_and_mumbling/2010/04/the-repressive-media.html
How could he not have seen that coming?
And there’s a side to Mounsey rarely explored, for people who think he is ‘principled’.
Despite calling himself a libertarian, Mounsey was always against immigration as far as I’m aware. Perhaps movement of people wasn’t defined as a libertarian right according to his dictionary.
Anyway, that constant railing against immigration came to a rather abrupt conundrum when he decided to marry an immigrant. Lo and behold – they found that the immigration system was a bastard and gamed to stop people moving to the UK and settling down.
Of course, if the system was easier to deal with then him and his ilk would have been complaining about it constantly.
So after years of criticising the govt for too much immigration, we went to tirades against the Home Office for being too difficult to deal with. Now, of course, immigration is barely mentioned.
The fall of a leader is going to happen tonight in a sanitised ‘debate’, not yesterday. The Libertarian Party has just had its best recruitment and donation day since its foundation, which is probably why the BBC ignored every press release in the last three years.
So washed up,vain,hair dying hacks do have their uses.
probably why the BBC ignored every press release in the last three years.
Perhaps. Or it could be that after three years he still has fewer than 500 members. I think that’s smaller than, say, the Allen Valley Quoits League. They don’t get much coverage either.
The Libertarian Party has just had its best recruitment and donation day since its foundation, which is probably why the BBC ignored every press release in the last three years.
Well, that’s a relief because it seems in recent months the party membership has actually fallen. In his last interview Mounsey said it was over 500 and counting. Now its about 450. Wonder if Mounsey’s own blogging had anything to do with that.
So, DK discovered his position on immigration was unlibertarian, unjust, and unreasonable. He changed it.
And you consider that shameful?
I suppose you expect libertarians to act like the rest of you human beings, and stick stubbornly to a point of view despite the monumental wealth of evidence that it is wrong.
Sunny:
Also, DK left UKIP mainly because he found their stance on immigration too illiberal.
Bella – I didn’t use the word shameful. I just think it’s an example of his lame politics, which usually isn’t thought out too well. I remember the days he used to smear me as a racist merely because I ran an online magazine reporting on Asians.
Did he write about his immigration u-turn? I’d like to read that.
bella gerens,
That is beyond parody. What do you think you are, Martians?
Rumbold,
Apparently, if Sunny is to believed, when he found it in his best interests to do so.
Paper, scissors, string equals politics, religion, love. How often do I have to tell you that?
It is patently obvious that, if the first two interfere with the latter, then politics and religion be damned!
“Paper, scissors, string equals politics, religion, love. How often do I have to tell you that?”
I have no idea what that means, but I’m going to use it!
cjcjc,
Heh!
The issue is not that he changed his mind about being a foul-mouthed, nasty-piece-of-shit-work on immigration. The issue is that he changed it, not out of principle, but only when it affected his personal life.
Live by the blog, die by the blog, you scum Mounsey.
oh dear…he may regret coming on.
That is a wonderful phrase Douglas. I shall have to use that too.
For people assuming all sorts of bizarre things, allow me to elucidate.
First, DK did not leave UKIP because their immigration policy was ‘too liberal.’ He left UKIP because they are not particularly libertarian.
Second, DK left UKIP long before he and I ever met, so his departure was nothing whatsoever to do with me.
Third, Sunny, he did write about his u-turn on immigration, several times. I’d link to it, but… well, I can’t. Sorry.
Bella:
Who said that?
Oops – read your comment wrong. Withdrawn!