Oh how wonderful

Elijah Lineberry's picture
Submitted by Elijah Lineberry on Sun, 2007-09-02 08:44

I found this speech when surfing the Internet.

It was Stanley Baldwin, Prime Minister of Great Britain, talking about Freedom and what it means to be British.
He makes some inspiring comments:

"...Freedom, ordered freedom, within the law, with force in the background and not in the foreground.."

"..The fruits of a free spirit of men do not grow in the garden of tyranny..."

Ahhhhhh, how wonderful things used to be when there was an Empire, no Welfare State and a chap who had some flair went out and made his fortune.

Things in Britain (and elsewhere) went downhill due to silly concepts like the Welfare State, independence for Negros, and lowering standards to be replaced by 'guilt' in various forms.


( categories: )

A powerful intellectual cleaning agent for the ethnic in you

William Scott Scherk's picture

I have hesitated to comment in the newer Loonberry threads. I re-read this thread and see what kind of reaction I got on September 2nd when I took a humour bat and beat about.

I had originally thought Elijah was playing a part (that of a circa 1936 Pukka Sahib). I had hoped he was at least an insightful debater, and able to defend his position rather that deny his own words' clear import.

What I wonder now is why he did not have the wisdom to simply write:

"Gosh. 'Ethnic Cleansing' was the wrong term for me to use. As much as current SOLOists may not understand what 'spiv' refers to, I did not remind myself of where the 'cleansing' term came from, or what it referred to. I don't support the kinds of ugly horrors that occurred in the former Yugoslavia . . . "

I understand that Elijah comes from a Jewish family.** If true, it seems ironic that he can be unthinking about 'ethnic cleansing.'

When he was ranting about how segregation laws in pre-1965 Mississippi were simply 'the ways things were,' I wondered if he was at all familiar with the history of his own people and the varied exclusions that they were subject to in the Anglo-Saxon world . . . not to mention the atrocities of WWII.


** From Elijah's SOLOHQ-era profile

Loonberry, Megros, and Ethnic Cleansers

William Scott Scherk's picture

The elite Loonberry is up to his naughty best on another thread, deriding Robert, scuffling with his intellectual betters, and lamenting that there is no present "ethnic cleansing" of Maori terrorists and/or spivs.

It makes me wonder what opinions our Elijah has on the cleansing undertaken on the ethnically Jewish in that long-ago time when men were men and profits were clean and delightful.

Elijah, lets say you were, oh, a homosexual ephebephile hemophiliac Jew yourself, for the sake of discussion.

How might you respond to a powerful intellectual cleaning agent such as the Final Solution, sir? Would your sadly non-white servants put you up in their attics for the duration, bring you clotting agents and well-fleshed darkling trade goods, and the latest news of Sow Belly Futures from Chicago Mercantile?

While you claim to never be abusive or personal, your hasty and boorish responses to Robert suggest otherwise.



Olivia's picture

Fair enough. I shall enquire no further, not even of Linz. Smiling


Older versions of Drupal has had some counting problems. We now also use Google Analytics to do some counting as well and our accuracy has gone way up. I don't want to give away the numbers but I'm very impressed by the geographic distribution and the number of unique visitors.


Putting the i in Imperialism

William Scott Scherk's picture

Colonialism = Fact of history of human development, generally absent in its old political forms.

Imperialism = Fact of the history of human development. The British Empire an exhibit, the Japanese co-prosperity sphere another. Often expensive to maintain, no standard of measurement. Today's dominant form of imperial action and structure: USA and its lesser allies.

Empire = rises and falls, ebbs and flows, lasts thousands of years, sometimes decades.

Capitalism = if interpreted as free trading, a foremost motor of human development. A product of human nature given its rein.

Independence = good if it implies an individual; discussable otherwise, not a good idea for minors.

Socialism = still rampant in industrialized economies in modern form, widespread in rich, literate (and poor, 'Christian') countries, lingering like a bad odour in many other places. In its high marxist form, retricted to Communist redoubts like Cuba and North Korea, with varying retreats, revisions and 'reforms' of its derivatives elsewhere.

In its cradle-to-grave care of persona sense, generally absent in China, and a fitful ration bowl in other areas.

Hostile takeover = "We want to buy your company and possibly fire your management, and possibly sell pieces of it, and possibly other things that we believer make sense to us. Let us see if we can beat the board and convince the market and see if the shareholders like come on side."


The bitch from la Sherkette

William Scott Scherk's picture

Claudia, you are right, both that the PS is needlessly, personally nasty and that I can be a bitch. I regret aping a stereotype. I regret that PS. Minor recent SOLO historical events larded up with over the top insult is not congenial now.

Indeed, on second thought, if he is a singular figure in NZ (Salient: 'ooh, Raceest!') and one who simoly states his mind, then yes: bloody good for him.

As for Lindsay's spree at Salient, yea verily -- a lot of the censoriousness and beheading calls and huffing puffing political anguish is quite entertaining.


-- if I had stopped at about, oh, the third word, as Cresswell points out . . .

-- the Clark regime will sooner or later fall at an election, and New Zealand's tradional rollicking political culture is ready

-- a grim subtext: a Drupal upgrade either stopped counting hits that used to be counted, or the silly season SOLO is about half the size it was a year ago. The schisms of year take a toll on readership

-- if Elijah shall ally with SOLO, the allies may also benefit, and further mutual benefits may follow

-- if there is a sunny side to my frothing mad, frenchified British Columbian arch bitch socialist nasty-face persona. . . I have helped rally SOLO troops

-- 562 reads in 36 hours. Dang! wrong about readership too. Where are these people coming from?

[edited for spelling, punctuation; added read count]


Prima Donna's picture

Regina Dildo and Prima Donna came separately.

R.D. came from a miscomprehension of an Italian word -- Linz called me Regina and I asked "Who's Regina?", for which he called me a Dildo and a disgraceful Italian. Smiling

The second is from a subject I'd rather leave in the past, but suffice it to say that I chose it as a cheeky title when returning to SOLO after an absence.


-- Food Philosophy. Sensuality. Sass.

I should say ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

... in all seriousness, I'm sorry to see Joe go, especially since, as far as I can tell, there's no real reason for it, even after I've received a private e-mail from him. But I've absolutely had it up to the eyeballs with babies and their pathetic, fucking umbrage. I become more and more convinced that liberty's epitpah is going to read, "My troops said they loved their freedom, but they loved the state of high dudgeon even more."

Joe's departure is a loss, but we can't all be treading on eggshells lest we offend some sensibility of his.

I have a (former) friend who hasn't spoken to me since 1995 for reasons he's never chosen to tell me. I have another friend who is friends with him. When I ask her, "Has David told you yet why he doesn't speak to me?" she says, "He just likes not speaking to people."

And he's not even an Objectivist! Smiling



Elijah Lineberry's picture

of [former] British colonies is one of these viscerally 'bad' concepts, rather like Capitalism.

Imperialism = Automatically bad
Empire = Automatically bad
Capitalism = Automatically bad

Independence = Automatically good
Socialism = Automatically good

A modern day equivalent is the media catchphrase "Hostile Takeover" of a moribund Company.

Hostile takeover = Automatically bad

But you have to ask the question...Hostile to whom?

1. It is not "hostile" for the Shareholders, the owners of the company, as the value of their investment rises.

2. It is not "hostile" for the customers, who see dramatic increases in customer service and quality.

3. It is not "hostile" to the Employees, including those who are 'downsized', because it puts a stop to unproductive activites which are effectively a waste of time, and usually creates career opportunities for those of merit.

So towards whom is it "hostile"?

Answer: ...incompetent Management and Directors who caused the moribund state in the first place.

These chaps are quite rightly sacked en masse and they are the ones using PR departments to spread nonsense of the "Hostile Takeover" catchphrase variety.

Similarly with the British Empire in Africa, it is viewed as a bad thing.

For whom was it bad?

1. It was not bad for those who bravely made large investments in mines, farms and businesses...millions of acres sitting idle for thousands of years was made productive and useful.

2. It was not bad for the consumers of the products produced by these Colonial farms, mines and businesses.

3. It was not bad for the population as they gained civilisation, the English language, a legal system, music, art, culture, employment, productivity, infrastructure and 1001 other things no one has exactly 'dis-invented'.

The only people it was 'bad' for were communists and terrorists who wanted to take over, enslave their own people and commit larceny and genocide.

I see images on television of famines, AIDS, wars, poverty, droughts, murders, genocide and a myriad of other horrors in Africa, ...and I wish to God there was still a British Empire!

(now go and put on your "Naughty Little Scamp" badge) Eye Sticking out tongue


Olivia's picture

I just can't pass this one up. How did you get your Prima Donna Regina Dildo title?? Smiling

I'm afraid ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

.... flouncing just isn't what it used to be. In the good old days, folk really knew how to flounce. They'd eke it out, make it worth something. I think Barbara posted eleven times after announcing she was leaving before we finally took her at her word and blocked her. And ask Prima Donna Regina Dildo how she got her name! Smiling I used to call them operatic farewells with endless encores. Now, all you get is a "Please delete my account." No class at all. Although the penultimate flounce was at least quite amusing, in the form of an AIM message: "Remove me from SOLO. Your site stinks."

The last flounce that was anywhere near half-decent was Diana's, though having said that I can't remember which of her flounces I mean. Smiling



Elijah Lineberry's picture

how "..freedom...with force in the background.." seems to have had no effect whatsoever.



Mitch's picture

Good to see you're not a DOHUT Smiling

You still there Mr Maurone? Care to rethink your position?

La Sherkette

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Claudia, don't worry about La Sherkette. She's mad as a snake. Smiling

Menstrual, mad ... SOLO gets 'em all. Smiling

Knee jerk reactions

Lance's picture

My first reaction to "independence for Negroes" was "huh?".
What independence? Which Negroes? When? I really had no idea what Elijah was referring to.
And so I asked Elijah in a private message, he kindly and patiently took the time to explain. All quite benign really.

Permanently menstrual ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

Are all prior friendships and associations for naught, when set against the apparent wish for self-righteous umbrage-taking?

Apparently so. The Age of Umbrage, as someone said.

None so queer as folk. Smiling


Olivia's picture

PS -- Master Meegrow, in case all the gold-smuggling and tax-havening and servant problems prevent you from running your hands up your new SOLO friends' legs (including the 'Mexican' who had not a clue who you are but a suit and gold bullion and a lecherous, puffy face), good luck on your next 'trade' at the cottage of love. Larry Craig would be proud.

You are such a BITCH!

Some of us met Elijah the other night, and I for one can assure you he was a unique and charming guest who is passionately in love with his own style of Capitalism - and bloody-well good on him!

What's wrong with asking for clarification?

Peter Cresswell's picture

Is there something wrong with simply asking for clarification when one sees something like that is more than likely simply poorly worded, as Elijah has indicated is the case here?

Are all prior friendships and associations for naught, when set against the apparent wish for self-righteous umbrage-taking?

Looks like it...

Olivia's picture

must be that time of the month again huh.

Am I to understand ...

Lindsay Perigo's picture

.... Joe has flounced because of "independence for Negroes"?


Elijah Lineberry's picture

never mentioned slavery.

I was referring to the British Empire, and calling 'silly' the "Winds of Change" Independence through Africa, which cost British shareholders Billions and Billions in lost profits and capital.

If you think grand larceny is "okay when Africans do it" you should read my 'Naughty Little Scamp" forum Eye


Olivia's picture

So when you say "Independence for Negros" you weren't referring to the abolition of slavery then?


Elijah Lineberry's picture

have read the posts by Mr Scherk several times and I presume he is some sort of hoaxer?

With regards to the Empire I was referring to the huge profits which were made in Africa, underpinning the wealth of the Empire, which for some bizarre reason was abandoned.

Along with this abandonment large numbers of people were condemned to rule by Tyrants such as Mugabe and Idi Amin and the resulting poverty, lack of freedom and other difficulties.

(If you look beyond Socialist axioms and peek at the facts from the century prior to Anti-Colonialism, you may find laissez-faire Capitalism) Smiling


Richard Wiig's picture


William Scott Scherk's picture

Good to know, Joe!

I was paranoid, you flouncer, cause I noticed a bunch of my former favourites at SOLO have been dropping like flies . . . it seemed that when I freely post my opinions at SOLO, down comes the red button.

Oh, how I too long for the days of Empire, when a few brave and true elite toads like Sir Robert Muldoon could make up for the loathsome voting rabble.

Thankfully, SOLO is not a mob, but a drinking party of world opinion leaders, Negroes and Negresses and dirty non-white Maoris notwithstanding.

Now, all get back to building the New Tomorrow, one Rick Giles Islamo-loving brick at a time. The commissars must rule, despite their clanging hangovers and dissonance and the purity of their principals.


PS -- how long before the New Zeals wake up and delete you, you figger?


JoeM's picture

No, not on your account.

Re: Moonberry and Maurone and the pomowanking jerk

William Scott Scherk's picture

This is surprising, Joe's decision.

It was an exhange between Joe and I back in April 2006 that got me banned in the first place. And Lindsay's principle of open debate that got me re-instated (courtesy of Phil Coates' lack of research).

Don't leave on my account, Joe! I was probably just being pre-menstrual, no need to be a flouncer. I am sure Moonberry takes the post in the manner intended, and that nothing will thwart him from posting more of his interesting thoughts on US politics and Negros and mortinis and so on . . .

[Context: "Sunny Days Ahead for SOLO"]

aged 49, gay, non-drinker (not by choice but by liver) & heavy smoker, like Moonberry not an objectivist; banned at Noodlefood, pre-banned from THE FORUM, self-banned from (f)RoR, about to be banned at Objectivish Living Wondering.

PS -- Master Meegrow, in case all the gold-smuggling and tax-havening and servant problems prevent you from running your hands up your new SOLO friends' legs (including the 'Mexican' who had not a clue who you are but a suit and gold bullion and a lecherous, puffy face), good luck on your next 'trade' at the cottage of love. Larry Craig would be proud.

Remember, in the words of your host, "Principle is more important than friendship." Have Tottenhottie read you the Credo, you loathsome toad.

Outta here.

JoeM's picture

Please cancel my account.

Loonberry and the Megros

William Scott Scherk's picture

I paraphrase Elijah Lineberry


"How wonderful things used to be when there was an Empire. How wonderful things used to be when there was no Welfare State. How wonderful things used to be when a chap who had some flair went out and made his fortune.
Things  went downhill due to silly concepts like independence for Negros."


Rather. I take it you mean that Negros in Colonies, not Negros in the Motherland, right? Of course, by Baldwin's time the pink parts of the globe had retreated a bit (after the glorious Imperial expanse upon the dark continent). Yes, Empire had shrunken by the time of Baldwin, and one quaint colony infested with Red Men had indeed dug up not only a Garden of Tyranny, but also the glory of  Georgian Rule.

You are a fan of America, I understand, and a close reader of  USA political history. So, you will understand that the ghastly American Colonies were forbidden to abolish the peculiar institution of Slavery, by a wave of the golden sceptre.  You also understand that  State constitutions proclaimed the right to vote for Negros in Delaware (1776),  Maryland (1776), New Hampshire (1784),and New York (1777) [**],  correct?

In which case there should be no cognitive dissonance for you to stand on the side of Empire versus those pesky, ungrateful colonials, with the nerve to offer freedom and equal rights to her darkly-complected citizens . . . while also standing for "Freedom." Gah.

Thank goodness no one could mistake you for an bigoted Sahib, Master. Not the Maori ticket-wallah on the rail platform, nor the Negress who collected your bullion during your recent frightening experience in the Auckland supermarket, or your two negro servants, Blinky the chauffeur/butler/tea-maker and Tottenhottie the maid/cook/bum wiper.

We all welcome you and your superior opinions at SOLO, darling Fudgie-moon. You put a pleasant face to elitism, and give a New White Zeal stamp on cupidity and ludic ignorance.

Lovely fat & lonely boorish Meegrow Elijah, lovely Ass-kissing SOLO minions, drooling for your dollars and custom and evading the stink of your dubious opinions.

. . . oh, perhaps you could get one of your lackeys to do up a URL for you, since you are too busy and stupid?

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.