Control Freakery Writ (Le) Grand

Via the Devil’s Kitchen, I am reminded – rather unfortunately – of the arrant bastard that is Julian Le Grand. This obnoxious control freak thinks that he understand the principles of libertarianism and has proposed what he claims is “paternal libertarianism”. Setting aside for a moment that this is an absurd oxymoron and the professor is merely an example of the latter syllable; what, exactly is this fetid little cunt proposing? (yes, I know this one first surfaced last October, but I was looking the other way at the time).

A radical plan to persuade people to stop smoking, take more exercise and change their diets was proposed last night by a leading Government adviser.

Oh yeah? None of this is anyone’s fucking business apart from the individual. Certainly it is none of the government’s business and it most definitely is none of the business of an unelected self-aggrandising busybody such as the execrable Le Grand.

In a speech to the Royal Statistical Society last night, Professor Le Grand said instead of requiring people to make healthy choices – by giving up smoking, taking more exercise and eating less salt – policies should be framed so the healthy option is automatic and people have to choose deliberately to depart from it.

Among his suggestions are a proposal for a smoking permit, which smokers would have to produce when buying cigarettes, an “exercise hour” to be provided by all large companies for their employees and a ban on salt in processed food.

The idea, dubbed “libertarian paternalism”, reverses the traditional government approach that requires individuals to opt in to healthy schemes. Instead, they would have to opt out to make the unhealthy choice, by buying a smoking permit, choosing not to participate in the exercise hour or adding salt at the table.

What the fucking, fucking, fucking, fuckitty, fucking… NONE of this, NONE of it is any of his fucking business. Get a permit to smoke? Just who the fuck does this arsehole think he is? It is none of his bloody business whether people smoke or not. The hubris of the man is staggering beyond belief – indeed, so angry am I that I have difficulty finding words to adequately express the rage. And I don’t smoke – never have. Any company that tried to “encourage” me to exercise would be given very short shrift – and I want salt on my food.

Mrs L does smoke. She likes the occasional roll-up. She will not be applying for a permit from the cuntish Le Grand, though. Not because this self-righteous turd plans to make the forms difficult for the proles in order to discourage them from making the “wrong” decision, but because she hasn’t bought baccy in the UK for years. She ether buys it on the cross-channel ferry or in France. What does this pompous demagogue plan to do, search everyone disembarking at Portsmouth or Dover? How dare he presume the arrogance to tell others how they should lead their lives, how dare he decide to “nudge” people in his preferred direction. Just who the fuck does he think he is, for christ’s sake?!?

Anyway, having been largely ignored last October, he’s at it again.

The permit might cost as little as £10, but acquiring it could be made difficult if the forms were sufficiently complex, Le Grand said last night.

His paper says: “Suppose every individual who wanted to buy tobacco had to purchase a permit. And suppose further they had to do this every year. To get a permit would involve filling out a form and supplying a photograph, as well as paying the fee. Permits would only be issued to those over 18 and evidence of age would have to be provided. The money raised would go to the NHS.”

Le Grand said the proposal was an example of “libertarian paternalism”. The government would leave people free to make their own decisions but it would “nudge them” in the right direction.

Libertarianism means letting people make their own decisions, it does not mean manipulating them towards one’s own preferred solutions or making life so difficult that they make the “right” decision. Professor Le Grand is a cunt of the highest order – except that cunts are useful and Le Grand is not.

See also, Trixie, Dizzy and England Expects

What an evil piece of shit is this man Le Grand. Rope, lamp-post and spike, methinks (not necessarily in that order).

Footnote: I don’t often allow my language to get quite this bad (mostly) but this man takes the biscuit. I am incandescent with rage at his oversized egotistic hubris to the point of being almost speechless (but not quite).

7 Comments

  1. I love the idea that they can stop people smoking by making the forms complicated. It’s one of the most barking mad ideas I’ve ever heard. This guy is smoking something, but I don’t think it’s tobacco.

    Perhaps we can expand this incredible insight to other areas? The forms that MPs use to claim their ridiculously generous expenses might be one place to start. They could complicate them by making them write down the real figures.

  2. “None of this is anyone’s fucking business apart from the individual”

    I take it shooting up herion in the street is ok by you then?

    I’m sure you do favour legalisation of all drugs (as I do) but it is not something we can just ignore. Drugs (all drugs, including tobacco and alcohol) do harm to society, not just the individual (of course, as I am sure you will point out, there are many thigs that harm society – over-eating, driving cars and yes, we need controls on these too).

    As I have tried to argue with you before on this – you are an absolutist. Life is not so cut and dried. Society delivers all sorts of coercian on the individual – mostly nothing to do with the state, whether peer pressure, financial pressures, media, whatever.

    The least we can do is sometimes use the state to steer some of this pressure into areas that would benefit the individual rather than be detrimental to them. Choice is not just about leaving people to their own devices, they need to be informed, they sometimes require financial and emotional support, advice and encouragement to be truly ‘free to choose’ and yes, sometimes we need to discourage activities that are known to be harmful.

    Neil Harding’s last blog post..Obama Or Clinton?

  3. No, Neil, it is not up to the state to steer anyone. Tobacco is a legal product (and yes I agree about legalising drugs. I might find shooting up in public distasteful, but would not seek to legislate against it).

    It may be worth pointing out here, that I have personal experience of substance abuse (alcohol as it happens – not me, but someone close) so I am well aware of the collateral damage and utter misery it can cause and it changes not one wit of my position on the matter. It is fuck all to do with the state and it is a matter for the individual to deal with as they see fit.

    If people choose, knowing full well what the risks are, then the state has no part to play in how they live their lives – and certainly not some jumped up, unelected little fascist like Le Grand. It is up to the individual to go to hell in the handbasket of their choosing. Choice is exactly about leaving them to make their own informed decisions and the state has no right “controlling” these activities. That is what free will means; making a decision based upon one’s knowledge of the risks and living with the consequences. We are adults, not children.

    Conflating this nasty, obnoxious and blatantly fascist behaviour with peer pressure is a non sequitur. I can choose to ignore peer pressure and I regularly ignore the media; financial pressure is just too bad, if you can’t afford it, then you either don’t do it or go without something else. This is not comparable with the state seeking to use coercion to influence choice at all – a smoker cannot ignore the pressure of the state with Le Grand’s proposed opaque forms and bureaucratic hoops*. Lifestyle and risks are a personal decision and nothing whatsoever to do with anyone else.

    So, sure, provide information and support for those who so desire it – but do not – absolutely do not – engage in any form of coercion. That crosses the line between support and force.

    *Well, actually, they can and will. See my comments about buying abroad. I can assure you that Mrs L will not be applying for a smoking permit, and she will not be giving up either.

  4. It’s people like this that need to be ripped from their ivory towers, lined up against the wall, and shot like the meddlesome, intrusive, freedom-hating pigs that they are.

  5. Personally I think Le Grand is just trying to slap true Libertarians in the face with his case for “Paternal Libertarianism”. I wonder what else was going on at the same time as this came to light in the media?

    In fairness I doubt this could be enforced – As DK pointed out recently Supermarkets have enacted stricter policies on identification to stop teen drinking; I commented that the effect had little to do with them and more to do with the myriad independant corner shops, bargain boozers and bad parents not enforcing these rules for profit, sheer stupidity or more sinister ends. If there is enough trouble stopping underage drinking and smoking how on earth will they enforce permit presentation? All answers to this problem just lead to greater loss of freedoms.

    Thom’s last blog post..Laura sings liver

Comments are closed.