THE LAST DITCH

Link: So much freedom lost…and on my watch | St Opinion | Opinion | Telegraph.

ShamichakrabartiShami Chakrabarti has undoubtedly done her best, but I share her disappointment at the losses "on her watch."

I think Liberty (which she leads and of which I am a member) went astray when it went into the "rights" business. The only "right" I ask for as a citizen is to be left alone, unless I interfere with that right on the part of others.
I am far less interested in my rights than in my liberties. In particular, I am very interested in my civil liberties; those that protect me from the State.

Many of the things now characterised as "rights" in Britain are mere entitlements, privileges or benefits. Some are actual restrictions of other people’s liberties (e.g. to protect minority groups against discrimination). They may be justified and they may be valuable, but they are not on a par with fundamental freedoms.

By trendily mixing such things with truly basic civil rights like the presumption of innocence, Liberty’s members (and many others in Britain) have muddied the waters. In trying to broaden people’s rights, we have unintentionally paved the way for Blair’s astonishing attack on our free society.

Shami does sterling work and is a good, calm spokeswoman both for Liberty and for liberty. There is no doubt though that the organisation she leads is currently, by any objective measure, a failure. It has failed to get its message across even as New Labour has set about our fundamental liberties with utter ferocity.

Brits in America are now always asked about Blair. A colleague at my conference in Las Vegas was surprised when I simply said "I hate him." However, it took less than a minute to explain why. Any educated American understands habeas corpus. They are taught about their Constitution at school and it provides that habeas corpus shall not be repealed. When I explained that, by introducing a house arrest regime paralleled only in Cuba, North Korea and Burma, Blair had essentially abolished habeas corpus in the country that invented it, my colleague saw my point immediately.

Shami can’t restrain a British Government unhindered by a Constitution. She can, however, direct more of Liberty’s resources to education. Somehow we have to get the message of liberty into the propaganda factories that pass for our State schools. Until Brits understand what they have lost, there is little hope of their fighting back. Having given up what our ancestors fought for, we may have condemned our children to fight for it again.

7 responses to “So much freedom lost…”

  1. Bishop Hill Avatar

    The problem with Liberty is that it has such an incredibly low profile. I’ve always wondered if Shami wants to follow the well trodden path from Liberty into the upper echelons of the Labour party, and for this reason doesn’t like to shout too loudly.

    Like

  2. jameshigham Avatar

    …I am far less interested in my rights than in my liberties…
    And this differentiates the socialist [or left liberal]from the libertarian.
    I’m with the latter. There are no rights but there are most certainly freedoms.

    Like

  3. Kinderling Avatar

    It sounds like Liberty has gone the way of Amnesty International.
    AI once worked for people with a conscience, now it works to salve their own conscience.

    Like

  4. pommygranate Avatar

    Bishop
    I’d bet anything that you are right.
    the best thing that we can do to ensure schools remain free of govt censorship is to introduce vouchers for parents who cant afford a decent education.
    James – welcome! i hadnt realised you are a libertarian.

    Like

  5. David B. Wildgoose Avatar
    David B. Wildgoose

    I could be mistaken, but didn’t Liberty refuse to support the rights of individual miners to work during the Miners’ Strike? The reason why I ask is that it is this understanding that has always stopped me joining “Liberty”, which surely must include the right not to be prevented from working and providing for your family.
    (I come from a mining area, and know families whose lives were wrecked by Scargill’s grandstanding).

    Like

  6. MJW Avatar

    I have a fundamental problem with Liberty, as an organisation it appears to me to value the rights of the aggressor above the rights of their victims e.g. we shouldn’t introduce draconian legislation against fascistic nutjobs because it’s not nice for them or we shouldn’t try to restrict the movements of feral chavs who intimidate and terrorise people going about their law abiding business etc etc ad naseum.
    If the nutjobs, chavs and other aggressors decided to respect the rights of others then there would be no problem. Anybody with a true respect of liberty is willing to moderate their own behaviour in so much that they respect the liberty of others, this makes much of the legislation Liberty protests at effectively redundant as a threat to the liberty of those who respect liberty.

    Like

  7. dearieme Avatar
    dearieme

    “Liberty” was for most of its existence just a communist front. (Hence its antics over the miners’ strike.) I presume that AI was too.

    Like

Leave a comment

Tom is a retired international lawyer. He was a partner in a City of London law firm and spent almost twenty years abroad serving clients from all over the world.

Returning to London on retirement in 2011, he was dismayed to discover how much liberty had been lost in the UK while he was away.

He’s a classical liberal (libertarian, if you must) who, like his illustrious namesake, considers that

“…government even in its best state is but a necessary evil; in its worst state an intolerable one.”

Latest comments
  1. Lord T's avatar
  2. tom.paine's avatar
  3. Lord T's avatar
  4. tom.paine's avatar
  5. Lord T's avatar