Firstly from Daniel Hannan:
Firstly from Daniel Hannan:
Daniel Hannan has spoken out on immigration and called for Europe to deal with illegal migrants in the same way Australia does.
A prominent British politician has urged European leaders to ignore the self-righteous “Mrs Lovejoys” who decry tough border protection policies and instead adopt Australia’s turn-back-the-boats policy.
The Simpsons character Helen Lovejoy, the wife of a reverend, is famous for her catchphrase: “Won’t somebody please think of the children?”
Rather than writing social media posts expressing compassion for migrants attempting to reach Europe by boat, Conservative politician Daniel Hannan says Europeans should learn from countries like Australia. Read more »
Daniel Hannan is a thinker, and an eloquent speaker.
He has challenged Nelson Mandela’s thinking on poverty and explains why Mandela was wrong.
“Like slavery and apartheid,” Nelson Mandela told 20,000 people in Trafalgar Square ten years ago, “poverty is not natural. It is man-made and it can be overcome and eradicated by the actions of human beings.”
They were inspiring words, and the crowd duly went wild. But the old man was talking utter, unadulterated bilge. Poverty is not “man-made”: it is the primordial condition of all living organisms, including humans. It is wealth that is “man-made”.
As usual Hannan is straight into it without hesitation.
Perhaps 100,000 years ago, our distant fathers hit on the idea that, instead of having to do everything themselves, they could specialise and exchange. If Ug is particularly deft at making flint weapons, let him stay behind and concentrate on what he’s good at while the rest of the tribe hunts and brings him a share of the meat. While we’re about it, Og from the neighbouring clan has a rare gift for making fishhooks: why not trade some of them for Ug’s flints?
From that simple discovery came, in due course, wheels and printing presses and spinning jennies and skyscrapers and antibiotics and the Internet. The greater the number of people drawn into a commercial nexus, the more each individual can concentrate on improving his or her particular métier. The hours which we need to work in order to support ourselves fall, giving us more free time – both to employ in leisure pursuits and to come up with yet more ingenious inventions. People became longer-lived, more literate, more comfortable, better-fed, taller, more numerate and more numerous. They also, incidentally, become more peaceable: far from being ruthless or selfish, capitalism joins men and women together in a cats-cradle of mutual dependency. That, in a nutshell is the history of homo sapiens.
From the Backchat post last night.
Watch Daniel Hannan explain how socialism does not work.
It is the best 13 minutes of your life that you can spend today.
Daniel Hannan explores and explains the sometimes unhappy relationship between traditional media and blogs…from his own blog, that is ironically part of The Telegraph.
Back in the pioneering days, blogs were seen as a challenge to the established media. And, in one sense, they were. When Guido scalped his first minister, Peter Hain, in 2008, something changed, though the newspapers were slow to notice. When, the following year, he aimed his tomahawk at Derek Draper and Damien McBride, old-style pundits were still laboriously explaining to their readers what these blog thinggies were. By the time Tim Yeo became Guido’s latest victim, no one needed to ask any more.
When a dozen dead tree newspapers determined the agenda, the media’s chief power lay in not reporting a story – not through conspiracy, but from shared assumptions about what constituted news. Take the leak of the “hide the decline” emails from climatologists at the University of East Anglia in late 2009. At first, the astonishing trove was reported only by bloggers. It wasn’t that environment correspondents were meeting behind drawn blinds and vowing to repress the discovery; it was that, being uncomplicated believers in the AGW orthodoxy, they couldn’t see why the emails were a story. Only when repeatedly needled by online commentators were they were eventually forced to report perhaps the biggest event in its field of the century.
The key moment came when the story was picked up by James Delingpole, whose post attracted 1.6 million hits. Tellingly, that post appeared here, on Telegraph Blogs. Blogs were now part of the established media. In the early days, some had believed that the MSM would be displaced, others that the old brands would conscript the upstarts. In fact, something more interesting happened: the distinction broke down. Read more »
Daniel Hannan blogs at The Telegraph about taxation and how Labour supporters believe that taxes are to punish the rich, not to raise revenue.
Ponder the graph above. Sixty-nine per cent of Labour supporters would want a top rate tax of 50 per cent even if it brought in no money.
I’m sure they’d dispute the premise. I’m sure they’d insist that it did bring money in. And, on one level, they’d believe it; it’s human nature to start with the result we want and then rationalise it to ourselves with what look like hard data. I think their rationalisation would be false, obviously – once the behavioural consequences of the tax are factored in, it becomes a net drain on revenue – but I might be subject to my own confirmation bias in the other direction.
Anyway, this isn’t a blog about the statistics – I’ve already posted one of those. No, this is a blog about the mind-set of people who see taxation, not as an unpleasant necessity, but as a way to punish others. Read more »
People, okay mainly left wing tossers with their heads jammed up their fundament, claim that this website is rubbish or a sewer not by what is written on it but by what is in the comments. their site is better, smarter or more erudite because we have nicer commenters is the answer.
Of course it is petty jealousy fuelled with an unhealthy dose of intellectual snobbery. The market speaks and the market decides if you’re good enough not some pompous leftwing snob’s idea of what people should say or think.
Daniel Hannan explores this in his blogpost (again the Telegraph is a mainstream “news medium” that has bloggers).
The FT’s former correspondent at the European Parliament used to ask me the same question at every press conference. “So does this mean you voted the same way as Jean-Marie Le Pen?”
It’s amazing how many people want to judge a proposal, not by its merits, but by its incidental supporters. We need only state their implication openly – that you should drop an otherwise sensible idea because someone you don’t like agrees with you – to see how absurd it is.
Yet people carry on doing it. It’s the phenomenon that lies behind Godwin’s Law, the observation that all Internet discussions, if allowed to run long enough, end with comparisons to the Nazis. Hitler didn’t like trade unions! Hitler banned foxhunting! Hitler was a vegetarian! Hitler was an atheist! Hitler was a Catholic! Hitler was a pagan!
Now there’s a new variant of the phenomenon: judging a blog by its comment thread. Again, the absurdity should be obvious. Bloggers are not responsible for what happens after they have posted. Those who comment most aggressively are more often than not hostile to the writer. The word “troll” didn’t originally mean, as is often thought these days, someone who is rude and unpleasant; it meant someone who used an assumed identity to discredit someone else. Read more »
A reader emails:
With reference today’s post about Farage; I saw an absolutely brilliant debate on the BBC World Service TV this weekend, the Intelligence2 (as in squared) debate.
Farage and Hannan debated Leon Brittan and a German pulchritude on the motion “Britain and the EU would be happier divorced”.
They smashed it. Great to see if you can find it. Read more »
Daniel Hannan MEP on the left’s position regarding the eurozone bailouts firstly on Spain:
and on Greece:
It looks like late last night the NZ Herald editors had a gap to fill and quickly knocked up some bullshit to fill it.
I can imagine the consternation…oh no! a gap, how can we fill it?
Some bright spark would have said to rip an idea from a popular blogger and so they had a quick scroll through and found something they could twist into an insult against John Key. Perish the thought that one of their journalists actually read The Telegraph. Clearly there must have been nothing of value in The Guardian that they could have used.
Now let’s look at this…the Herald has used a headline with quote marks…except Daniel Hannan never said that. What he did say was:
He is very clever and, at the same time, utterly charming in the informal and artless way that New Zealanders have. While he has little time for dogmas and theories, he has a clear sense of where he wants to take his country, and is able to communicate that sense to people around him.
That is quite a bit different from the “quote” used in the headline.
Then of course is the description of Daniel Hannan. The Herald describes him as “a journalist”….which is technically true but he is more well known as a Conservative MEP and has been since 1999. He was recently here in New Zealand for an IDU meeting so not only did he meet John Key on a plane, but he also would have spent some quite considerable time with him at the IDU meetings in Wellington. The repeater who pasted together this article also clearly doesn’t listen to Leighton Smith who spoke with Daniel Hannan for about an hour the other day.
This was a nothing article, 5 days after the fact…Daniel Hannan has written more more columns since then, and poorly researched and deceptively wrong with the headline. No wonder I call them the NZ Horrid.