Nanny State-Up Yours!

My beloved's mother is in rehab. No, she's not some kind of geriatric Amy Winehouse, she was rendered housebound around five years ago by our incompetent, nationalised health system and earlier this year landed herself in hospital again following a fall.

Anyway, earlier this week I went with my beloved to visit her mum and we took her outside in her wheelchair for a quick fag. We settled her in the sun, she put her fag of choice between her lips but didn't have a light, her lighter had been confiscated by the 'care staff'. We found her a light and she had a satisfying puff.

Today my beloved went to see her mum and had to replenish her stash of weed, so she went to Sainsbury's for ten Silk Cut (purple). They were closetted behind white screens away from the gaze of the public like hand maidens of the Lord, or vestel virgins secreted away from the gaze of sinners. The cashier respectfully opened the protective blinds on the magical goods behind but came back to inform Mrs B that they had no tens in Silk Cut (purple).

Mrs B asked to look at what other similar fags they had but was told by the state supply operative (supplier) that she couldn't let my beloved look at the products as that would constitute the operative "encouraging her to consume tobacco". She was directed to a price list at the end of the counter.

If my beloved wasn't a worldly wise ex-smoker she may have looked at the price of Park Drive, Senior Service or Woodbine and thought: "Oooh, I'll treat my mum to some of those, they must be really good quality at that price!!" Don't suppose the health fascists think like that that not living in the real world.

Despite the best (or worst) efforts of the NHS my m-in-law still survives at 88. Surely she should be allowed a fag in peace.

Smokers? Evil Bastards!

I used to have a friend who had a bit of an interest in conspiracy theories, not the completely loony David Icke style, slightly more credible, but still conspiracy theories. One of his more interesting ones was about the venemous assault on smokers, this was in the 1980s before the smoking ban.

His theory was that the increased incidence of cancer had been concerning governments for a long time, they were desperate to find the cause. Eventually they found a link, so his theory went, and the evil cause of many forms of cancer were petro-chemicals. That was that then.

But no, the governmnent then looked at what it could do. The petro-chemical industry, as well as being crucial to our existence, was extremely powerful. The government was scared it couldn't win a battle to clean that particular industry up. So what could they do?

Eventually they had the idea of creating a scapegoat in order to placate the population at large, who were increasingly concerned at cancer levels. Hey presto, the government decided to hammer the tobacco industry instead.

The second strand to his theory was that the government, in attacking smoking and the tobacco industry, would use it to assess the power of propaganda in a free and democratic society. Which is what got me onto this post today.

As for the first part of his theory I doubt it very much, although I do think there has been exaggeration of the effects of smoking, especially passive smoking. Wherever you have a new ideology you get the zealots who go to the far extremes.

What got me mulling this over again was seeing this week, for the first time, the government's latest propaganda attack on Britain's last, legally oppressed and officially villified minority, the smokers. If you haven't seen it the goverment commissars are not happy with just banning smoking and forcing people outside buildings for a drag, oh no, that isn't nearly enough. They are now ordering you to smoke seven miles (or was it seven paces?) from the building you have just been kicked out of. You see, the smoke may just seep through the bricks, or waft through an open window thus killing the occupants.

The propaganda element of this theory has worked incredibly well. In fact that element could have seen off smoking but Blair, the great dictator, just had to prove he was boss and brought in the ban. But what effect has the propaganda had?

Two personal examples prove the success of the propaganda. We have friends who still smoke, I gave up about three years ago as did my beloved. But when our friends come for a meal they insist on going out onto our balcony for a fag. We insist that we are not the tedious ex-smokers who claim to need the smell of smoke surgically removing and have to burn the curtains and redecorate the house when they've gone. But they have been conditioned not to smoke indoors any more. Although the power of numerous bottles of Cahors often reverses the effect of the propaganda by about 2-00am!

The second example is a chap a few doors down who, even in the blizzards last winter, could be seen shivering on his doorstep, less than seven yards from his home admittedy, no longer allowed by himself or whoever, to smoke in the comfort of his own home. I can't help wishing he would find some backbone and sit in the comfort of his armchair, with a nice glass of single malt, drawing on a Marlboro or Benson and Hedges.

So I finish with the view that not only has the propaganda about tobacco worked wonderfully well, but it has also shown what a nation of intolerant, self-obsessed wimps we have become, ready to ask how high when the state tells us to jump rather than sticking two fingers up in the great old English tradition.

Nick Hogan-Hero or Clown?

If like me you have been away, or extremely busy recently, you may have missed the fact that anti-smoking ban pub landlord Nick Hogan has been sent to prison, but has now been released. He wasn't imprisoned for breaching the smoking ban, but for non payment of fines in relation to breaches of the smoking ban in his pub. On many blogs he has become something of a cause celebre.

I don't accept that his actions are a great blow for libertarianism even though I heartily oppose the smoking ban, though no longer smoke. If I ignored every law I oppose I would have spent most of the last thirty years in Strangeways. What we all need to do is to campaign and fight against all those things that we find oppressive. There are issues that require civil disobedience but first we have to garner the support of the general population. The general population see those who stood in front of tanks in Tiananmen Square as heroes, somebody going to prison over the smoking ban they are more likely to see as a clown.

If real progress is to be made then libertarianism has to be seen as a credible philosophy. Too many people see libertarians as a group of people who just want to scrap laws so they can do what the hell they want and stuff everybody else, legalising drugs being the easiest thing to beat us with. I don't want to get bogged down in the drugs issue but I'm sure any libertarian knows the arguments back to front.

Supporting somebody over an issue such as the smoking ban, which is even supported by many smokers now, is picking the wrong fight at the wrong time. In a nutshell very few people give a shit. We can either tilt at windmills or we can fight a savvy and credible political war. Supporting Nick Hogan is clearly tilting at windmills.

What it really comes down to is a choice between libertarians posturing and posing on the internet for the next however many years, or building credibility, getting people to vote for them and getting people elected then making a real change. Supporting somebody who stamps his feet and throws a tantrum because he hasn't got what he wants invites ridicule and ultimate failure.

National No Smoking Day

In case you didn't know today is 'National No Smoking Day' when the government, and assorted hysterical anti-tobacco nuts and health fascists, badger us about having a drag on a fag. No doubt the government propaganda device in your living room will be pumping cancer and bronchitis warnings at you all day in between telling you how they will crush your car if you even think about not taxing it or will remove your finger nails with pliers if you forget to get your TV licence.

I gave up smoking three years ago but feel it is our patriotic duty to support our oppressed fellow citizens who are forced, by fascistic authoritarian government automatons, to brave the elements whenever they fancy a smoke, be they at work, in the pub or even at home it seems. Even on a railway station platform with no roof and a howling wind, smokers will be shot if they light up according to the tannoy announcements about not smoking or blowing up a train at Lancaster Station.

So, back to our patriotic duty. You get knobhead celebrities, like Prince Harry or William (which one's Ant which one's Dec?) kipping in cardboard boxes to support the homeless, smokers are much more deserving, at least they pay taxes, so each and every one of us should support the oppressed smokers of the UK and go out, buy a packet of ciggies and light up in solidarity.

Can you still get 5 Park Drive and a book of matches?

Age, Smoking, Drinking and Exercise

Taking a bit of fresh air this morning I saw an elderly fella staggering and wheezing down the canal towpath towards me. As he got closer I could see he was well into his 70s, glowing red, sweating and doing about 1 MPH. Seriously worried for him I asked if he was OK, he stopped, bent down with his hands on his knees and said: "I'm out for me morning jog, you should try it porky".

To say I was taken aback is putting it mildly, to such an extent that I just left him, no witty retort or torrent of abuse, and carried on walking. At least I don't have people checking I'm not about to die when I do go out for a spot of exercise is the best I could muster, and I just thought it as I walked away.

But it made me think, and I remember a few years back a colleague telling me about her husband, two years younger than me and without a hard earned beer belly and smokers cough. She was urging me to 'look after myself' and to think about doing some jogging, even a marathon or two like her husband. My feeling was sod that, you don't get St John's Ambualance and emergency doctors sitting around in pubs the way they line the route of a marathon. He died three years ago, just after I'd given up smoking.

Every now and then I wonder whether I should start smoking again, just to be on the safe side. It's especially good with a nice glass of Laphroaigh.

Nicotine Addiction

I usually meander down the stairs and check the TV news while I toast a couple of crumpets first thing, a good way of starting the day before popping out for newspapers or cranking up the laptop. This morning I saw the latest celebrity bullshit programme being plugged, and I use the word celebrity loosely.

This one is a programme following a bunch of misfits giving up fags. Wow, that will be rivetting viewing. They include the daughter of a couple of TV presenters, a Scouser who talks to the dead and some other bloke who seems to be famous for lying in bed being interviewed by the BBC on a Monday morning. It seems to have gone beyond z-list and left the alphabet completely.

I gave up the weed nearly three years ago, after more than thirty years on twenty a day, forty or more in my nightclubbing days. The main reason was starting to feel vulnerable to killer diseases (probably an age thing), so I wanted to minimise the chances of self-induced illness, especially after spending a night in a hospital which wasn't pleasant but that's another tale. I did it because I wanted to and didn't ponce about with patches, gum or some poxy NHS course. I certainly didn't do it on telly.

One of the things I don't miss, but it still angers me, is the self-righteous twat of a non-smoker who starts coughing and spluttering if he sees somebody light up fifty yards away, wanker. I still oppose the smoking ban, don't feel the urge to wash my hair or my clothes when I've been in the company of smokers, and urge visitors to my house to smoke if they want to. There you are, I'm all self-righteous in the oposite direction.

What I do object to, and it gets me very angry, is the state, in the form of the glorious NHS, putting expensive adverts on TV with kids whining about how mummy or daddy is going to suffer a long, lingering, painful death in front of said infant if they don't give up fags. That's not what I pay taxes for.

I also object to my taxes being spent by the state, in the form of the NHS, on courses and expensive kits to get smokers off nicotine. Then you hear some halfwit from the local NHS Trust telling us how they don't have the money to treat people with heart disease, MND or some other disease that requires expensive medicines.

Smoking, like chopping off your willy and growing breasts, is a lifestyle choice. NHS money should not be spent helping people change their lifestyles, use your own money not mine.

Here is the Libertarian Party policy on health.

I feel better for getting that off my chest, no pun intended.

Meat Free Monday

Paul McCartney and his coven of daughters are launching 'Meat Free Monday'. The idea is that we all give up meat on a Monday thereby saving the planet. They seem to think that all the farm animals will understand and stop farting for the day as a result, thus reducing methane emissions.

All it means now is that I will make sure I have a bacon and sausage butty for breakfast, a ham sandwich for lunch and a nice big, juicy steak with a bottle of red in the evening, every Monday.

It'll be a bit like making sure I have a smoke on 'National No Smoking Day'.