Driven to Create a blog

Finally, after all of the crap we have had to put up with for the last ten years, this has finally driven me over the edge and into blog land. I am interested in who commissioned this report - our government, or another stuffed-full-of-public-cash organisation like the EU or UN?

Anyway, it's the usual boiler plate green authoritarianism, which fifteen years ago would have been laughed at but is rapidly and disturbingly becoming mainstream, but the killer quote is below:

'it concedes that this approach "raises enormous questions and accusations of nannystate misery-guts spoilsportism".'


Or Fascism, as I'd rather call it, because it is (a) snappier and (b) more accurate. When the State uses its power to decide what you eat, could it be described as anything else?

I believe you are meant to 'hat-tip' your source, in this case 'Chapeau!' to Devil's Kitchen

Update:

I've been thinking a bit more about this. In order to meet their demand that we consume far less meat and dairy produce, they have two options:

• The hands-on, skull smashing variety of Fascism. That is, the use of force to impose rationing. There is no way such an extreme level of rationing could be imposed in peacetime and at a time of unparalleled prosperity without the indiscriminate and massive use of State force.
• The abuse of the market to price such goods out of the reach of all but metropolitan socialists.

The second option is mentioned in the article. But fixing the price at an artificially high level is a weapon almost as blunt and indiscriminate as the truncheons used to impose rationing. The limit on such foods they say we should consume are

one quarter-pound burger, two sausages, three rashers of bacon and one chicken breast, along with a litre of milk and 100g of cheese.

Now, at what price should these goods be set so that I am limited by my income to no more than this? My income is a lot more than many, and a lot less than those who own sumptious properties in Hampstead and vote Labour. How should the price be set? Will we have punitive taxation to steal money from the 'rich' (those able to afford two chicken breasts per week) to the 'poor' (those who spend their money on fags instead)? Are we going to have black-booted bacon inspectors turning over pubs to smash the flourishing black market in illicit pork products?

Like previous scares, e.g. about health, this report and others like it are produced for one reason, and it isn't to combat global warming. It is to prepare for the increase of State power.