I heard the news today, oh boy..

[mockney piers]

This might cheer you up a bit Brendan...not to mention shake East Dulwich's chatering classes to the core.

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=477&Itemid=59

[Ant]

Shit! Better flog my food processor and recoup the capital before it loses all its value.

[Brendan]

Brilliant!

One thing I love about EDF get-togethers is the distinct lack of those hellish ?property market? conversations.

[mockney piers]

Who'd be up for one of these babies!!!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/7054120.stm

[Brendan]

Just the thing for cracking open when you get home late from the pub with your friends and then necking the whole thing indiscriminately with various mixers.

[Jah Lush]

Me me me me! Also, the Black Cherry does a decent Mai Tai. Slurp slurp...Lurverly! Quite fancy one now actually.

[Keef]

*Rugby tackles Jah out the way, grabs bottle, runs for the hills*

[Brendan]

Ever tried a zombie in Black Cherry? They have stared back at me from the menu many a time but so far I have resisted the temptation.

[mockney piers]

Daaaangerous.

Have done it once. Didn't really like it, probably the absinthe that spoilt it for me. Good for bravura, bad for flavour.

[Jah Lush]

Don't be such a wuss Brendan. Call yourself man. You haven't lived until you've had a Zombie in the Black Cherry. It should be part of the EDF initiation rights.

Agree with you about the Absinthe Mockney, it spoils it completely as it's all you can taste until you're halfway through.

[Brendan]

Right that?s it. I shall go there tonight and drink 5 of them. Like a man!

I do hope they are served with those sweet little umbrellas in the glass.

[Keef]

Mmmmmm Zombie

Again, agree about the absinthe, but they are still awesome!

In fact Jah, I do believe you gave me my first ever taste of one, and after that I had to have a whole one all to my self! :)-D

[Jah Lush]

That's the spirit Brendan, good man. Trouble is I believe they have a rule that only allows you to have the maximum of two. There are about seven shots in it I think.

[Brendan]

I will wear a fedora, sunglasses and a fake moustache. Each time I order I will wear a different combination of these cunning disguises.

[Floating Onion]

I am rather biased. Not available in ED, but lovely stuff. I have wondered if I could convince Black Cherry to carry the black or gold. The old is too pricey for a cocktail, but you wouldn't want to spoil it with a mixer anyway. What a rum!! :)-D

[SeanMacGabhann]

The zombie limit - easily get-aroundable if you are with friends surely?

[SeanMacGabhann]

2 topics dear to the Forum's heart on the comment pages today

Forget your bias against the columnists, but I'd be interested in any arguments against them (Monbiot particularly)

Bleedin Libertarians - George Monbiot

You think crime is bad now??? - Polly Toynbee

[mockney piers]

Is it any wonder there's a gun culture these days with things like the

My Little Pony M4-A1 Carbine

*it's a hoax .. shhhh

[SeanMacGabhann]

but if I choose to ignore the subscript and just spread fear and panic... THAT WILL MAKE IT TRUE!!!

[Brendan]

I just read that George Monbiot article Sean. It raised the question that if libertarian ideals which generally focus around the rights of the individual are put into practice in government, what sort of social obligations would institutions that provide services that we consider to be basic human rights (housing, education, etc) have? Which led me to ask:

In our society where personal banking is becoming increasingly compulsory if you are to be a functional member of society, at what point will access to personal banking become a basic human right?

[SeanMacGabhann]

Brendan, I think that if the premise came to pass (ie individuals not governments were in control) the the concept of "human rights" would be defunct. it would be dog-eat-dog, survival of the fittest - ie pretty much where we started as mammals before we discovered civilisation.

[Brendan]

In general Libertarian ideals are that an individual is allowed complete freedom and is not forced into or obligated to do anything BUT they must allow other people leave to do the same. The second part of the statement implies that there is some obligation upon the individual in order to maintain the right to his freedom and quite possibly the need for some kind of law and enforcement.

Surely what you are describing is Anarchy?

[mockney piers]

Just scrapped a whole page of stuff as it was far too wide-ranging and ended up quite ranty. I can express it better as "what Sean said"

Brendan, what you are describing is pretty much exactly the anarchist ideal. Sadly it simply doesn't function in society anything above a collection of hamlets really. Now throw in an intensely selfish consumerist society and libertarianism boils down to:

"I'm alright Jack, keep your hands of my stack (and my family and mates), someone will step in and take care of you, like a charity, or something...innit"

[SeanMacGabhann]

[in reply to Brendan]

Not really (or should I say not intentionally)

Allowing other people to do the same assumes that everyone has the same goals - Monbiot's article argues (correctly IMO) that the reality of that would mean a land-grab by the fittest who could then turn around and say "well, you had equal opportunity" assuming, in effect, power

Anarchic societies (the theory as I understand it anyway) would not allow that level of autonomy by individuals

This is all very simplistic but I'm quite scatty today and trying to multitask

[edit after MP's post - I'd love to see that page rant ;-) ]

I was drawn to the term libertarian on the back of Bill Hick's description of himself - but then I forget that was 15 years ago.. sighs....

[Brendan]

Below is a paragraph lifted from wikipedia (so it could be about Japanese cheeses for all you know) which sums up generally what I have always understood the term Libertarian to mean.

??all human interaction, including government interaction with private individuals, should be voluntary and consensual. Or, to state it another way, they assert that all persons are the absolute owners of their own lives, and should be free to do whatever they wish with their persons or property, provided they allow others the same liberty. They maintain that the initiation of force by any person or government, against another person or their property?with force meaning the use of physical force, the threat of it, or the commission of fraud against someone?who has not initiated physical force, threat, or fraud, is a violation of that principle. They do not oppose force used in response to initiatory aggressions such as violence, fraud or trespassing.?

The way I interpreted the article was Monbiot describing Ridley using these apparent ideals to justify his being at liberty to take risks with other peoples? money. Then going further to say Libertarianism in practice would just be, as Sean said, ?A land-grab by the fittest who could then turn around and say `well, you had equal opportunity` assuming, in effect, power? i.e rampant capitalism.

I must just say that I do not subscribe to any particular school of thought but rather think that different ideas can be applied to societies in different situations and for different reasons. It is just a matter of finding what works, when and how.

Oh and when mentioned Anarchy I was not referring to the socio political ideal of some kind of collective with no leader. I meant the literal meaning of complete chaos and lawlessness.