Sunday, 11 December 2011

Moment of truth

A point I have made several times on here is that many “beer enthusiasts” seem strangely oblivious to the threat to their pleasure posed by the growing movement to have the State control and dictate individual lifestyles.

Not only do they refuse to accept the first they came for the smokers argument, but they seem to believe that their particular interest can sail on unscathed through the obviously increasing trend towards the denormalisation and demonisation of even moderate alcohol consumption. One day, though, something will happen to make them wake up and think “oh shit, this really does mean us!”

Perhaps it will be when the UK ends up with the highest beer duties in the developed world, which a few more years of the annual duty escalator will bring about. However, from the government point of view, we are already into the realm of diminishing returns on that one, with absolute revenues dropping and a substantial rise in smuggling and illicit brewing and distilling.

Or it could be when tiered beer duty makes selling anything beyond very weak beers prohibitively expensive.

Or maybe when restrictions on promotion and advertising (which is where I fear we are likely to see most action) make it impossible to carry on the activities of running beer festivals and producing local newsletters and render most micro-breweries unviable.

I don’t know, as I’m not in possession of a crystal ball. But one day it will happen, and the one thing that is absolutely certain is that it will be too late.

And, in case anyone still didn’t accept the “first they came for the smokers” argument, you only have to read this singularly vile article from Prohibitionist harridan Joan Smith in today’s Independent on Sunday, ably fisked by Chris Snowdon here.

Any suggestion that the principles behind the smoking ban be extended to junk food prompts near-apoplexy, as though we have an inalienable right to consume as much high-fat, sugary rubbish as we wish.
You do have to wonder what is the underlying motivation here. The hackneyed argument about “unhealthy” lifestyles imposing costs on the rest of society does not really wash, as it has been amply demonstrated that, over their lifetimes, those “healthy” people who live into extreme old age cost the NHS far more.

Or it is that we need to have a healthy population to fulfil our national destiny, something disturbingly redolent of the totalitarian ideologies of the 1930s? Or simply a desire to control others and stop them doing anything that the Righteous disapprove of?

And, for what it’s worth, although she says “filling your face with popcorn is not a human right”, in my view being able to choose your own diet and not have it imposed on you by the government is a fundamental human right.

9 comments:

  1. The late lifestyle freedom and tobacco advocate Gian Turci said "this is war".
    The brewing and distilling industry should wake up to this fact before it is too late for them as well.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Curmudgeon, this being the festive season I am beginning to see the Drinkaware logo on adverts where I never thought I'd see them. One was on an advert about festive food and a Christmas pud was shown aflame with brandy as the drinkaware logo was in the top right corner. A Christmas pud ffs.

    If any modarate drinkers out there still think that the health fascists are not coming for you then think again. Even your Christmas pud is deamed as a gateway to being an alcoholic by the healthist maniacs!

    ReplyDelete
  3. Sherry trifles and wine gums sold only to people looking to be over 25 will be next.
    I hate my own Country. How did it happen.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I've seen it coming for a while :(

    Just look at the younger generation. They are hooked up to machines all day long, believe what they they see and are told and do not have the way with all to stand up for what is REAL.

    People in their mid 40s are probably the last generation who undertand the meaning of community and have the ability to fight for it - If we do not do it, nobody will :(

    Russell

    ReplyDelete
  5. High cost of health care on everyone else in society because of [name intended target here] is an old Nazi trick from the last time they were in power and they used that as an excuse to develop solutions to problems, such as people they did not like living and so they had them murdered. Today's health fascists are true fascists as were the Nazis and use the same propaganda playbook and choice of persuasive arguments in order to discriminate and then kill off those they do not like. The fact they make it all seem like best intentions is just more way to get people to not see through it. They're a very clever bunch and again, everyone has fallen for it, hook, line and sinker.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Anon @19:22 you may think that your joking about wine gums but I can envisige some anti alcohol group wanting to change the name as WINE is alcoholic and may get the youth started on alcohol, which they abhore...and our stupid effing politicians will listen.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Indeed, you can't get "sweet cigarettes" any more.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Whether drinker or smoker,your
    real enemies are not the health
    freaks( mostly Bolshies not Nazis)
    not control nutters or out of touch
    polticians
    Your real enemy stands next to you,
    lives next door,shoulder shrugger,
    not bothered, "Im all right Jack"
    smug indifference
    Like the ones who blame the pub demise on Supermarkets and recessions
    Look around you,take a close look
    at the appeasers,the Quislings,
    the apathetic,they are your real
    enemy As for the whimps and wallies
    who still patronise the pubs,
    least said the better.

    Never alone with A Strand

    ReplyDelete
  9. @20.57
    Where precisely are you coming from? Are you in favour of pubs or not? If you don't like them, that's fine but why are you posting comments on a site called "The Pub Curmudgeon"? I'm a carnivore but I don't bother posting stuff on vegetablist sites; I can't be arsed.
    If your main concern is smoking, that's fine too. I hate the ban as much as most other people who post on here. However, I'd still rather meet my friends and acquaintances in the social environment of a pub than sit at home smoking myself silly. I would say "get a life" but The Curmudgeon prohibits ad hominem attacks so I wouldn't dream of it.

    ReplyDelete

Comments, especially on older posts, may be subject to prior approval. Bear with me – I may be in the pub.

Please be polite and remember to play the ball, not the man.

Any obvious trolling, offensive or blatantly off-topic comments will be deleted.

See this post for some thoughts on my approach to blog comments. The comment facility is not provided as a platform for personal attacks on the blog author.