Saturday, 23 June 2012

You pay for this

Chris Snowdon draws our attention to an organisation called Active Europe whose vision is “a democratic, diverse and peaceful world free from alcohol and other drugs where any individual can live up to her full potential.” Their questionable and intolerant policy agenda can be seen here. It starts with this and then goes on:

There is a direct connection between the consumption of alcohol and the extent of alcohol related harm. The amount of alcohol related problems in society is linked with the total alcohol consumption. Attempts to reduce alcohol related harm should therefore be aimed at reducing the total consumption of alcohol. Restricive alcohol policies save lives and money and therefore contribute to development of the whole society.
While everyone is entitled to their opinion, the worrying thing is that this unpleasant organisation is funded by the EU. Many will say the sooner we’re out, the better.

8 comments:

  1. That paragarph can be written for anything you wish to restrict. E.g. if you oppose car use:

    "There is a direct connection between the use of cars and the extent of car related harm. The number of car related problems in society is linked with the total car usage. Attempts to reduce car related harm should therefore be aimed at reducing the total use of cars. Restrictive car policies save lives and money and therefore contribute to development of the whole society."

    In other words, it's just generic, repressive twaddle. By the way, did they really spell 'restrictive' wrongly?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Nice one Nev. How about:

    "There is a direct connection between the use of tobacco and the extent of tobacco related harm. The number of tobacco related problems in society is linked with the total tobacco usage. Attempts to reduce tobacco related harm should therefore be aimed at reducing the total use of tobacco. Restrictive tobacco policies save lives and money and therefore contribute to development of the whole society."

    Slippery slope anyone?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Or even:

    "There is a direct connection between the use of the EU and the extent of EU-related harm. The number of EU-related problems in society is linked with the total EU usage. Attempts to reduce EU-related harm should therefore be aimed at reducing the total use of the EU. Policies restrictive of the EU save lives and money and therefore contribute to development of the whole society."

    Same logic, or lack of it

    ReplyDelete
  4. How about:

    “There is a direct connection between sports and the extent of sport-related harm. The number of sport-related problems in society is linked with the total sport played. Attempts to reduce sport-related harm should therefore be aimed at reducing sports. Policies restrictive of sport save lives and money and therefore contribute to development of the whole society."

    This could be fun!

    Radical Rodent

    ReplyDelete
  5. The problem is not the strength or
    valour of the small bands of fanatical Puritans
    The problem is the apathy and cowardice of those who the puritans would suppress.

    ReplyDelete
  6. The problem is anonymous people who sit passively on the sidelines and do nothing but post snide comments.

    ReplyDelete
  7. “Restrictive alcohol policies save lives and money …”

    Doesn’t it ever occur to these zealots that if in real terms restricting something would genuinely save the government money then they’d be bringing in restrictions all on their own without the need for campaign groups such as theirs to tell them to do it? After all, the only real reason why the government won’t legalise at least drugs like cannabis is because at the moment they aren’t making any cash from it, and they’ve had their fingers burned by getting used to high incomes from the likes of alcohol, tobacco and petrol to want to get themselves into another corner that they can’t afford to get themselves out of.

    I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: high prices on substances that we like to enjoy and indulge in are unfair and an irritant, admittedly, but ultimately they’re what has saved tobacco from being made totally illegal, and allowed us to keep driving our cars to and from work, and they’ll do the same for alcohol – a small silver lining for you lot who are gearing up to face down the new breed of Healthists who are looking at you all with greedy eyes.

    It may not seem like such a good deal at the moment, but believe me, once they get the bit between their teeth it'll be that one single fact which may stand between you and US-style Prohibition. Remember, for every extra penny they charge you for a beer, they need you just that teeny bit more ...

    ReplyDelete
  8. xX While everyone is entitled to their opinion, the worrying thing is that this unpleasant organisation is funded by the EU. Many will say the sooner we’re out, the better. XX

    You think it will make a difference?

    Ask Norwegian fishermen, or Swiss cow breeders if not being members makes the SLIGHTEST bloody difference to them having to "obey" E.U directives.

    Simple. "You do not follow E.U "guidelines", you will not be allowed to trade with any E.U member, and none of your goods will be allowd to transverse E.U territory. including land sea and AIR routs, in transit to your customers, regardless if they are E.U members or not."

    Which, in many more volumes, is basically what Norway were told when they told the E.U to "go fuck your net sizes!"

    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.