Just how far can the Nanny State go?
I was doing my shopping in our local Morrison’s supermarket during the week and there was a tannoy advert for toothpaste, complete with directions on how to use it, like “remember to brush below the gum-line”.
Can’t wait for the toilet paper announcements!
Boom-tish!
You realise that Morrison’s isn’t, you know, part of the state?
You know what I mean though.
Erm, no, I don’t.
I know what you mean.
Nanny crosses over from the Public to the Private sphere. The ubiquity of nagging and regulation becomes the norm, and with a few technological add-ons like databases and identity cards, we get the Stasi state without violence; indeed without most people fully noticing.
Oh, right, so it’s baseless paranoia. Thanks for clearing that up, Jeff.
How you can blame the government for something which they so obviously have no control over is beyond me.
“Oh, right, so it’s baseless paranoia.”
Andrew, we’re talking about the zeitgeist in Airstrip One.
No, I’m starting to follow now. You’re saying that you’re as paranoid as Orwell was.
I guess the state should probably tell privately owned companies that they can’t use their privately owned tannoys to advise their paying customers about how to brush their teeth. That would be more libertarian! Erm?
It’s not that evil lefties like me don’t WANT a huge, powerful and intrusive state capable of doing the benevolent work of the proles and sucking away the obscene wealth of the capitalist elite; I really, really do want such a thing to exist. It’s just that it doesn’t. So, in order to try and spread your delusion, you have to write stuff like this – so illogical that it seems to be self-satire.
“Can’t wait for the toilet paper announcements!”
With the decline in educational standards (Andrew F here helps to illustrate that) we should be thankful they haven’t yet resorted to cartoons…
How do I illustrate that exactly, Julia? How about a counter-argument, or did they just teach you to insult your opponent over and over again in the good old days?
And I wouldn’t say much for the standards of courtesy amongst the self-congratulating social conservatives.
Okay, listen. Sorry for making that observation (of the hearing type) in Morrison’s. It’s not the State, ‘Percy’, but it’s a symptom of the State’s agenda of nannying us till we die.
Does this suit everyone? Can we all live with this explanation? Andrew?
Now, remember to take your five portions of fruit and veg a day, sit up straight in your chair and don’t forget to unplug your computer before you go to bed…
That’s me acting on behalf of the state to make sure you have a happy, healthy and safe life.
‘How do I illustrate that exactly, Julia?’
Sigh. Where would you like me to start. Did you get those ‘A’s Andrew? I’ll bet you did.
Oh, it’s a “symptom”. That’s suitably vague.
*
Indeed I did, Jim Bob.
And I’ll be the first to admit that it wasn’t much of a challenge. But no one I know thinks that getting three As in their A levels makes them particularly intelligent. It’s just how we get into university.
Right wing nuts seem to take the view that if you’re not also a right wing nut you must either be, 1. an idiot, 2. uneducated, or 3. brainwashed by the Evil Socialist Conspiracy.
I could sit here and insult you back, but really, that doesn’t interest me: I come to this blog for a few minutes each day in the hope of finding people to argue with who have completely different views to mine. Sadly, most of the commenters here only seem to be interested in throwing out ad hominem attacks – probably because it makes y’all feel better about your sad little lives. If Julia, Jim et al are representative of the far right, they make a poor advert.
Andrew, I don’t think you’re
1. An idiot
2. Uneducated, although you can have lots of ‘As’ and still not have much *wisdom*. There’s not much around these days.
Now number 3. I don’t think it’s possible for you to have received a state education (did you?) and watch telly and not be brainwashed. I know I was on such things as the Theory of Evolution.
“it makes y’all feel better about your sad little lives.”
Glad you don’t go in for insults.
Heh! It doesn’t take much to get them to reveal their true colours, does it?
So easily manipulated…
‘Indeed I did, Jim Bob’
Ah, I knew it, I just knew it, not because I know you but because I know what has happened to our examination system. Time was you had to stand out from the crowd with some clever insights to get an A. Now you stand out from the crowd if you can write semi-coherently.
Anyway, anyway, well done Andrew, you son-of-a-gun you.
Sigh.
All shall have prizes. What a calamity, what a calamity.
Yet more substance from Julia and Jim Bob!
Now you stand out from the crowd if you can write semi-coherently.
I’d have to agree with this. I didn’t bother with going to lessona much last year. It’s just not worth the effort to sit and learn syllabi. I got As despite this simply because I can write more fluently than the vast majority of 18 year olds.
I wouldn’t say that’s a terrible development. True, to do well in History required very little specific knowledge, but I’d very much like to see an improvement in standards of written communication. I also don’t think the existing problem is generational: my local newspaper seems to be written my a coalition of illiterates. So, perhaps it’s more useful that we produce people capable of effectively communicating ideas than people good at reciting trivia.
And, as you were impolite enough to ask: what did you get in your A levels? Just so we know that you’re not at all bitter. :p
*
And, Stewart, I do appreciate that you are more courteous and thoughtful in forming arguments than Jim Bob and Jules here – hence my continued presence. The difference between my remark and their continued ad homninem attacks is that mine offers an explanation for their buffoonery. Believe me, I would rebut their substantive arguments if only they existed.
Ah, Andrew, you are a caution. Not a terrible development eh? I suppose the fact that so many of our schools turn out so many adults who are semi-literate at least gives the linguistically mediocre chances they wouldn’t have had before.
No ad hominem arguments from you, such as religious people are schizophrenic. You think that’s an appropriate word to throw around do you? How very socialist. How very compassionate. Good though that you are sensitive to what is polite and impolite.
That just makes me think you don’t know what ad hominem means. Equating monotheistic traditions with schizophrenia isn’t ad hominem in any sense. It’s actually a rather obvious comparison to make.
(And I’ll assume it was EEE, since you didn’t answer.)
“Equating monotheistic traditions with schizophrenia isn’t ad hominem in any sense. It’s actually a rather obvious comparison to make.”
a) Accepting reality isn’t mental illness.
b) You still benefit from our Judeo-Christian culture enormously. As it disappears, so do your freedoms.
You just carry on assuming Andrew. It’s what you do best. Don’t try thinking whatever you do. You’re not cut out for it mate.