On 1 July 2007, the day the UK smoking ban came into force, when I was standing in the car park outside the River holding a beer, somebody – I don’t know who – came up to me and said:

“It’s not a free country any more.”

And I thought he was right. And I think he’s still right today, over 5 years later. Britain is no longer a free country. On 1 July 2007, I started feeling that I was living in a prison.

But what did he mean by a “free country”? Well, a country where people could, by and large, do whatever they wanted. Like sit in a pub, and drink a beer, and smoke a cigarette. That’s the very least of freedoms. And when the least of freedoms has gone, the greatest of freedoms have probably gone too. Free people are people who decide for themselves what they’ll do. Unfree people are people who can’t do that. And slaves are people who only ever do what other people want them to do.

But the strange thing about the loss of freedom that arrived with the smoking ban was that it was all justified as a completely new sort of freedom: the pubs and restaurants had gone ‘smoke-free’. The smoking ban was actually a liberation. And Britain was now ‘smoke-free’, yay!

But this new freedom didn’t actually liberate anyone to do what they wanted. It wasn’t a positive freedom. It was a negative freedom. It was an anti-freedom or -freedom. It subtracted something. A smoke-free environment is an environment minus smoke. An alcohol-free beer is a beer minus alcohol. And negative freedom negates positive freedom. The negative freedom of new pubs negated my positive freedom to sit in a pub and drink a beer and smoke a cigarette.

Language like ‘smoke-free’ negates or inverts the meaning of freedom. But it came along with another accompanying inversion of the meaning of freedom. Because the smoker who had been sitting in his pub with his pint of beer was at the same time told that he wasn’t really a free man doing what he wanted to do, but was actually an ‘addict’ and a ‘slave’. He was addicted to tobacco, a slave to the cigarette. And the smoking ban was going to help to liberate him from his slavery. It was a new emancipation.

It doesn’t stop there. The people who are emancipating the slaves with their smoke-free laws like to call themselves ‘liberals’. A liberal used to be someone who wanted people to be able to make their own choices. But it doesn’t mean that any more. It now means the opposite, more or less. It means someone who wants the new negative freedom. And since this new negative ‘freedom’ actually amounts to ‘constraint’, the new ‘liberals’ actually want to restrict and constrain people – while calling this constraint ‘freedom’, of course.

And that’s why the new ‘smoke-free’ negative ‘freedom’ doesn’t seem like freedom at all. It’s constraint. It really is like being put in prison.

The ideal world of the antismokers and the healthists – their “free world” – is actually what most people would regard as a prison. These people don’t want real freedom – positive freedom – at all. They want to be constrained. And they also want to be told what to do by authorities and experts. They don’t want to make their own choices.

So I’ve been thinking today that, in order to give these people their kind of freedom, they really all need to be rounded up and put on a sort of Alcatraz island, where they’d be well-housed and well-fed and they’d have TVs and cars and dishwashers. They could even smoke and drink and eat burgers if they wanted to. Of course they wouldn’t want any of those things. After all, they want to be somewhere that’s smoke-free and alcohol-free and fat-free and sugar-free and salt-free and meat-free. And probably carbon-free and car-free.

No need for a trial or anything. These people would just love prison life. They’d love a place where the only food was porridge.

And they’d also like a place where they got plenty of exercise. What better exercise is there than breaking rocks? It would be a really healthy existence, getting up in the morning to eat your bowl of porridge, and then heading out to break rocks all day, before coming back and eating another bowl of scrumptious porridge. There’d be no obesity. And they’d be supplying the world with valuable gravel, and thus doing something useful for once. They’d probably march out in the morning singing, and come back singing in the evening. That is, they would if it wasn’t a music-free environment. Which of course it would be, because ‘Your right to play music stops at my ears’.

And I thought that they’d also like plenty of fresh air, not just while they were out breaking rocks, but when they got back. So I thought you’d have to take all the glass out of the windows, and replace them with simple iron bars.

And they’d probably like fresh water too, so I thought that punching a few holes in the roof would supply them with all the fresh water they’d ever want.

And since a lot of them are Greens, I wondered how to make their environment nice and green, until I realised that with water trickling down all the walls there’d be moss and green slime growing everywhere.

And since they’re probably conservationists too, they’d probably love it if it was ‘natural’, and the place was full of flies and cockroaches and rats. And in fact cockroaches and rats would probably thrive in such an environment. And they’d probably also drown in the porridge, giving it its scrumptious texture.

Electricity? They’d have windmills. And the windmills would provide just enough power to light their favourite watery dim bulbs, one in the ceiling of each cell. On good days, anyway, when the wind was blowing.

Now, personally I’d hate being in one of these places. But that’s just because I love positive freedom. But what I want doesn’t matter: it’s what they want that matters. And they’d love it, because they love negative freedom. They love constraint. They want to be slaves. Because they think that slavery is freedom.

So I don’t think anyone should have any qualms about building a damp, draughty, rat-infested prison for them.

And just in case they didn’t like it, there’d be a Prison Complaint Officer facility outreach attendant to whom they could voice their dissatisfaction – like, for instance, that there wasn’t enough grit in the porridge – and steps could be taken to correct the error, and more grit added.

No, sending all these people to prison wouldn’t be punishment: it would be giving them exactly what they’ve always wanted, answering all their prayers. And when Deborah Arnott was first led into her cell, and saw the water dripping from the wan dimbulb in the ceiling, and trickling down the slimy walls onto a floor seething with cockroaches, she’d probably break out in a broad smile, and say: “It’s lovely! It’s a dream come true.”

And once the antis were all living in their healthy ideal world, we could go back to living in our ideal world: the one in which we sat in pubs and drank beer and smoked cigarettes, and in which we were free.


About Frank Davis

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

34 Responses to -Freedom

  1. timbone says:

    “I have not come to destroy the law, but to fulfill the law” “The truth shall make you free”
    Two of the many biblical quotes used regularly by the evangelical fundamentalist christian. Have you ever tried their restrictive lifestyle, I have.

  2. Reinhold says:

    The people who are emancipating the slaves with their smoke-free laws like to call themselves ‘liberals’.

    And someone like Mr Bloomberg calls himself even a philanthropist:

    They want to be slaves.

    Not sure about that. I think they rather want to be slave-owners. Owners of slaves whom they want to be happy: happy to be their slaves (“Thank you for punishing me, Master, now I know how to do it right!”)

    • Frank Davis says:

      No, I think they want to be slaves. I think they want other people to make the decisions. They want authorities and experts to make the important decisions, which they’ll just go along with. And when you hand all the important decisions to somebody, you become their slave, even if you don’t think you are.

      • jaxthefirst says:

        I think the drones probably want to be slaves – well after all, they already are, pretty much. They’re so keen not be held responsible for even the slightest thing that goes wrong in their lives that they even think as they are told to. And then they obediently believe that their opinions are their own, born of their own free will and sensible decision-making processes. But even that belief is only held because that’s the reason they’ve been told that they hold those opinions. So getting them to live in a Green Prison – and getting them to say how much they like it – would be a piece of p*ss.

        But I agree with Reinhold. I think that the big “movers and shakers” at the top of the anti-smoking (and anti lots of other things) tree want to be the slave-masters. The politicians’ convenient exemption of themselves from the smoking ban indicates how their approach – like the slave-masters of old – is always “do as I say, not as I do.” And I think that the likes of all those politicians and the Arnotts of the world would hate having to live in a green, porridge-eating, twilight, rock-breaking world.

        Wouldn’t stop me shoving her in there with the rest of them, though!

  3. Junican says:

    How about a slight amendment to the last few words:

    “…..and in which we were free, but not free-from.”

  4. Frank Davis says:

    Because I don’t really believe that free-from is real freedom. Free-from is the negation of real freedom. It just happens to have the word ‘free’ in it, where ‘free’ actually means ‘minus’ or ‘zero’.

    • Thomson says:

      On BBC Radio 4, this morning, a Muslim woman living in France was being interviewed about how awful it was living in such an islamophobic country. She declared that she was going to continue wearing the hijab and, if the French do not like it, they can “leave France. We are here to stay”. So, you see, we shall never be Muslim-free: but wouldn’t that be a liberation?

  5. harleyrider1978 says:

    Id rather fight than switch…………………lucky strikes……………lets fight for freedom!

    Well done Frank as always I totally agree!

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Bunker update- The big dig is almost complete have the driveway leading down to it dug out and sloped with banks. I still have to get permission from the farmer to run a water run off line into the field beside me and also to take down a 75 year old fence so I can dig the trench for the run off pipe plus slope the bank next to the bunker…….then put the farmer up a new fence if he goes for the deal……….then next week I start the back hoe work on the footer trenches and my barrel in the ground for my septic line……..ya we still do that and its very effective! Ive seen drums last 50 years in the ground when coated for tank use.

      • Rose says:

        Harley, thinking about the bunker/tornado shelter, I was wondering if you were making two exits,because it occurred to me that if the house roof blew off and fell on the entrance you might find yourself trapped underground.

        I’ve been doing a little research.

        “A fogou or fougou is an underground, dry-stone structure found on Iron Age or Romano-British defended settlement sites in Cornwall. Fogous have similarities with souterrains or earth-houses of northern Europe and particularly Scotland including the Orkney Islands”

        But they don’t really know exactly what they were for,speculations range from ritual uses to food storage or bolt holes.


        “Fogous consist of a buried, usually corbelled stone wall, tapering at the top and capped by stone slabs. They were mainly constructed by excavating a sloping trench about 5 ft (1.5 m) wide and 6 ft (1.8 m) deep, lining it with drystone walling as stated, which was battered inwards and roofed with flat slabs; soil from excavation was heaped on top as at Pendeen Vau or incorporated in the rampart of the enclosure as at Halliggye Fogou, Trelowarren”

        “In 2004, Kenneth L. MacGregor, during his M.A dissertation, proposed a new use for fogous, that of refuge during raiding trips. Before then this had not been considered.”

        “Being open at both ends, a fogou could provide ideal conditions for food storage”

        “Tacitus describes the Germans hollowing out underground caves, covering them with manure and using them as storehouses and refuges from winter frosts.

        He also claimed that they hid in their boltholes to escape detection by raiders, which is one function of the souterrains of Gaul and early medieval Ireland.”
        http: //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fogou

        Carn Euny Cornwall

        Excellent pictures of the inside of a fougou.

        “It is best known for the “fougou” which is in a remarkable state of presentation. It consists of a passage about 20m (65ft) long, a side passage leading to an unusual circular stone-walled chamber (the domed roof of which has collapsed), and a tiny creep-passage, possibly the emergency exit. (see photo inside)

        “Fougou” is the Cornish word for cave, and it is an artificial underground passage, usually running just below the surface of the ground and roofed with massive stone slabs. Fogous have been found at various places in Britain and Ireland, mainly near villages and fortifications, but their purpose remains a mystery. They could have been used for storage, habitation, or ritual.”

        Lower Boscaswell Fougou
        More good pictures including the creep passage.

        “This ruinous above-ground fougou in the far west of Cornwall is covered by a large overgrown earth and stone bank. All that remains of the main passage is a stretch just over 2 metres long with height and width each about 1.8 metres. The passage opens to the west and the chamber is still covered by two large capstones. A roofed 1.48 metre long creep passage opens off to the south-west.”

        Boleigh Fougou is situated in the grounds of Boleigh House in the sheltered Lamorna valley just south of Penzance. Thought to be around three thousand years old, Boleigh Fougou is one of the better examples of these mysterious underground tunnels, although the roof has collapsed at the end of the main passage.

        The fougou, which is nearly forty feet long and six feet high, is essentially a deep trench lined with dry stone walls and roofed with big stone slabs.

        As well as the main trench, Boleigh Fougou has a small side chamber, whose external entrance is now blocked, and a carving of a figure with it’s right arm raised up and holding an object that may be a spear. Boleigh Fougou was apparently used during the English civil war as a hiding place for Royalists fleeing the Parliamentary army as it attacked Penzance.”
        http: //www.cornwalls.co.uk/history/sites/boleigh_fogou.htm

        • harleyrider1978 says:

          Im going with 16 wide by 20 long and a head height of about 7 feet. Im kinda close to the property lines as it is. But I can build permanent structures within 5 feet of the line.Im staying back 10 feet from the line but the dirt embankments and grading will require I move a fence temporarily and put a drain line in across the property line. Just gotta get permission first!

    • churchmouse says:

      ‘I’d rather fight than switch’ — Tareyton, wasn’t it?

      • harleyrider1978 says:

        ya stupid me………but then its been 40 years since a tv commercial and maybe 20 years since a magazine ad………………

        • churchmouse says:

          Yes, way too long, harleyrider!

          I used to love those adverts as a kid. Knew all the slogans and can remember certain images. Those were the days.

          You know, ASH in the US make such a big deal about tobacco ‘advertising’ and ‘marketing’, but I don’t know where it’s allowed or where one can even find magazine ads for cigarettes. I’ve not seen any in the few American mags I read. There are no free sample packs of five cigs handed out anymore (okay, not for 20 – 25 years?). No television advertising. No public transport ads (that I’m aware of). So, I’m unclear on where this rampant tobacco advertising is in the US.

          If you — or another US reader — can enlighten me, I’d be most grateful. Thanks!

        • churchmouse says:

          No, not ‘stupid’ you, it’s just been way too long.

          I used to enjoy those adverts as a kid. Knew all the slogans — they were just fun to watch.

          Do you have any idea why ASH in the US go on about tobacco ‘marketing’ and ‘advertising’? I thought it was pretty much kaput. There might be a handful of magazines which still accept cigarette ads, but I haven’t seen any. (Not that I’m the biggest reader of American magazines, but, even the tabloids at the supermarket don’t seem to have them. Just observations from occasional visits.) If you or another reader can enlighten me on this notional rampant and blatant marketing, I’d be grateful. Many thanks!

        • churchmouse says:

          Apologies for the duplicate post — Frank, please feel free to delete one of them. The first took a while to post, hence the second attempt. Many thanks!

        • Dave says:

          Not true on the magazines. I was sitting in my Doctors office reading one of those dumb celebrity gossip magazines just passing the time by and to my surprise was an ad for newport cigs. I thought for a second how can that be. I have not looked or bought a magazine in decades but assumed it was banned. Then I thought the only answer could be is that because a person chooses to buy that magazine that must be why it is allowed. This was just 6 months ago and was a major magazine. This is here in the US and I believe from your posts you are from here as well. Anyway I was very pleasantly surprised.

  6. Hi Frank.
    You wrote “Language like ‘smoke-free’ negates or inverts the meaning of freedom.”
    Absolutely. Spot. On.
    The concepts of freedom ‘from’ and freedom ‘to’ are quite separate things. The only thing they have in common is the highly emotive word ‘freedom’. Our enemies have taken the root word ‘free’ and prostituted it for their own aims.

    We can play with this. Like:

    “Nigger-free”: we are working towards a nigger-free world. (look! I can use emotive words too!)
    “Jew-free”: we are working towards a Jew-free world.
    “Vegan-free; Carnivor-free; Carbon-free; Gay-free; Ginger-free; Cycling-free; Science-free…”

    And let’s not forget that “smoke-free” = “smoker-free”.

    See what I did there?

  7. waltc says:

    In Orwell’s Newspeak, if I recall correctly, the word free as we understand it had been deleted from the language (and even to think it was, in fact, “crimethink”) and the word was only used in the context of, for instance, “this dog is free of lice.” I would personally consider it a giant step towards freedom as we formerly knew it, if all of us could be free of tobacco control (and food control and drink control) freaks.) But the nannies have convinced most people (call them dogs) that we’re the lice they’re now free of.

  8. kin_free says:

    We should never use ‘smoke free’- ever! – it is a corruption and the exact opposite of the word ‘free’. (‘anti-free’) It is a propagandists (newspeak- public relations expert’s) way of putting a positive ‘spin’ on excessive state control over the individual. Deceiving the unsuspecting that something undesirable is desirable, bad is good,..’Smoke free’ = ‘smoke/smokers prohibited’, ‘smoke/smokers verboten’ – Say it as it is! Nor should we ever use any other Orwell’s 1984 ‘blackwhite’ style newspeak and play along with anti-smoker game rules.

    The anti-smoker agenda/campaign is based almost entirely on propaganda – not surprising given that Edward Bernays, the original propaganda expert, author of the book called ‘Propaganda’ and held in high regard by Joseph Goebbles, was a FOUNDING SPONSOR of ASH in the US – Recruited by John Banzhaff. – a fact that they try to keep hidden from public knowledge.


    Before that, Bernays worked for a tobacco company and was credited with increasing sales of cigarettes to women in the US in the 1920’s. He coined the slogan ‘Torches of freedom’ to describe womens’ use of cigarettes.

    The tobacco CONTROL industry are always quick to criticise tobacco company tactics and those who worked for the tobacco companies, but they are not averse to using those same tactics for their own purposes. Hypocrites all!

    • Margo says:

      Very interesting points here. ‘Free’ now means ‘Forbidden’ and Slavery is Freedom. War is Peace. Attack is Defence. But even George Orwell didn’t predict the smoking ban.

  9. Rose says:

    And just in case they didn’t like it, there’d be a facility outreach attendant to whom they could voice their dissatisfaction

    But under there very own version of Article 5.3 they could complain all they liked but everyone in a position of authority was duty bound not to listen to their pleas, but to repeat ad infinitum “it has been a Huge Success” and say on their behalf,how very much the inmates support it.

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      Right and what warden is going to risk his neck by allowing a real and truthful news team interview and poll the inmates for the real answers!

  10. Mr A says:

    Yes, it always perks me up a bit that my spellchecker doesn’t recognise “smokefree” as a real word, even after 5 years of this.

    And as Lysistrata pointed out, let’s not forget that the first use of freedom in this sense was from you know who, who took great pride in the 30s in declaring that they had achieved their goals of turning whole cities “Jew Free.”

    It’s a funny old world. Perhaps imprisonment could be described as “liberty-free”, the ultimate oxymoron that shows how these evil people twist and distort language.

  11. RooBeeDoo2 says:

    One thing about smoke-free, it certainly isn’t cost-free.

  12. Rose says:

    Native American Spiritual Beliefs Influential in Spurring Youth to Avoid Drugs and Alcohol
    http: //www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/08/120820110807.htm
    Including tobacco.

    I looked to see if Indian Country Today had covered it and found James 1st of England instead.

    “Pearce quoted from Letters Patent issued in 1606 for the colonization of Virginia to illustrate his point. In that document, said Pearce, the King of England wrote of the furtherance of a work

    which may, by the Providence of the Almighty God, hereafter tend to the Glory of His Divine Majesty, in propagating of Christian Religion to such people, as yet live in darkness and miserable ignorance of the true knowledge and worship of God, and may in time bring the Infidels and Savages living in those parts to human civility and to a settled and quiet Government…

    The King of England characterized the undominated and free existence of our original nations as a life lived “in darkness and miserable ignorance.” Second, the planned domination of our free nations was characterized as ‘bringing’ our free peoples “to human civility” and “to settled and quiet Government.”

    Something nasty hidden at the back of the cupboard.

    Towards Effective Tobacco Control in First Nations and Inuit Communities
    Physicians For a Smoke Free Canada
    March – 2007

    “It should not should not be surprising that when First Nations members who practiced traditional ways did not, when asked, agree that they were addicted to tobacco.
    Every aspect of their tobacco use, including craving and drug-seeking behaviour, had social or sacred meaning.”

    Etc. etc. these people do make my flesh crawl.

    In 2007 it seems that they were also trying to persuade these sovereign nations to sign up to the FCTC.
    But when I first found this I didn’t read it all and at that time had never heard of the FCTC or Physicians For a Smoke Free Canada

    • Rose says:

      Thanks to Iro, I’m sure we all remember Physicians For a Smoke Free Canada

      “We strongly suspected that this hostile attitude demonstrated toward individuals or associations with differing opinions were not the doings of ordinary citizens, however one must always give the benefit of doubt: perhaps public opinion had changed overnight when public smoking bans were adopted?

      Well, you can relax folks. All this time, it was not your next door neighbor, co-worker, friend or relative who was turning into an aggressive “Mr. Hyde” when protected by the cover of anonymity. We now have tangible proof that most of the people who are posting obnoxious and hateful material are simply following orders from the anti-tobacco industry:

      We have obtained the manual on how to effectively implement outdoor bans published in September 2010 by Physicians For A Smoke-Free Canada (PSFC) :


      write (or sign ghost written) letters to the editor, etc. (pages 31 & 33)

      …..submit at least two letters to the editor each month during the campaign, under the names of different authors”. (page 33)

      …….Nothing can ruin a campaign faster than public disclosure of financial wrongdoing (intentional or unintentional) ? something your opponents would love to expose if given the opportunity. (page 34)”

      Interestingly, in the following paragraph they acknowledge that there are in fact authentic citizens (labeled as angry smokers) expressing themselves and that it is not the tobacco industry and their ‘’front groups’’ who are doing the complaining. Furthermore, they are acknowledging that most non-smokers don’t complain leaving us to conclude that indeed most of what we read in the various media must therefore be plants of the tobacco control industry.

      ……. A key aspect of any smoke-free campaign is to mobilize the silent majority. Most non-smokers do not speak out against smoking, but you have to tap into their power to win your case. Angry smokers who feel they are losing what they feel is their right to smoke will likely speak out in a variety of ways
      — letters to the editor, comments sections of online articles, radio call-in shows, etc. Their voices can seem very loud, even though they represent a significant minority of the population. (page 36)

      …….. For the next few months, strive to ensure there are positive media stories, letters to the editor, etc., that tout how well the bylaw changes are working. There will no doubt be a backlash from smokers in the beginning until they get used to the changes. In the meantime, you have to counter their negative comments in the media, in comment sections of online news pieces and blogs, on radio call-in shows, etc. Your job is to make politicians continue to believe that they did the right thing. It is not unheard of for councillors to backtrack on their decision and water down legislation. (page 48)

      …….. Plant stories in the media about non-smokers politely asking smokers to move to a designated smoking area or outside the smoke-free area and smokers complying. Create the impression that the bylaw is working and it will! (page 48)

      “There are many other examples, far too many to list here, but we invite you to peruse the whole document yourself and get an eye-opening education about how anti-tobacco operates.”

  13. garyk30 says:

    Ah how serene the non-smokers would be on their smoke/smoker free island.

    They would probably believe that they would never die from the diseases that are said to be caused by smoking.

    After all, Doll’s ‘Doctors’ mortality study’ showed that 85% of current smokers’ deaths were from the diseases said to be caused by smoking. A terribly high percentage!!!!!!

    Imagine the howls and shrieks of dismay and anger when they found out that 84% of their deaths were from the diseases said to be caused by smoking.
    (data from that same study)

    Mortality in relation to smoking: 50 years observations on male British doctors
    Doll et al

    Table 1, page 3
    This table lists the deaths from the 8 disease groups that are said to be caused by smoking and the total deaths.

    Never-smokers had 16.2 deaths from the smoking caused diseases out of 19.38 total deaths.
    That is 84%

    Current smokers had 30.2 deaths from the smoking caused duseases out of 35.4 total deaths.
    That is 85%

    Just a bit more, smokers are told that quitting will keep them from dying from those diseases; but, ex-smokers also had an 85% death rate from those diseases.
    So, it makes no difference!!
    (x-smokers = 20.62/24.15 = 85%)

    A little irony or a paradox,if you wish, is that heavy smokers of 25 or more cigs/day had the same 84% death rate from those diseases as did the never-smokers.
    (38/45.34 = 84%)

    If a heavy smoker quits, their chance of dying from those diseases actually will increase slightly!!!

    • harleyrider1978 says:

      I prefer we just hang the nazis………….why waste good lead!

      • james101 says:

        Sometimes I think referring to them as nazis is the only way forward to get the attention this deserves . Just take the smoking ban. It clearly is totally wrong to legislate against a group of people denying them a space in any public building; reducing people to standing in fifty percent enclosed shelters. It is treating people like lepers and persecuting them, depending much on the weather conditions outside of course . We know that modern air management systems eliminate any perceived problem caused by ets. This is a disgusting way to treat people. It is government that allows tobacco to be sold and nicotine is addictive although not in the same way as say heroin. If smokers are in part legal addicts (and it is definetely right to describe this as a personal choice too) that governments have created by allowing tobacco to be sold ; then surely those same govenments have no right to make smoking illegal which is what the total smoking ban has done forcing those hooked to a completely legal product (all be it ones that they enjoy) outside taking away peoples dignity and causing them to be exposed to inhumane conditions as a direct consequence.

    • Margo says:

      And all of these smoking-caused diseases have risen and risen, as smoking has declined and declined.

  14. As a schoolchild I read Orwell’s 1984 when 1984 was still far into the future. As I grew up we had dangerous drug laws and manufactured consent for locking up innocent Irish people and by 1984 I realised that Orwell was quite predictive.. Other intereting writers of the 50s were Vance Packard (Hidden Persuadors) and Rachel Carson (silent Spring). Although I never went to an ‘acid-house party’, and I am not the type of person to even want to attend these ‘raves’ I was appalled to read about the mass arrests that were used to break up these events.

No need to log in

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s