Fox hunting?

I don’t hunt. I never have and I don’t think that I ever could but that does not mean to say that I do not support it. But why do I? I live in suburbia, I know little about the countryside and I know absolutely no one with any interest in the activity whatsoever. These observations are hardly qualifications for my feelings on the subject which are, quite frankly, ones of anger.

It’s the same with the Handgun ban. I’ve never owned a handgun of the banned variety and never felt the desire to. I didn’t know anyone who had or wanted one and knew little about them at the time. But the ban really pissed me off. After all this time I’m still angry about it. Same M.O. as fox hunting.

I thought, at first, that perhaps I had a problem with authority but I soon discounted the notion because there are many examples of authority in action that I simply do not have a problem with. I thought that it might be that I have a strong sense of fairness but I don’t think that’s it either. For instance, I can be a pretty unfair guy when I want to be and certainly don’t mind certain unfair tactics being used to achieve an end that I support.

I’m not a great thinker (no, you don’t say) so my positions on various topics tend to be instinctive and not based in any formal pre-formulated rational framework but after I have instinctively made my mind up about something I can usually come up with a reasonably rational argument in support of my position given the time. It’s rare that I change my mind on a subject, though I appreciate that admitting to doing so carries a certain amount of kudos in the blogosphere.

There is, however, a common theme and it’s that theme that first drew me to the Libertarian Alliance and it’s militant dinner party wing, samizdata.net. I have a strong liberty streak that runs right through me. People, I think, should be allowed to do pretty much what they like as long as what they does not hurt another person or damage their property (and no, I’m not talking about hurting sensibilities, that’s a fact of adult life and a perfectly reasonable and acceptable state of mind for the enemies of liberty to be in).

Don’t get me wrong; I don’t consider myself a libertarian as there is much that I disagree on with people who do call themselves libertarians but I think that I have more in common with them than any other, what do you call it, movement – ideal – whatever. I believe in the individual and the individuals right to do pretty much whatever they want regardless of what a majority of individuals might think about it.

It’s a frightening situation to find ones self in for the first time I can tell you. To begin to ask questions of yourself that, at first, seem contrary to what you thought you knew as right and proper is no easy thing. It’s messy. Do I really believe that, within a certain framework, the desire of one person to do something is as important as the desire of one million for him not to do it? More to the point, do I believe it even if I am among the one million? Cleary no, then clearly maybe, then clearly yes. That’s the process.

Of course, I’ve still got to go through the really messy part. The big question. The one that will have me excluded from polite company. Isn’t your position incompatible with the whole notion of democracy? Errrm…….don’t ask difficult questions (see what I mean about not being a great thinker). I don’t know what the answer to that one is yet.

So, fox hunting. The desire of a few over the desire of the…….erm……ah……well, who exactly? I don’t think that anyone has proven to me that it is the desire of the many (not that knowing that would change my view) but it is an interesting point. Who will benefit from the ban? The fox? I said who not what. This stopped being about the fox a long time ago.

I have a feeling that no one will benefit really. I don’t even think its about fox hunting anymore. Its about two small groups (The Blair camp vs his backbenchers etc) of men and women arguing the toss over a subject on which each group is determined to get their way. One group (Blair etc.) would like to let the issue slide because of the trouble it will cause on the streets and in the countryside and another group (backbench MPs) wants to carry it through because no one can get away with ignoring them. It has got to the position where the subject matter could be anything or, perhaps, lost in time like a bad science fiction novel and none of it is based upon evidence or principle.

Of course Blair etc. will capitulate and it is his position that is the most disgusting to me. Sure, it’s in his manifesto but who here believes that he would not make that pledge magically disappear if he could? He is making his choice on the basis of which group scares him the most – the hundreds of thousands of hunt supporters or the relative handful of people who belong to the same club as he does and who can, you know, influence his enjoyment of that club.

He has made his choice and, no doubt, will make all the right noises about promises, cruelty, majority and the like but that won’t change the fact that he’s a pussy and that what he and those other meddlers are doing strikes me as symbolising exactly the opposite of what I believe in.

You know, it’s the same for me really. It’s not about fox hunting, it’s about how I think I should be able to live my life.