Sean Gabb on Emma West

Quick Statement on Emma West

Emma West is a white working class woman who got into an argument with some black people in a South London Tram. You can see the video here:

Miss West has now been arrested for her opinions and locked away, and her children have been taken away by the social services.

Of course, if she had been wearing a headscarf about the “kuffar” who were killing her brothers and sisters in Iraq/Afghanistan, the authorities would have looked the other way.

For a woman to have her children taken away because she expressed opinions disliked by the ruling class means we have come as close as doesn’t matter to a totalitarian police state. I note that this has happened under a “Conservative” Government. Where are all those “Tory” MPs who like to preen themselves on how libertarian they are? Don’t ask.

My view is that every single politician and official involved in this arrest of a dissident and legalised kidnapping of her children should be punished after the collapse of the present regime – not only sacked and deprived of pension rights (because they all will be in the disestablishment of the ruling class), but also made jointly and severally liable for compensating Miss West and her children for whatever they may have suffered.

Dr. Sean Gabb
Libertarian Alliance

21 comments for “Sean Gabb on Emma West

  1. December 3, 2011 at 6:33 pm

    I have argued on many different sites that for all we may not like Emma West’s position or views, what this woman did is no more than a section 5 public order offence, which in normal circumstances (if they even bothered arresting you) would get you a spot fine of £80.
    Had she been any colour other than white I suspect nothing would even have been done. As it is, being (possibly) drunk and shouting and swearing at people while in charge of a child is no way to behave and she was arrested for it, but Im sure its not justification to be locked up for weeks in prison, your child removed by social services and then having the book thrown at you, just because you dared have views that people do not like.
    In comparison, muslim extremists got an £80 for burning poppies and shouting “die British soldiers?!”.
    That’s PC Britain for you though.

  2. Loki
    December 3, 2011 at 6:51 pm

    Don’t blame me; I voted BNP 😈

  3. JamesQuigley
    December 3, 2011 at 6:58 pm

    I’m all for free speech, but when you use that to degrade/discriminate against a different ‘type’ of human being, you’ve overstepped the mark.

    I suspect she had her kids taken off her for being a junkie, as it’s fairly clear she’s off her face in the video. I would agree, getting your kids taken from you for a low level crime like this would be OTT

    • Radical Rodent
      December 3, 2011 at 8:05 pm

      I take it you do not see the irony in your first sentence?

      Compounded by your leaps to massive conclusions based on what you see in a short video clip; however, you do ameliorate it in your final sentence.

      So what if she offended someone? Whatever happened to the saying: “Sticks and stones…”?

      I moved to England many years ago (too, too many…), and railed against being English for a while (England played against the rest of the world – and won! I was most miffed!). Now I have become English, and, like a true Englishman, it is not possible to offend me. Whatever your skin colour, when you accept your “Englishness” no-one will ever be able to offend you.

      I believe in free speech, and anyone can say whatever they like, so long as they don’t translate or coerce into physical assault.


      • JamesQuigley
        December 3, 2011 at 9:24 pm

        I don’t think it’s ironic. With freedom, comes responsibility. It’s one thing protesting about immigration, it’s another assaulting people verbally.

        It’s fair to say, based on the above, I find your post a little ironic also. It’s fine to assault someone, but just not physically – it all counts in my view.

        • Edgar
          December 4, 2011 at 6:12 am

          There is no problem deciding between verbal and physical abuse, but who’s going to decide what is robust, but legitimate, comment and what is ‘verbal assault’? I don’t want to do it, and I don’t want anyone else to do it ‘for’ me.

        • December 4, 2011 at 3:54 pm

          A public rant that makes her look a tit is not the same thing as physical assault. People can get off the tram and walk away unharmed following a rant. Therein lies the difference.

          This is the classic case of the loony on the bus syndrome. Everyone is a captive audience until the next stop. But, and this is the crux, although free speech comes with the acceptance that it can have consequences – someone might give you a black eye, for instance – that freedom should mean that the state has no say in what is, or is not allowable and this is what has happened here.

          Incidentally, from the clip I saw no evidence of her being high; merely some very unpleasant bigotry.

    • dora
      December 3, 2011 at 8:23 pm

      Junkie ? I don’t think you have seen many Junkies, she was pissed. She was also being a total arsehole.
      I am guessing that you don’t have children.
      If you do then I hope that the next time you are a total arsehole, we all are once in a blue moon, then no one decides to take those children away from you.

      To err is human, to forgive is divine.

      • JamesQuigley
        December 3, 2011 at 9:19 pm

        I’m from Paisley, I’ve seen many a junkie. You might be right though on her being pissed, I thought otherwise though.

        If she’s getting off her face, when she’s looking after her child (in public), then it needs taking off her. If she’s getting her child taken off her, for throwing a few words around (as dirty as the words may be), that’s fundamentally wrong. Just so we’re clear on my position.

        I’m sure the Daily Mail readers would point out she was putting her kid in danger by saying what she did, when she did, but I’m with you on the last sentence you made.

    • December 4, 2011 at 2:33 am

      Free speech is an absolute – if there’s any legal restriction at all on what can be said, any mark than can be overstepped, then ipso facto speech is not free. Poisonous, disagreeable, anti-social and downright nasty though some views might be if those who hold them aren’t free to air them (short of actually inciting violent acts) then we’re in thought crime territory and we’re all in trouble. What happened to ‘I disagree with what you say but I defend your right to say it’?

      I notice that now that Emma West’s been charged with voicing her opinion more are coming out with police now ‘hunting’ women involved in two separate similar incidents on public transport. One of them seems to have upset the paragons at the Mainly Fail for saying she’s a BNP supporter. Funny, I wouldn’t vote for them in a million years but they *were* a legitimate political party last time I checked… 😕

  4. December 3, 2011 at 8:58 pm

    Clearly off her face on drugs/drink/glue whatever but that is what is needed for the underclass to finally announce their true beliefs about immigration. In sobriety they dare not for fear of having their benefits withdrawn.

  5. Stadtler
    December 4, 2011 at 12:16 am

    She may have a mouth like a burst sewer on Boxing day morning, but I’d be really intrigued to know what sparked this off.

    Strip out the anti-immigration rant and any other day the world would have looked the other way, no Spi-Phones would have been whipped out.

    And if we’re going to start removing kids from alleged “junkies” there’ll be a lot of empty schooldesks come Monday.

    • December 4, 2011 at 5:34 am

      From that link, a little clue to why we are in this pickle: “I reached over, pressed eject and took out the CD. For a while they were speechless, and I explained slowly to them that they could have their CD back when they got off the train. One of them immediately offered not to play it, but the biggest of them, backed by the nail-chewer, insisted that I was going to give it back and they would start playing it again. He said if I didn’t give it back, he would take it from me by force. I said whatever happened the music was over, and if he laid a hand on me I’d break the CD. He laid a hand on me. I broke the CD.

      Of course, replaying the situation, that was when I slipped from the moral high ground. On the scale of righteous interventionists, I was now a good few centimetres away from The Good Samaritan and edging closer to Tony Martin, the Norfolk farmer who took the law into his own hands.”

      *rolls eyes*

      You broke his CD, not his neck. Man up, you wimp!

      • December 4, 2011 at 4:17 pm

        Quite so. The teenager was calling his bluff and he decided that he wasn’t bluffing. Tough shit on the teenager. And that should have been the robust response. No loss of moral high ground at all.

  6. December 4, 2011 at 10:08 am

    This was a straight reprint of Sean Gabb’s article. I don’t know enough about it to comment myself.

  7. john in cheshire
    December 4, 2011 at 11:19 am

    I don’t see what she did wrong. I don’t understand why the police were involved and I am astonished that social services (if that is who is involved) thought it proper to take her children away from her. Why couldn’t the morality enforcers just do nothing for a change, since no one was injured as a result of her outburst. I don’t suppose any organisation has offered her any assistance against the state’s vindictiveness.

  8. John Smith
    December 4, 2011 at 1:09 pm

    I read somewhere that she has a husband,why couldn’t he have taken care of the children?.

  9. David
    December 4, 2011 at 3:59 pm

    ‘99% of us are Emma West now’. Please write this everywhere and anywhere you can. She must be supported in her hour of need and TPTB need to know that there are millions of us who agree with her.

    What is her prison address so we can send cards and letters of support?

  10. Joe
    December 4, 2011 at 8:46 pm

    Radical Rodent–are you sure you became English? British maybe but not English. I object to immigrants claiming they are English (or Scottish or Welsh). The best they can manage is British. English is what I am and I don’t like the title scattered around on just anyone.

    • December 5, 2011 at 7:17 am

      He can have my Englishness going cheap if he wants it. Sounds like he passes the Tebbit Test with regards to England even if he wasn’t born there and I certainly fail it even though I was, at least if Australia is losi… I mean playing them.

Comments are closed.