The Cambridge Dictionary defines Privilege thus:
I suppose that that definition is adequate, provided that you want to keep definitions simple. But that definition, although correct in a generalised sort of way, is not quite sufficient. The problem word in the definition is the word ‘has’. “…that only one person or group of people HAS…”
The reality is that ‘privilege’ can also be an verb. But, normally, we would not think of the phrase ‘to privilege’.’To confer a privilege’, yes, but not ‘to privilege’. Our language can be very odd. For example, we have got used to the phrase ‘to house’. “Jack was housed in a hostel”. That phrase, regardless that we know what it is intended to mean, is contradictory. A ‘hostel’ is not ‘a house’. “Jack was helped by being imprisoned”. “Jack had the devil driven out of him by torture”.
It seems that ASH ET AL have been privileged. Erm… No. They have been raised by powerful people into a position of privilege. That privilege reveals itself in ASH ET AL’s use of taxpayers’ money to lobby Government. ASH ET AL have been raised to the position of Aristocrats. I mean that. They can say what they like and demand what they like, and those who gave them the Privilege must comply. Privilege confers unaccountability.
PRIVILEGE CONFERS UNACCOUNTABILITY. Do you see the importance of that? Politicians can quietly confer privilege on others, even if they themselves are not privileged and just passing through.
We see, again and again, the use of privilege in the EU. What is astonishing is that the Privilege was conferred upon the EU by our own elected representatives.
What continuously astonishes me is that politicians do not see that there is no such thing as ‘International Law’. There are only international treaties. There would only be International Law if there was a World Government to enact such laws. The World Trade Organisation’s ‘laws’ about trademarks have been ignored by Australia with its internal PP regulations. Thus, Australia has torn up those treaties. Australian businesses no longer have the protection of WTO treaties, since the Australian Government has torn them up.
Of course, it will take some time for the effects of the tearing up of the WTO treaties to become clear. It may be that producers of inferior wine might use Australian wine producer logos and trademarks. Not that I would recommend Australian wines. I do not care.
Around 1950, if not before, some pre-war German sympathisers, such as Doll, decided to side with ‘Tobacco Prohibition’. But, because of the American experience of Alcohol and Tobacco Prohibition – failure – the process must be propaganda led and not law led. The process has been ongoing for decades. The anti-smoker laws have followed upon the propaganda.
But the ability to disseminate the propaganda had not to be Government. The use of Privilege was required. That Privilege came from the Society of Physicians. The higher echelons of that Society were ripe for take-over.
The WHO is another example of Privilege. It is Aristocratic. It can waste millions of pounds on a Conference in Moscow without having to account for the use of funds to the UK Government which provided those funds to some extent. Meanwhile, it ignored Ebola for years.
If we in the UK had a proper Government, then we would not be paying the EU massive sums of money. Every penny of costs would have to be justified. One of the tricks is ‘budgets’. Erm… NO …. You cannot have a budget. Give us a cost for the next month and we may or may not pay. We might want competitive estimates. And is that not an enormous problem with the EU? There are no competitive estimates.
Everything is a privilege.