When you cross the Independent with a man with a name like ‘Le Grand’, you know it’s going to be an uncomfortable morning’s reading.  But when the rubbish said newspaper and said man spout are as rancid as that that corrupt the minds of the nation this morning, we could be excused for choking on our cornflakes (it’s lunch, but I was hungover at breakfast, so I’m having cornflakes now anyway).

The ‘Le Grand’ in question is Professor Julian, chair of Health England - whatever that is - and professor at LSE.  Speaking to the Royal Statistical Society on Monday night, he suggested that the way to end the health crisis was to introduce:

a smoking permit, which smokers would have to produce when buying cigarettes, an “exercise hour” to be provided by all large companies for their employees and a ban on salt in processed food.

Fair enough.  I mean, not fair - they’re stupid, stomach-churningly abysmal ideas that deserve to be lined up against the wall and shot one-by-one, and anyone can see right through that - but we’re used to this sort of shit from the government and its incompetent and intellectually illiterate advisers.

But what really gets me is that, apparently:

The idea, dubbed “libertarian paternalism”, reverses the traditional government approach that requires individuals to opt in to healthy schemes. Instead, they would have to opt out to make the unhealthy choice, by buying a smoking permit, choosing not to participate in the exercise hour or adding salt at the table.

What the f***?  “Libertarian paternalism”?  How the f*** is this libertarian?  Who the f*** dubs it ‘libertarian’?  This is about giving the government complete control over our lives.  It is about shifting the assumption of innocence to the assumption of guilt.  It is about making ourselves - the people - subservient to them - the state: those that we created to help us, not the other way around.  That is the opposite of libertarianism.  It is totalitarianism.  The ‘traditional government approach’ of allowing people a choice is not ‘traditional’.  It is essential.

Professor Le Grand may use his credentials to spit fascistic political bile at us, under the guise of a ’statistical’ analysis of the health problem, but so can we.  We, true libertarians, refuse to let you use that word.  We refuse to let you steal our clothing.  We refuse to let you drape the terminology of freedom and tolerance over your policy of slavery and intolerance.

Le Grand can piss off back to the LSE.  He can give us back our clothing, and he can piss off.  God help him if he runs into the Hayek Society any time soon.  If he does, he might just want to get some new clothes designed with those with second arseholes in mind.