For a comment to be published I must be satisfied that:
[snip of perfectly reasonable criteria]
6. It is not questioning the fundamental tenets on which this blog is based.
This last point is important. Those who wish to argue that tax havens / secrecy jurisdictions are good things may do so, but not here. Likewise those promoting neoliberal economics may do so, but not here: propagating the delusion that an economy can be accurately modeled using counterfactual propositions about its nature is not something I wish to partake in, and will not allow.
In other words, you're only allowed to comment on his blog if you come at it from a statist, tax-and-spend-is-good perspective.
He then goes on to say:
I would stress: agreement with me is not a condition of a comment being accepted, but disagreement must be reasoned and be offered within the framework of understanding that this blog seeks to promote.
How the fuck can you register your disagreement with someone if you can't challenge their base assumptions? "Yes, Dick, tax-and-spend is great, but you're not arguing the case for a sufficiently high level of taxation"???
Is he really that unsure of his case that he's not even prepared to allow someone to suggest something with which he does not agree in the comments?
I can only imagine that anyone reading his blog and comments without reading the comments policy must be struck with how enthusiastic his supporters are and how nobody challenges his wisdom. What a complete fuckwit.
Still, his gaff, his rules.