We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Editorial Pantheon announcement

Due to technical difficulties – we ran out of elves powering the blog – there will be a ‘reduced service’ on the blog. We’ll be back in full form as soon as possible.

21 comments to Editorial Pantheon announcement

  • David Crawford

    Well, beat the damn elves you have left harder. Simple solution really.

  • We do! We do! :) Some of them are BT elves that we need to get our hands on first…

  • James Waterton

    Ooooh, state-owned elves – they’re the most fun to beat. Pass the truncheon.

  • Bruce Hoult

    When the elves are available, could they please indicate whether this is real and not a spoof?

  • Nuke Gray

    When you beat the elves, don’t any of them even try elf-defence? Wait until Elf and Safety hear about this! (Oh, that’s where you get them from!)

  • RW

    Bruce: sadly it is real – you can read some comments on it on WattsUpWithThat today (1 October). Personally I’d rather share the planet with elves than with the sickos who made this.

  • llamas

    Gnomes are cheaper, they have lower health-insurance exploitation ratios, and they believe in a LVT. I’d go with gnomes.

    llater,

    llamas

  • Rob

    Just watched that video – incredible, they really are stalinists.

  • “” Just watched that video – incredible, they really are stalinists.

    Posted by Rob at October 1, 2010 10:48 AM “”

    I have been calling then that for years. The only problem is that nobody listens, for we are all supposed to be “moderate”.

    And so they go on.

  • Johnathan Pearce

    “Gnomes also make shitloads of money by oppressing the downtroddoen proletariat, who are dreaming of the day when all unearned income, such as land values, is taxed and spent on the Public Good.”

    (Overheard in a lunatic asylum).

  • Ian B

    I’m mystified by that video. I’m not clear what they’re trying to say. The sympathetic characters are clearly those mercilessly slaughtered, and the act of slaughter displays horror from those around them (the other teachers and pupils), while the eco-leaders are shown as lying monsters (“really, no pressure, that’s fine”).

    I really don’t know what they’re even trying to say.

  • Rob

    Oh and the cowards have removed the video now.

    It almost seems like a deliberate sabotage by Curtis.

    They must have considered the response of the actors under direction.

    But given the scene depicted what could the reaction of the bystanding sheeple have been:

    i) Laughter

    ii) total indifference

    iii) Licking the blood/jam off their own faces.

    Whatever was done would have led to the obvious Orwellian comparrison. If it had been made by a Skeptic then the doe eyed teacher with the convincing reasonable tone, the brainwased children/people and the ease of justification of murder would have been brilliant satire. It’s like Black Adder in reverse.

    Can Curtis really be so stupid or this bad at Comedy?????

  • Ian B

    Email to my MP-

    “I’ve emailed you on a couple of previous occasions, the last time was over the case of Jean Gambell who spent her life in mental institutions for no reason. I’m motivated to email you again regarding an astonishing video which has caused a furore, produced by the “10:10 Climate Change Campaign”. It has been released today and shows, in astonishingly gory detail and with lavish production values, the murder of “climate sceptics” by literally blowing them up; the resulting splatters of gore would certainly put such
    scenes, in a Hollywood movie, into the adults only category.

    But distastefulness- and grossly distasteful it is- is not the issue. If a video were to depict some other group being dispatched in this manner- homosexuals or immigrants for instance, it would immediately be seen as Hate Speech and its makers hauled into the local police station. If the BNP made a video showing immigrants being murdered, it would be immediately condemned as utterly unacceptable and “fascist”. But when it is climate change sceptics, we are told it is “edgy”.

    The furore has led 10:10 to take the video down, but it is still available here at the Guardian, one of their “partners”-

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/blog/2010/sep/30/10-10-no-pressure-film

    Why is this a matter for an MP? Well firstly, these purveyors of hate are a registered charity, which provides them with special state benefits and a
    halo of righteousness. It seems unacceptable to me that such a group can possibly have charitable status. Secondly, they are as is common for activists, imbedded in a byzantine funding network of corporate gifts,
    trusts, partners, charities etc. As a taxpayer, I think we all have a right to know whether they are in receipt of state money, either directly or indirectly (e.g. via another charity or trust).

    But thirdly and perhaps most importantly, this group proudly declare that they are involved with schools and hospitals- both of which are taxpayer funded and which ordinary British citizens have no choice but to pay for
    and, particularly vulnerable children, interact with. It defies belief that in 21st century Britain, British schoolchildren are being subjected to propaganda which cannot be interpreted in any way other than the message
    “people who disagree must be killed”. It is not “edgy” or “challenging” to tell children this. It is barbaric and monstrous. In each case in the video we are shown somebody- in the first case two young children- who dissent from the prescribed view being literally blown to bits. By their teacher! It is particularly appalling considering the current terrorist issue of suicide
    bombings- who are of course all driven by fanaticism. Here is Action Aid, a 10:10 “partner” showing off about their penetration of the education system, for instance-

    http://www.actionaid.org.uk/102084/1010_schools.html

    This is a matter for the government, because this group are gaining benefits from Government-awarded charitable status and penetrating state-run institutions. It is unacceptable that state institutions- our schools to
    whom we entrust young minds, and hospitals too- are associated with this disgusting message, and surely they must be required to sever such connections forthwith.

    I apologise for this lengthy email, but this issue seems to me to be of the utmost import. The pollution and perversion of the minds of the young with such fanaticism and violence is simply not something that is tolerable. The State surely should withdraw all association with this Hate Group immediately. And surely this is one of those matters regarding which
    “questions should be asked in the Commons”.

    Sincerely etc”

  • Ian B: please let’s not go off-topic. What does this have to do with elves?!

  • Ian B

    10:10 are partnering with hospitals, which are part of the National Elf Service.

  • I only watched it now – bloody hell…

  • Laird

    Ian B, great letter. I think you’re right that if anything is “hate speech”, this video is. Has anyone filed a criminal complaint under the hate speech laws against these people? (Is that even how such matters are initiated under your current legal system?) That would seem to be a logical first step.

    (Oh, and I think one of the unfortunates blown up in the corporate lobby scene was an elf!)

  • Ian B

    Laird, unfortunately Britain is, well, it’s America as dreamed of by American academics, without a constitution. So the Hate Speech laws only cover protected groups; they are designed not to be used against Left-Hate. So Greenism is protected, but not Anti-Greenism. Vegetarianism is protected but not omnivory. And so on.

    IANAL, but I think if this video showed Greens being murdered, it would be prosecutable; but because the victims are Ungreen, it isn’t.

  • Fuck it, I am having to post from a cyber cafe: I have HAD IT with these damn slacker elves… I am off to Zurich next week and I am going to bring back some GNOMES. These frigging elves can see how they enjoy unemployment whilst efficient capitalist gnomes do their jobs.

  • Laird

    Wouldn’t that violate some sort of EU directive?

  • Nuke Gray

    Yeah, isn’t Switzerland Gnome-man’s land, as far as the EU is concerned? a Gnome reservation, in fact?