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]
|
Index of freedom I am slightly wary of trying to rank the freedoms of different countries according to some sort of benchmark, but these things can sometimes have their uses, if only in conveying movement from good to bad and vice versa. This index of freedom, provided by the US-based Heritage Foundation and the Wall Street Journal, shows that the US has definitely gone backwards in recent years. There will obviously be finger-pointing at Mr Obama and his Democrat allies, but the Republicans under Bush & co bear some of the blame for this state of affairs, also.
As for the position of Britain, I hardly need to read the link to realise that freedoms are declining.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
Canada is now higher than the US; I’d be interested in Mark Steyn’s comments, particularly in light of this piece from a couple of years ago.
Agree with the general thrust of the post. However, this is an index of “economic freedom”, presumably as distinguished from some other or more general sort of freedom. Hong Kong and Singapore, which top the list, are by no means the nastiest countries in the world, but nor are they very comfortable places for political dissent.
Italy’s doing its bit, wants to control video downloads:
http://www.italymag.co.uk/italy/politics/licenses-upload-video-italy
I try to follow the index of freedom from the heritage foundation. But I’ve always wondered about its validity.
Yes, Singapore may rank at the top. But I recall having stopped there once many years ago while serving in the military (US Marines)…at the time, there were some seemingly arbitrary laws that you most certainly wouldn’t want to run afoul of (spitting on the sidewalk, or chewing gum, or something such as that).
Does anyone know of a liberty index (by any name) that doesn’t take into account the national infrastructure? For example, I’d consider emigrating to a country that would let me live in peace, undisturbed by the collectivists and gun-grabbers, EVEN if there was no “city water” and unreliable electric service.
Ron, I don’t know if it’s a country, but The Isle Of Man is part of Great Britain with laws of its’ own, and the stars of Top Gear think it is a great place to go! You should probably google it first, though.
As for lifestyle, We have a place here in australia, nimbin, where the police care about catching criminals, and don’t worry about what you smoke on your own property. Marijuana is still against the law, but very low on their list of priorities.
New Zealand is also liberalising in this regard- Auckland has some cafes which serve grass. This is very recent, and may be stopped soon, but it is something to watch out for.
The fault lies not in the stars……
Nuke, when you say the Isle of Man is part of Great Britain…what does that mean? By all accounts I’ve seen Great Britain isn’t the bastion of freedom that I’d be looking for.
Same with Australia. I know there are some locales that generally recognize privacy, but overall, aren’t there some pretty restrictive gun ownership laws in AU?
I’m a ‘live and let live’ sort. While THC isn’t my bag, it’s none of my business what others drink, smoke or eat; and what they do in the bedroom is none of my concern either. It may be semantics, but I’m a Southerner; that means we don’t talk about things that involve bodily fluids in public 😉
I’m looking for a place that has no bogus “money laundering” laws to speak of, no gun restrictions, no restrictions on the ownership of precious metals, and maintains private property rights as absolutely sacrosanct.
Someplace that won’t violate my political beliefs(Link).
The Isle of Man is part of the British Isles (but then so is the Republic of Ireland), but it is not part of the United Kingdom.
It has the same Queen (but then so do Canada and Australia, New Zealand and …..), but NOT the same government.
However, the British government does throw its weight around – and the Manx (Isle of Man) government gives in.
For example the Isle of Man had corporal punishment (beatings) but the European Court of Human Rights (the British government has signed the Convention) said “stop” and the British government put the pressure on.
The most blatent case was recent and financial.
Since Britain (but not the Isle of Man) entered the E.U. the British government has collected VAT (sales tax) on the island.
“Do not worry (said the British government) this is just a formal collection – we will collect the money and then hand it back to you as a grant”.
The Isle of Man liked this – as it meant they got a lot of revenue without any responsibilty for imposing or collecting the tax.
Then (a couple of months ago) the British government said “you know that grant – we are keeping half of it”.
And the Isle of Man government did…….
Well it has done nothing much.
Jersey (one of the islands off France that are under the Queen – or Dutchess of Normandy as she is in the islands) is gutless as well – they always give in to London.
Guernsey people have more spirit (and the rest of the “Bailiwick” such as the Sark people also do) – but the place is small.
Hard to see how it could stand if the British or French governments ever got violent.
Even the Economist magazine has noticed that governments are getting (even) bigger (government spending now takes up MORE THAN HALF THE ECONOMY in Britain and that most people do not like this.
For almost a year the Economist (like the rest of the “mainstream” media) has mocked the Tea Party protesters in America (when has not been busy implying that they are paranoid or racist or….), but now they are nice people who oppose the growth of government which (stand by for the blatant lie) the Economist also opposes.
The Economist way of dealing with the growth of government. mentioned in the same cover article, is to baillout that banks (they may worked out that the next economic crises will soon be upon us, a crises caused by the last bailout, so they are preparing people for yet more bailouts) and to provide government backed healthcare for everyone.
“But that is a wild contradiction to their stated aim of limiting government”.
Of course – but then “there can be no hard rules about this” – no hard rules, i.e. no principles.
In short – unprincipled, corrupt, corporate welfare supporting, …