<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Samizdata &#187; Historical Perspective</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.samizdata.net/category/white-rose-categories/historical-perspective/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.samizdata.net</link>
	<description>A blog for people with a critically rational individualist perspective</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 21 May 2013 21:08:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
		<item>
		<title>A new kind of freedom</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2006/01/a-new-kind-of-freedom-2/</link>
		<comments>http://www.samizdata.net/2006/01/a-new-kind-of-freedom-2/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Sat, 07 Jan 2006 11:56:10 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Guy Herbert (London)</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Big Brother]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Civil Liberties]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Historical Perspective]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Identity Cards]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=8445</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>As the report stage of the Identity Cards Bill approaches in the Lords, a reminder of one highlight from the first day of the committee stage Hansard, 15 Nov 2005, Col.1012:</p> <p>Lord Gould of Brookwood: Both the previous speakers&#8212;the latter with great emotion&#8212;were arguing for freedom. We have to ask what greater freedom is there than the freedom to place a vote for a political party in a ballot box upon the basis of a mandate and a manifesto. That is the crux of it: the people have supported this measure. That is what the noble Earl&#8217;s father fought for. <br/>...continue <a href="http://www.samizdata.net/2006/01/a-new-kind-of-freedom-2/">A new kind of freedom</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>As the report stage of the Identity Cards Bill approaches in the Lords, a reminder of one highlight from the first day of the committee stage <a href="http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld199900/ldhansrd/pdvn/lds05/text/51115-19.htm">Hansard, 15 Nov 2005, Col.1012</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p><strong>Lord Gould of Brookwood:</strong>  Both the previous speakers&mdash;the latter with great emotion&mdash;were arguing for freedom. We have to ask what greater freedom is there than the freedom to place a vote for a political party in a ballot box upon the basis of a mandate and a manifesto. That is the crux of it: the people have supported this measure. That is what the noble Earl&#8217;s father fought for. But that is too trivial an answer. I know that. The fundamental argument is that the truth is that people believe that these identity cards will affirm their identity. The noble Lord opposite said that he likes to be in this House and how he is recognised in this House because it is a community that recognises him. That is how the people of this nation feel. They feel that they are part of communities, and they want recognition. For them, recognition comes in the form of this identity card. Noble Lords may think that that is strange, but it is what they feel. This is their kind of freedom. They want their good, hard work and determination to be recognised, rewarded and respected. That is what this does.</p>
<p>Of course it is right and honourable for noble Lords to have their views, but I say there is another view, and it is the view of the majority of this country. They want to have the respect, recognition and freedom that this card will give them. Times have changed. Politics have changed. What would not work 50 years ago, works now. It is not just me. I have the words of the leader of your party:</p>
<p><em>&#8220;I have listened to the police and security service chiefs. They have told me that ID cards can and will help their efforts to protect the lives of British citizens against terrorist acts. How can I disregard that?&#8221;.</em></p>
<p>This is not some silly idea of the phoney left. It is a mainstream idea of modern times. It is a new kind of identity and a new kind of freedom. I respect the noble Lords&#8217; views, but it would help if they respected the fact that the Bill and the identity cards represent the future: a new kind of freedom and a new kind of identity.</p></blockquote>
<p>This is the sort of rhetoric that makes my blood run cold.  Here&#8217;s a prefiguring  example:</p>
<blockquote><p>In our state the individual is not deprived of freedom. In fact, he has greater liberty than an isolated man, because the state protects him and he is part of the State. Isolated man is without defence.</p></blockquote>
<p>  &#8211; Benito Mussolini.</p>
<p>Terry Eagleton (from a review of Paxton&#8217;s <em>Anatomy of Fascism</em> in the <em>New Statesman</em>) elucidates the connection:</p>
<blockquote><p>Conservatives disdain the popular masses, while fascists mobilise and manipulate them. Some conservatives believe in ideas, but fascists have a marked preference for myths. If they think at all, they think through their blood, not their brain. Fascists regard themselves as a youthful, revolutionary avant-garde out to erase the botched past and create an unimaginably new future.</p></blockquote>
<p>All supporters of the old-fashioned conception of individual liberty, whether they think of themselves as left or right, conservative or progressive, must do what can be done.  <a href="http://www.pledgebank.com/resist">Resist.</a>  We should not expect any quarter for outdated ideas under a new kind of freedom.</p>
<p>[cross-posted to Samizdata]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.samizdata.net/2006/01/a-new-kind-of-freedom-2/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Building walls</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2004/07/building-walls/</link>
		<comments>http://www.samizdata.net/2004/07/building-walls/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 13 Jul 2004 11:20:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Antoine Clarke (Neuilly-sur-Seine, France)</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Historical Perspective]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Liberty]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Security]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Technology]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=6364</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>The War on Terror, like any war, provides the opportunity for certain technologies to be developed at an accelerated pace. The problem is that we seem to depend on the rather glib assertion that without freedom there is no prosperity. This is fine so long as government is concerned with prosperity. But how long do people have to wait in societies where an &#233;lite puts the power to rule ahead of prosperity? As George Orwell put it in Hommage to Catalonia: &#8220;We don&#8217;t grasp it&#8217;s [totalitarianism's] full implications, because in our mystical way we feel that a r&#233;gime founded on <br/>...continue <a href="http://www.samizdata.net/2004/07/building-walls/">Building walls</a>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The War on Terror, like any war, provides the opportunity for certain technologies to be developed at an accelerated pace. The problem is that we seem to depend on the rather glib assertion that without freedom there is no prosperity. This is fine so long as government is concerned with prosperity. But how long do people have to wait in societies where an &eacute;lite puts the power to rule ahead of prosperity? As George Orwell put it in <strong>Hommage to Catalonia</strong>: &#8220;We don&#8217;t grasp it&#8217;s [totalitarianism's] full implications, because in our mystical way we feel that a r&eacute;gime founded on slavery <em>must</em> collapse. But it is worth comparing the duration of the slave empires of antiquity with that of any modern state. Civilisations founded on slavery have lasted for such periods as four thousand years.&#8221;</p>
<p>With this thought in mind, from <a href="http://www.techcentralstation.com/071204A.html">Tech Central Station</a>:</p>
<blockquote><p>Chemical detectors may provide, by the way, the greatest advance in counter-insurgent capabilities. Biochips will make it possible for self-directed UAVS to seek out explosives, including those used in small arms, and chemical and biological agents. They will also enable the identification and tracking of thousands or even millions of individuals in a monitored area based on their &#8220;smell.&#8221;<br />
 <span id="more-6364"></span> It is inevitable that military and police agencies will be able to monitor and create detailed and exhaustive virtual records of any location, whether it is along a security barrier or the entire town of Fallujah. If insurgents are not prevented from carrying out attacks, they will be backtracked in a recorded virtual world and then, when identified, arrested or eliminated remotely using smart weapons along the lines of Frank Herbert&#8217;s flying hypodermics. Even those who plant bombs or send and equip suicide bombers will be vulnerable to detection and removal.</p>
<p>There will, of course, be enormous privacy concerns as these technologies come online, and guerrillas/terrorists will do their best to use off-the-shelf products to stay in the tech arms race. It should also be pointed out that tyrants will enjoy many of the same advantages that democracies have over insurgents, and their ability to transfer tech capabilities to third parties constantly seeking to &#8220;hack&#8221; our system will remain a critical security concern.</p>
<p>History has shown, however, that the conditions needed for real tech innovation exist in direct proportion to the degree of freedom enjoyed by a populace. Democracies with relatively free markets, like the United States and Israel, will therefore accrue increasingly important advantages over those that would replace liberty with coercion. What is not clear, however, is to what extent free societies will allow the use of these technologies to counter Islamists and other advocates of tyranny, both domestically and internationally.</p></blockquote>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.samizdata.net/2004/07/building-walls/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>1</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Britain &#8211; a secret history</title>
		<link>http://www.samizdata.net/2003/07/britain-a-secret-history/</link>
		<comments>http://www.samizdata.net/2003/07/britain-a-secret-history/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 31 Jul 2003 09:52:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Gabriel Syme (London)</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Historical Perspective]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://192.168.200.139/?p=4105</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p>Britain has a murky record of official secrecy which stretches back to the Elizabethan era, the BBC points out.</p> ]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Britain has a murky record of official secrecy which stretches back to the Elizabethan era, the BBC <a href="http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3072271.stm" target="new">points out</a>.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.samizdata.net/2003/07/britain-a-secret-history/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
