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]
|
Interesting-looking paper on dealing with pirates of the non-cyber kind Via Instapundit, is an academic paper on the issue of how merchant vessels can protect themselves from pirates. This will not break new ground for Samizdata regulars, of course, but I recommend it.
Talking of merchant shipping, if this volcanic ash problem continues to mess up air travel, then merchant shipping is likely to get a boost in the short run. Bring brack the transAtlantic ocean liners, maybe. Here’s a website where you can even buy such monsters of the sea. Bit out of my price range, alas.
|
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.
|
I think there should be a revival of the Q ships. These were innocent looking merchant ships in WW1 which were actually heavily armed with a naval crew. There should be a take no prisoners policy, so the existence of the Q ships doesn’t get out. Eventually when the pirates stop returning from their trips, the pool of volunteers will dry up.
Q-ships, good idea, but it won’t have much effect without the no prisoners policy. And that’s the sticking point. The current effort to suppress piracy is failing because the tranzis won’t allow pirates to have their “human rights” (as defined by the tranzis) breached in the slightest.
Many governments (including that of the United States) make problems for armed civilian ships (the only real way to stop pirates – as the navy can not be everywhere at once).
Perhaps governments are wise (in their own twisted and vile form of “wisdom”) as about half of the ships that defeated the Spanish Armada (supposedly the most powerful government fleet that had every sailed) were private merchant ships.
And even in 1812 elements of the Royal Navy (the most powerful navy the world had ever seen) were defeated many times by American merchant ships.
In the depths of their dark hearts the statists may not just be concerned with the lives of pirates when they discourage armed merchant ships.
I hadn’t thought of that until you raised the possibility, Paul. It makes sense. The threat of a good example.
I don’t think that there are many government baddies consciously thinking that way, but people often have an incredibly sensitive “nose” for their own self-interest and class-interest that operates a little below the conscious level.
That is very well put Natalie, and this is the rather more realistic alternative to all the silly conspiracy theories.
If we really wanted to stop Somali piracy a half dozen W88 475 kT warheads over the appropriate population centres would do the trick. Call it the modern-day equivalent of the Barbary Wars.
Natalie and Alisa:
Agreed.