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]

Samizdata quote of the day

Overall it’s just that Birkenstock stamping on a human face, forever, again isn’t it?

Tim Worstall

12 comments to Samizdata quote of the day

  • I wonder, does putting free speech tenth and last in the list of dread threats to humanity mean they see free speech as the greatest threat of all, or as the least? I’m guessing the former. The other nine merely threaten the end of the world, or of humanity, or of something, at some near but regularly-extended date, whereas free speech threatens the credibility of regularly extending that date.

  • CaptDMO

    They can’t stamp on your face with Uggs if you smash their knees with a Louisville Slugger!
    Sorry, I don’t know the popula brand names of Cricket bats in UK.
    Metaphorically of course.

  • pst314

    “…does putting free speech tenth and last in the list of dread threats to humanity mean they see free speech as the greatest threat of all, or as the least?”

    I am guessing that they put it last so that first reading all the previous items, already popular with lefties, act to enhance the sense of a crisis that must be solved by abolishing dissent. Putting it first would not work as well.

  • Ferox

    “In a world … on the brink of destruction … one small group of heroes … will save us all …”

    They are the stars of the film, how could they possibly be wrong? And if we oppose them, that makes us the villains. You know what is supposed to happen to the villains …

  • Fred the Fourth

    The first nine are mere tactical beliefs, and could be replaced by pretty much any similar list.
    The last is about power and control, and is the absolute essence of the thing.

  • Roué le Jour

    CaptDMO,
    Pick axe handles where I come from. Readily available and heavier at the end, like a hammer.

  • Runcie Balspune

    “The 10 threats are climate change, environmental decline and extinction, nuclear weapons, resource scarcity (including water scarcity), food insecurity, dangerous new technologies, overpopulation, chemical pollution, pandemic disease, and denial and misinformation.”

    Without the irony that the ideologies such as that proposed are actually the _cause_ of all of the above

    The biggest clue is “dangerous new technologies”, a technology is only dangerous in the wrong hands – you can use an ultrasound to check an unborn child’s health, or to determine it is the “wrong” gender for your cultural necessities.

  • … Putting [the threat of free speech] first would not work as well. (pst314, April 22, 2020 at 9:55 pm)

    Good point, pst. They try to hide their real agenda behind all the ‘good’ they will do with it.

    The biggest clue is “dangerous new technologies”, a technology is only dangerous in the wrong hands – you can use an ultrasound to check an unborn child’s health, or to determine it is the “wrong” gender for your cultural necessities. (Runcie Balspune, April 23, 2020 at 7:15 am)

    It is basic to (a very strong strand of) the left that people are politically perfectible; evil can always be localised in some economic system, prejudice, culture, lack of ‘correct’ instruction or other specific cause from which people can be freed by the efforts of the left – without unavoidable side effects, because the problem had an external cause, not the innate demands of human nature, scarcity or whatever. In this way of thinking, it is indeed the technologies that are dangerous, not something innate to people that a political programme can only ameliorate.

    So I’m agreeing with Runcie – unqualified talk of dangerous technologies is indeed a clue to the philosophy of the speaker. At the same time, I note that ameliorating Runcie’s particular example seems pretty easy even from one left-oriented viewpoint (no ‘wrong’ genders, except maybe white male) but hard from another (‘abortion on demand, no questions asked’) – as was Runcie’s point, I guess.

  • Tim Worstall

    I must hasten to add that the line isn’t mine, not originally. Can’t recall where I did see it, a few years back at least, might even have been here.

  • Michael Taylor

    Another very good argument for Vivobarefoot shoes. Won’t get much face-stamping done wearing these.

  • Sam Duncan

    I’m not one to entertain conspiracy theories, but if the CCP was trying to persuade everyone that single-party totalitarianism is superior, rather than simply throwing the PRC’s weight around (and I think the distinction is worth bearing in mind), it could hardly have come up with a better plan than releasing a novel long-incubation virus into a world already up to its eyeballs in authoritarian panic-merchants and doom-mongers while releasing and encouraging propaganda to the effect that it has handled things so much more efficiently than dumb ol’ America with its stupid liberties, checks, and balances.

    “Without the irony that the ideologies such as that proposed are actually the _cause_ of all of the above.”

    Indeed. There’s only one threat to humanity, and it isn’t on the list.

  • Paul Marks

    Good post.

    Tyranny “for our own good” is still tyranny.

    And tyranny by “nice people” who wear Berkinstocks is IN THE END the same as tyranny by Nazis in jackboots.

    Either people have rights AGAINST the state or we do not.

    And if we do NOT have rights AGAINST the state – then the future is the road to the gas chambers.

    Nice Francis Bacon, William Petty, Thomas Hobbes, David Hume and Jeremy Bentham will lead us to the gas chambers.

    If there are no rights AGAINST the state – then Lenin, Stalin, Hitler, Mao and so on committed no crimes, because they decided what law is and what crimes are.

    “It could not happen here” – what about when the economy totally collapses and there is mass starvation?

    The government of that time will not say “our own policies led to this economic collapse” – on the contrary they will state that their policy was for the “greatest good of the greatest number” and that they “must” now follow certain other policies…….

    “It” can “happen” anywhere – anywhere the population allows the “nice” government to have such unlimited powers.

    And the “nice” people in the Birkenstocks (the “liberal” minded people – with their “Green” desires) would be happy to see a greatly reduced population.

Leave a Reply

You can use these HTML tags

<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>