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

Just how racist is The Guardian against black Africans? That they must be condemned to longer and deeper poverty to conform to fashionable metropolitan ideas?

Tim Worstall

10 comments to Samizdata quote of the day

  • Today is Tim Worstall Day… wishing you all a Worstally New Year

  • Natalie Solent (Essex)

    It was the best of days, it was the Worstall of days…

  • Natalie Solent (Essex)

    A direct link to the Guardian article: “The Guardian view on Africa rising: the continent must develop in its own way”. It opened by quoting A Tale of Two Cities, prompting my silly remark above:

    “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times.” So opens Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities. Set in London and Paris during the late 1700s and the lead-up to the French Revolution, the novel was a warning about what happens when wealth funnels upwards while the masses stagnate. Nowhere do the best and worst of times collide with more geopolitical force than in Africa.

    Oddly, the editorial did ask a question that is well worth asking:

    Africa was once a breadbasket; how did it earn a reputation for being a basket case?

    But of course, as Mr Worstall says, the answer the Guardian offers is more of the same old discredited rubbish that their newspaper was peddling when Julius Nyerere was running Tanzania into the ground.

  • Paul Marks

    Translated from “Woke” language – the Guardian is suggesting more government spending and more state owned industries in various African countries. Which means economic collapse and mass starvation.

    The Guardian has not changed – it is still the same as when it was the Manchester Guardian, covering up the murder of millions by Stalin in the 1930s., and sacking one of its own journalists (Malcolm Muggeridge) for the crime of trying to report the truth. The New York Times was, and is, the same.

    The “Classical Liberal” Economist magazine is supposed to be the alternative to socialist publications such as the Guardian and the New York Times (socialist media is called “liberal” in the United States – in a baffling misuse of language).

    So what is the Economist magazine doing this week. Well it is bravely denouncing the corrupt Biden/Harris regime as the threat to the democracy that it is – pointing out not only that the 2020 Presidential Election blatantly rigged, but that the Biden/Harris regime (in cooperation with the accursed “international community”) is seeking to crush Freedom of Speech and all other basic liberties (via such things as the “Hate Speech” doctrine and the “Environment and Social Governance”, ESG, system – the Western version of the Chinese Social Credit system). Oh, silly me, the Economist magazine is NOT doing that – what is doing is denouncing President Trump as a “threat to democracy”.

    Donald John Trump (not the Biden/Harris regime) is the “threat to democracy” – because the common people support him, and the common people must have no say on policy – which is a matter for their “educated” (very Plato) betters, a small elite who will allow elections AS LONG AS THE RESULT OF THE ELECTION DOES-NOT-MATTER.

    When the “alternative” to socialist publications such as the New York Times and the Guardian is, essentially, on the same side as them (supporting the total control of the population by a small elite of officials, “intellectuals”, Credit Bubble bankers and “Woke” “scientific” Corporate types – more Saint Simon’s vision of socialism, rather than the vision of socialism of Karl Marx) it is hard not to be cynical.

    “Heads, rule by the establishment with the general population being their playthings – or tails, rule by the establishment with the general population being their playthings”.

    That is the vision of “democracy” of both the Guardian and New York Times socialist newspapers (which are in alliance – and endlessly cite each other) and the “Classical Liberal” Economist magazine.

    And people wonder why I have a problem with what the IEA has on display when one first enters the building.

  • Nicholas (Unlicensed Joker) Gray

    I realize that Paul Marks and others will not like this, but the Republicans, because of Bidens’ poor performance, could win seats in the up-coming elections- thus disproving the idea that all elections are rigged. Indeed, some people think that Trump could win a second term in 2024. I am not sure which would be worse- a second Biden, or Trump Presidency! I hope both sides offer the American Electors better candidates.

  • the Republicans, because of Bidens’ poor performance, could win seats in the up-coming elections- thus disproving the idea that all elections are rigged. (Nicholas (Unlicensed Joker) Gray, January 2, 2022 at 9:01 am)

    Nicholas, AFAICR no-one on this blog ever argued that all elections were rigged, let alone that all elections were so extensively rigged that the margin of fraud was unbeatable by any imaginable swing. The U.S. founding fathers assigned control of electoral processes to state legislatures precisely because they believed that some elections might be rigged long before all elections were rigged, so the legislatures were the safest place to put them. Sundry executive and/or judicial usurpings of that control from legislatures in 2020 suggest that certain Dems agreed.

    I hope both sides offer the American Electors better candidates.

    Do you mean candidates who will not boast of having created an exceptionally inclusive vote-fraud organisation? 🙂

  • Paul Marks


    It has been explained to you, at great length, how the 2020 Presidential Election was rigged – for example by masses of “mail-in ballots” without proof they came from real voters, and by the FARCE that was the counting centres in certain key cities.

    As for a better candidate than Donald John Trump – via the internet I helped campaign AGAINST Donald John Trump in the 2016 Primaries (Legal Note – I was NOT paid for any work on behalf of the campaign of Senator Cruz, some people seem to think I was).

    Nicholas – do you really think that the tidal wave of “mainstream media”, and government bureaucracy, LIES that were directed at Donald John Trump over the last five years would not also be directed at any other candidate who the establishment did not like?

    I assure that they would carry on the much the same campaign of lies. The creatures who make up such despicable organisations as the “Justice” Department and the FBI (who have, for example, ignored the crimes of Hunter and Joseph Biden for YEARS) would carry on the same campaign of lies against Ted Cruz or Ron DeSantis that they carried on against Donald Trump – and the “mainstream media” would carry he water of the Administrative State (the so called “Deep State”) as they always do.

    The institutions of the Western world, including those of the United States (overwhelmingly the most important part of the Western world) are rotten to the core.

    That is why a person who puts their faith in the institutions is deeply mistaken.

  • Paul Marks


    The crimes of the Biden family, include such things as taking part in underage sexual abuse and sexual trafficking, crack cocaine abuse, firearm offences, and accepting bribes from the enemies of the United States (including the People’s Republic of China – that might concern you in Australia) – and yes the money often went to Joseph “the Big Guy” Biden – not just his despicable relatives.

    None of these crimes has been punished – and the evidence for the crimes has been sat on by the FBI and the “Justice” Department for years, with the full support the “mainstream media”.

    And yet it shocks you that the establishment would engage in postal vote fraud?

    There are people who have been abused for months (you do not want to hear what has happened to them in prison) – for the crime of trespassing, even though they were encouraged to enter the Capitol building by people who turn out to have been working for the FBI.

    “They should have appealed to the courts – not engaged in a riot”.

    They did appeal to the courts – but the courts refused to even hear the cases of Election Fraud (the courts DID NOT CARE about blatant election fraud).

    Even when almost half the State Attorney Generals put their names on complaints – that nonentity “Chief Justice” John Roberts would do nothing.

    And there farcical legal moves, at State level, such as claiming that the candidate (the candidate) had no “legal standing” to make a complaint about election fraud.

    To take just Pennsylvania – the State Legislature never passed any change to election laws allowing mass mail-in ballots.

    What is your case Nicholas? That using the magic word “COVID” or the magic words “Public Health Emergency” mean that election laws (in Pennsylvania and other States) are overturned?

    And what about the exclusion of poll watchers from the counting centres in key places) – is that O.K. with you Nicholas? By the wonders of modern technology (mobile phones and the internet) I watched them being excluded. So Nicholas do not tell me what happened – I watched it happen.

    And then there is the finance of the process of voting and vote counting.

    Mr Mark Zuckerberg spent, via a “charity” he set up, hundreds of millions of Dollars on the voting centres and counting centres of key areas.

    Is that O.K. Nicholas?

    Do you think that Mr Zuckerberg and the rest of the ultra wealthy “cabal” (the word that TIME MAGAZINE used – and they intended it as a compliment) should be allowed to control the voting and counting process in key areas?

    How about that being allowed in Australia? And the courts telling anyone who complained, to drop dead (which they did – ask the family of Ashli Babbitt, and I watched her die).

  • John

    The mainstream media lies were equally virulent against Romney and Bush junior, both dyed in the wool establishment figures. The next Republican candidate whether Trump, De Santis or as a ridiculously extreme example Romney again will be subject to the same treatment (although the wetter and more obviously establishment candidates for the nomination will at least get enthusiastic support until the selection process is over – remember McCain?).

    However the weaponisation of the entire governmental, judicial and even military apparatus after 2016 to systematically oppose and thwart an elected President throughout his term was a new and infinitely more serious development. Such power, once seized, will not be easily harnessed let alone relinquished.

  • pete

    I’m not sure it’s racism.

    It’s business.

    ‘Liberal’ and ‘progressive’ people need a constant and reliable supply of victims.

    It’s how they make their comfortable wages, often funded by the taxpayer.