Someone posted this on Twitter…
And Twitter suspended their account. Thou shalt not blaspheme against the True Faith.
|
|||||
|
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] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
Thou shalt not blaspheme against the True FaithJuly 30th, 2022 |
 21 comments to Thou shalt not blaspheme against the True Faith |
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, āPorcupinesā, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty FrĆ©dĆ©ric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons   |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||
Perhaps for offending the English language?
Perhaps the poster can get restored by telling them he was decolonizing spelling.
Sure, that’s the smart take, Fraser. That’s what really matters here.
I thought my spelling was good, Fraser – but a quick look at the picture again this morning left me still unable to spot the ‘decolonised’ word. I may be seeing what I expect to see, and will spot it in a minute, but I think you’re going have to, uh, “spell it out, for me”. š
If you are thinking “and know it’s not” has to mean “and no its not” (i.e. ‘and, to negative an alternative explanation, it is not’) instead of “and know it’s not” (i.e. ‘and be aware that it is not’), then of course ‘know’ would be misspelt if the first idea were intended instead of the second. I saw the spelling and took it to mean ‘and be aware that’, so it was a reach for me to spot the mere possibility that it was instead a typo. You could be right about the writer’s intent – and there again, the meaning I took is valid and I reached it so automatically that I suggest the writer could have too.
That said, I suppose the second sentence’s lack of a capital A at its start and a full stop (that’s a period for you benighted Americans) at its end does give some very slight licence to suspect it of other errors. I only report FWIW that your reading never occurred to me till you made me look for it.
Anyway, now the account is cancelled, it cannot be corrected even if correction were needed, so I advise going with the meaning written.
‘nor’ would be preferable.
Another great take. Quality discussion this.
IIUC what the writer meant, then the correct spelling would be “And knowing …”
Half off topic, but I recommend this article.
https://boriquagato.substack.com/p/believe-in-something-even-if-it-wrecks?utm_source=%2Fprofile%2F32715357-el-gato-malo&utm_medium=reader2
“And knowing THAT…..”
Snorri Godhi (July 31, 2022 at 9:11 am), I agree with capitalising “And”, but not with your suggestion of ‘knowing’ instead of ‘know’
is a sentence, whose subject is the reader, whereas
requires a following clause, or else (no capital for ‘and’, and) the preceding sentence to drop its full stop and become a clause of an overall sentence (and then the subject of that whole sentence is the subject of the picture – it is he who clutches his heart while ‘knowing’ he is not suffering from myocarditis, a stroke or an oncoming heart attack, which is a grammatical but unlikely reading to my way of thinking.
By all means clarify, Snorri, if your understanding of what the writer meant is not what I guess in this comment. And by all means do not bother if you feel there are matters of greater moment to discuss. š
Niall, since you asked…
But first i acknowledge that, as JohnM wrote, one must also add “that”.
The way i would have written it:
(Is this even a sentence? I am not sure.
But it makes perfect sense, as does “Picture of a sportsman” or “Portrait of a lady”.)
Coming to think of it, there is another modification of the original that also makes sense:
The amount of pendantry in this thread… š
Hat Tip to Timmy.
I’ve just posted two comments on the Guardian website. Both have been removed by a moderator. They don’t like being reminded the European Union is a political union that reduces the effectiveness of its former independent sovereign states.
Could also be:
The original point is very well made and begs the question of how many thousands of snitches now consider it their right and indeed duty to report on literally anything poking fun at āthe messageā.
I say snitches deliberately as it is inconceivable to me that an organisation the size of twitter csn possibly employ enough of their own checkers to pick up such pictorial micro-aggressions.
As I attempted to post on the recent article about the progressive swastika, which reminded me of the rather jolly little windmills I used to place on my sandcastle turrets, you can tell a good meme by the strength of reaction it generates.
Just a while ago, Twitter decided to block the Epoch Times without any explanation. UK-folk might not be so aware of the Epoch Times. Jo Nova explains:
https://joannenova.com.au/2022/07/twitter-censors-the-epoch-times-and-president-xi-cheers-silencing-of-chinese-dissidents/
https://www.theepochtimes.com/
@John
you can tell a good meme by the strength of reaction it generates
I concur. Who was it who said “You know you’re over your target when the flak starts”?
Just wanted to say that i approve of getting back on topic, even though i have nothing profound to contribute.
It is increasingly clear that there are problems with the Covid injections – even with the British ones (let alone the American companies) – many people have been killed or seriously harmed.
And on the other hand, the benefits of the injections are less and less clear – indeed the death rate from Covid for people who have had the injections and people who have not, appears to be about the same.
So it increasingly appears that there is serious risk from the injections – yet no real benefit.
“You anti vaxer!” – firstly these injections are not vaccines as that term was understood before the definitions of words started to be changed to benefit the international establishment, and far from being an “anti” person, I had two AZ injections in 2021 (which I now rather regret).
As for forcing people to get these injections – which do NOT prevent someone getting or passing on Covid, by threatening their freedom of movement or right to carry our their trade of profession.
Such evil (and the “unless all are protected none are” lies of Mr Gates and Dr Schwab are evil), must be opposed.
At least you weren’t subjected to the mRNA stuff. I’ve been avoiding that like the plague since they first started pushing it. Not because of “Muh 5G transmitters” or any of that, but simply it was a bit too far ahead on the “Should we be doing this scale” for my liking.
Maybe in a decade or so after the side-effects are better understood.
Then again, maybe not. Depends on my own personal risk profile, which is what these compulsory vaccinators never understood.
“My Body. My Choice”.
John Galt – agreed.