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 quotes of the day – hold people responsible for their actions Already, the Golders Green terrorist is being explained away as “he suffered from mental health issues”.
As a therapist, I’m sick of this.
It is circular.
Only someone seriously unhinged could commit such a heinous act.
Hold people responsible for their actions.
– James Esses
—
And for added context…
—
It’s worth remembering that the man who stormed a kosher supermarket with a knife in 2024 received only a suspended sentence
– Ed West
|
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 am a bit confused.
For starters, Is James Esses being sarcastic in the 1st sentence?
I ask because i believe that sentence to be true.
And what about the 2nd sentence? Does he mean that people should be punished for their actions, irrespective of their mental conditions?
I ask because i believe that they should. For deterrence.
If someone believes that if they kill Jews and are then killed themselves they will go to heaven and be given 72 virgins, are they mentally ill? I would think they’d have to be.
So maybe we need a new examination of what “mentally ill” means in our legal systems.
@bobby b
So maybe we need a new examination of what “mentally ill” means in our legal systems.
I guess it depends on the goal of the justice system, and I think a lot of the confusion stems from the fact that it is trying to do several different things. There is a place in the justice system for vengeance, where the state vents the outrage of the victim on the perpetrator so that we aren’t all doing that independently. And in a sense I am not sure how your mental state affects the need for vengeance against someone who has seriously injured you or even killed you. Another part is protecting the public — and if your mental illness prevents you from managing you actions then that mental illness is a BIGGER reason to lock you up rather than a mitigation. There are other issues like punishment and rehabilitation where mental state may well have an impact, and of course restoration, but usually these sorts of people have no resources to restore with.
One has to ask — is some madman killed your loved one would you be any less desirous of seeing them swing a from a rope compared to someone who was in his right mind? Some people would distinguish between the two, I’m not sure I would, though I have never had to find out thankfully.
Its weird, if a person kills another because the voices in his head told him to, he will be considered insane, locked up in a mental institution and medicated against his will in an attempt to rectify his mental illness. And potentially released within a short period of time if considered ‘cured’. However if someone kills someone because his belief in an invisible supreme being tells him he should, he is considered entirely sane and he gets chucked in a normal prison, and no attempt is made to alter his mental state of mind. And some people do utterly horrendous things (like Axel Rudakubana did) but don’t bother to claim any justification from any exterior source and are thus considered ‘sane’ too, despite to all intents and purposes seeming utterly batsh*t insane.
Personally I think there’s no point trying to determine whether someone who commits heinous crimes is ‘evil’ or ‘mentally unwell’, and then treating them differently depending on the conclusion, because the dividing line between the two seems entirely arbitrary. Just execute the lot of them and let God (if there is one) sort things out in due course.
Why try to make sense? It all depends on which side the judge is on. Even with identical crimes, the favored murderers get light sentences, and the unfavored ones get harsh ones. What we should do is study the sanity and bias of the judges.
100% agree.
Apologies, this is very much off-topic, but it is a topic I see mentioned here quite frequently:
https://johnd12343.substack.com/p/data-centres-in-space-i-think-not
Before the First World War there any number of assassinations: American presidents, Austrian queens, Russian Prime Ministers, Greek kings etc. Just about every time the authorities claimed it was a madman despite them as often as not being communists or anarchists.
Patrick, Elllen,
Good points.
In general, this will be another excuse to escalate the “Cutlery War”
There is a refusal, by the Western establishment, to understand either what Muhammed taught (do not have non Muslims as friends – treat non Muslims as enemies – subdue them into ritual humiliation), or what he personally did – for example pledge peace and friendship to certain communities (including Jewish ones) in Arabia and then launch surprise attacks killing the men and taking the women as sex slaves.
Instead of understanding either the teachings or the personal example of Muhammed, the Western establishment lumps him in with other religious teachers such as Jesus and Buddha, and even claims (I have even heard Reform Party candidates make this claim) that the dispute is only over “what name we use for God” – as if religions were teaching, basically, the same things. They teach fundamentally DIFFERENT (and opposed) things – principles.
All this goes beyond any honest ignorance the Western establishment may have had – as they punish anyone who tells the truth about Islam – so it is not an honest mistake by the Western establishment, they REFUSE to understand, they do not WANT to understand. If Prime Minister Gladstone or Winston Churchill were around today they would be driven from public life for what they said about Islam – and might well be sent to prison.
The reaction to the October 7th 2023 attack, where thousands of Islamic warriors murdered more Jews than in any other attack since the 1940s, is instructive – there were, at once (before Israel had reacted at-all) gatherings (“protests”) in many Western cities (both by Muslims and by the leftist allies – the “Red-Green” alliance) in celebration of the mass murder, they celebrated the event in many Western cities and have carried on doing so for the last two and half years.
Meanwhile the weak (very weak) Israeli response which has left the hostile population sitting in Gaza (Gaza which has been “Jew Free” since 2005 – there was no “occupation” on October 7th 2023) is denounced as “genocide” by “Sir Ed” Davey (leader of the British Liberal Democratic Party) and other intellectual giants. A military operation that, for example, gives warnings before a building which has been used a firing station, is destroyed “we have come under fire from this building – please leave, as we are about to destroy the building” – that is no-way-to-run-a-war, especially against a population that wants to exterminate you (a real genocide “Sir Ed”) and believes that if they die in battle against infidels they will automatically go to paradise and have eternal bliss.
Deep down the Israeli Deep State (including the higher ranks of the military) is as gormless as the general Western establishment – for example the former head of Shin Bet (who did not notice thousands of Islamic warriors preparing a massive attack – over months) whose response was “I do not understand why we failed to deter the attack”.
One can not “deter” people who believe it is their religious duty to kill or enslave “infidels” and who also believe that if they die in combat with infidels, they will automatically go to paradise and have eternal bliss. That is not the the view of a few “extremists who have twisted Islam” – that is the mainstream view, taught by Muhammed and his followers for 14 centuries.
Failing to study the enemy, assuming the enemy are “just like us”, is the worse mistake someone can make – and the entire Western establishment have made it, indeed they do not even understand that the enemy are the enemy (the Western establishment treat war as “community relations” – they refuse to understand that they are in a war) – and (again) they punish people who tell them truth.
As for the people reading all this and saying to themselves “yes – but I am not Jewish, so I will be O.K.” – infidel does NOT just mean Jew – it means anyone who has not sincerely (sincerely – not just pretended to) embraced Islam.
That includes you – and your family.
Whenever I hear an Israeli say, in response to some attack or other, “they will pay a heavy price for this” my heart sinks.
Sincere followers of Islam do not care about “prices” (“heavy” or otherwise) – they believe that if they, or other sincere followers of Islam (such as their children) are killed, they will go to paradise and have eternal bliss.
“Do they not love their children?” – yes indeed they do, which is why they are not concerned about them being killed (why they use them as human shields) so that they can go to paradise and have eternal bliss.
Why is this (not very complicated) principle, seemingly so hard for some people to understand.
The Islamic commander of the army besieging Christian Alexandra (which had been founded by the Greeks and populated by the Greeks for about a thousand years) said “you love life – we love death, that is why we will win” – he was correct.
Constantinople was the greatest Christian city in the world (vastly larger than Rome a thousand years ago) – today it is not a Christian city, it is a Muslim city.
Vienna was saved, both in 1529 and 1683 – but there will no saving Vienna from what is happening now (some 40%, and rising, of the children are Islamic) – and other Western cities will, eventually, fall.
Oddly enough I was just thinking exactly this whilst having lunch. And what you said is true Paul (and important) – in both comments. Though I dunno about Istanbul. Ataturk hated Islam. Of course there is now Erdogan so… One other thing. The likes of Hamas don’t put their kids in harms way to get them on the express ine to paradise. They do it because it works brilliantly as a propaganda tactic. One dead baby is worth more to their cause than a whole squad of dead IDF soldiers.
I really don’t know to what level the West’s complicity is ignorance (often wilfully), stupidly, cultural self-loathing or simply deranged (Queers for Palestine).
What I do know is that, “From the River to the Sea” is an explicit call for genocide. It is “The Final Solution to the Jewish Question in the Near East”.
But what I don’t know is how many of the deranged lefties chanting it really believe that. I suspect a lot don’t, a lot don’t care and quite a few do understand and they just want to see a “Western” nation thoroughly destroyed.
A large part of the reason that the left hates Israel is because Israel started out very socialist, lots of kibbutzim, but now Israel is one of the most capitalist, and successful nations on Earth! Stalin, who supported Israel at the UN, must be turning in his grave.
Nicholas Gray – there is much truth in what you say (that rhymes).
“Stalin” hated Jews (as his “Doctor’s plot” persecution showed) – but he was willing to use socialist Jews, of which (yes) there were many.
No more than 5% of the Jewish population of the land were in kibbutzim, but, yes, there was a socialist atmosphere in Israel up to the 1970s – the Labour Party (although it never had an absolute majority in Parliament) dominated politics.
And it is true that Israel has become more conservative over time – and not just in economic policy, the “Social Revolution” seen in Western countries since the 1960s seems to have passed Israel by.
Families are strong (not a large proportion of births outside of wedlock), the fertility rate is above replacement level (where else in the Western world can say that) and the population is more religious than it used to be – again no other Western nation can say that.
Stalin was, on the quiet, a bit of a social conservative – although very much a socialist in his economic opinions, so the social conservatism of modern Israel (compared with, say, Britain) would not have disturbed him (but, yes, the rejection of economic socialism would have enraged him) – but it would have horrified the Frankfurt School Marxists, what today are called the “Critical Theory” types.
Ironically the founders of the Frankfurt School of Marxism were mostly Jewish (well “of Jewish families”) – but they would really detest Israel now, and (yes indeed) the modern “Critical Theory” Marxists do detest Israel – as they show in the universities, and by all the lying books on Gaza (and so on) they put in to book stores.
Anyone handed British citizenship who develops any liability needs citizenship revoked and deported. We have enough home grown criminals and mental health issues.
“A large part of the reason that the left hates Israel is because Israel started out very socialist, lots of kibbutzim, but now Israel is one of the most capitalist, and successful nations on Earth! Stalin, who supported Israel at the UN, must be turning in his grave.”
I doubt the average leftist Jew hater has a clue the Kibbutzim existed, nor that they were practical examples of socialism in action. This all has nothing to do with economics and everything to do with a very deep and historic vein of anti-Semitism that the Left are currently mining. They hate the Jew because he is a Jew, there’s nothing more to it than that. There is no rationality to it.
Jim – some of the left remember, they remember very well.
As for the Kibbutzim – they were subsidized, but they still, mostly, worked badly over time.
Prime Minister Sharon’s father once lived in one of these communal places – every farming decision had to be made either by a mass meeting or by a committee, it did not work.
As for people hating Jews just for being Jews – in reality they are very specific about why they hate Jews, the “exploitation and oppression” LIE – for example the “Jewish domination of the professions” LIE cited (as truth about Germany in 1933 – with fake statistics and so on) by President Franklin Roosevelt (who was nice to Jews in public – and hated Jews in private) – see Paul Johnson “A History of the Jews”.
Both the Nazis and the modern left agree on this basic point.
Dr Karl Marx was from a once Jewish family, but that did not stop him writing the following…..
“What is the God of the Jew? Money! What is the religion of the Jew? Hucksterism!”
Jews are not hated “just for being Jews” – there is a whole system of belief behind anti-Semitism, based on Jews supposedly being materialistic (not in tune with the spirit-of-nature – not dancing in the forests and so on), and “exploiting and oppressing” others.
Ironically the two people who gave the Labour Theory of Value (and the FALSE theory on land – that argues that landlords oppress people by charging rent) the biggest push, were both from once Jewish families – David Ricardo and (the already mentioned) Karl Marx.
The modern Critical Theory Marxists (who hate Israel because it has stable married families with children) are a direct development of the Frankfurt School of (Cultural) Marxism – most of whose founders were also from once Jewish families.
Jim – just dismissing anti-semitism as a form of insanity will not do – there are very specific economic and cultural theories behind it – including with Adolf Hitler (who hated Jews long BEFORE he went out of his mind on drugs – when Mr Hitler wrote “My Struggle” he was an evil man, but quite sane).
Anti-Semitism will only be defeated with the specific theories that it rests on are defeated – most importantly the “exploitation and oppression” myth which, including when it is applied to “Gaza”, is based on Labour Theory of Value and Ricardian land doctrine – and the, equally FALSE cultural theories of the Frankfurt School – now called Critical Theory.
Most Western universities teach hatred of the Jews (under the “Anti Zionist” disguise) – and these academics are not, Jim, irrational (they are not insane) – the academics (and the teachers, and the media people) are in the grip of false economic and false cultural theories, these theories, Labour Theory of Value, Ricardo’s theory on land, and the Cultural theories of “Critical Theory” on race, gender and sexuality, must be defeated – shown to be utterly false.
Of course some people would dismiss everything I have just written as “Jewish rationalism” (the effort to make rational sense out of things that make no rational sense) – but there we are.
“But have you ever danced in a forest?”
No I have never danced in a forest – and if I did dance in a forest (the sight of my fat and old self trying to “dance” would indeed be horrific) the Greens (including the leader of the British Greens – who is from a once Jewish family) would hold that I had spiritually polluted the forest by being in it – so I can not win.
The Green movement comes from the German National Socialist movement (which makes it, in a sick way, funny – when they accuse other people of being Nazis), but there is more (a lot more) to modern Anti-Semitism than them.
For example, Hobson (the early 1900s Liberal Party Anti-Semite – whose theories on “Imperialism” inspired both “Lenin” and Jeremy Corbyn) was certainly not “irrational” – and his, utterly false, economic theories are wildly accepted to this day – including his belief in Credit Money (he was pushing “Keynesianism” long before Keynes).
The modern Liberal Democratic Party is a group in which Mr Hobson would feel very much at home – whether it is pushing more government spending (supposedly to help the poor) or denouncing the (mythical) “Gaza genocide”.
Jews today are told that the great threat in the modern West comes from “far right” political parties.
In reality the main threat to the lives of Jews (and other infidels) comes from Islam (NOT from nominal Muslims – but from those people who actually try and follow the basic doctrines of Islam) – and it is precisely the “far right” political parties, the Freedom Party in the Netherlands and the Freedom Party in Austria, the AfD in Germany, the League in Italy, Vox in Spain, Chega in Portugal, Progress Party in Denmark or Norway (and so on) that oppose the expansion of Islam.
So what the education system and media are telling Jews (and which some Jews sincerely believe themselves) is the exact opposite of the truth.
An exception to this may be the Reform Party in the United Kingdom – which, alone among the “far right” parities in Western Europe, does not seem to oppose the expansion of Islam – that is why some (some – not all) people have left it and joined the Restore Party. Given the “first past the post” voting system in Britain – this may be a fatal development, although the Restore Party is NOT putting up candidates (outside one small town) in the local elections next week – so “vote splitting” is not yet a threat.
The Conservative Party? It is following much the same line as the Reform Party – trying to make a distinction between “Islam” and “Islamism”.
But it is hard to see what this distinction, between “Islam” and “Islamism”, is based on. A distinction between “nominal Muslims” (people who just happen to have been born into Muslim families – but do NOT believe what Muhammed taught and practiced) and sincere Muslims, would make more sense.
THIS!