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]
|
Labour’s 2024 manifesto was called “Change”. It delivered. 
“Change”, currently on sale at the Labour Party online shop for a mere £12.50. One has to admire the way that Sir Keir Starmer allowed himself to be photographed with his sleeves rolled up, but loosening his tie was a step too far.
The ungovernable country? Why Britain keeps losing prime ministers – Tom Clark in the Guardian.
Britain isn’t ungovernable. Our leaders just can’t govern – Tom Harris in the Telegraph.
|
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.
|
Good riddance. A lying Brit hating gimp of a man.
But… the real problem is the herd of blue haired nose ringed moronic lefty yammering monkeys who sit behind him. There is no majority in parliament for doing the necessary. In fact there is only a majority to deepen the enshittification of our once great country. 😭
The country is not “ungovernable”, it’s just they shouldn’t be aspiring to govern the country in the first place. Just get out of the way, stop trying to “govern”.
I rather liked Tom Harris when he was in Parliament. He came off as a sensible chap, the more so being a Labour MP. His analysis seems quite reasonable.
Much will be said about this sanctimonious and also rather sly individual. I think Andrew Lilico, at CapX, has this justifiably brutal assessment:
Two notions about Starmer’s period in office will probably stick in the imagination. First, he seemed almost pathologically attached to the idea that Britain should submit, in its laws, to some higher power. He tried to give away the Chagos in service of “international law”. The UK refused to assist the US in Venezuela and Iran not because the government had any principled objection in either situation, but because “international law” forbade doing so. International law appeared to stymie any alternative to the Rwanda scheme for asylum-seekers. And of course Starmer did all he could to submit to EU law in his “reset”.
Second was his two-tier approach to everything – earning him the “two-tier Keir” moniker. Two-tier policing. Two-tier attitude to Covid violations (Beer and curry, anyone?). Two-tier political response to gilt market spikes (“crashing the economy” when it was Truss; a normal Tuesday when it was Starmer). It was even two-tier as Starmer was ultimately undone. This was, ironically, the one time he tried something arguably bold – the appointment of Peter Mandelson as US Ambassador.
Read the whole thing.
Meet the new boss . . . . .
llater,
llamas
Britain is governable. All it needs is a party not under the thumb of sneering progressives.
My choice for QOTD on a great Andrew Lawrence tribute to our departed leader: by peterbee88
Starmer and Carney are each the New Man for the globalists. They look and act and govern the same.
Bland and white and inoffensive-looking and forgettable. Managerial, even. I can see why uninformed middle-class normies might vote for them. Technocrats, with little feeling for humans.
G Orwell designed them well.
“….Our leaders just can’t govern ”
They prefer to RULE.
There IS a difference.
LLamas: “Meet the New Boss”?
When does the “Silent Running” start?
@ Bruce Gentner:
“Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss . . .”
Copyright 1971 Peter Townshend/Abkco Music
You know you’re getting old when what used to be universally-understood culturally-based references begin to fall flat.
llater,
llamas
More government spending, higher taxes and more regulations.
But then that was also the case with the last government – and with every government in Britain since Margaret Thatcher was betrayed in 1990, some 36 years ago.
And I suspect that Tom Harris in the Telegraph is mistaken – that the elected people are not really in charge.
At local government level all the election of the Reform Party meant was that the Ukrainian flags came down – spending and taxes continued to increase, because elected people are almost powerless, and it is much the same at national government level.
Elected politicians do indeed make some decisions – but their hands are tied in many areas, and what they see and hear is controlled by officials and “experts”.
This was partly true even in Margaret Thatcher’s time – for example the lady was told that the Single European Act of 1986 was a “Free Trade” measure – and was utterly astonished by the tidal wave of regulations that followed, regulations that Margaret Thatcher found she no longer had any power to veto.
By 1990 Margaret Thatcher no longer believed what the establishment (including the officials and “experts”) told her – as they had lied to her too many times. Starting with the lies they told her about the “need” to increase taxes in 1979 because the outgoing Labour Government’s public pay settlements “had to be” accepted, and the tissue of lies they told her about Rhodesia – had Margaret Thatcher known that the agenda of the international establishment was to let the Marxist lunatic Robert Mugabe come to power, the lady would have acted very differently.
That is why they got rid of her – because, by 1990, Margaret Thatcher could no longer be deceived.
With Liz Truss it was much quicker.
It is fashionable to say that Geoffrey Howe was a good Chancellor – he was no such thing, he increased taxation (for example almost doubling the sales tax and increasing the payroll tax) and allowed government spending to continue to rise – the “cut” in government spending that the BBC (and so on) talked about from 1979 onwards was a LIE – government spending went UP not down.
Another dreadful minister was James Prior – the Employment Secretary who cried crocodile tears about UNEMPLOYMENT – whilst doing nothing to remove the powers that government (government – the state) and given to the Trade Unions to push “Collective Bargaining” – powers (such as being legally allowed to obstruct the entrances of a place of business with para military “picket lines”) that led to Institutional Unemployment.
This is an old story in Britain – with the “Liberal” government of the 1906 Act denying that their Act would lead to UNEMPLOYMENT – whilst already planning “Labour Exchanges” and “Unemployment Benefit” to respond to the unemployment they knew (they knew) they would create.
In the United States the mess came later – but it came, and both parties were responsible.
For example, the “alternative” to Franklin Roosevelt in 1936, Alfred Landon, was also a “Collective Bargaining” fan – i.e. a fan of mass UNEMPLOYMENT, and had been a Progressive as far back as 1912.
If Landon been elected in 1936 it would have changed nothing.
There has been one good Chancellor in my life time – Nigel Lawson.
Although Kwasi Kwarteng could have been a good Chancellor – had not the officials and “experts” sabotaged him from day one. I am certainly not “Woke” (“anti racist” Marxist) – but the abuse that man, Kwasi Kwarteng, was subjected to had an unpleasant racial edge to it, for example the gossip that he “could not keep still” (that he moved his arms and body about) “because of his African cultural heritage” – I am not sure that he did fidget more than other people – and, even if he did, what has that got to do with economic policy?
Thomas Sowell and Walter Williams were (are in the case of Thomas Sowell – who is still alive) both black – were they not good economists?
As for “Andy” Burnham – Mr Ed is correct, Mr Burnham is an establishment puppet. He will not reduce government spending, taxes or regulations – or get rid of the officials and “experts”.
An article a little OT but in the same scenario as Britain spirals down the loo.
Apparently the culture department having completed their recent abominations on social media such as mass censorship, government tracking through “age verification”, Ofcom and its endless tyranny, have decided that that is not enough. And now they have decided to “forcing social media firms to prioritise trusted news“. As you know the culture department will absolutely ensure that a good balance of different “trusted” news sources will be provided, and they have pinkie sweared that they will not use this power to ensure only good stories about the government. O’Brien from the department of truth, ensures us through his spokesman Winston Smith (who seemed rather glassy eyed, almost hypnotized) ensures us that they will ensure that the public gets a diet of information that will be suitably nourishing according to to the scientists at the Newspeak institute.
Yeah, every time I say “23 skidoo!”, all I get are blank looks.
It’s ‘6 7 skidoo’ now, due to inflation.
Fraser Orr – yes indeed Sir, but it is not just Britain – it is the Western world in general where telling the truth is becoming a “crime” and lies are pushed by official, and officially liked, sources.
The American “mainstream media” (like the education system) is already much the same, if not worse, than that of Britain – and a couple of appointments to the Supreme Court would lead to the crushing of all dissent – under the “hate speech is not free speech” doctrine.
Already such things as the Director of National Intelligence exposing Doctor Fauci as a liar and a persecutor are ignored by the media.
And the Chairman of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee for investigations (Senator Johnson – that rare thing, an honest man in Washington) finds that the media ignore the deaths of tens of thousands of people from the Covid “vaccine” injections.
What is the point of writing a report exposing massive corruption – if no one is punished and most people will never hear of the report.
“The system works – the Permanent Senate Committee that has the task of investigating the government, has uncovered institutional corruption leading to mass death”.
But no one will be punished, and most people (who get their news from the “main-stream media”) will never hear of the report.
So the system does NOT work.
@Paul Marks.
The American “mainstream media” (like the education system) is already much the same,
FWIW, I think we should all agree to stop calling it the “mainstream” media. CBS, ABC and NBC and all the major newspapers have considerably smaller audiences than larger podcasts/yt channels so they can’t claim “mainstream” by volume, and the views they represent are definitely not in the middle stream of thought in the country.
I mean horse and buggy used to be the main mode of transport and consequently road infrastructure was built around it, but it isn’t any more, and the “mainstream” media is just as disconnected from “mainstream” as such old modes of transport.
I mean does anyone really care what NBC or the NYT says anymore? Anyone that is, except those who already are vehemently on the same side? If the NYT or in Britain the FT shut down tomorrow, would you even notice? You are right about education, but I really don’t think the “mainstream” media has much influence on thought at all.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=q4seLMd_FRo
llater,
llamas
Fraser Orr – a disturbingly high number of people get their view of the world from the mainstream media, both news and entertainment.
It is falling number of people – but it is still, I fear, a very large number – a very large number indeed.
CBS may reform – although I want hard evidence. But ABC and NBC, both owned by “capitalist” corporations, are basically far left agit-prop.
The three largest cities in the United States are governed by vicious criminals, fanatical Collectivists – and this is spreading.
In a few months the Speaker of the House of Representatives may well be someone who, in a sane world, would spend his days in a public park – making insane speeches to no one in particular.
And many judges are just like him – naturally enough as insane doctrines control the schools and universities, including most Law Schools.