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 – the BBC’s dangerous lies Visit BBC Broadcasting House in Central London and you’ll pass a statue of George Orwell accompanied by a quote from an unpublished preface to Animal Farm: “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.” When the statue was erected in 2017, the head of BBC history said it would serve as a reminder of “the value of journalism in holding authority to account”.
If only. The statue isn’t a symbol of the BBC’s journalistic excellence, but a standing reproach for its failure.
– Helen Joyce, in an article called The BBC’s dangerous lies in the print version of The Critic
|
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 dunno. Freedom of speech includes the freedom to cover your ears and chant “La la la la! I can’t HEAR you!” It doesn’t, or shouldn’t, extend to a “duty to listen.”
On the other hand, if Alice is telling Bob something that Bob does want to hear, it’s an infringement on them both for Karen to try to make Alice shut up.
Or, if freedom of speech means anything, it means your right to tell me what they don’t want me to hear.
Imagine going to work every day at the BBC, passing that statue, knowing what it stands for, and then not slitting your wrists when you reach your desk.
I wanna nitpick. “the right to tell people what they do not want to hear”. I don’t agree. it is “right to say what people do not want to hear”. Whether they listen is entirely up to them. Nobody has the right to demand your engagement. Which is especially ironic since the BBC has precisely that right by virtue of their legal right to force people to pay for their microphone regardless of whether they want to hear what the BBC has to say.
It really is a loathsome organization, a horrendous anachronism from a time long past.
How did we go from John, Pete and Val and “get down Shep”, to Pravda and tyranny?
But the BBC are good at giving murderers the amplification, fame, and encouragement they want. Top of the world, Ma!
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cly97ervz1zo
In 2017 the BBC, like the rest of the international establishment, was already committed to censorship and propaganda – crushing dissent and pushing indoctrination.
For them to put up a statue of George Orwell was hypocrisy – and privately, most likely, dark (ironic) humour.
But then George Orwell (Eric Blair) was himself caught in a contradiction – he wanted Freedom of Speech (and other basic liberties), but he also wanted socialism (Collectivism) – he wanted a cat that barked, he wanted water that was dry.
This contradiction could only be resolved in one of two ways – either the establishment could give up their desire for Collectivism, or they could give up their support for Freedom of Speech and other basic liberties.
The establishment, the international establishment, have chosen the second alternative.
Are you being intentionally obtuse?
It is an excellent article. Another bit:
Perry – Helen Joyce’s article may well be in the print version of “The Critic” – but it does not appear to be in the electronic version of the publication, that you have given a link to.
But there were other interesting articles there.
And yes – the BBC does lie, they say things they know to be untrue.
This because truth does not matter to them (or to the international establishment generally) – only the Progressive agenda matters to them.
Of far more import is surely that our Home Secretary lies.
Friday morning declaring the Yom Kippur killer wasn’t known to the police. Friday evening it transpired he was on bail for rape!
@Paul Marks
But then you can make a reasonable argument that we are now all living ‘Nineteen Eighty-Four’. Not perhaps as fiercely in your face as the fictional book, but still.
Censorship and propaganda (see BBC and main stream media)
Official policies at odds with reality – and policies invert without warning
Ministry of Justice
Never ending war with ‘climate change’
Demonisation of free speech
Arbitrary definition of ‘non hate crimes'(wrongthink)
Hmm.
First week of the new Reform government in 2029 the incoming DCMS minister should simply lead a bill to kill the licence fee. No replacement with tax funding. Just let the beeb find its own money however they fucking please – ads, subscriptions, foreign sales, social media, whatever. But zero mandation for you or me. Putting that in the manifesto is worth 2 or 3% in the polls!
The big deal is that the likes of the BBC and The Guardian rail constantly about “miss-informarion” or “fake news” and that a lot of people are taken in by this. What they are really against is anything which isn’t fully compliant to their editorial policies.
The even bigger deal is this seems to work. Every poll I have ever seen has the BBC and the NHS boxing and coxing for #1 spot as “Britain’s most loved institution”. Until this changes and they are seen for what they are nothing changes.
Fortunately, Fraser, that ain’t wholly the case.
I’ve refused to listen and refused to pay for BBC propaganda for the last 20 years (continuously) and closer to 40 years excluding the shortish period of my marriage. Wives do hate the BBC threatograms and goons turning up on the door.
The BBC will get nothing from me.
As others say, the license fee needs to go, because just like USAID, it is providing sustenance to the enemy (the nest of Marxists at the BBC) and we can’t have that.
I don’t think it’s the first thing that needs to be done in a Reform UK administration, but it certainly needs to be done in the first term and it should absolutely be a manifesto commitment.
Take a guess why I mentioned it was in the print version rather than linking to an online article 😀
@Old Jack Tar
Are you being intentionally obtuse?
No, the original quote I objected to contains a common and dangerous misconception about free speech.
Here in the USA recently a late night talk show host, Jimmy Kimmel, was kicked off his show because he said something horrible about Charlie Kirk. The left went nuts accusing the company of censorship, going on and on about free speech.
But this is not censorship, Jimmy Kimmel could continue to say whatever he wanted. He just didn’t have the right to use NBC’s infrastructure to do it. After all, I have things to say but NBC isn’t obliged to let me use their airwaves to say it. Of course with all the public pressure NBC relented and went back on TV because the loudest voices are more important than the sane ones.
However, it is a recent illustration — say what you want, but don’t expect me to pay for you to say it, or, for that matter, listen.
The word “free” means something quite different in the expressions “free speech” and “free beer”.
Meanwhile, on Scarborough beach someone has carved a piece of pure genius, a sand sculpture of ‘1984’ with the British Prime Minister’s face and shoulders forming the ‘8’.
Yes indeed Mr Ed – a fellow Kettering libertarian (yes there are more than one of us in this town) Dave Clemo, drew my attention to the sand sculpture.
Fraser Orr.
As you know – Jimmy Kimmel is back on the air, his “firing” may have been a publicity stunt. He is also a despicable hypocrite as when his “friend for many years” Roseanne Barr was fired, Mr Kimmel put-the-boot-in he SUPPORTED her being fired for saying something the left did not like.
Perry – yes indeed, quite so. By the way the Czech election result is, as you know, complicated – it looks like ANU 2011 will have to form a coalition with the Freedom of and Direct Democracy Party and (also) the Motorists Themselves (a rather interesting new party) to have a majority in the Czech Parliament.
The BBC is vile – but it is no worse than Sky News (Sly News), Channel Four and so on.
Even GB News (the only non leftist television station) stabbed in the back Mark Steyn and other people I rather like – whilst keep, the utterly revolting, Nigel Nelson.
Discovered Joys.
Yes – we are heading that way.
@ Discovered Joys – no offence, but your list left out an absolutely-key practice, to wit
Near-universal video and audio monitoring of the entire populace.
llater,
llamas
llamas.
Presently only in “public places” – which, according to the Collectivists, include business enterprises such as pubs (people will be punished for saying things the left does not approve – even if they are overheard speaking to someone else).
However, there is a large scale movement in the international establishment to monitor and punish people in relation to things they say in their own homes.
@ Paul Marks – surely you don’t expect me to believe that you don’t suspect thst governments, including the UK government AREN’T trying every way they can think of to tap into eg Amazon Alexa? And may have already done so? Who’s to stop them? If I understand UK law correctly, they can already harvest your telephone communications on the say-so a a senior police officer if it’s in connection with alleged “terrorist activity”, but as we already know that so-called “anti-terrorist” measures have already been used to investigate matters such as using the wrong garbage cans, so that supposed protection obviously means nothing. I wouldn’t trust the buggers an inch. Not an inch.
llater,
llamas
llamas – quite so.
I am mentally prepared, at least as prepared as I can be, for arrest and imprisonment.
But other people have families and careers, it is harder for them.
Maybe that’s the last great argument for our 2nd Amendment. We can always go out in a great blaze of glory if it comes down to it! None of this resigned acknowledgement of powerlessness.
Spoken like a true Norseman!
I admit that i would not necessarily choose that route (depends, inter alia, on what food is on offer in prison).
But the fact that others would, is a disincentive to the regime’s henchmen.
Til Valhall!
bobby b – yes my resignation, my lack of any hope or purpose, is not good.
Snorri – if we wind up in the same cell, I apologize for my snoring.
On the matter of the media, including the entertainment media (for the BBC entertainment programmes are Critical Theory Marxist agitprop – not just its news and current affairs programmes) a recent film is instructive.
“One Battle After Another” (2025) is a Hollywood Marxist agitprop film – it is very much “in your face” with its Critical Theory Marxism – there can be no mistaking it.
This film, pushed by Warner Brothers and staring leading names of Hollywood, and its drooling support by all the “mainstream” critics, settles a long debate – namely whether Hollywood, and Corporate Big Business generally, know they are pushing Critical Theory (Frankfurt School) Marxism – or whether they have somehow be conned into pushing doctrines they do not really understand.
No one connected with this film, or who praises it, could be in any doubt of its Critical Theory Marxism. And its smearing of opposition to Marxism as “White Supremacy” “racism” and-so-on.
Hollywood, and, I am sorry to say, much of the rest of Corporate Big Business (the so called “capitalist” Corporations) is pushing Critical Theory Marxism – KNOWING what they are doing.
They are not mistaken – they are evil.
By the way – the film also shows the true agenda of the Open Borders movement – their Marxist agenda. Open Borders libertarians please note.
“McCarthite!” – Senator Joseph McCarthy was not very interested in Hollywood or the media generally – he was interested in pro Marxist traitors in government (such as the “Old China Hands” whose treason handed China to Mao and led to the deaths of tens of millions of human beings, see “Mao: The Untold Story” by Jung Chang and the historical works of Frank Dikotter, something they would have been delighted to do in the United States as well as China) – and Senator McCarthy was correct on this – see “Blacklisted by History” by M. Stanton Evans.
However, if you mean the House UnAmerican Activities Committee (Senator McCarthy was not a member of this House Committee – for a reason I should not need to explain) of Congressman Reece (1st or 2nd District of Tennessee) and others – yes indeed they were correct, Hollywood, even then, contained many Marxists who would have happily murdered many millions of Americans in the effort to create a Communist society.
Such books as “Red Star Over Hollywood” are, sadly, correct.
But now, with such films as “One Battle After Another” the debate is over – Hollywood is no longer making any effort to conceal the evil for which it stands.
I would ask such people as Mr Larry Fink of BlackRock (intertwined with State Street and Vanguard) and, now head of the World Economic Forum, “is this what you stand for Sir?”
If his answer is “no” – then he needs to explain why Blackrock, State Street and Vanguard, which (between them) control most shares in Corporate Big Business (so much for “anti trust” laws and “competition policy”) in Hollywood, and other, corporations, push this agenda – if he does NOT believe in it.
Normally DEI, Sustainable Development Goals, or whatever this Frankfurt School “Critical Theory” Marxism is called, is not very profitable from a financial point of view.
So, again, if you do not believe in Critical Theory Marxism, Mr Fink – why do corporations that your enterprise (and allied enterprises) control the shares of, push it?
Please explain Sir.
The “Woke”, Critical Theory Frankfurt School Marxist, agenda is evil – it seeks to destroy “capitalist” civilization and murder tens of millions of human beings.
This world view dominates the education system and the media – especially the entertainment media.
So, the question for the “managers” of the shares in these corporate entities is as follows – do you support this agenda or do you oppose it? There is no middle ground neutral position on this matter.
Time for you to pick a side – and face the consequences of your choice.
For the Marxists will not allow you to have Henri Saint-Simon Collectivism controlled by the Credit Bubble banks and other Corporate Big Business enterprises – they want to destroy you.
For example, Mr Larry Fink should consider, seriously consider, the attitude the modern left have towards JEWS.
Larry, if a pauper such as myself may be so familiar, they do not care that the Frankfurt School of Marxism (from which Critical Theory, including Critical Race Theory and the various sexual doctrines, comes) was founded by Jews – the modern left do not like Jews, in fact, Larry, they would like to murder you and murder your family.
So why are you supporting them?
Back in the 1960s Progressive minded Jews supported such groups as the Black Panthers.
And the first people the Black Panthers murdered were Jewish merchants in inner city areas, and then they murdered the lady who kindly did their books (oh yes – they had accounts) for them.
After 60 years one would have hoped some understanding had crept into the minds of people such as Mr Larry Fink and Mr Bob Iger – but seemingly “Radical Chic” (as Tom Wolfe called it) is all that matters to them.
By the way – in my youth the Progressives talked endlessly about Rhodesia and South Africa, now they do no mention these places at all – it is as if they want to pretend that these parts of the world do not exist.
“Liberation” has not turned out well.
It will not turn out well in the United States, or elsewhere, either.