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]
|
I recall reading years ago about ‘rumblings on the reservations’ but the Lakota Indians have finally done it… they have repudiated their treaties with the US federal government and UDI‘ed their asses. Cool. I have to say I am looking forward to seeing what comes next.
I am guessing the response will not involve F-15s or the army but would anyone would anyone who knows what they are talking about (my grasp of Lakota/US politics is a tad weak) care to speculate what will actually happen? Are the Lakota agriculturally self-sufficient? Do the leadership really represent the majority Lakota view? Are they serious or is this a ploy for Federal handouts? I am curious to say the least to hear from anyone who actually understand what the significance (or not) of this move really is.
Rupert Everett is a serviceable actor but he does seem a little confused:
“Hollywood is a place that pretends it’s very liberal but it’s not remotely,” he told The Times. “It’s like Al-Qaeda.” Everett, who is gay, believes that his sexuality has cost him “tons” of leading roles during his career.
Silly man! Because Hollywood is like Al Qaeda, you keep losing out on jobs not because you are a poofter of moderate talent but because you do not have a beard!
Given how Hollywood is famous for stoning adulterers and gays to death, making snuff porn videos of Muslims cutting off the heads of western journalists, forcing women to hide their bodies from view (something Hollywood is particular well known for), prohibiting secular movies (another one of Hollywood’s strong points) and making men wear beards, clearly poor old Rupert is lucky to still be alive.
I am a hawk, no doubt about it. If I am going to be taxed by the state, I would much rather my hard earned money be spent dropping bombs on the lackeys of Slobodan Milosevic (Bill Clinton’s finest hour, without a doubt) and Saddam Hussain, than on corrosive domestic ‘entitlements’ and ever more kleptocratic regulatory statism.
So then along comes Ron Paul, the first US presidential candidate since Ronald Regan with any notion whatsoever that the state is way way way too big. Moreover here comes a person who thinks the only way liberty can be preserved is to take a radical axe to Leviathan’s tentacles and re-establish constitutional limited government. Cool. Very cool, in fact. So do I really really like Ron Paul? Well I like him but less than you might think as some of his remarks are borderline delusional ‘troofer‘ stuff and that does him no credit at all. Is he actually going to win? Probably not but that is not what this article is about (commenters please note). Do I even want him to win? Well that is what this article is about.
He wants a return to constitutional limited government. What’s not to like about that? But then my eye falls on that picture of Murray Rothbard in Ron Paul’s office. I am not a fan of Rothbard even though there is indeed much good stuff in The Ethics of Liberty. Although I think he was correct about a great many things, I also think he was often as intellectually dishonest as Karl Marx and Noam Chomsky and perfectly fits Adriana Lukas’ definition of a barking moonbat: “someone who sacrifices sanity for the sake of consistency”. For Rothbard to have argued that the cold war was a delusion and that the Soviet Union was not really a clear and present danger is so preposterous on so many levels that I am not even going to elaborate why. If you can not figure out that one yourself then this article is not addressed to you. In fact, please stop reading and get lost.
Otherwise, read on… → Continue reading: Ron Paul – so what is a pro-liberty hawk supposed to think?
Henry Porter has written an excellent take down of Jack Straw and Polly Toynbee in the Guardian Online.
The air is clearing now. Each one of us is probably more certain where we stand in the ideological divide that is opening up. Are we for the growth of state power at the expense of individual freedom, or do we believe that our democracy depends on individual freedom and an inviolate system of rights? If you agree with the following propositions you may just find yourself on the opposite side to Straw and Toynbee.
I commend the whole article to you.
I would add is that the air was always pretty clear from our perspective. There was never any doubt to us where the state was headed or what all these laws really meant. Also I would like to point out that there is scant evidence that David Cameron is not quite happy to stand on the same side of the ideological divide as Jack Straw and Polly Toynbee (whom he memorably praised) for as long as the amoral jackanapes thinks it suits his personal career interests.
Also the conflation of democracy with liberty is fallacious but I realise that we have quite a bit of work to do at the axiomatic level to bring that once obvious and widely accepted fact back into the broader intellectual meta-context. The notion that “our democracy depends on individual freedom” strongly implies that freedom should or does serve democracy. I would argue that democracy is not an end in and of itself at all but at best merely a tool by which freedom is pursued by mitigating the power of the state.
Alec Muffet, redoubtable trencherman that he is despite his dainty frame, pointed me at this splendiferous expression of the manifest superiority of western civilisation:
Multi-bird roasts, where different types of bird are stuffed inside a larger one, have become the thing to carve this year – and the more birds involved the better. One of the top-sellers is the Waitrose four-bird roast: guinea fowl, duck and turkey breast stuffed inside a goose. Demand has soared 50 per cent this year – even though each roast costs an eyewatering £200 [about $400 USD].
The surge in popularity may have something to do with TV chef Hugh Fearnley-Whittingstall’s creation of a ten-bird roast on his show two years ago. He stuffed an 18lb turkey with a goose, duck, mallard, guinea fowl, chicken, pheasant, partridge, pigeon and woodcock – producing a remarkable Russian doll-like dish. But now his effort, inspired by recipes dating from Tudor times, has been dwarfed by a behemoth containing no fewer than 48 birds of 12 different species. This massive roast, the proud creation of Devon farmer Anne Petch, weighs almost four stone (more than most airlines’ baggage allowance), costs £665, and has enough meat to serve 125 people.
Magnificent! However after reading the comments attached to this Daily Mail article decrying the practice, I could see my enthusiasm was not shared by all. The best comment and a real contender for the Samizdata Pig’s Head on a Spike Award for Thigh Slapping Hilarity was:
See, it’s because of madness like this that the terrorists hate us
– Marcus, Northampton, UK
The man is either a sage-like wag of the very highest order or a deranged Imam in need of an extended holiday in a certain part of Cuba… and an honourable mention also goes out for:
These graceful animals were alive and living a short while ago. Go veggie this Cristmas and let more of gods creatures experience what you do …Life
– James Mills, Nottingham
Naturally I felt the need to leave one of my own, as indeed you might:
This year for Christmas we are having one of these wonderful multi-birds and I am very much looking forward to it. However after reading some of the comments here, next year we are going to eat a PETA activist stuffed inside a Greenpeace activist stuffed inside a Animal ‘Rights’ activist stuffed inside Gordon Brown’s voluminous carcass (with a non-‘Fair Trade’ apple stuffed into his mouth).
Merry Christmas and God Deliver Us All… from priggish activists of all stripes.
Yummy! Nom nom nom!
Triticale (real name Tom Arnold), a blogger and commenter on more than 250 Samizdata articles, has passed away.
God speed, Good Sir, you were a welcome guest.
Yes, it is true. I am going to go and sign the treaty for the European Constitution on behalf of Belgium.
Now you might well ask yourself, why would Perry de Havilland have the right to sign the EU Treaty (do not worry, I intend to ‘accidently’ tip the ink pot over the foetid thing)? Simple… because clearly anyone can. There are many articles about what El Gordo is going to do and the long running weird protocol spat between Portugal and Belgium over where the treaty must be signed… but that should be academic to Belgium because Belgium still does not have a government, ergo there is no one who can sign on Belgium’s behalf… yet strangely that does not seem to be stopping the former government from doing just that.
If the people who were voted out of office in Belgium months ago can sign the treaty, then why not me too? They have no more right than I do to sign anything on behalf of Belgium. The fact that the Belgian establishment can and have simply banned popular political parties that do not play by the required consensus should indicate that to all intents, Belgium is not a democracy in any meaningful sense. This latest action indicates Belgium is in fact some sort of divine right oligarchy where being a member of the power elite is all the legitimisation you need.
It is gratifying to see mainstream journalists such as Alice Thomson also pointing out what we have been doing here for quite some time: people who vote for the Tory party under Cameron because they are revolted by the legacy of Tony Blair are in fact just voting for more of the same as Cameron and Blair are largely interchangeable.
I met two key Blairite special advisers from 1997 last night, they were as thrilled with the Tories’ progress as they were by recent sightings of Mr Brown’s psychological flaws. One said that Cameron would never treat the garden room girls at Downing Street in the way that Mr Brown does. Another wondered what job Cameron would give Mr Blair when (not if) he becomes Prime Minister.
All too believable.
This YouTube video on the Volokh Conspiracy shows a truly outrageous incident where a policeman in the USA tasers a man who was at no point threatening anyone and who was actually calmly walking away from the policeman. The longer CNN coverage gives more context and makes it more clear to me that this was a completely unjustified use of force.
Yet more proof no state should have a monopoly on the means of violence. The incident is astonishing and at least it does show the value to the public (and without doubt to honest decent policemen) of having all traffic stop incidents videoed.
A Muslim lawyer in Canada is trying to use the profoundly illiberal notion that ‘contempt and hatred’ should be criminal offences (which are by definition ‘thoughtcrimes‘), to silence Mark Steyn for his critical remarks about Islam. Bizarrely, the move to sanction Steyn is being billed as a ‘human rights’ action. That said, I suppose it is indeed a ‘human rights’ action in the perverse sence that the intention is to abridge Steyn’s human right to express his opinions in favour of allowing Islamists to have a veto over anyone printing anything they dislike.
Well, that sort of fascistic behaviour makes me both hold the likes of Faisal Joseph and the Canadian Islamic Congress in utter contempt and to hate them. I suppose I better give my lawyer a heads up then. Or then again, as it is their behaviour which makes me hold them in contempt and hatred, can I sue them for making that happen? Would that actually be any more unreasonable than what they are doing?
Just askin’.
Of course do not kid yourself that thoughtcrimes do not get prosecuted in Britain, or that it is only something Islamofascist lawyers do to us non-believers, because sadly nothing could be further from the truth.
Many of the Samizdatistas attended the Stockholm Network‘s Golden Umbrella Awards last night, an event that was described to me as the ‘Free Market Oscars’. The intention is to encourage the people working in the varied pro-market think-tanks and advocacy groups around the world by acknowledging their contributions to the cause of liberty.
In truth I attended with moderate expectations as I have struggled to say awake through all too many award ceremonies, but was surprised at how well the event was managed and produced and although it may damage my credentials as a cynic, I thoroughly enjoyed myself.
Helen Disney, the Stockholm Network’s CEO, is one of the most focused and appealing people on the free market scene and her team, such as Tim Evans (who as many of you know, also wears a Libertarian Alliance hat), should be congratulated on managing such a great event. The Master (Mistress, surely?) of Ceremonies was Dr. Karen Horn of the Cologne Institute for Economic Research and former economics editor for Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung. She was an outstanding choice, attractive, witty and very engaging, thus setting a wonderful tone for the evening.
The after-dinner speech was delivered by C. Boyden Gray, the imposing US Ambassador to the EU. He is a terrific speaker and I found his less than flattering remarks about the US legal profession most endearing. There was very little to disagree with in his advocacy of reducing limits to free trade and he was frank about how this needs to happen on both sides of the Atlantic.
Another notably good speaker was Ján Čarnogurský, the former Prime Minister of the Slovak Republic. In fact the only speaker who hit the wrong note was Iain Duncan Smith MP, who launched into a defence of his own think-tank, the Centre for Social Justice, although by the time he had finished speaking I still had no idea who he was defending it from or what the hell it actually does.
For details of who won what, see here, but the big winner of the evening was the Bulgarian think tank, the Institute for Market Economics, who walked away with two well deserved prizes. I was also delighted to see the very worthy UK based Taxpayers Alliance come away with an award. The TPA are like a fact-checking ‘urban guerilla’ organisation of thorn-in-the-side activists who have achieved results out of all proportion to the resources at their disposal.
I was quite struck by how young most of the think-tank and activist people in attendance were and that is surely a good thing.
The US Ambassador is an excellent speaker…
…and he towered over everyone! Seen here with Tural Veliyev of the Free Minds Association of Azerbaijan
Karen Horn and Cécile Phillipe, presenting an award to Richard Durana of the Institute of Economic and Social Studies in Slovakia
The delightful Cécile Phillipe, Director of the Molinari Economic Institute
Ján Čarnogurský is also an excellent speaker
Janet Daly is not someone I often agree with but I found little to disagree with last night
No, I am not going to put up any pictures of Iain Duncan Smith speaking
Big Pharma! Eye Catching Dresses!
Not much bloggage today because the Samizdatistas are… otherwise engaged tonight. We are at the Golden Umbrella Awards.
|
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.
|
