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]

XML

noun. XML is a web language used for (amongst other things) syndication formats used on blogs. Acronym for eXtensible Markup Language

Progblog

noun. A ‘Progressive Weblog’. A blog expressing various left wing political views.

(coined by Madeleine Begun)

Thread

noun. A series of remarks posted by people in a public comment section of a blog that follow a conversational and topic related sequence.

Whilst used on blogs to describe related comments under a single blog article, this term is more specifically and accurately associated with on-line forums, many of which use a ‘threaded’ format that indents related digressions from the main ‘conversation’ in a branching manner, making it more clear to which previous comment a person it replying. Although some blog-forum hybrids also use this ‘threaded’ format within their public comments section, the term is more commonly associated with forums rather than blogs.

usage: “A blog article by Mike over on Cold Fury has sparked off an interesting thread with people arguing about the merits of private firearms ownership”

Flame

verb. To ‘flame’ someone is to make a hostile intemperate remark, usually of a personal nature. Also see: Flame War

Usage: “Andrew has seriously flamed Brian over his views on abortion again”

Flame war

noun. A hostile exchange of views via the Internet characterised by highly intemperate language.

(This term is by no means exclusive to blogs and is found in wide use throughout the Internet)

Clog Blog

noun. A Dutch language blog.

Arrrrrrrgggggggg…

Due to a DNS/IP cock up, we have been off the air for a while… a shout goes out to the support staff at Hosting Matters for solving the problem with lightning speed when I actually told them what they needed to know.

Hosting Matters are simply the best, so give them your spondulies and host your site with them!

They rock

‘Free speech’ means that people will say things you do not want to hear

… and that includes making music, creating pictures, writing verse, shooting films and producing computer games that annoy the crap out of other people.

An attempt by the usual ‘guardians of morality’ to regulate the nature of computer games in a way that would never be tolerated for the written word has been defeated in a US court.

“If the First Amendment is versatile enough to “shield the paintings of Jackson Pollock, music of Arthur Schoenberg, or Jabberwocky verse of Lewis Carroll”, we see no reason why the pictures, graphic design, concept art, sounds, music, stories, and narrative present in video games are not entitled to a similar protection. The mere fact that they appear in a novel medium is of no legal consequence.”

Score one for the good guys! Now let me fire up my copy of Grand Theft Auto… I feel like running over a few hapless pedestrians.

The full ruling can be found here [pdf file].

Have you ever noticed…

Hint: it is not about health and safety…
at least not your health and safety

Big Media on Blogging

John Naughton has written an article about blogging and much to my surprise, he avoids all the usual Big Media whinging.

In fact, when it comes to many topics in which I have a professional interest, I would sooner pay attention to particular blogs than to anything published in Big Media – including the venerable New York Times. This is not necessarily because journalists are idiots; it’s just that serious subjects are complicated and hacks have neither the training nor the time to reach a sophisticated understanding of them – which is why much journalistic coverage is inevitably superficial and often misleading, and why so many blogs are thoughtful and accurate by comparison.

Third, there is the problem – not often touched upon in the New York Times, by the way – that many controversial public issues are ignored by Big Media for the simple reason that the ideological and commercial interests of their proprietors preclude it.

Read the whole article, it is good stuff!

The Tory Party is not a pro-liberty party

Sadly none of Britain’s mainstream political parties are, they just vary (slightly) in who they want to benefit from their regulation of civil society. When it comes from choosing amongst which tribal faction of statists will regulate your life, we are spoilt for choice.

So next time you have an earnest young Tory hopeful turn up on your doorstep asking for your vote and pledging to save you from those beastly Labour socialists, ask him where his party stands on the issue of ID cards, which will naturally start off as ‘National Health Benefit Cards’ and then very quickly become mandatory for pretty much anything you try to do, such as open a bank account or rent an apartment.

And then look ‘earnest young Tory’ in the eye, explain why his party is part of the problem rather than part of the solution and then tell him to fuck off. A choice between a party which brought us Michael ‘a touch of the night’ Howard and one which has brought us David ‘RIP’ Blunket is no choice at all. But if you cannot bring yourself to resist the syren call to the ballot box, vote UKIP.

The British Government caught red-handed

Former Italian prime minister Lamberto Dini, one of the people drawing up the new European Constitution on the EU Convention on the Future of Europe, has flatly and explicitly contradicted British ministers who claimed that the new constitution is only a ‘tidying up exercise’.

Anyone in Britain who claims the constitution will not change things is trying to sweeten the pill for those who don’t want to see a bigger role for Europe

If this constitution is adopted by Britain, control of much of how the state intrudes into society will be placed in a power centre far more remote and less amenable to the British public’s democratic influence politically. It is nothing less than the wholesale disenfranchisement of Britain, talking a moderately effective democratic system of accountability (albeit a long decaying one) and replacing it with European-wide ‘democracy’ that in fact places vastly more power in remote bureaucracies.

Although I never doubted that Tony Blair was simply lying through his teeth, can anyone now doubt that what the Labour government is saying is intentional falsehood pertaining to altering the most fundamental underpinning structure of the British state?

If the Tory opposition was capable of rational analysis, they would start realising that Blair has torn up the rule book and soon rolling back the tide of statism will simply be beyond the legal power of British politicians. If the Conservative Leader was to stand up in Parliament and say “a future Tory government will simply abrogate this constitution on Day One and repatriate democratic accountability to the British people”, then there might be some grounds for thinking they had actually decided not to just be Labour Party Lite as they blather on about ‘good public services’ and tolerate the likes of Chris Patten in amongst their numbers.

What I find so exasperating is the Tory’s refusal to think outside the box. Will they just meekly accept that once the primacy of the EU is complete, they will just have to adapt into their allotted role as a European style ‘Christian Democrat’ Party of the statist centre in return for a place for their snouts at the Euro-trough? Perhaps so. The Conservative Party is a noxious organisation so I cannot say I am surprised, but unless they quickly rediscover their radical roots, Britain as a self-governing entity is finished regardless of the lies to the contrary (just see the remarks of our honest enemy Lamberto Dini).

Unlike most of continental Europe, there is a significant anti-statist element in the mainstream of British society… I don’t mean people like me, who are essentially out on the ‘lunatic fringe’, but the sort of people who Maggie Thatcher tapped into in her excitingly radical but maddeningly inconsistent way. Once this swathe of society finally realises that they no longer have any meaningful outlet for their political aspirations, I wonder if they will just be content to shrug and surrender to the Europe wide majority who favour regulatory top-down statism? I think not.

The Labour Party and all who support Euro-wide statism have seen the way to put all the bits about the role of the state they value beyond British politics: their vision of regulatory statism is about to be locked in and in future, politics will just be about factional pleading for a share of the monies appropriated from the remaining productive sections of the economy. The only antidote to this is for anti-EU politicians to simply refuse to cooperate. The Tory Party would be more useful if they simply walked out of Parliament and declined to return unless the constitution is completely gutted (which of course will never happen). After all, so what if Labour used that opportunity to pass all manner of nasty laws? They have such a large majority they can do that anyway and so it is only by radical action that the Tories can de-legitimise what is being done… i.e. by provoking a constitutional crisis because we are bloody well in one already!

2. The Member States shall facilitate the achievement of the Union’s tasks and refrain from any measure which could jeopardise the attainment of the objectives set out in the Constitution.

If anti-EU activists ever manage to start mounting effective resistance to the EU and actually undermining its authority, do you seriously doubt that laws suppressing what we say and do will not follow?