When you look at 19th century America or 18th and 16th century Europe, all of a sudden it’ll become clearer that the thing that broke the back of poverty and privilege in developed countries in the past was when property rights came around and destroyed feudal title.
|
|||||
|
I was watching this video about electric cars… …and was struck by this remark by Mark Tinker, discussing driving a Tesla:
Hmmm… Then I had a flash forward a few years into the future… Me: Hello, sorry I am a bit late, but I had a car crash. Friend: oh no, is everyone alright? Me: Not that kind, I just had to pull over and wait for the car to reboot. March 30th, 2015 | 17 comments - (Comments are closed)
 The part I find hilarious is the divestment movement that’s popping up around this law. They’re basically saying that Indianans have done something they find deeply and personally offensive, so the boycotters are going to refuse to do business with them as a result. It sounds like a prima facie argument for the exact bill that they’re opposed to. – Samizdata commenter Alsadius March 30th, 2015 | 11 comments - (Comments are closed)
When I read this:
… I concluded the best way to keep your children safe is to home school them so that they stay as far away as possible, not from GTA, but from power obsessed busybodies like these people. March 30th, 2015 | 17 comments - (Comments are closed)
… and you cannot have freedom of association without freedom of disassociation. Therefore I am perfectly willing to see a non-state owned company decline to do business with me because of my politics, or because of my hippopotamus fetish, or because I tend to wear red trousers. Of course by ‘perfectly willing to see’ I mean ‘that a company is legally permitted to discriminate against me’… I am not suggesting I would be thrilled by it. So is there any reason anyone who cares about liberty should oppose this? Indeed would it not be better if the law just stated it was none of the state’s business who a company chooses not to do business with for any reason, absent any prior or overarching contractual obligation? March 29th, 2015 | 44 comments - (Comments are closed)
This is one of the funniest things I have read in quite some time.
My goodness what timorous fearful little things they are! Not exactly the sort of women who might be up for a spot of defending Kobani with some fellow Marxists then, eh? Truly the western world’s loonie left is vanishing up its own backside. Well should I have the singular misfortune to find myself in a room with these delicate little flowers, I might be moved to make a somewhat different gesture rather than “Jazz Hands” as an alternative to clapping. Think this might ‘trigger some anxieties’?  March 27th, 2015 | 44 comments - (Comments are closed)
Amongst the ten people voted “World’s Top Thinkers” are Russell Brand and Thomas Piketty? Seriously? This must be a truly tenebrous selection of voters! I have occasionally stood in more thoughtful things than those two whist incautiously walking down the street palm surfing for March 26th, 2015 | 31 comments - (Comments are closed)
This is too nightmarish to write about at length, but it suggests yet another upside to taking the human out of the loop: avoiding a CFIT of the worst kind possible. March 26th, 2015 | 31 comments - (Comments are closed)
Chinese government cyber division accused of hacking Google is a very self explanatory headline and I hope this vulnerability will be addressed swiftly. But of course the NSA would never do that. They do not need to when they have FISA courts to rubber stamp any fishing expeditions they wish to carry out. No need to break in when you have a spare set of keys under the doormat any time you want to look around. March 25th, 2015 | 4 comments - (Comments are closed)
I assume Obama Beer makes you fart a lot and tell an endless stream of porkies. March 25th, 2015 | 9 comments - (Comments are closed)
What you will notice is that it is all presented in terms of social conservatives and social liberals. It is about the competing rights of members of religious communities and members of sexual communities. And, depressingly, there isn’t a single even slightly libertarian voice in the debate. Everyone that speaks is (if I may use the word) a statist. My own theory is that the “Troubles” in Northern Ireland that started in the late 1960s have less to do with religion, or even national identity, than they have to do with Northern Ireland’s endemic statism, or, to be precise, with the fact that pretty well everyone in Northern Ireland believes strongly in coercion and in the duty of the state to coerce people into doing what they believe is right – be it banning sex between two blokes, banning people paying for sex, banning people from discriminating against prods, papists or gays, and forcing people to pay for state education and healthcare. – John Mann, commenting here on Samizdata. March 24th, 2015 | 9 comments - (Comments are closed)
When the Kremlin says something like this…
What exactly are people supposed to hear? What I am hearing is…
What reaction are they expecting to overt threats pretty much explicitly saying “if you, as a NATO nation, assist NATO with the deployment of a defensive weapon system within NATO borders, we will point nukes at you!” Might this not be a tad counter-productive when the Russian Troll Army are tirelessly trying to convince assorted useful idiots to push the line that “Russia is no threat to anyone, honest guv!”…? I guess the the Russian ambassador to Denmark did not get the memo 😉 March 22nd, 2015 | 21 comments - (Comments are closed)
|
   |
||||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
|||||