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]
|
The Massachusetts people put in an enormous amount of work these last two years. They put their entire personal lives on hold to fight for Liberty. They came within a statistical whisker of forcing the biggest tax abolition in US history that we are aware of. They fought for our Party.
After the dust and confetti settle and the balloons are all popped… there are the bills. Lots of them. It’s not glamorous or exciting. But they must be paid before moving on.
Please consider helping them close out the old so they can move on to the new.
You can visit their tip jar or you can go to one of their web sites and read about it first.
Carla Howell
Michael Cloud
Small Government Initiative
Our teams fight with perhaps a hundredth of the resources of the Left and Right. Do your part to change the equation.
If we have to buy our Liberty back, then so be it.
Whatever else may or may not be said about US Democrats, they are certainly not slow to respond to adverse events. Almost immediately after the mid-term term elections, some of them (grassroots supporters it would appear) set up a ‘message wall’ that gave other disillusioned or frustrated activists an opportunity to, shall we say, let off a little steam. Or possibly suffer a full nuclear meltdown judging from some of the comments.
“BRING BACK THE BLACK PANTHER PARTY AND THE WEATHER UNDERGROUND!!!!!!!!!”
Yes, that’s bound to increase your popularity.
“Now I know what moderate Afghanis must have felt when the Taliban took over!”
They’ll be wearing burqas in Boston before the year is out.
“OVER FIFTY PERCENT OF AMERICANS SUFFER SOME FORM OF MENTAL RETARDATION”
The Democrat campaign slogan for 2004?
“DUBYA’S APPROVAL RATING IS STILL LOWER THAN ADOLF HITLER’S!”
And nowhere near Saddam Hussein’s!
I very much expect that the Democrat leadership is huddled in a smoke-free room somewhere at Democrat HQ trying to figure out why they lost. My advice would be, please see above.
The first time I spotted this in a Fox News article, I assumed it was just a simple error, something done in the rush to get the news up on the web. But after seeing it a second time:
“Some of the shootings occurred in Prince George’s County, Md., in the same town where Muhammad’s ex-wife, Mildred, lived with her sister. Mildred Muhammad had fled there from Washington because she feared her husband would hurt her, according to court documents.”
I have to wonder if it is policy.
I do not believe Mildred ever changed her religion or name. From what I remember of what I have read recently, she has not exactly been on speaking terms with her ex for longer than the time since he changed his name.
Why saddle the poor woman with this horrid association?
Proposition 1, to end the Massachussetts income tax did not pass. Few of us expected it would this first try. But despite massive counter efforts by the entrenched interests, it came damn close:
With 2155 out of 2157 precincts reporting,
881,738 people voted Yes on 1 — 45.4%
1,060,525 people voted No on 1 — 54.6%
Despite a total news black out from the major Boston news outlets, Michael Cloud managed a respectable showing against the very senior “safe seat” incumbent John Kerry:
With 2155 of 2157 precincts reporting,
John F. Kerry (Dem): 1,596,350 – 81%
Michael Cloud (Lib): 368,304 – 19%
Richard Winger, Third Party authority and Editor of Ballot Access News, said the following: “This was the best U.S. Senate result for a Libertarian in Party history, and the best by any nationally organized Third Party candidate in a U.S. Senate race since 1932.”
Carla Howell only managed 1% on the hotly contested governor race between two indistinguishable candidates. Insiders feel she sacrificed her own campaign to push Proposition 1 ahead at every opportunity.
All of this was done in campaign efforts outspent by factors of 100 to 1 and higher by candidates whose campaigns were partially State funded.
“You done good”, guys. Or as Ms O’Hare said, “Tomorrow is another day.”
Paul Marks puts on his kevlar battle-bowler and sticks his head above the ramparts to criticize the Libertarian Party for its role in… helping statism!  Now duck, Paul!
Both the proposition to legalise the growing of hemp (rather than importing hemp products from Canada) and the proposition to put ‘jury nullification’ (i.e. returning to the traditional practice of juries judging both fact and LAW) into the South Dakota Constitution have voted down.
One of the main reasons these propositions were voted down seems to be that they were associated with the Libertarian Party (which is seen, rightly or wrongly, to be a bunch of freaks).
The Republicans have failed to gain the South Dakota seat by 500 votes.
And the Libertarian Party (with its normal 1 percent or so of the vote) has cost the Republican party the Governorships of Alabama and Tennessee.
This will mean (for example) that Tennessee will now get a State Income Tax (the Republican was a very good man – utterly opposed to a State income tax).
True the L.P. failed to prevent the Republicans retaking the Senate (despite a very big effort to defeat a good man in New Hampshire – Sununu managed to beat the Democrats and their de facto allies the Libertarian Party).
However, this can go on. The Libertarian Party people must understand that their work simply helps expand government (see the Tennessee example above). If Libertarian Party people do not think that the Republican party is free market enough (and I agree with them that the Republican Party is not free market enough) then they should join the “Republican Liberty Caucus” and make the Republican party more free market. If the Republicans had backed the two pro-freedom propositions in South Dakota they might well have passed.
The energy of Libertarian Party activists is helping statism. The Libertarian Party takes just enough votes to cost the Republicans close elections and the statement “the Libertarian Party backs X proposition” is enough to defeat that proposition.
This is madness, please stop it.
Paul Marks
When Generalissimo de Havilland introduced the ‘comments’ facility on this site, I made a promise to myself that I would never tailor any of my articles to pander to the likely responses that such a facility makes possible. It is a good rule; sort of ‘publish and be damned’ only without the regency swagger.
However, I intend to make an exception in this post and this post only because I know that what I am about to say will attract a whole raft of predictable admonishments from those you of with a Phd in ‘Stating the Obvious’. So here is an FAQs section which I strongly recommend you read and absorb before proceeding further.
- Yes, I know that the Republicans are not libertarians.
- Yes, I realise that Republican policies can be just as damaging to liberty as Democrat ones.
- Yes, I know there are some good Democrats
- Yes, I am quite sure that the Homeland Defence Department will prove to be every bit as sinister as it sounds.
- I am generally indifferent to political parties
- Yes, I am still a libertarian.
That said, there are many things in this life which bring me untold pleasure: the love of my family, the affections of a good woman, watching Chelsea win the FA Cup, a stimulating evening with close friends and a large rump steak with English mustard are all among them.
But, last night, I would merrily have swapped all of those in return for the intoxicating, enervating, memorable, boundless joy of watching the American socialists get shoved through the electoral meat-grinder and turned into hapless, hopeless, abject little patties of self-pity and recrimination.
As the results flooded through in the wee early hours, I squealed with shameless glee, I punched the air in triumph and I even managed to earn a complaint from my downstairs neighbour after waking her up at 5.30 in the morning by marching around the lounge to the lockstep of ‘Semper Fidelis’ blaring from my CD player. Yes, I got that carried away.
I laughed, LAUGHED like a drunken buccaneer at the sight of the BBC newsanchor announcing the Republican victory, looking as if she had just been f*cked with a dead cat. It was more than celebration, it was revenge. I love the smell of the BBC being napalmed in the morning.
As you may already have guessed, I have temporarily suspended my animus towards parties of state because as someone (I can’t remember who) once said it isn’t always a choice between the good and the bad; sometimes its a choice between the bad and the even worse. Well, in my book, the socialists come under the category of ‘even worse’, so I’ll throw whatever muscle I have behind the other guys, though they may be merely ‘bad’. If I was an American, then the Republicans are not what I would want, but what I want (what I really, really want) is simply not on the table, so I’d take the best I can get.
So, thank you President Bush for making this Englishman very happy. Your country is the engine of Western civilisation and, right now, whatever else it may or may not be, it is not in the hands of the left.
On any reading, that is profoundly good news, and I am not so proud that I cannot jump down from that lofty fence, wipe the splinters from my raddled posterior, and give credit where it is so richly due.
While on one level it made little difference to me (someone as LP as a coalminer was Comm… er… Labour) which of the other American parties won seats, I must admit to some glee at watching the effect of Republican victory on UK correspondents. They are visibly shaken by the implications and I thought it great fun.
Channel 4 News had Michael Moore on for the Democrats and Laura Ingraham for the Republicans. She did rather well, but Mr. Moore had the last word:
“No wonder they win, they look better than us.”
I wonder what would have happened if such a really harmless joke had come from the lips of a liberal or a conservative rather than a Leftist?
Political Correctness is not a matter of what is said; it is a matter of who says it. The annointed are “allowed” freedoms of speech unavailable to the hoi polloi. Had it been myself on ITV news, making the same remark, I would be pilloried for it.
Do not get me wrong: I am not castigating Michael Moore for this remark. I am merely pointing out there is an inherent asymmetry and illogic to the Left’s position on Freedom of Speech. The fact is, I agree with Michael Moore. Laura Ingraham is better looking than he is.
Smarter too.
Election day is upon us and those of you who live in Taxachussetts have an incredible opportunity: YOU can end your State Income Tax and keep your hard earned $3000 a year out of the greedy and wasteful hands of the crooks who govern you.
Vote YES on Proposition 1 to end the Massachusetts income tax.
If you have found the two turkeys the Democrats and the Republicans are running for Governor simply too much alike and too much to stomach: VOTE YES for Carla Howell.
You might even consider voting straight Libertarian, but whatever you do:
Get yo’ ass out there and VOTE YES on Proposition One!!!!
Out of sheer horrid fascination I dip into Bartcop from time to time, and look what I found just now on the Forum:
“Why don’t we send letters to the BBC begging them to expand here? At the worst, the other nets will get word of our actions. At the best, the BBC considers it, seriously. We can coordinate this action after the election.”
Well, well, well. It seems that American socialists just love the BBC. I wonder why?
So now we will see another test of George Bush’s very shaky Free Trader credentials. He rightly wants Latin America to open up its markets to mutually enriching capitalism via the Free Trade Area of Americas (FTAA) agreements… but will the USA do the same for its markets?
In order to make FTAA worthwhile, Brazil has demanded the United States open its fiercely protected sugar, steel and citrus markets to freer competition.
Analysts agree that without Brazil there will be no FTAA, and it is unclear how quickly Washington can lower key tariffs.
It amazes me how so many US Republicans who cursed every breath taken by Bill Clinton, damning him quite rightly as an unprincipled political weathervane, nevertheless just gloss over George Bush’s dismal record on liberalising world trade. Why is allowing the state to interfere in markets so as to make products such as sugar, lumber, steel and fruit more expensive to American consumers and industry just shrugged off?
The need for political support from key states, you say? Ah, I see. So you mean George Bush is just an unprincipled political weathervane, then. Gotcha.
It is not often that I pass comment upon US partisan politics. Yes I have, in the past, railed against American socialists who insist on referring to themselves as ‘liberals’, but, that aside, I tend to avoid analysis of the political battleground in the US if only because our American contributors are so much better disposed to do that than I am or ever could be.
However, once in a while I am prepared to set aside my customary reluctance and grasp that big, American bull by the horns.
On my travels around cyber-space, I happened upon a website called ‘Bartcop’. I have no idea who Mr.Bartcop is, but he is clearly a socialist and a very long way from being anything even resembling a happy man.
Mr.Bartcop also hosts a forum wherein those of a similar disposition are invited to share their thoughts and views and where I found this woefully pathetic thread.
Of course, this may not be representative of the American left in general; merely a reflection of the company that Mr.Bartcop likes to keep. But, if it is a fair cross-section, then I suggest that US Republicans have very little to worry about in the foreseeable future because these people are going, quite literally, out of their minds.
|
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.
|
