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 very worthy folks of the Free State Project are holding an event in June in New Hampshire to highlight their work and maybe attract some more supporters.
[PorcFest 2008] is the FSP annual event as an out reach to those that are interested in migrating to promote Liberty and Freedom. We are trying to get the message out to a larger population that there will be a gathering of Liberty Activist coming together from anarchists to those working within the system meet and make the migration.
If you are interested in supporting the FSP and becoming a ‘porcupine’, check it out!
As many of our readers already know, Carla Howell succeeded in collecting a sufficient number of signatures for her ballot initiative to end the Massachusetts income tax. There may be further legal challenges but it will almost certainly be on the ballot this year. With polls showing a dead heat between yes and no voters the inappropriately named “Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation” is already preparing its defense of high taxes.
Although the core battle is months away, politicians are already hitting back. Can you guess which party this statement came from?
“I personally understand why someone would vote for it out of
frustration that Beacon Hill has not been doing its job for quite a
few years now,” says Torkildsen, a former congressman. “A lot of
people on Beacon Hill start the argument with how much money would
they like to spend,” he says. “A better starting point is, ‘What’s an
appropriate level for people to pay?’ and then ‘What’s the most
economical way for the public officials to use that money?'”
It was from Peter Torkildsen, the Republican state party chairman of Massachusetts.
And you wondered why libertarians do not flock to the Republican Party?
The correct answers to Torkildsen’s quiz are: “Zero” and “Leave it with the honest folk who earned it”.
I am live-blogging the primaries over at my election blog. My prediction: the Hildebeast will not die. This is good for John McCain as the chances of more dirt getting dug up and thrown at the two Democrats is getting ever greater.
Also, the obvious ticket of a year ago: Clinton/Obama or even Obama/Clinton, looks somewhat hard to pull off now.
The fine folks on The Line is Here (subtext: an anti-nanny state collective) have started something called the Picador Project which may be of interest to our USA based readers.
The Picador Project was started in order to combat what many of us see as a root problem underlying the pernicious rise of the nanny-state mentality in our society. Namely, that too many people believe they are entitled to gifts from the government, coupled with a government all too willing to hand those gifts over in return for a few basic human freedoms and a monopoly on “truth.” This sort of trouble being a perennial consequence of basic human nature, utopian schemes of running off and starting over are never the ultimate solution. Thus, if we want to preserve our way of life, we have to face these troubles here at home and conquer them.
Check it out.
There is an interesting article on Martin Kramer’s Sandbox blog about Obama adviser Samantha Power. The article points out the extraordinarily daft 2002 foreign policy suggestions made by her and Michael Ignatieff (who I have met a couple times… nice enough for a total Guardianista) in which she urges US military intervention against Israel on behalf of the Palestinians. But in the quoted part of her problematic remarks…
Unfortunately, imposition of a solution on unwilling parties is dreadful. It’s a terrible thing to do, it’s fundamentally undemocratic. But, sadly, we don’t just have a democracy here either, we have a liberal democracy. There are certain sets of principles that guide our policy, or that are meant to, anyway. It’s essential that some set of principles becomes the benchmark, rather than a deference to [leaders] who are fundamentally politically destined to destroy the lives of their own people.
… the real ‘money quote’ for me is not the bizarre notion of (in effect) going to war with Israel, it is “But, sadly, we don’t just have a democracy here either, we have a liberal democracy. There are certain sets of principles that guide our policy, or that are meant to, anyway.”
Her remark is a pretty clear cut rejection of the US Constitutional Republic in favour of unrestrained democracy. That is of course clearly what Obama thinks as well and why he will not allow the Second Amendment to get in the way of what he wants. So it is hardly surprising that he chooses an advisor who shares his opinion that constitutional limits on democratic politics are something to be sad about. It is also something that needs to be pointed out loudly and often by people who think limits on what the state can do are a very good idea indeed. At least Samantha Powers is somewhat honest about the fact she feels the US Bill of Rights is a regrettable limitation on untrammelled democratic politics. I wonder how many politicians would be so candid?
William H. Stoddard of San Diego, California has some interesting commentary on the state of the debate between Clinton and Obama on what they want for US health care policy
Health care policy is a major issue in the Democratic Party’s choice of a presidential candidate. The final debate between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, in Ohio, spent a reported 15 minutes on it. Yet the mainstream news media in the United States consistently report that there are only very minor differences between the positions of the two candidates. Given this, the argument looks like little more than semantic quibbling over the meaning of the word “universal,” all too typical of Clinton’s struggle to contest Obama’s unexpected rivalry for the nomination.
But the mainstream news media have it wrong. There is, in fact, a vitally important difference between the two positions, though one that their worldview makes them ill equipped to recognize. The difference is that Clinton would compel everyone to purchase health insurance; Obama would not. The standard label for this difference in health policy debates is “mandate,” for what Clinton wants.
Clinton has been evasive about exactly how she would compel the purchase of insurance – which is not surprising, as talking about punishing voters is not a good selling point in an election. The state of Massachusetts, which has a mandate, imposes fines on adults who do not have health insurance. Clinton has not talked about fines, but has suggested garnishing wages or making enrollment compulsory on admission to any hospital.
Of course, Clinton promises to make health insurance affordable to everyone, through subsidies and through massive new regulation of the insurance industry. So does Obama. But what if their plans do not work out? Under Obama’s plan, adults who thought even subsidized health insurance cost more than they could pay would remain uninsured, and at least be no worse off. Under Clinton’s plan, they would be forced to sign up, or penalized for not doing so – and either way they would be hurt. And given that Clinton predicts that fifteen million Americans would remain uncovered under Obama’s voluntary plan, it seems that she anticipates that fifteen million people would have to be hurt financially to make her plan viable – or, perhaps, simply to justify her in calling it “universal.” → Continue reading: Health care, class conflict, and the Democratic Party
John McCain has called himself a ‘liberal Republican‘.
In other news today, Maria Sharapova called herself a ‘tennis player’, Nicolas Sarkozy called himself ‘President of France’, Natalie Portman said she was interested in Scarlett Johansson’s breasts and Terry Pratchett called himself ‘an author’.
Dr. Murray Sabrin is running for the United States Senate in New Jersey and reportedly has devoted his career to promoting limited government and personal freedom.
There will be an online fund raising event today (February 29) and Dr Sabrin hopes to raise $1.5M by getting 15,000 Americans to pledge a minimum of $100 each. If he succeeds, he will be the favorite to win the U.S. Senate seat against Frank Lautenberg.
I do not personally know much about him but we can certainly do with all the real constitutionalists in DC that we can get.
There is a depressing article at Reason magazine about the protectionist instincts of both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. What the article does not tell us about much is whether McCain is much better (I honestly do not know, so I welcome comments about his voting record). And of course George W. Bush hardly made friends with Britain by slapping tariffs on steel imports – which also hurt American manufacturers and builders (but they lacked powerful friends in Congress). America is the largest economy in the world and despite what some of the more starry-eyed writers on China or the other ‘Brics’ might claim, is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future.
Basically, America matters. If the country goes down a more protectionist path, it will hit the world economy in general. For all his many flaws, Bill Clinton’s signing of the NAFTA Treaty – admittedly when Congress was in Republican hands – was one of the few major achievements of his time in power. It has helped to fuel the ascent of the world economy, lifting millions into higher living standards: if any fans of trade restrictions out there want to contest that assertion, let them provide figures. Here are some official US ones that give some pretty punchy numbers.
As the title says, I wish they could all lose. I have had it with the media guff about how a McCain-Obama contest will somehow elevate American politics and ‘restore’ its image in the eyes of the world. What is the point of winning image points among the Guardian-reading classes if you pull a rug under the world’s economy through greater trade restrictions? How is that going to help America’s ‘image’, assuming that Americans could or should give a flying **** what people think of them in the first place?
One of the most important writers and intellectuals of America, William F. Buckley, has died. I did not agree with all of his views, but it would be churlish and extreme bad manners not to acknowledge his enormous influence in the fightback against what was, when he started out, the entrenched Big Government views of the US. He was, by all accounts, a most civilised, friendly and good man. As they say, he left the world a better place. He is one of those American intellectual and political figures, like Barry Goldwater, whom I regard, warts and all, as heroes.
May he rest in peace. My condolences to his friends and loved ones.
It seems John McCain, of McCain-Feingold fame and little else, has been hoist on his own petard and run afoul of the anti-democratic, anti-free-speech and anti-liberty FEC regulations.
This could not happen to a more deserving individual.
You have nothing to lose but your place at the trough and a whole world to win!
One non-conservative Big Government Republican (George Bush Sr.) praising the ‘conservative’ credentials of another non-conservative Big Government Republican (John McCain). I assume I am not the only finding this more than a little absurd. These guys are not ‘neo-cons’, they are ‘non-cons’.
|
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.
|
