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]
|
Former governor Mitt Romney won the Michigan Primary, and it seems he did it the old fashioned political way, not by showing any leadership or vision, but rather by showering other people’s money at the voters. This earned him the scorn of David Brooks in, of all places, the New York Times. The money quote was pure snark.
His campaign was a reminder of how far corporate Republicans are from free market Republicans. He proposed $20 billion in new federal spending on research. He insisted that Washington had to get fully engaged in restoring the United States automotive industry. “Detroit can only thrive if Washington is an engaged partner,” he said, “not a disinterested observer.” He vowed, “If I’m president of this country, I will roll up my sleeves in the first 100 days I’m in office, and I will personally bring together industry, labor, Congressional and state leaders and together we will develop a plan to rebuild America’s automotive leadership.”
This is how the British Tory party used to speak in the 1970s.
Who should be more ashamed of themselves- Mitt Romney for pandering or Michigan primary voters for swallowing this claptrap?
If only I was a American voter – what wonderful things I would be get for voting for the correct person.
Former Governor Romney has been busy for weeks telling everyone that he will restore “every job” lost in the Michigan Auto industry if they vote him – and not by anything difficult like taking away the government granted power of the United Auto Workers union. No, all that is needed is more taxpayers money for scientific research and ‘Mitt’ Romney’s own management skills if he becomes President. After all there is no basic difference between a business enterprise and the government, so if one can run a business one can “run the country”, right?
Senator Hillary Clinton has added another 150 billion Dollars of government spending on top of the all the other hundreds of billions of Dollars the Senator has already promised – again if only people will vote for her.
And it is only January. What will the candidates be promising by November – eternal life?
Christopher Hitchens recently mentioned a small, if telling example, of how Hillary Clinton fibbed about how she got her first name. It is a small detail, not the sort of thing to necessarily cause my blood pressure to rise dangerously, but it is revealing about what sort of character she is. Rather like Tony Blair claiming to have seen Newcastle FC legend Jackie Milburn, when that would have been an impossible feat, given Blair’s age when he made the claim.
These little details, they get noticed.
Check out this Bloomberg headline. No doubt one of the editors thought this was nicely “ironic”, etc, and I get their point. Even so, I fail to see why a Vegas stripper or waiter is not as able to judge the wisdom of where to put nuclear waste as say, Hillary Clinton.
Ron Paul is the least objectionable Republican. The second-least objectionable Republican is Fred Thompson, and if he were likely to win the nomination I might be persuaded to switch my support. All the ones who are likely to win are indistinguishable from Democrats (and some of them are Democrats on Fire for Jesus which is just all kinds of not a good idea).
– Blogger and serial commenter Joshua
Apparently, the reason Senator Hillary Clinton (New York) won the recent New Hampshire Democratic party US presidential primary was as follows:
No, it appears at this early stage of analysis that the pieces were in place for this win all along, and that the “secret weapon” of the Clinton campaign was their field program to significantly boost turnout with their strongest demographic, single women and women with less than a college degree.
I wonder what we should call “single women and women with less than a college degree”? Not “Soccer Moms” obviously. I have a horrible feeling I know what Chris Rock would call them…
BTW, I note there are no Samizdata category sections for “witchcraft” or “elections”. This might be a case for either or both.
The ballot initiative to end the income tax in Massachusetts has survived the challenges of some of the State’s worst tax whores and will be on the ballot this fall. If you live there, brace yourself for a cacophony of awesomely silly claims. You will soon be hearing the schools will close, your children will grow up to be heroin addicts, your pets will die of Ebola and the Atlantic Ocean will rise and smite thy town should you have the temerity to vote ‘yes’ in spite of the warnings of your betters.
Do you think I am kidding? The Governor of that State has already tried to relate tax repeal and Darfur. I kid you not. According to Jeff Jacoby:
So Governor Deval Patrick is cranking up the rhetoric. He told the Associated Press last week that undoing the income tax is “just a dumb idea” that would utterly devastate Massachusetts.
“Patrick said he has lived in places with no taxes, including the time he spent in Darfur 30 years ago,” AP’s Steve LeBlanc reported. “He says there were also no bridges, no good roads, and no public safety there. ‘Civilization costs something,’ he said. ‘If we could have something for nothing, which is the fiction that has been sold by the right for some time now, then we wouldn’t have a $19 billion upkeep backlog for the roads and bridges.’ “
You have loads of time to tell your friends and neighbors about this Initiative. Get out the vote and give the Statists their head on a platter this November.
Ezra Levant is not someone I had heard of before but I already take my hat off to the man. He has been summoned before a kangaroo court in Alberta to answer for daring to publish the Mohammed Cartoons in 2006.
His opening remarks to the absurdly named ‘Alberta Human Rights Commission’ are, quite simply, pure uncompromising brilliance. Read the whole article yourself as no mere snippet can do them justice.
Update: go to the root Ezra Levant site and watch the videos. Oh. My. God. The man is simply magnificent. Watch and learn. It is a master class in confronting the enemies of liberty. Head on.
I invite people to do what I just did… if you feel Ezra Levant speaks for you too, go to his site and drop your mouse on the button ‘Donate to fight the HRC’ to help defray his legal costs. Put your money where Ezra’s mouth is.
Cato have written about why they are not real keen on Ron Paul and although I pretty much agree with the generality of what causes them such discomfort, I do not actually end up with the same set of conclusions. The money quote for me is:
And now he and his associates have slimed the noble cause of liberty and limited government.
Please, gentlemen, take a deep breath. I realise racism is the cardinal sin of our time and that it carries the automatic penalty of public abomination and auto da fe, followed by burning at the stake (it even gets you banned from commenting at Samizdata, although probably not for the reasons most people think), but the notion that the cause of liberty is inextricably tied up with Ron Paul’s campaign is excessive hyperventilating, both from Ron Paul’s supporters and his detractors.
I never felt he was the dream candidate, just the only one serious about shrinking the size of the state and frankly if he wanted to do that in order to preserve the purity of his precious bodily fluids rather than to increase the general sum of liberty, well so be it, just so long as he really is serious about shrinking the state.
Just as I am (still) quite willing to support him in spite of, rather than because of, his view of foreign affairs as foreign affairs just ain’t the most important issue at the moment in my view, similarly this admitted lapse of judgement by Ron Paul regarding these dismal newsletters does not really change much in my opinion.
He is a politician, for Christ’s sake, what did you expect?
…or should I say Ron Paul. The previous post makes the case against Ron Paul as a champion of the libertarian faction of the US Republican party.
However, I shall be speaking about the US primary system and what Congressman Paul’s campaign means at the Putney Debates tonight. I shall try to get a summary up over the weekend, either on Samizdata or here. The title of my talk is ‘Change at the Top: How the US Election Process Works and What are the Opportunities for Ron Paul?’ Details from here.
I shall also be continuing to cover the US primaries on my election blog.
Although I like a lot of its articles, I have to say I got irritated with some of the intellectual flabbiness of Reason magazine a few months ago and my subscription lapsed. I am also trying to save a bit of money and realise that I have rather lot of subscriptions as it is. The magazine spends too much of its time desperately trying to make libertarianism cool and funky by devoting so much stuff to drugs etc, for my liking; but I do check out its website and I enjoy reading its writers such as Brian Doherty. But something of its old hard edge has gone. Maybe I am just becoming an old git (I am sure readers will agree).
It appears one of its former editors, Virginia Postrel, is none too impressed by the judgement of some the magazine’s writers. This has to hurt:
I do fault my friends at Reason, who are much cooler than I’ll ever be and who, scornful of the earnestness that takes politics seriously, apparently didn’t do their homework before embracing Paul as the latest indicator of libertarian cachet. For starters, they might have asked my old boss Bob Poole about Ron Paul; I remember a board member complaining about Paul’s newsletters back in the early ’90s. Besides, people as cosmopolitan as Nick Gillespie and Matt Welch should be able to detect something awry in Paul’s populist appeals. (Note that by “cosmopolitan” I do not mean “Jewish.” I mean cosmopolitan.) I suspect they did but decided it was more useful to spin things their way than to take Paul’s record and ideas seriously. As for Andrew Sullivan, his political infatuations are not his strong point as a commentator.
The line right at the end about Sullivan is a devastating put-down for being so polite.
According to American Thinker, there is a move afoot to nationalise the ability of people to control the temperatures of their own homes (yes, really!) in, where else, the People’s Republic of California:
What should be controversial in the proposed revisions to Title 24 is the requirement for what is called a “programmable communicating thermostat” or PCT. Every new home and every change to existing homes’ central heating and air conditioning systems will required to be fitted with a PCT beginning next year following the issuance of the revision. Each PCT will be fitted with a “non-removable ” FM receiver that will allow the power authorities to increase your air conditioning temperature setpoint or decrease your heater temperature setpoint to any value they chose. During “price events” those changes are limited to +/- four degrees F and you would be able to manually override the changes. During “emergency events” the new setpoints can be whatever the power authority desires and you would not be able to alter them.
In other words, the temperature of your home will no longer be yours to control. Your desires and needs can and will be overridden by the state of California through its public and private utility organizations. All this is for the common good, of course.
Good grief. Presumably the same logic will be extended into all your household functions. As for the “and you would not be able to alter them”, has the political class’ dislike of so-called ‘assault weapons’ been extended to ban hammers and screwdrivers?
However I must say that American Thinker demonstrates what a big part of the problem is:
Building codes and engineering standards are generally good things.
By which I assume they mean politically derived and state imposed building codes and engineering standards (and if they do not, ignore all that follows). Well guys, all your are doing is reporting on the logical progression of these ‘good things’ that you like so much. Building codes and engineering standards demanded by insurance companies on the other hand are far less likely to have ‘mission creep’ built into the process. American Thinker makes the classic statist mistake of assuming that order can only be imposed by the state regardless of all the evidence to the contrary (or as Bastiat put it, “Paris gets fed” without any central planner). People want and need order. Order is at the core of what civilisation is about. But it makes little sense allowing a monopoly provider of order to decide how best to achieve that. When you do, you end up with shit like this.
(hat tip to Dropsafe)
|
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.
|
