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 British newspapers are agog at rape allegations inside the Royal Household.
Yawn.
The British state daily rapes million of people of billions of pounds to pay for ‘services’ that fail to deliver whilst blighting the economy and distorting civil society… yet the idiot media concentrates of the trivial antics of House of Windsor, who are little more than a bunch of national tourist attractions who at least generate more money than they cost the hapless taxpayer. Now that is the true scandal, not who might or might not have buggered whom in some drafty palace.
A leading Tory moderniser warned that the party had to be completely transformed and must be ready to give up “some of the things we hold dear” if it was ever to win power again.
Could he possibly mean giving up its statist attitude and blinkered view of reality? Has the Tory Party seen light at the end of the tunnel? No, Archie Norman, a close ally of Michael Portillo once seen as a Thatcherite Tory leader hopeful, called for tax rises to pay for improved public services.
Not only are the views of Mr Norman, a direct challenge to Ian Duncan Smith’s policy (shock! horror!) but tax rises?! To fund public services?! There is light at the end of the tunnel but, alas, it is an on-coming train…
It is morbid fun watching the Conservative party stumble into oblivion. Meanwhile, Labour, given its own problems, must regard it as a blessing rather than political opposition.
There is more information here. It leaves you with a certain level of… uncertainty. Like “why was he writing a draft statement that said this in the first place?”
Time passes….
I’ve now read the original statement by Blunkett and am left wondering who hyped this whole thing into silliness. There does not seem to be any warning of imminent attack, only a general warning of what we all know already: we’re a target and the enemy is utterly ruthless.
Following Home Secretary David Blunkett‘s confused apocalyptic warning yesterday about the threat of an Al Qaeda attack on the UK, which was then quickly retracted, earlier today on News Direct 97.3 FM radio, I caught a fragment of some UK government warning about a “credible threat of an attack against London” and “poison gas” was mentioned. However I have not heard a blessed thing since then. Is this something new? Is it a retraction of yesterday’s retraction? Did any one else hear more of this and get any details?
Is it just a coincidence that there has been an astonishing number of military helicopters (mostly Pumas and a couple Chinooks) flying over my house throughout the day?
Hmmmm.
The Gibraltar government called a referendum and Gibraltarians have turned out in force to vote in a referendum that is expected to overwhelmingly reject attempts by Britain and Spain to negotiate joint sovereignty over the British colony. Here are just a few things that caught my attention:
- Both London and Madrid say the referendum carries no legal weight. I know, I know, legal is far from democratic, let alone commonsensical but are they not even going to pay lip service to the wishes of the governed population?
- A party atmosphere prevailed in Gibraltar, where streets were decorated with red and white pennants and many houses flew Britain’s Union Jack or the Gibraltar flag. One man walked down the street wearing a “Proud to be British” tee-shirt. Yeah, that’s how you can tell it wasn’t in Britain…
- There is no official “yes” campaign. The overwhelming sentiment of campaign posters and of people ready to give their opinion was a rejection of joint sovereignty. What are the chances of replicating this in the UK with a rejection of abrogating our sovereignty to the EU?
Gibraltarians say they have been British since the 18th century and culturally are not Spanish nor do they want to be. They also believe they are better off economically as a British colony than they would be if they joined Spain. (Spain ceded Gibraltar to Britain under the 1713 Treaty of Utrecht, but has been attempting to recover it ever since.)
At least the Gibraltarians seem to know what is at stake in their referendum…
Rowan Williams, the next Archbishop of Canterbury, has stated that it is more important to “maintain the society of states” than to depose a murderous dictator, namely Saddam Hussain.
Now if Williams was of the opinion that Saddam Hussain was just the victim of western calumny and he was in fact the generous benefactor of the Iraqi people, then it would be quite understandable that he would oppose starting (or more accurately, completing) a war with the object of deposing him and crushing Ba’athist Socialism.
Yet that is not the case: Williams describes Saddam Hussain as “brutal and violent” and yet still takes the view that the stability of those collective edifices called ‘states’ is more important that the right of Iraqi civilians not to be murdered in order to ensure the supremacy of the Ba’athist Party.
Here is a man who, as an Anglican Archbishop, is presumably concerned not with geopolitics but with Christian morality and yet takes the view that the political stability of the Islamic world’s sundry despotisms matters more ending the nightmare of the 23 million people who live or die at Saddam Hussain’s whim. The fact Hussain is “brutal and violent” matters less than the needs of Realpolitik.
This is exactly where collectivism can lead even an Archbishop, because morality and collectivism are antithetical.
Not only has monitoring the real level of crime in the UK failed but the deterrence value of the law grows weaker by the day.
The main reason that a burglar has a one in five hundred chance of spending three months or more in prison is the “efforts” of the Crown Prosecution Service. I have often thought that if one were to burn all the graduates of the Ecole Normale de l’Administration, that the Gross National Product of France would rocket. In the case of the Crown Prosecution Service, its staff are too soggy to serve as fuel. However, the removal of that bunch of hopeless failed lawyers (think about it) from the gene pool would doubtless lead to a drop in crime.
The bungling over the prosecution of Paul Burrell last week is a case in point. Let’s not forget either that these are the people who prosecute shopkeepers for selling a pound of bananas to someone who asks for them and who decide that Tony Martin is a criminal.
Remember, remember, the fifth of November,
Gunpowder, treason and plot,
I see no reason,
why gunpowder treason,
should ever be forgot!
– Traditional English, sung on 5th November.
I wonder if in the future, the ‘Guy’ burnt in effigy on the bonfires around Britain on the 5th November will be known by the name of other more recent traitors, as a ‘Chris’ or a ‘Ted’1 rather than a ‘Guy’.
Rest in peace, Guy Fawkes… the only honest man to ever enter Parliament.
Eurosceptic views are not a new thing in Britain
1 = Thanks to Patrick Crozier for the link
I didn’t think it would happen quite this quickly but it does appear as if the much-predicted disintegration of the British Conservative Party is now well and truly underway.
It has been brewing for a while. The party is riven with squabbling factions such as traditionalists versus modernisers, pro and anti-EU, liberal versus authoritarian and mercantilist versus free marketeers. No party can long survive, let alone thrive, the eruption of that many running sores. Had they had the benefit of a leader strong enough to unite them (in the way that Tony Blair has managed to stamp his authority on the equally fractious Labour Party) then they may have pulled off a revival-trick but I was not alone in believing that Iain Duncan Smith was not that leader. And so it has proved.
On the face of it, the crisis issue (whether to allow non-married couples to adopt) hardly qualifies as the kind of major rock on which political ships could be expected to flounder. More likely, it has been siezed upon by a posse of the discontented as the means of launching an ‘intifada’.
It is always possible that the Tories will pull off some sort of miracle and survive as a major political party of state but I am doubtful for they are not just batting against an unassailable Blair or their own brittle consensus; they are also the first high-profile victims of the radically changing political fabric of Britain and the increasing disconnect between the public and established politics.
So, I think the end is near for the Tories as we have known them and that leaves New Labour in the role of ‘the establishment’ to be challenged.
But, by who or what? That’s the real question.
I don’t often base my postings on comments but this one in conjuction with yesterday news was asking for it. A comment on the famous ‘1984 Poster’ article left by lawyer Martin Pratt goaded us:
Oh, and street crime in London is down 30% from last year. Don’t see you rushing to post anything about that.
One reason for responding to Mr Pratt’s otherwise unremarkable comments is that he claims to have worked for the Crown Prosecution Service (the UK equivalent of Office of the District Attorney). I suppose that was to give him an air of authority or at least credibility when venting his frustration with Samizdata and the posting. It didn’t work then and certainly not after reading about a report that confirmed what everyone in Britain apart from former CPS lawyers has known for quite some time – the crime is rising and the massaged official statistics are plainly wrong!
The report, compiled by the think-tank Civitas and based on Home Office research, much of which is unpublished, discloses that the official total severely underestimates the real level of crime. The last survey showed about 13 million offences a year. The true level of crime is four times higher than official figures have previously shown with more than 60 million offences committed each year in Britain.
David Green, the author of the report, identifies the underlying problem:
…many, if not all, statistical reports are still being submitted to ministers for approval of their content and the timing of their release. In an open society, there is no justification for the involvement of party politicians in regulating public access to information. Inevitably they use their control of the flow of facts to gain advantage over their opponents.
The intriguing bit about it is the note at the end of the report: Civitas wishes to record its thanks to the Home Office for checking and confirming the accuracy of the comparisons between the BCS and recorded crime. This is because the head of the Home Office crime statistics unit, has seen the figures used by Civitas and has confirmed that they are accurate, saying that he is “content” with the report’s findings.
Watching them lie to us
It takes a former Russian dissident to stand up to the BBC, no offense to Natalie Solent who has been collecting evidence of their biased reporting, but she can’t beat Mr Bukovsky’s dedication. In the true dissident tradition Vladimir Bukovsky said yesterday that he was prepared to go to jail in protest at the BBC’s lack of impartiality, particularly towards the subject of Europe. He plans a mass civil disobedience to protest against being forced to pay the £112 licence fee accusing the BBC of being both “sub-standard” and “politically biased” on many issues, including the Conservative party, Israel and the question of Europe.
The BBC insisted yesterday that everybody who owns a television must possess a valid television licence.
Sixty year old Mr Bukovsky defected to Britain after more than 10 years in labour camps and psychiatric hospitals. I guess he is qualified to spot the bully…
Though most of our readers will doubtless be unaware, the BBC has been running a competition to find the ‘All-time Greatest Briton’.
I have, thus far, been indifferent to the whole wretched exercise but it has been brought to my attention that, currently, Lady Diana is topping the voters poll.
I am no longer indifferent. If Lady Diana wins, it is not just a victory for sentimentality over reason but a gross insult to this country’s glorious history. I cannot allow that to happen without let or hindrance.
So may I please urge all contributors and readers to go to the BBC vote page and vote for Cromwell, Brunel, Shakespeare, Newton, Churchill or anybody except Lady f*cking Diana!
I thank you in anticipation of your kind and worthy assistance.
[My sincere gratitude to Hadrian Wise for the alarm bell]
|
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.
|
