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]
|
Last night I watched the latest episode of Make Me Honest, in which Howard, a night club entrepreneur, completely and totally failed to make Lawrence honest. “Lawrence” is a fat young Jamaican conman, born and raised. (Last week I watched the previous episode in the same series.)
Nevertheless, Howard, for all the fatuous optimism that he brought to the project and to a large degree because of it, did a job on Lawrence and on all the other Lawrences who now infest Britain, and on the present pathetically feeble legal arrangements in Britain that make life so easy for all the Lawrences, that was sweetness itself.
As an exercise in trying to rescue Lawrence from the errors of his ways, it was an abject failure, with ABJECT FAILURE stamped all over it, from day one. It was never going to work. But the last laugh in this saga may not be Lawrence’s, because Lawrence’s true character is now nailed down in video for all the world to see and complain about. Lawrence’s life is probably now about to get a lot more complicated and nasty. In short, the tabloid pack will now be after him. → Continue reading: Howard fails to make Lawrence honest
Has anyone ever come across a case of a politician championing the expansion of state regulation from beyond the grave? Is this a first for cemetery regulation?
The Florida Funeral, Cemetery and Consumer Services Bill has just been passed by the state’s House of Representatives in response to the Menorah Gardens scandal, where fees were pocketed by the funeral home and corpses went unburied. This bill is known as the “Howard Futch” Bill since his untimely demise was marred by his internment and relocation, after the plot designated for his widow was filled by someone else. Futch was, by all accounts, a decent man, a Second World War veteran, and like all representatives, inclined to act in order to right perceived wrongs through government action. Now he has a highway and a funeral regulation bill named after him. Still, people will sleep easier in the ground for this:
The bill will require cemetery operators to survey and plot new grounds, establish minimum grave sizes, and put names on vaults. It also will establish a monument dealer inspection program, allow monument companies to join funeral homes, cemeteries and crematoriums in the pre-need funeral services industry and consolidate the regulation of the industry under the Department of Financial Services….
Why the scandal of unburied bodies requires the monument dealer inspection service or other regulatory actions is beyond me? At the moment, the European Union has only turned its attentions to pet cemeteries as the ever vigilant Euromyths website under David Delaney details here and here.
Once this furore has died down, let us hope other deceased politicians rest more quietly than Howard Futch.
Instapundit posts today on how two stories are playing out in the elite media and in the on-line world. (Aside: I know, I know, it looks incredibly lame to link to Glenn Reynolds’ blog. But hey, the man has already done the heavy lifting on this issue, so why shouldn’t I take advantage? I mean, he’s a public utility, isn’t he?)
To summarize:
The Nick Berg murder story holds all of the top ten slots for searches at Lycos and elsewhere. The elite media, if it ran the story at all, has “moved on” and renewing its obsessive focus on the Abu Ghraib story. This would certainly seem to point up, at a minimum, a disconnect between the elite media and web-savvy info consumers. The kind of disconnect that should have you purging your portfolio of media shares.
The real question is, as always in the blogosphere, what kind of uninformed speculation can I heap onto this occurrence?
First, it certainly seems to support the conclusion that substantial swathes of the elite media are not only opposed to the war in Iraq, they are shaping their publications to justify their opposition and to ensure the political defeat of those who support the war.
Second, it is striking how the elite media’s opposition to the war plays out in ways that undercut the American/coalition side and give aid and comfort to the Islamofascist side. The Islamofascists, of course, want the Abu Ghraib story played up in the West and the Nick Berg murder played down in the West, and this is exactly what the elite media is doing. The phrase “useful idiots” comes to mind, although for the most part “fellow travellers” seems too strong.
For the most part. There are exceptions. I can’t think of a better word for news outlets that peddle obvious fakes and frauds put forth by our enemy’s crudest propagandists. I saw the fake rape pictures a couple of weeks ago, and you would have to be total naif not to see instantly that they are porn – the posing, the production values, the uniforms, the haircuts, the whole thing practically shouts “not candid photos of US servicemen.”
Of some interest is the historical fact that many of Islamofascism’s useful idiots were also Communism’s useful idiots. Make of that what you will.
Finally, it must infuriate the media elite that, despite their most urgent efforts to make Abu Ghraib the logo of the occupation, their best and most sophisticated audience is much more interested in the Nick Berg story. This, I think, bodes well, for it demonstrates the degree to which we set our own priorities and interests, and seek information, independent of those who buy ink by the barrel.
Top down information management is defeated, yet again, by a distributed network.
UPDATE: On the fellow traveller front, we have pretty solid confirmation that the photos of alleged British abuses were faked as well.
There is good news for the differently-conscienced and the caringly-caffeinated. They no longer have to exorcise their middle-class guilt by travelling overland to India or teaching English to ragamuffins in the shanty towns of Kinshasa.
Absolution is soon to be found right here in Central London:
The UK’s first fair trade coffee shops are set to open later this year, courtesy of Oxfam. And to give customers a flavour of what to expect, it opened one for a day in central London.
As if anybody does not know what to expect!
The food is fair trade wherever possible, so fruit, cereal bars and chocolate are “ethical” but pastries are not.
These diabolical right-wing, warmongering neo-pastries with their blundering, inept foreign policies are inflaming the ‘Arab street’ and bringing the world to the brink of war. It’s all about creeeeeeeeaaaamm!
“The cafes are about people enjoying classy coffee in a classy place. If they want to find out about the coffee and the issues they can make that discovery. It’s not about saying ‘Come and feel worthy’ but ‘come and have a super time’. The values are extra.”
Only if munching your way through an inedible cereal bar in the company of a bunch of po-faced do-gooders is your idea of a super time.
There are photographs on the walls showing the people who matter most in the venture – the farmers from Honduras, Ethiopia and Indonesia.
Collectively, they share 25% of the profits, community projects in those areas get another 25% and Oxfam has a 50% share.
In other words, some 75% ends up back in the pockets of the professional welfare classes. This is not ‘fair trade’, its a money-laundering scheme.
Two cups of hot, steaming piety, please!
It is my belief that unless we demonstrate that ID cards are not only complex, unnecessary, difficult to implement and expensive but also above all detrimental to the objective they are trying to achieve e.g. security, we will not capture the imagination of those who can’t think off-hand why Big Blunkett should not have his way with ID cards. After all, we have nothing to hide and we all use driving licenses, credit cards, store and loyalty cards etc, etc.
We need to spell out more often just what kind of danger an ID card and similar attempts by states to hoard and tag its citizens pose to the individual.
Darren Andrews of Freedom-Central.Net does just that in a structured and erudite manner. He looks at the liberties that will be lost if a government ID card system is introduced:
Principle 1: Governments receive their just powers from the governed
Principle 2: The Right to the Presumption of Innocence
Principle 3: The Right to Anonymity and Privacy
Principle 4: The Right to Free Speech
This sentence should resound throughout the debate:
Freedom is not about opinion, it is about principle because there is an unchanging commonality in people that regards neither time nor place, and there are unalterable laws that govern human life and all who are a part of it.
Read the whole thing…
In future, Judges are going to have to be less judgmental:
Judges have been issued with guidelines to encourage political correctness in court. Advice sent to all judges and magistrates in England and Wales, tackles misleading social stereotypes that have led to a high-profile judicial gaffes.
Note of explanation: ‘gaffe’ is a term applied to instances of public figures accidentally letting the truth slip out.
Judges are told the term “coloured” should never be used, to avoid using the description “oriental” and to take care that “British” is not used as shorthand for white, English or Christian. They are also given a definition of asylum-seeker, and are reminded that women “remain disadvantaged” in society. “The disadvantages women can suffer range from inadequate recognition of their contribution to the home or society to an underestimation of the problems women face as a result of gender bias,” the guidance says.
Somebody should really slap a Preservation Order on these ‘guidelines’. They have a unique, period 1970’s charm all of their own.
The term “asylum-seeker” is associated with people without a genuine claim to be refugees, and is almost pejorative, the advice said.
Hilarious! We used to use the word ‘immigrants’ until the PC brigade got it banned for being offensive. ‘Asylum-seeker’ was the neutral replacement term. This country is institutionally anti-euphamist.
And judges are advised not to overlook the use of gender-based, racist or “homophobic” stereotyping as an “evidential short cut”. They are also warned against using words that imply an “evaluation” of the sexes, however subtle: for instance, “man and wife”, “girl” (unless speaking of a child) and “businessmen”.
The judiciary is to undergo regular training sessions.
Where they will learn that they are bourgeois counter-revolutionaries and lackeys of the capitalist running dogs.
Here is a list of ‘verboten’ terms:
Coloured: An offensive term that should never be used
Oriental: The term should be avoided because it is imprecise and may be considered racist or offensive
British: Care should be taken to use the term “British” in an inclusive sense, to include all citizens. Exclusionary use of the term as a synonym for white, English, or Christian is unacceptable
Postman: Use postal worker instead
Right on! It is about time that anti-postworkerism was confronted and smashed.
Are you married?: Intrusive and irrelevant
Yes, especially in divorce proceedings.
Mentally handicap: Judges should use instead “learning disabilities” and “people with disabilities”.
Feel free to chip in with further useful suggestions.
Last month, I was in the Sydney Fish Markets with fellow Samizdatista Michael Jennings. We had a splendid lunch, as the Fish Markets have plenty of good places to eat. Anyhow on leaving we grabbed a coffee to go, and headed off back to the tram stop to return to the CBD.
I was tardy in finishing my coffee, and in fact I did not finish it until I had got to the tram stop. So I got up to put the cup in the bin. However, I found to my considerable surprise that the bin had been closed. A plastic lid had been placed over the top of the bin.
I had never seen anything like it in my life. Michael Jennings, though, knew why- he explained that it was the practice to seal such bins to prevent people from placing bombs there, and that this is a common sight in London.
Well, that makes sense. There is a war on, as they used to say.
If truth is the first casualty of war, then libertarian ideals seem to me to be not far behind. In a society under military pressure, the liberty of the individual is quickly appropriated by the State for its own ends, often quite justifiably. The needs of the RAF in England in 1940 really were quite important, after all.
In Australia, the touch is very light. We are rather remote and isolated from the crosscurrents of the War on Terror. But we’ve had experience of this phenomena before, in the Second World War. With the Japanese ‘at the gates’ so to speak, the Federal Government wasted no time in seizing power over large swathes of the liberty of the individual. And, as a libertarian minded individual, if I had protested, the government would have told me “hey, there’s a war on, you know”.
The only Western society that would really understand this these days is Israel, I would guess. Liberty is best enjoyed when you are alive, and sometimes the need of the latter have to take precedence over the former.
I think though, that it is no coincidence that the necessary loss of personal liberty in both Australia and Britain in the second world war acclimatised the citizens for the massive assault on personal liberty and responsibility that came straight after the war, when socialist governments in both nations erected all-embracing welfare states.
Not that they saw it that way at the time – it was seen as a ‘just reward’ for the people who had endured the costs of war. It turned out to be a false reward indeed, but the idea that there really is no such thing as a free lunch took thirty five years to sink into the minds of the electorates in both nations. (Indeed, it is arguable that it has not penetrated even now).
The lesson is clear though – the state will use the loss of liberties necessary to undertake the war on terror to its own advantage, and we must be vigilant to prevent a second welfare state disaster being built on the back of it.
Yes, so far it is just a rubbish bin. Let us keep it that way.
However badly the war on terror infringes our liberty,
there are at least appropriate ways in which
we can deal with the Wasabi strain of Islam.
Nigel Meek, contibuting to the Libertarian Alliance Forum, translates the first paragraph of a Swissinfo news story from its original French, thus:
Hungarian researchers have announced the discovery of a remedy for hay fever. “Rhinolight”, a natural therapy, comprises the direction of “specific light” on the mucous membrane according to specialists at the University of Szeged.
What exactly might “specific light” mean, in this context? And is “Rhinolight” some kind of brand name, or is it a technical term? And: “natural therapy”. In Britain that sounds like: will not work.
But, if this report turns out to be true, I agree with Nigel’s comment:
Hooray!
Indeed. Nigel is a hay fever sufferer himself, as I have so far not been. But I am always pleased about creative, helpful, basically good news stories such as these. The other side, it seems to me, to stories along the lines of “here are some politicians and they have just done/presided over/caused something idiotic/cruel/destructive this” is not: “oh no they haven’t”, or maybe: “well here are some other politicians who are doing better. It is: “well maybe the politicians are making a mess, but there is also good stuff happening in the world being done by quite other people.”
Any comments on this, either from people with better French than me (not very hard), or with better medical science (even easier)? And, is there any news of this that we can read about in English?
UPDATE: Commenter number one reveals that “Rhinolight” is a brand name, and says: here is the link. But the other question still remains: Is this treatment any use?
A free public meeting is being held in London next week to discuss the Government’s Identity Card plans. A number of high profile figures will be speaking at this important meeting, so if you’re in London try to get along. Let’s show Big Blunkett and the media that there is massive public resistance to this scheme.
More details and registration information at:
Mistaken Identity
I put up one pissy blog post about how there is no hope for liberty in the American political arena, and next thing you know I see this:
A group of libertarian-minded Republicans in Congress is blocking President Bush’s effort to strengthen domestic counterterrorism laws and reauthorize the USA Patriot Act, which the president has made one of his top domestic priorities this year.
Kind of a good news/bad news thing. Good that there is some opposition to the Patriot Act, which is odious in a number of ways, bad that Bush has made extending it his top domestic priority this year. Legislation is apparently gaining ground that would rein in some of the worst bits of the Patriot Act, although apparently Bush has threatened to veto anything of the sort. I should note that the lead paragraph above is a little misleading; Democrats are carrying more than their fair share of the load on this front.
Bush, who has not vetoed a single bill in his entire Presidency (a record, I believe), would single out a bill protecting civil liberties for veto. I happen to think that, from a broad strategic perspective, the Bush administration has gotten a lot right in the current war. However, they seem to be doing everything they can on the domestic front to encourage me to stay home in November.
The Independent reports that Blair is planning a short autumn session of Parliament. This is to allow a clear run to next year’s General Election.
In the limited time available, Blair has reportedly asked Ministers to prioritise two Bills: The Europe Bill and Big Blunkett’s discredited ID Card Bill.
So expect every political trick in the book to be used to get the Bill through both Houses with a minimum of reasoned debate.
It is often said that rushed legislation is bad legislation. When legislation starts out as badly as Blunkett’s ID Card scheme and is then rushed it can only get worse.
The imposition of ID Cards on innocent British citizens is a major constitutional change for which the Government has no mandate. Any vote on such a controversial issue must be a free vote.
To rush it through Parliament in this way would be an insult not just to the British public but also to democracy.
Cross-posted from The Chestnut Tree Cafe
Rather like Robert Clayton Dean in America, when I cast my libertarian eye at the Australian political scene, I find little reason to cheer. Australia is due to have a Federal election this year, although the exact date is at the pleasure of the Prime Minister. So election date speculation abounds, with some saying in August and others saying October.
The government here is dominated by the old line ‘conservative’ John Howard, who is basically a right-wing statist. In power since 1996, after a moderately good start at cutting back the state, the government has been in decline ever since and is now a menace, wandering through society causing havoc wherever it goes.
As it happens, last night was Budget night, where the government gives its annual account of its rapine and pillage of our wallets. With the election looming, this is a classic ‘tax-cut and spend’ pre-election budget, although the ‘cuts’ to taxes are not really cuts at all, but mere adjustments of the brackets. Therefore, you have a chance to earn ‘slightly’ more money before the government decides that half of your income belongs to them.
If London readers wonder why their city is full of very clever Australians, that is one of the bigger reasons why.
This is, by the way, the supposedly ‘free market’ party in power. It will in all probability be replaced by Mark Latham and his Australian Labour Party. On economic issues there is very little difference between the two parties, just a disagreement about where to splurge the tax-take on. I can only echo what Mr. Dean said in his survey of his own country’s political scene-as it is, one simply despairs of advancing the libertarian agenda in current Australian politics.
|
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.
|
Recent Comments