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]

Why Andrew Sullivan does not thrill me

And of course I am sure he does not particularly care what I think either. In an article titled Europe and Liberalism, he notes that Ramesh Ponnuru has praised him for changing his mind about the European Union.

Sullivan now thinks the European Union is not such a good thing as he once thought and both he and Ponnuru have finally noticed that having the EU completely swallow Britain is also not in the national interests of the USA. In fact that Americentric utilitarian observation seems to be the entire basis for their opposition to The Great European Project. Massive regulatory statism? Dramatic erosion of due process? Ever higher taxes? ‘Fortress Europe’ trade barriers with the rest of the world? Spectacular corruption? Higher unemployment? No… the reason to finally start glaring at the EU across the Atlantic is to preserve the UK’s ability to support the US in foreign policy matters and to work for US interests from within the bastions of Fortress Europe.

This narrow utilitarian argument seems to be what has brought Sullivan to stop being a cheerleader for the EU without much of a nod to the idea that maybe the EU is bad for Britain. So whilst I am happy to see a fairly influential commentator like Sullivan stop arguing Britain should embrace the EU even more deeply, he has nothing whatsoever to contribute to the British domestic debate on the subject. In fact, the stated views of Sullivan play to anti-American sentiments within Britain so harmoniously that I really wish he would just shut the f**k up.

To argue that the reason Britain should not allow its national sovereignty and identity to be submerged by Europe is because it does not suit the United States, is to put many of the people who dislike the EU in Britain in rather a quandary. Many such folks dislike the EU because British interests matter far more to them that those of the EU… and for exactly the same reason they are also highly suspicious of the USA, seeing it as subordinating ‘our’ interests to ‘their’ interests. For an example of anti-EU sentiments allied to deep and festering suspicion of the USA, you need look no further than Air Strip One. I see little value in Sullivan actively kicking the none-too-tight lid off latent anti-Americanism with statements like:

Keeping Britain both in the [United States of Europe] and outside of it militarily, diplomatically, and monetarily should become a prime U.S. objective in foreign policy. Without it, the United States could lose its most valuable military and diplomatic ally.

But the fact is almost no one who actually (in theory) gets a vote on the subject, not even Atlanticist enthusiasts like myself, think US interests are more than passingly germane when trying to argue against Britain sleepwalking to the gaping maw of that half-dead and half-mad leviathan called the European Union.

It seems Sullivan is no fan of the social/cultural Anglosphere meme. What with him being a party political right-statist (a Republican) and only a passing commentator on things like objective rights and moral philosophy, I suppose it is not all that surprising to read him taking a highly collectivist ‘American national interests’ view of pretty much everything, but then this is precisely why his views are of little value in any positive way to people outside his American national collective.

I would argue that the Anglosphere does exist as a cultural vibe, but it is something that can be made a great deal weaker precisely by attitudes like Sullivan’s. The underlying cultural basis for UK political support for US actions in Iraq sprang from these very real Anglosphere notions. Yet if I thought the United States government was working to keep Britain inside a United States of Europe (just not too far inside) for its own interests and at our expense, which is to say working against people like me who are calling for the UK’s complete withdrawal from the EU, then I would be bulk purchasing US flags to burn in demonstrations in central London… and if a relentlessly Atlanticist Anglosphere person such as me thinks that, one can only speculate what less pro-American segments of popular opinion might think.

If the US government wants Britain as an ally, fine. But if it wants to sacrifice individual British people as political cannon fodder to mitigate the effects of EU power? Want to know where you can stick that? I will continue to regard US civil society as having many admirable qualities and still feel an Atlanticist affinity to it regardless… but at that point the US government loses its ‘lesser evil’ status for me and becomes just another enemy on every level as the last basis for having incidental common goals vanishes.

A bit of light(bulb)-hearted humour

The inimitable Alice (well, only by herself) sums up some ‘lightbulb blogs’. In the spirit of pro-Samizdata bias I select two for your amusement:

How many David Carrs does it take to change a lightbulb?

I had thought that the madness of last week’s lightbulb-blowing could not be toppled. I was, of course, wrong. Things are much worse than I thought then, in my light-hearted, innocent, Morris-dancing kind of way, and it is now perfectly apparent to all of us here at Samizdata.net that today’s lightbulb lunacy is tomorrow’s Mysteron plot to destroy the universe. Those who disagree must be conquered in the strongest terms. I refuse either to change the bulb or not change it. It is an outrage that anyone should dare to ask such a thing in the first place. I personally refuse to compromise and demand that they cease forthwith!

How many Brian Micklethwaits does it take to change a lightbulb?

Yesterday I posted about this article. Tomorrow I am going to post about this blog, which related to an earlier posting of mine here, about this rather interesting subject from last Thursday, which I’ve been wondering about for weeks, to do with car parks. I wonder whether anyone will comment or not? Sometimes they comment many times, and other times they don’t. It’s hard to predict these things. In the meantime, I might watch Friends tonight. Not sure yet, depends whether or not I blog about lightbulbs.

Heh.

A ‘snapshot’ from France

Ilana Radwinter captures a precious moment of French ‘democracy’ and shares with us her experience of encountering striking teachers.

Well, most of the people demonstrating are teachers — and not too many of those either — but they are trying to engage others and actually managed to do a lot of damage by disrupting the end of year examinations as well as gross acts of vandalism.

Last Monday, I was driving my children to school at about 8 o’clock. On the way to the centre of Perpignan, just before a large roundabout, we hit a huge traffic jam. I saw a lot of cars turning back in front of me but I decided to continue. Eventually, the cars in front could no longer turn easily and I spotted some men holding banners. Ah, the strike! I had the choice of staying put or getting off the road and driving on the grass.

All around me there were people who were meekly waiting to be able to turn back. I could not believe it. Why couldn’t we all shout and rev our engines and hoot and call them names and go past?! Haven’t these people ever been to a football match?! After all, these were not the burly, tattooed hunks we saw last year during the truckers’ strike! They were the normal, testosterone-depleted, round-hipped western males as seen putting the rubbish out on Monday mornings.

I chose the way forward and soon I found myself in front of the eight men who were stopping all the traffic. They pounced on my car and forced me to stop. It was just me, a petite middle-aged woman, dressed in pyjamas as mornings before school are too hectic to allow for any grooming, and my three children (11-year old girl and 7-year old twin boys).

I rolled the window down and I asked why I am not allowed to go where I needed to. I said that I respected their right to strike, I lied but I was not in a position to start fight, so a bit of politeness was probably wise, but by the same token they should respect other people’s right to go about their business. After all, I was neither the government nor another teacher trying to cross the picket line.

They gave me leaflet and told me they were actually fighting for my children’s future. Then, I really lost it — I can’t stand people using my children as an excuse for their anti-social acts. I told them that on the contrary, they are fighting for my children’s ruin as in the future they will have to work for next to nothing to pay for their pensions. As anger tends to exacerbate a foreign accent, they realised I am a ‘foreigner’ and told me to go back where I come from. I retorted that they should go as they are the ones who clearly do not like their country as they were rebelling against a legitimate government. I suggested North Korea as a possible destination.

My 11-year old daughter was crying — she had been crying all morning because her elder sister was going back to London — and the boys at the back were speculating who was going to win, Mummy or those old men.

Sometimes during the argument, the bullies took their hands off my car and, quite unexpectedly, started to back off. It transpired that they were not in charge, just being big mouths. The real ‘master of ceremony’ was someone else, who kept quiet during all this. As they backed off, a nice woman approached me and said that many demonstrators did not approve of such methods.

A group of teachers just wanted to slow down the traffic, smile and hand out leaflets. So there were two camps: those who wanted to allow us to pass and those who did not. In the end, we were allowed to go…

Ilana Radwinter, Perpignan, France

Lies, lies and more lies

I am sick to death of the BBC, I really am. How anybody can even try to suggest that it is an objective news source is beyond me. The paranoid, ranting, ‘Little Englander’, anti-EU, xenophobic mentality is clear for all to see:

The 12-nation eurozone is in even worse economic trouble than previously thought.

How can this be anything but complete garbage? It is high time that the BBC was exposed as the extreme right-wing, capitalistic, Bushista, warmongering propoganda tool that it really is!

Bloggers! – The future belongs to us

I have placed my bets. I am now a blogger, and I intend to die a blogger.

And how will that work? “Today folks, I want to take another crack at the crisis in the Middle Ea………..UUUUURRRRRGHHHH!!!!” Crash. Head hits keyboard. Interestingly, funny random typing, thus – “;ldsrh;rg;gfmj’o;sarl’mj;gdvlklkkkkkkkkkkkkkkk” – is what you might then expect. But it turns out that if your head does hit the keyboard, almost or even absolutely nothing happens. Try it. Pressing random keys one at a time, monkey-Shakespeare style, gets you a mess of letters as above. Pressing just one key continuously gets you kkkkkkkkk, also as above. But pressing fifteen keys at once and holding them all down continuously while keeping the head motionless seems to achieve nothing.

Delete the above two paragraphs only if they crack immortality soon enough to include me, and if that happens I intend to blog for ever and ever. (And how might that work in the decades and centuries to come?!?!?)

What I’m saying is that I think blogging can only get bigger and better until it conquers the whole world and there are blogs everywhere about everything.

Samizdata’s readership seems to be creeping ever upwards. Yes there are numbers dips, which apparently afflict the whole blogosphere, but they are soon corrected and the underlying upward trend then resumes. People taking walks in the early summer sunshine after a war, like animals after they’ve been hybernating, for a few days, and such like. That’s all that is.

My reason for thinking that the blogophere is expanding is basically that, so far as I can see, it is. New blogs (thankyou Instapundit just when I needed you) are being started. Semi-sleeper blogs that have going a while are starting to really come alive. Long time scoffers give up the unequal fight, and start blogging as well (and yes there should be a link there alsol but I don’t know of a recent example – maybe commenters can chip in there). I really don’t think that this is CB radio. And these people certainly seem to agree with me. I wonder who they are.

But, question: Has anyone abandoned blogging with extreme prejudice? → Continue reading: Bloggers! – The future belongs to us

Normal service is resumed

Well, that didn’t last too long. Hot on the heels of yesterday’s moderately good news comes today’s customary bad news.

Again, I was sort of expecting this to happen and now that it has happened it proves that my ‘Glumness Meter’ is actually quite reliable:

Burglar Brendon Fearon who was shot and injured by Tony Martin has won the right to sue the jailed farmer for damages.

A judge at Nottingham County Court on Friday overturned an earlier decision which threw out his claim.

Fearon, 33, hopes to sue Martin for a reported £15,000 following his wounding during a break-in at the farmer’s home in Emneth Hungate, Norfolk, in August 1999.

Which goes to prove I suppose that you just can’t keep a bad man down and that the word ‘absurd’ is fast becoming redundant in this corner of the world.

An earlier hearing was told that Fearon, of Newark, Nottinghamshire, claimed that his injuries, which included a leg wound, had affected his ability to enjoy sex and martial arts.

Which he doubtless enjoys best when practised simultaneously. Still, I’d best temper my comments regarding Mr.Fearon lest he ‘win the right’ to come after us with a defamation suit.

“I have to take the view that there are important issues here that need to be determined and that it would be wrong, subject to other considerations, to deprive the claimant from airing his claim and having a full trial,” said District Judge Oliver.

He said that to deny Fearon the right to his claim could contravene the burglar’s rights under Section 6 of the Human Rights Convention.

I must be honest, when I first heard the term ‘burglar’s rights’ being bandied about I thought it must be some kind of blogosphere joke or a bit of British tabloid ribbing. Turns out they actually mean it. I should have known better than to assume that parody could actually be a match for reality these days.

I suppose some clarification of this decision is required. Please note that Fearon has won the ‘right’ to sue Mr.Martin. That does necessarily mean that his claim will succeed. However, as regards that latter prospect, my ‘Glumness Meter’ is already twitching ominously up in the high eighties.

Dead burglars don’t sue

When I first heard about this case, a few days ago, I was glumly convinced that this man would be convicted of manslaughter and sent to prison.

I was wrong:

A company director accused of killing a burglar who had sneaked into his business to steal a lorry has been cleared of manslaughter.

Steven Parkin, 46, of Derby Road, Nottingham, was alleged to have battered Mark Brealey with a pickaxe handle and slashed him with a knife as he fled the site.

It remains to be seen whether or not the Crown intends to pursue any other charges against Mr.Parkin but there is no mention of this either way in the story. All I can say is that I certainly hope not.

Judge Richard Pollard directed the jury to return a verdict of not guilty after a pathologist told the court he could not rule out the possibility death was caused by an accident.

Given the Judge’s direction, I think it is a little premature to assess whether or not this marks any sort of change in the judiciary’s institutional anti-self-defence culture. Probably not. But at least this man is not languishing in prison for defending his property and that is good news.

Andrew Sullivan on Hillary Clinton – and me on the globalisation of the “who we are” question

I did a posting here a few days ago about how political debates are, at any rate in Europe, and most especially here in Britain and in England, becoming more about who we are, and not just about who is right. It was the one about the Renault TV car advert.

There were many commenters, one of whom said that in the USA, things were different. Who we are, he said, is not an issue in the USA, because we know who we are. And in the sense that in the USA, unlike here, or for that matter here, there is no debate about what country they should be, what continent they should be a part of, and so on, that’s true.

But now take a read of this bit, from a Sunday Times article by Andrew Sullivan, on the subject of Hillary Clinton. Hillary C, says Sullivan, is the most divisive US politician since Nixon, and she doesn’t just divide at the level of opinion, she divides at the level of “identity”. (Equals: who we are.) → Continue reading: Andrew Sullivan on Hillary Clinton – and me on the globalisation of the “who we are” question

Some advice, please…

We started off on Samizdata.net with a sitemeter.com tracker… alas the java version which tracks referrals refused to work when we upgraded our site to Movable Type, so we added a Extreme tracker. That too is doing strange things now since our latest Movable Type upgrade (all referrals are being recorded as coming from our MT installation rather than the actual referral page) and as I have never, not once, got a reply from their tech support people no matter how often I send them messages (and I have their premium paid-for version), I am looking for recommendations regarding:

  1. What might be causing our problem with the Extreme’s tracker?
  2. And is the java version of sitemeter’s premium counter likely to work with MT 2.6x?
  3. Are there any better premium trackers out there as I hate to keep paying for crap service from Extreme?

Any suggestions?

The only way is out

HMG is being high-handed, undemocratic and arrogant. That is the view of the British tabloid newspaper The Daily Mail on the refusal by the government to put the issues of the EU constitution and joining the single currency to the British public in a referendum.

In response, they have been running a campaign in the form of a ‘People’s Referendum’ which gives members of the public an opportunity to let HMG know how they feel and demand a formal, legally-binding referendum of these issues. The campaign ends at midnight tonight.

Whilst I can wholly sympathise with the sense of outrage and injustice that has driven this ‘voxpop’ campaign, I have chosen not to participate because, strange as it may sound, I do not want a referendum.

I do not wish to be too harsh on the organisers of this campaign or the proprietors of the Daily Mail. They are being far more proactive in advancing the debate in this country than just about any other organ of the fourth estate and, to the extent that the eventual result provides a bellweather of public opinion, it may prove useful in terms of boosting moral. But, tactically, to demand a referendum on these issues is to play right into the hands of the enemy.

I say this because with a government which is committed to the EU project, coupled with the ability to write out a blank cheque to enable them to realise their vision, a referendum is anything but the level playing-field that too many people fondly imagine it to be. There are loads of ways that the result can be pre-determined and HMG is almost certain to employ every single one them.

First off, the ‘yes’ campaign will have access to unlimited tax-payer funds while the ‘no’ campaign will have to rely on voluntary donations from their supporters. The (state-owned) BBC propoganda machine will be put into overdrive and current sceptical non-state media sources will be bought off or bullied into switching sides. Organised indepenence campaigns will be infiltrated with people who will start making nazi-type noises to the press at the right moment, thus giving the impression that the ‘no’ campaign is merely a fig-leaf for a scarey national socialist movement and, every day of the campaign will see dark, ominous op-eds in various established media outlets warning of the ‘dire economic consequences’ of a ‘no’ vote.

Added to all this, of course, is the distinct possibility that the actual voting figures themselves will be diddled. I wouldn’t put it past them. Even if that were not the case and, by some miracle, the ‘no’ campaign won a slim majority, we all know what happens next. Yes, that’s right, just as in Denmark and Ireland, we would have to endure another referendum in order to get the ‘right’ result.

In short, the referendum on the Euro and the Constitution will be as rigged as an 18th Century tea clipper. If the independence movement has put all its eggs in the referendum basket, then where does it go from there? The answer is nowhere. Having been spiked by the appearance of a ‘democratic consensus’ we will have no choice but to watch helplessly while Mr.Blair abolishes our country with a flourish of moral authority.

That is why I will not join in the voices calling for a referendum. I choose, intead, to demand complete British withdrawal from the EU and not to settle for any less. It is the only position which cannot be bargained away, compromised or outflanked.

Neither this nor any other government has the right to sign away the sovereignty of the British people and I do not accept as legitimate any show of hands which purports to provide it with the authority to do so. I demand independence and I will accept no substitutes.

EU tax on internet sales

A new EU directive, that goes into effect on July 1, will require all Internet firms to account for value added tax, or VAT, on “digital sales.” Computerworld reports how overseas Internet retailers may see their European profit push derailed by one of the oldest drags on business: tax.

The effect of the law will be an additional 15 to 25 percent levy on Internet transactions such as software and music downloads, monthly subscriptions to an Internet service provider and on any product purchased through an online auction anywhere in the EU.

The VAT tax is not new burden for European dot-coms that have been charging customers VAT since their inception. Their overseas rivals though have been exempt, making foreign firms an obvious choice for the bargain-hunting consumer. David Melville, general counsel of UK ISP Freeserve, a division of French ISP Wanadoo, rejoices:

It’s a massive competitive disadvantage. It’s good to see at last it being eroded.

Freeserve has lobbied furiously for the past two years to get the loophole closed, saying its chief rival AOL UK, the Internet unit of AOL Time Warner, saved 150 million pounds ($249.7 million) in tax payments over the years.

Shock, horror! How about lobbying the EU comissariat to abolish the internet sales VAT in the EU instead?! I thought not.

For example, on eBay, a UK seller will pay six pounds to list an automobile and 35 pounds for real estate, both 20 percent increases that include the UK’s 17.5 percent VAT charge. Some analysts predict that the new tax will decreases sales in the short term, which will hurt American dot-coms such as eBay and Amazon, given their expectations of higher growth in their overseas business.

But European firms feel justice have been done.:

The old way certainly gave non-EU companies a leg up during a very crucial stage in the development of the market.

Please note the assumption that it is acceptable for governments to meddle with competitive markets and ‘equalise the race’. The EU businesses behave in a way that is not surprising, they are happy to see their overseas competitors weakened, however, I fear their victory is rather Pyrrhic.

Legislatures

George Monbiot made one valid point in his debate with Perry (and others) on B.B.C. Radio 3. Although I suspect that Mr Monbiot did not believe in his own point.

George Monbiot stated that a Parliament does not have to pass laws so his World Parliament need not mean world regulations. I suspect that world regulations are exactly what Mr Monbiot wants (indeed he admitted this by talking about ‘fair trade’ rules in the same discussion). However, a Parliament need not be, indeed should not be a legislature.

Having a group of people elected to pass laws is a terrible system. It leads to endless laws to please this or that special faction (which may represent only a tiny fraction of the general population), and even laws passed to satisfy the whims of politicians.

When libertarians and others denounce ‘delegated legislation’ (rules made up by officials), we should not forget that laws made up by politicians are no good either.

Whether one believes that law should be established by deduction from the principles of justice (i.e. property rights – the nonaggression principle), and-or should evolve in a Common Law way – the whole concept of a body of politicians creating laws (a legislature) just does not make sense.

But can a Parliament just be a check on the Executive – deciding on the budget and (under some systems) throwing out the Executive if the Prime Minister or President becomes too bad to tolerate.

Does not having a body of politicians sitting there and then saying “now do not do very much” involve a fatal contradiction? Someone is not going to go through all the vast effort of getting to be a member of this body and then do little or nothing – human nature just does not work that way. Individuals and parties are going to mess about.

Once you elect a body of people (called a Parliament or whatever) do they not inevitably become a legislature – creating laws as they choose? That is part of the basic anarchist libertarian case.

Constitutional limits on the power of such bodies have proved largely ineffective (although in the case of the United States Constitution this may be because it relies for its enforcement on a body of appointed judges).

Perhaps the way to go is the way of the Constitution of Texas – have the ‘legislature’ meet for as few days as possible, this structural limit (rather than policy limit) may have some effect in limiting the number of crazy laws such a body can pass.

I hope there are not too many absurdities in the above (sleeping in the last day or so might have been a good idea), but let those who will open fire.