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]
|
News that elegant Italian prime minister Silvio Berlusconi has appointed the leader of the ‘post-fascist’ National Alliance party Gianfranco Fini as his representative to the Convention on the future of Europe has me grinning from ear to ear.
This is not because I am really any fan of the numbskull statism favoured by Gianfranco Fini but rather because it will make the superstatist collectivists that will have to deal with him apoplectic. As several articles on Samizdata have pointed out, the essential difference between fascist and socialist economics is that fascists believe that what matters is control rather than ownership of the means of production. Fini is a classic advocate of that approach, wanting to regulate economic matters in order to further ‘Italian national objectives’. Of course this approach is in no way different in methodology to that practiced by most social democratic regimes with their ‘national industrial champions’ and acronymed French conglomerates.
And of course that is exactly why a man with overtly fascist links like Fini is hated so much by the ‘social democrats’ across Europe. I am sure if he wore a black shirt and called prime minister Berlusconi ‘Duce’ they would actually not mind so much, but that is not the case. They do not want to be seen standing next to him because people might start to realise that there really is no difference between any of them.
Or should I say higher tax future. Head of the European Central Bank, Dutchman Wim Duisenberg has said that the new Euro currency will lead to tax harmonisation in the long run. Of course I don’t think anyone thinks that means taxes will move down to the lowest common denominator given the French and German remarks about ‘unfair tax competition’. No, we are talking about the whole EU moving up to the confiscatory levels of the highest.
This is of course a 100% political, rather than economic, matter. Taxes are the amount of money confiscated by the state and that is decided by political, not economic, processes. Yet still people maintain the fiction that the European Central Bank is not a politically motivated entity. What economic factors are going to drive taxes to the same levels because the EU now has a common currency?
Now correct me if I am wrong but I thought the entire USA used the US Dollar. Tell me, are the total taxes in New Mexico, Carolina and New York all ‘harmonised’? No, I didn’t think so.
Our ISP e-mail problems have been sorted out and we are receiving all e-mails properly once more.
Anyone one who did not receive a reply to an e-mail sent to us in the last 24 hours or so might want to send their e-mail again as it does seem that the dircon server ate a few incoming mails. Yummy.
I have been fuming about this for a while. A few days ago, Wolfgang Petritsch, the euro-gauleiter in Bosnia-Herzegovina (BiH), announced he thinks Croatia needs to structure its democratic system on multi-ethnic lines. In short, he wants ethnic groups to be encouraged to see themselves as politically different rather than as members of a common civil society. He has of course be informally invited to take his views, write them on sheets of stiff paper, roll them up tightly and stick them somewhere warm and dark. We have already lived through the aftermath of the Yugoslav experiment in tribal collectivism. I for one have no desire to do that sort of thing again, thank you very much.
Unlike hapless BiH, Petritsch would do well to remember that his views do not have a large NATO army to impose them in Croatia. Someone once asked me why I was so glad that NATO does not ‘guarantee’ Croatian security in the same manner as in BiH. Simple. What was the point of the war if we are going to trade taking orders from Belgrade for taking orders from Brussels via some petty Austrian politician like Petritsch? Security of the sort on offer from Petritsch and his Euro-collectivist kind is the security of the cage.
The captured Taliban that are now in Cuba are getting one bath towel, they are getting shampoo and toothpaste. The people there are seeing this and asking Castro, “Can we get this stuff?”
– David Letterman
As Glenn Reynolds on Instapundit points out, it is nice to see National Review On-line deciding to copy Samizdata’s format of multi-contributor blogging. I am sure we were foremost in their minds the whole time 
Update: Cal Ulmann over on Where HipHop and Libertarianism meet has a rather entertaining take on NRO Corner<. Cal wrote:
The Corner on National Review Online is National Review’s attempt at a blog. They don’t want to call it a blog though. I guess that would mean their opinions are no better than anybody elses opinions.
Samizdata seems to be having e-mail problems (or rather the ISP through whom the e-mail routes is having problems), so we may not be getting all incoming mail at the moment (as of 23:15 GMT). It is unclear how long this problem has been going on. I shall report when we are back in touch with the blogosphere.
Sacred cows make the tastiest hamburgers
-Abbie Hoffman
“First they came for the Jews and I did nothing because I am not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists and I did nothing because I am not a Communist.
Then they came for the Catholics and I did nothing because I am not a Catholic.
Then they came for the Lawyers and I could not stop laughing”
Natalija Radic (2002)
Seeing as how Perry has posted pictures of me on Samizdata, it seems only reasonable that I should post one of him… so here is he and his lawyer. I have not met David Carr so perhaps the lawyer is him. I will leave you to figure out which of them is which.
 Perry and his lawyer
Well, wow, what a day this was. I had no choice but to blog this story, because it is so darn perfect. I could have put it on my blog (that is a secret), but it just fit better on Samizdata.
It was the first time in a long time I got in trouble for defending an idea of mine (last time was three years ago). This time it was that nasty G word that the college elite love to hate. Guns! We libertarians love them (or at least I do). They give us an ability to not be a ward of the state when it comes to defending our own life. I think that is really good. Yet, these darn profs hate the guns. I found this out when I argued in favor of gun rights and the second amendment today in class (it is a philosophy class) – I should have known better but I was feeling rebellious. After uttering a quick defense of guns, I was quickly sent to the Dean’s Office so that my gun slinging ideas could be mended to the “right path” – ironic that they call it right path, huh? As he booted me out the door, I was called a terrorist supporter by fellow students (well, the fellow students who were not drugged or hung over).
Now I should say here exactly what I said in class. My friend tape records the lectures and I was blessed with the ability to listen to my exact words and tone of voice. I said quite calmly that guns protect people from over zealous bureaucrats. I said that guns most certainly could be used for wrong, but no laws could ever prevent that.
When I reached the Dean’s Office, I was told that I was trying to threaten the life of the college rulers. Not at all! Before the police were called for me (or my parents) one of my more reasonable profs (not the one who sent me to the Dean’s office) vouched for my character and I was saved from the wrath of these gun hating Nazis (and I mean Nazis).
So, all this while I was in trouble for defending the second amendment, I had a nice taste of what it feels like to not have a first amendment. How many more years till graduation? Oh God, that many… HELP!
Let me state that I do not expect a paleo-conservative like Pat Buchannan to actually agree with libertarian views, but what I do expect is that, if he is going to comment on them, that he actually takes the time to figure out what libertarian views actually are before opening his noise making apparatus.
I have had numerous e-mail on his ludicrous article called Does libertarianism lead to statism?. Over on Dodgeblog, there is also a rubbishing of Buchannan that speculates what his real motivation for the remarks might be. The section of Buchannan’s article that best sums up his complete lack of comprehension regarding what libertarians actually do stand for is:
As these immigrants are also far poorer than Americans, they are disproportionate users of social services — i.e., health care, food stamps, rent supplements, legal services and general welfare. Immigrants have become the principal propellants of the growth of the welfare state.
Libertarians to Buchannan: Read this carefully
The state has NO legitimate role in health care, food stamps, rent supplements and ‘general welfare’… Libertarians do not support the very existence of the theft based welfare state! Eliminate that and the only people who will be willing to emigrate to another country under those conditions are self selecting high initiative folks who want to avail themselves of employment and entrepreneurial opportunities…i.e. exactly the sort of people who came through Ellis Island and made the USA the wealthiest nation on earth. I fail to see a problem with that!
So in essence Pat Buchannan’s thesis of genius is that “libertarianism leads to statism because non-libertarians have imposed welfare policies that libertarians regard as both immoral and economically unsound”. D’oh!
Thanks to Virginia, Andrew, Hank, Ann, Anne, Ivan, Jorge, Margarthe, Will and Dieter for also baring their fangs via e-mail regarding the utterly clueless Buchannan article. I have never received so many e-mails that made almost exactly the same points on the same issue!
|
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.
|
