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]
|
Official: the world is now a better place Some people have far too much time on their hands:
The County of Los Angeles actively promotes and is committed to ensure a work environment that is free from any discriminatory influence be it actual or perceived. As such, it is the County’s expectation that our manufacturers, suppliers and contractors make a concentrated effort to ensure that any equipment, supplies or services that are provided to County departments do not possess or portray an image that may be construed as offensive or defamatory in nature.
One such recent example included the manufacturer’s labeling of equipment where the words “Master/Slave” appeared to identify the primary and secondary sources. Based on the cultural diversity and sensitivity of Los Angeles County, this is not an acceptable identification label.
Okay, how about we use the term ‘Boss-man/Bitch’?
|
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.
|
Would this apply to every single disk drive they have then ?
I am *so* glad David picked this one up. I near choked with laughter when I read the item. It is just so over the top silly as to be difficult to take seriously.
In fact, I think we should bombard them with lots of technical terms. Why, we could make it literally impossible for them to use any thing more modern than a stone tablet… which is about the all that these pre-human mentalities can really deal with. Stone axes. Yeah, now there’s a really green technology. So long as you don’t cut down trees for farms, kill animals for food or gather a food plant colonized by an endangered virus.
I’d recommend them for a Samizdata award… but I need to talk with Perry about the idea first. It’s truly evil.
I can’t claim to have thought of this replacement (how I wish that I had), but: `government’ and `citizen’.
Your sir, are a genious. But instead of Boss-man/bitch, how about player/ho?
For more dark humor, how about the Washington DC niggardly flap of a few years back?
To quote a friend, “I can’t wait until they find out that cables and ports are can be male or female”.
Or how about the “Abort all child processes? Y/N”?
Male and female ports yes… and you can buy a ‘gender changer’ at any radio shak.
Might I suggest they adopt the homoerotic “Top” and “bottom”?
I’ve heard other variations: pimp/’ho, president/intern are my favorites 🙂
And for those who are excessively religious there’s always the UNIX/Linux “daemon”.
sigh.
Stupidity is forever.
niggardly, niggardly, niggardly, niggardly, niggardly
rape seed, rape seed, rape seed, rape seed
golly, golly, golly, golly, golly, golly, golly, golly
There. now I feel much better.
I, as a faithfull Tennessean, declare California seperate from the Union. Do any of you wish to buy it…heck, just come pick it up and it’s yours.
What a waste of time. Ballcock!!
I wonder what will they do about Master’s Degrees. “Slavs” means “slaves” originally. There’s over 300 million of them now-a-days. I’m a Mexican, can I say that I master Spanish? What do you master? we all master something. Do you slave away in a job? And how about the Great Lake of the Slave in Canada? Ohhhh, shame on the RCA Victor! “His Master’s Voice”! and…THE LORD WAS CALLED “THE MASTER” SOMETIMES! What else can we find to show the utter stupidity of the PC beaurocracy?
I read somewhere the other day that it’s now illegal to advertise a property in Atlanta as having a “master” bedroom
The astounding thing about PC promoters is not that they are pathetic or stupid but that they exercise real power. They are effective. They0 know exactly what they are doing and why. While we stand on the sidelines these people just take care of business. Yes, they are bereft of common sense and irony. Yes, they are wrong, wrong, wrong. But they are forcing change on the world, their change, and as yet we’ve found no way to stop it.
This is the lesson we need to take from yet another PC obscenity.
The link was to snopes so I suppose that means the item is not real.
Or is my sarcasm-meter under-reading?
Guessedworker – “Yes, they are wrong, wrong, wrong. But they are forcing change on the world, their change, and as yet we’ve found no way to stop it.”
It is extraordinary. Is this the first time this has happened in history – that tens of thousands of unelected and unaccountable nobodies have managed to quietly get a tight enough grip on power to force unwanted changes on the majority?
The link was to snopes so I suppose that means the item is not real.
Oh, its real. Follow the link and see. Snopes debunks a lot of stuff, but they also confirm a lot of stuff.
Recalibrate your sarcasmometer. The cynicism plug may be loose. You can never be too cynical, after all.
More “politically correct” double-think BS…
When I was at uni, I got taken to task by a professor for using the phrase “to call a spade a spade”, because of its “obvious” racism….
Verity,
You must know the history of PC … politcheskaya pravil’nost and all that. Criticism tended to be lethal in Lenin’s USSR. So I’ll bet the apparatchik’s who got the news that their thought processes were insufficiently obedient to the Party line reacted in some way other than droll irony. Modern-day PC folk are committed to cultural egalitarianism and that makes them irony-resistant. We seriously underestimate the present-day problem if we think we can laugh this off.
Guessedworker – I do not laugh it off. It is fascist, totalitarian and horrifying. I just don’t know what the majority can do. Or does the majority care that their freedom to think for themselves is being colonised by parasites?
What is so astonishing is how it has spread, like a virus. And as we all know, there is yet no cure for viruses – even the common cold. From the United States to Britain, thence to Europe, Australia and to – although to a milder degree, but still present – SE Asia. It baffles me that people have shrugged and tolerated it.
And the way they pervert the language and science! An Englishman calling a Scot a Scottish git is now guilty of “racism” despite the fact that both are Caucasian. It is totally insane, yet these ignoramuses are in the ascendant, and no one knowledgable steps in and tells them they’re talking rubbish.
There is a lot of pernicious rubbish talked by a lot of people, it’s not just the PC leftists we need to keep an eye on. People like Guessedworker like to make a huge fuss about the excesses of PC as part of their strategy of shoring up a socially conservative agenda.
As libertarians we are constantly presented with a whole series of false dichotomies between the socialist left and the socially conservative right and told we must choose between them. The only choice we need to make is to reject both of these false ideologies with as much vehmence and clarity that we can manage. Don’t lets be the useful idiots of either side.
Paul Coulam – The PC warriors are very dangerous to liberty. We can’t ignore them. They are intent on domination and they’re being allowed to get away with it because, for some reason which I do not understand, people fear to say them nay.
Verity,
Oh, I didn’t mean that you, specifically, were laughing off this censorious poison. But people tend so to do, especially those of us on the right. At the same time, though, we strengthen the guard against further outbreaks of thought-crime. It is quite pernicious.
There’s nothing we can do with the progenators of this situation … the university dons, the race industry professionals, the journalists, the infected politicians and all the manifold mini-nutjobs beavering away in our public sector. I suppose the politicians might sway with the breeze if it changed. Byt the rest are commited activists in the culture war. Their objective requires the debasing of the culture that supports a perceived white, male hegemony. That’s what this is really all about.
Second problem: not everyone in the rest of the population thinks PC is bad. The “identities” in identity politics seem only too happy to be beneficiaries. All women are, to some extent, feminists these days and consider that their rights have been advanced and that getting out of the home was a good thing. All non-whites – and jews -believe white males are fundamentally and fatally flawed if we exhibit the slightest hint of disregard for colour or difference. Same with homosexuals. PC has created an expectation among its clients that the hegemonous majority must meet … or pay a price in moral opprobrium, unemployment or imprisonment.
We cannot roll this back. We have to espouse an alternative, truer, more potent – and here’s the thing – anti-egalitarian message.
Many blog-hoppers will, by now, look at my net-name and think, “Oh jeez no, it’s that sociobiology guy!” But human difference is my answer to the spreading vines of egalitarianism. It’s not just sociobiology, of course – that happens to be the only useful and complete theory of human difference to hand at the moment. But population genetics is rowing in behind and catching up fast. It just isn’t there yet, though.
My other cure – aimed at the ladies and the family, really – is social conservatism. Yep, more unpopular still. But what do you want, a stable society or an equal society? (Libertarians please note, an equal society will not be free but a stable one might be).
Other/better ideas will be received here with an open mind!
Verity writes:
“The PC warriors are very dangerous to liberty. We can’t ignore them. They are intent on domination and they’re being allowed to get away with it because, for some reason which I do not understand, people fear to say them nay.”
I agree, that’s why I urged the most vehment resistance. The social conservatives though would have you out of a job, barefoot and breeding. That’s their agenda.
PC is a bullshit, dogmatic & prescriptive reaction to various real problems.
Social conservatives would deny that the problems (homophobia, racism etc.) are problems, & have us return to “the good old ways”. No way.
PC-ites seem to think that by simply avoiding a few bad words, we can change peoples’ minds.. hahaha!
What you have to understand though, is most PC advocates aren’t warriors against freedom. Some of them are meddling nanny-state advocates, but a lot of their supporters just see these terrible things, want to do something about them, & believe that their simplistic approach will work. They’re not the enemy, just kinda stupid.
Reviling them as “evil” will make you look as though you’re in lockstep with the social conservatives, and anyone in thrall to the PC movement will dismiss you as such. I don’t have any magic “cure the world of this stupidity” solution, but to at least agree you don’t like people having having racist or homophobic attitudes either (if you don’t, that is. If you do, well whatever.. no moral relativism for me. You’re wrong. Full stop), and then to go on & explain why you feel their approach is dumb.
Dunno… might be worth a shot.
Paul,
Once again I read your (truly) stuck-in-a-rut views of social conservatism. I know this credo might sound paternalistic. I know it might sound backward-looking. No doubt there ARE many paternalistic, backward-looking social conservatives. But there is also a crisis in reproductivity. There is a crisis in family stability. These are profound issues – THE two great social issues of our age, really – beside which being free to take more liberties is perfectly irrelevant.
Neither the egalitarianism of the left nor the social liberalism of the redoubtable Mr Coulam says anything constructive about these two issues. Social conservatism does (or, at least, the parts of it that accord with our biological imperatives do). Open your mind, as you suppose this social conservative’s mind should be opened.
A_t,
I understand PC to be, along with identity politics, one of two strategies culled from what one might call the Frankfurt/Gramsci prospectus for cultural revolution in the west. Do you agree?
Obviously, I agree with you that the left as a whole is not culturally revolutionary. But even if it just thinks in terms of advancing social justice for disempowered groups, it has ALREADY internalised these two very dangerous, group-based strategies. In fact, in action IP and PC produce the delegitimisation of white heterosexual society, most specifically in the roles of husbands and fathers. It doesn’t take a genius to see the truth of this and to realise that you don’t need armies of mao-suited cultural revolutionaries to achieve it.
You mention social conservatism as if it was some kind of plague! But social conservatism is just another tool – and the only one that can repair the ravages not of PC but social liberalism. Actually, it does not engage directly with PC. For that, a specifically anti-egalitarian dynamic is required, a new and powerful truth that disproves the underlying assumptions of group equality. Paul’s vehement and sincere opposition won’t make a blind bit of difference. But science is cooking up the possible answer.
Shouldn’t something bedone about those male and female mating connectors?
Guessedworker,
I want a stable society. I propose we ban autos and drive in movies.
And these computer thingies will just have to go.
Personally in terms of genetics I do not see non-breeders as a problem. They will die out. As long as we keep them out of drive in movies.
Guessedworker says:
“All women are, to some extent, feminists these days and consider that their rights have been advanced and that getting out of the home was a good thing. ”
But I could easily argue that there is a subset of women in the suburbs whose husbands are the sole breadwinners who view child-rearing as their “career.” They also expend much effort in “community service” — to their churches, schools, and other volunteer projects.
Oftentimes they work part-time or are self-employed so that they can “be there” for their children and families. They also make sacrifices — less grand houses, no SUVs, no cleaning crew to help with housework, don’t buy the latest technology, etc. etc.
They are alive and well. So, please, don’t use the term “all women.” You might be surprised at how diverse we are.
But you’d be right in thinking a lot of us believe that we should have the right to make choices in our lives. We might not agree with the choices other women make, but NOT having the choice “made for us” is still new enough to garner great support among most of us.
Tessa Jowell – or anyway, one of those Stepford Wives in the cabinet – said it was a “problem” that some women had not gone back into the labour market two months after giving birth. I view this as not only insane, but an aggressive pushing of a communist agenda. Nationalise children; the state will take care of them, and get the drones back to work. I still maintain that these people are warriors in the destruction of society and I am still baffled that so few people advise them to sod off.
Tony Blair is going to introduce “incentives” for people to go to the gym. Why aren’t people falling about laughing? Ban smoking in public. Put a levy on alcohol advertising. As parents can’t be trusted to say no to their children, ban TV advertising of “unhealthy” treats. These people are dangerous and I do not believe they are responding to perceived injustices in society. It’s all of a muchness with the race relations industry and the gay rights mafia. They are out to control.
CJ,
Criticism accepted and apologies for the unpardonable generalisation. It’s just that at a push I am old enough to remember a different age when, I think, “all” women understood the advantages of their sex over mere males. But feminine wiles are not what they were. The obviously dangerous egalitarianism of the feminists, the pill, the male work environment and that perfect lie you mention – choice – have very much coarsened them. Even the country house wives, with whom I pass the time of day at my daughter’s school each morning, have not escaped the influence of these things. Still, thanks you for the comment. I am more than happy to be fisked by a lady.
Verity,
For some time Polly Toynbee has been calling for that amounts to political re-education for the under fives – the ultimate grab for control. It won’t be in the next Labour Manifesto. But I’ll bet it materialises in government policy if they win.
Oh, this terrible ‘choice’. Both sides seem to be trying to foist things on people. Guessedworker & his ilk would like women to stop applying their “wiles” to particle physics, & leave such things to men. This is ridiculous. Furthermore, I see no means, other than highly repressive government & ridiculous laws, to achieve this goal.
Equally ridiculous is imposing work on mothers; telling them the old way is bad for everyone, & no-one should use it any more.
Anyone who says “women should act this way” & would like to back this up with action, is no good in my book. Women should make up their own mind how they wish to behave, & not have others coercing them into ‘correct’ behaviour. That, to me, was the essence of intelligent feminism anyway.
To Guessedworker in particular, how far would you like to roll feminism back? Should women vote? It’s rather outside their ‘traditional role’, don’t you think?
Just putting a nose in–
“Paul Coulam – The PC warriors are very dangerous to liberty. We can’t ignore them. They are intent on domination and they’re being allowed to get away with it because, for some reason which I do not understand, people fear to say them nay.”
The reason people fear them is because they are in turn unafraid to tar with a wide brush. In the instant example, to suggest that this objection to the use of “master/slave” in what clearly IS that kind of relationship (one doing as bid by the other, without any input of its own into the matter), will draw endless ad hominem–“HOHO! SO, you think the it’s OK for people to be slaves!? HEY EVERYBODY, THIS GUY LIKES SLAVERY! HE HATES BLACK PEOPLE! GET HIM! B U R N H I M!”
It’s not true, of course, but it’s a lot easier than rational discourse, and since PC is an extremist ethic, it’s hard for moderates to run up against. After all, the first thing a moderate will say is, “I see your point, but….”