This morning, when I read Guy’s post about his and the public’s responses to the letter bombing, I felt a thrill of excitement. I have been expecting and looking for signs that this time is finally coming. I actually have found some comfort in the acceleration of the recent decline of liberty and privacy in the UK. It is slow declines that go undetected and unchallenged. Generations may forget, but individuals remember. When good intentions run amok, individuals remember what the original justification was. James Madison in Federalist 51, said “Justice is the end of government. It is the end of civil society. It ever has been and ever will be pursued until it be obtained, or until liberty be lost in the pursuit.” Recognition of this danger seems to be unique to English cultures.
Being farther removed from the UK, I have a different and wider perspective. My expectations come from reading more Tolkien than Times. And from reading history, not histrionics. English literary and political history is one of awakenings. In the past millennium, freedom has been won in sweeping victories, and is only lost through neglect. For two of my favorite authors, Lewis and Tolkien, awakening was the sole plot line of virtually their entire life’s work. Dickens’s best known character is Ebenezer Scrooge, and his story is the essence of an awakening.
This struggle against obsessive domination by a big brother state will be difficult with many wobbles and diversions. There will be times when backward steps out number the forward ones. But my confident expectation is that the history of Britain and of English speaking cultures everywhere is on our side. Liberty “lost in the pursuit,” will be reclaimed. It always has been.
This event inspires a feeling that confuses a lot of people. They cannot quite put their finger on it. Some have mentioned schadenfreude. No. That’s not it. In fact, that particular viciousness is so alien to English speakers that we need to borrow a European word for it. I am confident that no person here takes any sick pleasure from that clerk’s suffering. The trail of English history is a search for justice, not redistribution of suffering. The feeling this event inspires is deeper than that and it is a just and justified one. This feeling is coming from our recognition of possibility, of alliance, of purpose; the first perceptions of a change in the direction of history. Since this feeling is one we have felt seldom and mentioned even less, it does not surprise me that it should go unrecognized. But when I read Guy’s post this morning, I felt it.
Joy.
Who is “Dicken”?
Oops. Fixed.
Dickens. What’s up with the nitpicking?
You read Tolkien?
Tel; you what. You and Ray Mears slope off to your scandinavian fantasies and the adults can clear up the sad fool who thinks the best way to manage his delusions is by conducting a small bombing campaign.
What is it – you sneakingly approve of his actions because you don’t like the DVLC? Grow up.
Literacy a problem, David? Or perhaps attention span?
At no time did I or do I approve of his tactics or his target selection. No thoughtful person could. The post you apparently never finished reading is about what people are responding to and why. I made clear that I doubt anybody here approves of what happened. And I reject any suggestion that there is any happiness whatever at the clerk’s experience.
What people are discovering that is so difficult for them to understand, is their agreement with his anger and his passion. And that so many others share it with them.
Mmm, I can read, thanks:
‘I felt a thrill of excitement. I have been expecting and looking for signs that this time is finally coming. ‘
some little fantasy, some thrill, a frisson.
It’s a bomb, not an argument or a cause. A bomb.
Two of your favourite authors are ‘Lewis and Tolkien’ although I suppose you’re too much of a dimwit to even be aware of other people called Lewis who might more plausibly be cited by an adult as a significant writer. But if it’s true that you really rate the tiresome Tolkien and the apologist C.S.Lewis (I suppose you mean him, I doubt your reading material ever ventured much out of the nursery) then I can only advise you to go and read some grown-ups.
Your post, such as it is, is shot through with nonsense but I don’t see you even once condemn the action of the sick idiot who sends bombs through the post.
Well, David, you’ve clarified several points. First you have a very short and selective memory retention. Second, you seem to be unable to pick out a clearly labeled topic of discussion, which was “about his [Guy’s] and the public’s responses”. Since it still seems to be eluding you, I’ll type slowly. It’s about people’s responses, not the letter bombing itself. These responses (the people’s, not the letter bomber’s) have been a long time coming and I welcome them.
It is probably a waste of time to respond to you. By your own unwitting declaration, you do not understand allegorical works. With that great disability, I suggest you may have trouble with a lot of other topics, as well.
And from my post:
Unlike you, who seems to be trying to turn it into a job opportunity.
Saying, rhetorically, that you’re sure noone takes pleasure form the clerk’s suffering stops somewhat short of a condemnation of the idiot who sent the bomb. I’m sure you can see that.
Go away, with your sub-McVeigh fantasies.
David. The bomber and the bombing are not the topic. I made the topic very clear in the first sentence. You need to learn to read a complex sentence. You are off topic. If you want to talk about the bomber, do it on your own blog.
Oy ! Monkee Face!!
You’re only supposed to blow
The bloody doors off!!!
For my part I would paintball and necklace speed and cctv cameras, scramble their data bases if i had the expertese, but I would never ever send a bomb through the post.
And that goes for everyone here, unless they wish to contradict me.
But I have done none of the above.
So When you hear a newsstory that implies that the little guy is fighting back at last
Well you punch the air there for a milisecond, and then feel bad about yourself.
Much like lefty friends of mine expressed post 9/11
Terrible and all that but they had it coming because of
Blah Blah Blah
Then on reflection, hating themselves in the morning.
Yep it lifted my spirit for a second, but only one.
This thread is a confessional, in case you had any hard and fast/black and white ideas David.
There are better ways to affect things if only we all get off our arses and do them.
Deleted. Be an ass elsewhere
RAB – I’ve pretty black and white ideas about sending bombs through the post, yes. You mean to say you don’t?
Jesus!!!
What was it about
“I would never ever send a bomb through the post”, and that goes for the rest of us,
That you didn’t understand????
David Jones, you are a heartbeat away from getting all further comments deleted. Your points are asked and answered. Repeating yourself insultingly is not an available option however.
Mid,
Tolkien frequently stated that he disliked allegory. But then he was a writer of fantasy 😉
But then I don’t quite share your joy at Guy’s post because I am pessimistic about the UK for too many reasons to go into now.
David Jones,
Did your cat die this morning or something? I haven’t seen such a display of invective on Samizdata for a while. Thank you sir!
England in particular and its derivative cultures, across the board, are the free-est. I don’t think this is a coincidence. I think our innate cultural character is for the underdog and an individual is the smallest minority. I believe that it is deeply in our culture, and even in our language, to hold the values we do. For example, ‘schadenfreude’ is not in the English language. Literally. Our values run far deeper than we imagine. I am fully expecting a rejecting of present trends and assumptions. We are already seeing it. You may be pessimistic, but I am merely impatient.
Even though the great majority of them believed that the act is disgustingly and obviously wrong, what is remarkable, and what I am remarking about is how they did feel something good about it. And most importantly, questioning what is the real source of the good feeling?
A very many Britons did feel a moment of glee. And being good people, they immediately felt guilty about it. This is because in most cases they misdiagnosed the source of their feeling. I am convinced that what they felt was the presence of someone who shared their cause if not their values. And subsequently, that of others who also shared their cause.
To reject their support for the underlying cause on the grounds of this bomber’s crime is unwarranted. This would be the equivalent of rejecting abolition of slavery on the grounds of this abolitionists crime.
Like John Brown’s geniunely horrific quintuple murder did, this attack brought together people that didn’t realize the degree of their mutual cause.
The finding of common cause with others does not equate with the support for the actions of one of them. It is this misguided equation that is sometimes perpetrated as a strawman attack by those who support the status quo.
midwesterner, your post is far scarier (more scary?) than Guy Herberts – you’ve managed something of the feeling of a Rapturist looking forward to Armageddon and Tribulation.
It just doesn’t read like it’s written from ‘a critically rational individualist perspective’
… which is possibly why libertarian bloggers should be a great deal more careful to clearly distance themselves from bombings. I know you don’t agree with posting bombs, but if that disagreement is toned down it will easily be overlooked. It would be a shame if those who support the status quo were to be fed more posts like this which they could use to brand those who disagree with the social democratic mainstream as violent cranks. Ritual condemnations of mail bombings may be tedious, but in this context they could be necessary.
On a positive note, I think you are right about the Anglosphere’s instinctive support for liberty. I just wish I could share your optimism.
Re: “A very many Britons did feel a moment of glee. And being good people, they immediately felt guilty about it.”
I do not approve of letter bombs (though by the sound of it these ones were actually intended to scare, more than cause physical harm) and it is a reasonable view that the people who are actually the victims are by and large blameless – unless you subscribe to the view that they are tiny cogs in the machinery of state oppression.
Never-the-less when I realised the campaign appeared to be targeted where it was I did feel a slight lightening of my spirits and I am not sure why. Oh and I do feel a bit guilty about it, but still…
When I first heard about the letter bombs I admit to a frisson of satisfaction, and then I thought the matter through and didn’t really like that response. I am sure I’m not unique in that.
After reflection (maybe mature reflection, maybe not), I condemn the sender. Even if the packages are intended to scare rather than cause harm, there is no guarantee that is all they will do. A little too much explosive, a recipient who is more sensitive than expected, an envelope that doesn’t open, so the recipient uses their teeth?
There was a comment on Guy’s post about a truly effective fight back. Does anyone know Blair’s registration? The thought of speeding past a few cameras and jaunting round the C charge zone with that on the MarkE mobile!
Oh my! I’m learning a lot about communication on this thread. What I was trying (and failed miserably) to capture is that moment in history when the pendulum begins to swing back. I very much view history as mid term cyclical with long term trends underlying the mid length cycles. And what I am seeing (but with a lot of legitimate and informed disagreement) is a long term trend towards liberty and recognition of individuality moving on shorter term cycles of which the last century has not been in the longer term direction.
I think what I do as a result of a ‘rationally critical’ process, but that does not lessen the pleasure of seeing positive trend shifts.
And I’ve learned a whole boat load about communicating in a blog environment on this thread. I think the rantingkraut nailed it with his observation:
My goal from the start was to interupt and derail self chastisement for feelings mistakenly attributed to ‘schadenfreude’. I hope readers followed that link for it. I was amazed how apparently every language on the planet has an institutionalized statement for it except English.
Often the very condemnable actions of a radical fringe do in fact move the bounderies of the greater society’s general assumptions. This in no way means that those members of society approve of the acts of the radicals.
I said (in perhaps too dry of a phrasing) that “At no time did I or do I approve of his tactics or his target selection. No thoughtful person could.” But apparently this is not inclusive or ritualized enough for some of our visitors.
Letter bombing is wrong for more rational reasons that need named. And anyway, targeting clerks by any means is absurd and bound to have a reverse effect.
Oh well … Live and learn. I guess I still need training wheels.
I guess I still need training wheels.
I doubt it. It is possible to make a perfectly lucid post and still be arrantly misunderstood. Look at what I got for failing to hawk and spit with the approved conditioned reflex at Monbiot.
I thought you skirted Nietzschean territory in the latter portion, though.
Thank you for your kind words, Guy. I like the rantingkraut’s descriptive “ritual condemnations”.
I have occasionally had the impression that he is rational and perceptive although I hold different values and therefore, different goals. I didn’t go public with this opinion since I didn’t want to kick a hornet’s nest. Apparently, I’m good at finding different ones to kick.
I am interested in your perception of anything Nietzschean about my interpretations. I have to confess I don’t see it and may not be looking at the specific comments you are refering to. I looked with a mind to finding the similarities and didn’t see them.
Certainly, if anything essentially Nietzschean is present, it is unintended and unwelcome. I am not in agreement with many of his observations and any of his conclusions that I am aware of. But I haven’t looked too deeply into his work.
My apologies for walking on your post. It’s quite apparent that I’ve much yet to learn about blog posting and the dynamics of group blogging.
A little late, but as a fan of Tolkien and Lewis myself, I just have to respond to this, by David:
Critics who treat adult as a term of approval, instead of as a merely descriptive term, cannot be adult themselves. To be concerned about being grown up, to admire the grown up because it is grown up, to blush at the suspicion of being childish; these things are the marks of childhood and adolescence. And in childhood and adolescence they are, in moderation, healthy symptoms. Young things ought to want to grow. But to carry on into middle life or even into early manhood this concern about being adult is a mark of really arrested development. When I was ten, I read fairy tales in secret and would have been ashamed if I had been found doing so. Now that I am fifty I read them openly. When I became a man I put away childish things, including the fear of childishness and the desire to be very grown up. – C. S. Lewis
W.E.M.
The Great Divorce was probably not intended to be interpreted this way, but it is the most visceral allegorical demolition of socialist group-delusion on the anvil of objective reality that I have ever read. Bar none.
I assume you have read it, but encourage you to think of it (and perhaps reread it) in that light.
Wow, I guess a rereading might be in order. I didn’t really think of it in those terms when I read it (though I do remember something somewhere in the book hitting a political nerve in just the right way to make me go, “Oooh! Exactly!” though I can’t remember what specifically). As you said, I’m fairly sure that Lewis’ main concern is the salvation of the reader from whatever little piece of hell he might be jealously clinging to, however small it may be.
It’s a short little read. Might just breeze through it tommorrow.
Anti socialism, antigroup-think, anti collectivsm, along with individuals achieving great things through voluntary cooperation are common threads in his work.
The theological themes will be too off-putting for many readers on this site to get past, but on the other hand, they may miss them entirely and so be unoffended.
I particular enjoyed the side of him that came through in “The Dark Tower and other Stories“. The story of the space prostitutes showed a side of him that I didn’t expect.