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]
|
Samizdata quote of the day Slavery was in fact the very first form of “Renewable Energy”. Slavery was green! And, what is even better, slavery was sustainable – it lasted for thousands of years, until the ability to use fossil fuels gave us the liberty to feel bad about it. Whenever someone waxes eloquent about “Renewable Energy”, think slavery. Because that is where wishful thinking is taking us.
– Commenter Alice.
|
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.
|
No it was not – animal power was.
It is VERY improbable that animal domestication pre-dates forced labour.
Equating renewable energy with slavery is breathtaking stupidity.
Equating renewable energy with slavery is breathtaking stupidity.
Because…?
Actually it is breathtakingly brilliant and very funny, you foolish toad. The luddite atavistic roots of the eco-statists are obvious and they can only get what they want by making us all slaves.
Slavery? Isn’t that a bit optimistic?
Odd that slavery lingers on in some oil-rich countries.
To be sure: all muscle work is renewable energy, whether by animals, slaves or free laborers.
And yes, the “greens” want more muscle work and less burning of fuel.
Some “Greens” have a genuine concern about such things as the emission of C02 from the burning of oil and coal, and do NOT want to return us to, at best, slavery and, far more likely considering how many people industrial civilization supports, mass starvation.
James Lovelock, the father of the British environmentalist movement, suggested a way of telling people like himself (who do not support slavery and mass starvation) from “greens” who do wish to destroy industrial civilization.
Ask them whether they support nuclear power.
Sadly it turns out that most Greens are the bad sort of Green.
I’ve long wondered why the campaign to abolish slavery got into high gear in the mid-eighteenth century, i.e., around the same time the steam engine was invented, and were these two events related.
Of course they do not want. They are dumb enough not to realize the inevitable consequences of the policies they promote.
They basically want what all socialists want: stasis, no growth, no new anything.
Mass starvation (or slavery) is not the immediate result of their policies, it’s rather gradual impoverishment.
You may be prosecuted for failing to separate your rubbish into whatever categories are currently fashionable. In Hertfordshire you are supposed to wash-up the tins and bottles that are left for recycling.
While this doesn’t constitute slavery, it’s clearly a step in that direction.
Where would we get the idea that environmentalists would embrace distasteful things like slavery or child labor in the name of conservation?