Truth in advertising?
|
|||||
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] Authors
Arts, Tech & CultureCivil LibertiesCommentary
EconomicsSamizdatistas |
A really great way for the police to make people uneasyNovember 4th, 2017 |
11 comments to A really great way for the police to make people uneasy |
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. CategoriesArchivesFeed This PageLink Icons |
|||
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. |
Before the Act of 1856 (at least I think it was 1856) government police forces were not compulsory in English and Welsh counties – I do not believe we were eating each other before then.
And before the 1870s there were no public prosecutions (in England and Wales) unless the offence was against the Crown – this did not mean that robbers, murderers and rapists did not get prosecuted.
The Edwin Chadwick (Jeremy Bentham) view of everything (basically “first there was darkness and then THE STATE moved in the darkness and said let-there-be-light!”) is wrong.
And, no, I am not an anarchist – I just think this look-to-the-state-for-everything doctrine leads to the situation that the photograph in the post (unintentionally) shows.
During communism, this place was were people with incorrect opinions were taken into the basement for ‘adjustment’.
Perry De Havilland. Do you have any idea from when the facade of the building dates?
Where is it?
Jay: 1925
Alisa: Bratislava, where I am currently
Thanks.
All hail the Napoleonic Code, peasants!!
Echoing what Paul said, even as recently as a hundred years ago when newspapers referred to the “prosecutor” in a criminal case they meant the victim.
Yes Patrick – or someone prosecuting on behalf of the victim (for example in a murder case).
The difficulty is that such a political and legal order can not endure when its philosophical foundations are undermined. The establishment elite gradually rejected the “Old Whig” philosophical beliefs of such thinkers as Ralph Cudworth, Thomas Reid and Edmund Burke (indeed the Victorians tried to reinterpret Burke as a utilitarian – whose only objection to bigger government “Social Reform” was that it should be done in a gradual and orderly way, both this Victorian philosophical and this Victorian political point about Edmund Burke is FALSE), replacing them with the philosophical ideas of Thomas Hobbes, David Hume and Jeremy Bentham.
One can NOT get to the politics of the Bill of Rights (British or American) from the philosophy of Thomas Hobbes, David Hume and Jeremy Bentham. John Stuart Mill tried desperately to create a new philosophical case for political liberty that did NOT depend on the old philosophical principles (such things as human moral agency – free will, the soul, and also universal and objective Natural Law), but as James McCosh pointed out at the time – the effort of J.S. Mill to build a new philosophical foundation for liberty FAILS.
Contra to such writers as the late F.A. Hayek – if the philosophical principles of the “Old Whigs” (philosophical principles they actually shared with such Tory folk as Dr Johnson – there is a vast philosophical divide between the Aristotelian Dr Johnson and his “fellow Tory” David Hume) are rejected, then the political principles of the “Old Whigs” eventually also go.
No, de Havilland, you are in Presporok (or Pressburg, as a café outside the rather grim railway station will remind you).