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 A totalitarian state cannot tolerate privacy, even and especially within the family, the last redoubt of dissent. Hate-speech laws do not yet cover what you say in the privacy of your own home – you can’t be prosecuted for stirring up hatred at your dining table or in the bedroom.
The [law] commission, however, finds this idea of privacy intolerable. So, if it gets its way, any words you use in your own home that are ‘likely’, even by accident, to ‘stir up hatred’ against a vast array of ‘protected’ groups – including ‘punks’, if you can believe it – could get you sent to prison for seven years. These proposals will make parents fear their own children – and children fear their siblings.
– Radomir Tylecote
|
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.
|
The ghosts of Mao and Stalin must be exhausted from laughing.
There are many “hate speech” words and phrases that I agree ought not be used in polite society by polite people.
It’s going to be exhausting and a bit jarring now having to intentionally remember and use each one of them daily.
Because that’s really the only way to fight this.
No. 1 on the list being “hate speech”.
Having the Frankfurt Sect of Marxism dominating education was always going to have consequences – and the totalitarian “Law Commission” is one of those consequences.
These people are not just bit misguided – they serve the cause of evil (of tyranny) and they are educated to do so.
Almost every institution (churches, big business, whatever) in the Western world is under the influence, at last to some extent, of the totalitarians.
The Law Commission was a creation of Harold Wilson’s government on 15th June 1965. It consists of ‘Commissioners’ headed by a judge and the rest of the Commissioners are lawyers or law lecturers, who seem to be ‘suitably qualified‘ for the position. Each part of the UK has its own commission.
What do the commissions do? Section 3 (1) in brief:
Forgive me, but I thought that we elected MPs to do that, and appointed Peers in the House of Lords to represent themselves, so that they could do that. This is simply delegating the task of reviewing the law, and modernising it, to the worst possible combination, one of judges and academics.
No, we are not going to forgive you, or forget you. Were you going to say, “I never expected the Spanish Inquisition!”? Nobody ever expects the Spanish Inquisition- that is why we are so successful! Will you be free Saturday for an interrogation?
So transgender identity is a protected characteristic and now they want to add all women as well. What’s to stop any man accused of misogyny of simply claiming to be a woman?
Also: “A totalitarian state cannot tolerate privacy”. I’ve heard Joe Rogan on his podcast repeatedly bringing up Elon Musk’s neural net idea and he rhapsodises about a world with no privacy, where everyone has access to everyone else’s inner thoughts. Whenever I hear that I think to myself when that happens I’m committing suicide, imagine a world where you aren’t even free inside your own head
So perhaps, with hindsight, can we put to bed the idea that concepts such as ‘the thin end of the wedge’ or ‘slippery slope’ are in fact not wild fantasies, but legitimate expressions of concern.
I propose that we’ve moved off of the ‘slippery slope’, we’re now on the helter skelter.
Targeted victims may not identify as non victim groups.
The defence contends the person who presents as a woman and claims to be a victim of misogyny is actually a closeted man.
Yes Mr Ed – for example the Law Commission (Law Commissions) would define the State Motto of South Dakota “Under God The People Rule” as CRIME-THINK – on two grounds.
Firstly because the motto places God above the State – which is unacceptable to Collectivists (such as the Law Commission – Commissions) who hold that the State is God (much of the language of Hegel seems to suggest this – but formally he would have denied it. And Secondly because “the people” should, to Law Commission (Commissions) not decide matters of law – only totalitarian Guardians (such as themselves) should decide what is law.
From Australia.
Professor Triggs (former Australian Human Rights Commissioner) told the sell-out audience “there has never been a more important time to stand up for laws which prohibit racial abuse in the public arena’’
“SADLY you can say what you like around the kitchen table at home,’’ she said.
https://www.abc.net.au/mediawatch/episodes/internal-war-at-news-corp/9972716
Triggs – just look at her ‘record’ in office (and in her private life – in respect of her disabled offspring). She has ‘previous’. An odious individual – suitably connected, I may say, to an odious university in an odious state (Victoria).
Every effort to stop me speaking only makes me think far, far worse of the people trying to stop me
‘Are you guilty?’ said Winston.
‘Of course I’m guilty !’ cried Parsons with a servile glance at the telescreen. ‘You don’t think the Party would arrest an innocent man, do you?’ His frog-like face grew calmer, and even took on a slightly sanctimonious expression. ‘Thoughtcrime is a dreadful thing, old man,’ he said sententiously. ‘It’s insidious. It can get hold of you without your even knowing it. Do you know how it got hold of me? In my sleep! Yes, that’s a fact. There I was, working away, trying to do my bit—never knew I had any bad stuff in my mind at all. And then I started talking in my sleep. Do you know what they heard me saying?’
He sank his voice, like someone who is obliged for medical reasons to utter an obscenity.
‘“Down with Big Brother!” Yes, I said that! Said it over and over again, it seems. Between you and me, old man, I’m glad they got me before it went any further. Do you know what I’m going to say to them when I go up before the tribunal? “Thank you,” I’m going to say, “thank you for saving me before it was too late.”’
‘Who denounced you?’ said Winston.
‘It was my little daughter,’ said Parsons with a sort of doleful pride. ‘She listened at the keyhole. Heard what I was saying, and nipped off to the patrols the very next day. Pretty smart for a nipper of seven, eh? I don’t bear her any grudge for it. In fact I’m proud of her. It shows I brought her up in the right spirit, anyway.’
llater,
llamas
Just remember, in the current commies utopian fantasies, we’re the kulaks in the way.
Of course they want to criminalise everything we do and say. Its just a step in their process.
Excellent comments. I just wish they were not true – but they are true.
One might reasonably ask, WTF?