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 Hollywood illiberals such as George Clooney and Michael Moore made a career of sneering at the ageing Charlton Heston, which was almost enough to make me join the NRA. True, many of Heston’s conservative views might be as dated as his movies. But a willingness to take up arms for human freedom is one reason why we still don’t live on the planet of the apes.
– Mick Hume, reflecting on the stance on the right to bear arms that was taken by the late, great Charlton Heston. Here is a wonderful tribute to Heston by the US actor, Richard Dreyfus. Dreyfus is a ‘liberal’ in the American usage; his comments show real class and generosity of spirit.
|
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.
|
Heston also stood up for civil rights.
A man who believed in liberty and rights for all, including the right to be responsible for yourself and your own defence.
May he rest in peace.
What makes Dreyfus’ tribute even more significant, is that it was written almost years ago, when he was not recently deceased, and so it was OK to sneer at him.
‘almost 6 years ago’
Good for Dreyfus, he seems like a decent person.
Yes, thanks particularly for the Dreyfuss link. Very impressive.
Isn’t it great how you can come across great pieces of writing from a longish time ago on the internet. But, someone has to go looking for them, and then realise how good they are, or it doesn’t happen. So, like I say, thanks.
And how many Americans are dead as a consequence of Heston’s misguided macho posturing?
The more he was maliciously misrepresented, the more I liked Charlton Heston.
If you wish to weigh the amount of crap tossed on this man, I suggest you to read his speech at the Harvard Law School:
http://www.cnsnews.com/culture/archive/CUL19990316a.html
Huh? Since when did belief in self-defence imply support for wars and killing of innocents? The right to keep and bear arms for self-defence can sit quite easily with opposition to foreign interventions, for example.
Brian: I remembered reading the Drefus article and was so impressed that I hunted it down. It is worth reminding ourselves that Hollywood contains plenty of good people.
Because a woman raped and left dead in an alleyway is morally superior to one explaining to the cops why she shot someone dead in self defence, right? Fuckwit.
Indeed.
Some actors can write too. Remarkable.
“Misguided macho posturing?”
Well, he was a film star. I mean that’s the job, right?
I love the casual connection you attempt to make. Are you really saying that Charlton Heston was responsible for those deaths? And not perhaps the people who did the shooting?
The short answer to BritSwedeGuy’s question: “None, moron.”
“BritSwedeGuy”: “And how many Americans are dead as a consequence of Heston’s misguided macho posturing?”
Not a single one. Not one. Do you understand?
While we’re at it, though, it wouldn’t be impossibly difficult to work up the number of people — in America, at least — who are dead because they called 911. In some cases, we have their last gasps at the hands of their murders on tape.
Why are you such a shit-heel?
BritSwede:
How many Jews are dead because they were disarmed?
Come over to the dark side Luuuuuke, the water’s fine!
BritSwedeGuy, it seems you’ve some sort of inside knowledge about a suspect, alias “Misguided Macho Posturing,” whom you claim is responsible for murder or murders. This must be deeply confidential information, as the media has not yet released a description of this “Posturing” character. Would you like to share your information with the police, or would you prefer one of us come to you, to make a citizens’ arrest for being an accomplice to the crime?
One thing I found interesting in the Dreyfus article was the idea that portraying a truly epic hero simply isnt done anymore. I tried to think of the last time I saw a character like Ben Hur or Taylor from Planet of the Apes, and the closest I can come is Indiana Jones.
Maybe it is time to see such macho Star Trek-fisticuffs he-men again.
Darryl: “Gladiator” (no, Crowe is no Heston, for good or bad, I was referring to the movie itself).
I look forward to BritSwedeGuy putting a sign on his window saying “gun free home”. After all I am sure he lives in an area with “gun control” – so the criminals will not have firearms, any more than they do in Washington D.C., which has had strict “gun control” for more than 30 years.
For the record, those States of the United States that allow such things as “concealed carry” (so that a potential attacker does not know whether one is carrying a firearm or not) see marked REDUCTIONS of violent crime.
On freedom:
I am glad that Mr Heston’s support for the foundation of civil liberties (the private ownership of means of defence) is not considered “dated” – as freedom is no more or less “dated” than tyranny.
For example, the first Roman Emperors passed and enforced regulations against the private ownership of and training in swords and other weapons – and they did so out of fear that one day the people might rise up and restore the Republic.
Nor is the right to own firearms for the purpose of maintaining a free state (there is nothing about “hunting” or other such in the 2nd Amendment) confined to the American Bill of Rights – this POLITICAL position was the same in the British Bill of Rights of a century before.
Indeed up to the First World War private firearm ownership was very common in Britain (and millions of people were members of the British National Rifle Association), and yet violent crime was lower than it is now.
Those who talk of reducing violent crime do not really believe that people who are prepared to violate the law against murder will respect regulations against firearm ownership.
Support for “gun control” is POLITICAL, just as support for the right to keep and bear arms is POLITICAL.
It is a matter of being pro or anti freedom.