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]

A comment by Paul Marks… deleted by The Economist

Paul Marks of this parish commented on an article in the Economist called ‘A lament for America’s Jews’

…whereupon the magazine deleted it.

However, for your edification and as if by some black internet magic, here is that deleted comment…

Do you not ever fear your nose growing Lexington? Or your pants catching fire?

You know perfectly well that the “mentors” who got Comrade Barack into Columbia and Harvard were not “Zionists” (not even “liberal” ones).

At Columbia his room mate was Sohale Siddiqi. William (Bill) Ayers worked just down the street at Bank Street College of Education (and he and Barack went to the same Marxist conferences – continuing Barack’s Marxism whilst at Occidental – and his the work of his true “mentor” in childhood the Communist Party member Frank Marshall Davis).

Bill and Mrs Ayers are the pals of Hamas (part of the unholy alliance between Marxist atheists and radical Islamists — that is so much a feature of the Hyde Park area of Chicago, where both Bill and Barack went to live – of course Frank Marshall Davis was a Chicago CP member till he was ordered to go off to Hawaii).

A teacher and friend of Barack at Columbia was Edward Said (not known for his Zionism). They (and Bill Ayers) continued to be friends after the Columbia years.

And Harvard?

Barack got in because of the letter by Percy Sutton (the attorney of Malcolm X – who Barack’s mother had so admired)

And then there is Khalid Abdullah Tariq al-Mansour (again not known for his Zionism) – who started off as Donald Warden.

And on and on…

Lexington, a genuine question… Do you really believe we are so stupid or so ill informed that you can get away with pretending that Barack Obama has a “Zionist” background?

I really want to know.

Do you despise us (the readers) so much, that you believe you can blatantly say things that are untrue (that you must know are untrue) and we will not even notice?

Barack Obama was elected in 2008 because the “liberal” (again I rather think Gladstone and so on would dispute your definition of the word “liberal”) media managed to hide the truth from most voters – and substitute a tidal wave of “Journo-list” disinformation in the place of the truth.

I assure you that the same trick will not work twice.

Before November most people will know Barack Obama for who and what he really.

… the comment taking form once more like some vengeful revenant risen from that un-quiet place where deleted comments supposed slain by a moderator go, reaching through the screen and grasping ‘Lexington’ by the throat.

Other journalists are openly accusing Robert Fisk of making things up

Damian Thompson at the Telegraph is circumspect, but he quotes Jamie Dettmer, former war correspondent for the Times, who is not:

It has been common knowledge for years among British and American reporters that Bob can just make things up or lift other’s work without attribution and embellish it. I recall him doing it to me on a story in Kuwait about the killings of Palestinians at the hands of Kuwaitis following the liberation of the emirate. I remember also the time Fisk filed a datelined Cairo story about a riot there when he was in fact at the time in Cyprus.

Pope’s theory on this — why Bob gets away with it — is that fellow members of the press corp don’t like to dish the dirt on their colleagues. “The one time I decided to let it be known that a fellow reporter was cheating and passing off others’ work as his own, it was I who became the odd man out, an informer with a chip on my shoulder, and standing joke,” he writes. He notes also that “editors are reluctant to challenge established writers.”

It is noticeable that this collegiate solidarity only fractured when Fisk himself offended against it, by insulting fellow journalists.

(Via Tim Blair, also of the Telegraph, but a different one.)

Delingpole turns his attention to the financial system

A while back, in a posting here about a meeting at the House of Commons addressed by Detlev Schlichter, at which James Delingpole was also present, I speculated that maybe Delingpole might at some point in the future choose to get stuck into the question of what has been going wrong with the world’s financial system.

So, I was delighted to encounter this recent Delingpole posting, about why the price of oil is going up. He features a video of Ron Paul saying that if you print lots and lots of money, everything goes up. Or, to put it another way, it’s not oil that is going up; it’s fiat money that is going down.

I see that Delingpole gives the Cobden Centre an appreciative mention, which will please them greatly.

Delingole, whose idea-spreading abilities I admire more and more, is a significant voice in the world. He has a huge following, which is well deserved. He takes important ideas seriously, but himself not so much, in a most engaging and yet informative way, the proof of his effectiveness being how much he gets up the noses of whatever bad guys he takes aim at.

If Delingpole could do to the world’s central banking racket what he has already done and continues to do to the world’s “climate science” racket, that might really be something.

Amusing Christmas period quotes from the telly and the radio

We already have a ‘Samizdata quote of the day’ for today, but, yes, here are seven more. I wrote them down over last Christmas, and then forgot about them. Ant then today, I encountered them again. They still make me smile, so here they all are for you good people.

First, a couple of things said by Patsy Stone, the amazing fashion monstress played by Joanna Lumley in Absolutely Fabulous. Over Christmas there were two new episodes. So much for my “complete” box set that I found in a charity shop last year.

On the terribleness of the recent riots in London:

Oh I don’t know. Nothing wrong with a bit of extreme shopping.

On the drugs issue:

Have you seen the price of methadone? It’s cheaper to buy crack.

Also on a fashion theme, from one of those Father Christmas in a New York Shopping Store movies, said by the Lady Boss:

I don’t know if large women care what they look like, but if they do, let’s exploit them.

That’s the spirit. And depending on how the project turns out:

This is either the smartest decision I’ve ever made or the stupidest decision you’ve ever made.

Which has to be a very old joke, but like I say, it made me smile.

Next, this from the Headmistress of St Trinian’s (played by Rupert Everett), about her (I think) brother (also Rupert Everett), to her brother’s daughter:

Your father has a short memory masquerading as a clear conscience.

Finally a couple of overhearings from BBC Radio 3. Here’s something from the recently deceased Gustav Leonhardt, about and with whom they did a commemorative Music Matters show, featuring a recorded interview with him. Leonhardt is explaining why the biographical details of the lives of the great composers don’t interest him that much, only their music.

When you meet a genius, you don’t know he is one. He is only a genius when he is at work.

Finally, here is Professor Robert Winston, ruminating on science, in between introducing some of his classical favourites with Rob Cowan:

Uncertainty is a good place to be. It worries me when governments take a very assertive position on the basis of very weak evidence and then stick to it.

The phrase “climate science” was never uttered, but you got the distinct feeling that this particular Public Voice is thinking that CAGW is a band-waggon that it now makes more sense to get off rather than to shout from. I must remember to email the Bishop about that.

Something tells me that the CAGW-ists will, any year now, start having short memories masquerading as clear consciences.

Reasons for guarded optimism about the ID card issue

Talking to a business contact of mine earlier today, the subject of the Levenson enquiry concerning the alleged hacking of persons’ phones by journalists/others came up. One thing that was mentioned was that the corruption of certain police officers, and possibly other officials with access to important data, highlights the dangers of aggregating large amounts of important data into a few places, since the temptation to abuse this for financial gain – by selling some of the juicy stuff to journalists – will be hard to resist. And that surely is another argument against centralised ID systems of the sort that groups such as No2ID have campaigned against.

Call me optimistic, but at least I hope I can say that for the moment, the case for compulsory ID cards is off the table in the UK. That does not, of course, mean that the Database State is not advancing, quite the reverse. But at least some of the more brazen examples of this are not advancing, and the public are getting a very good education in the dangers of data aggregation and the abuse of data by those who are entrusted to defend the public.

That Hayek v Keynes video gets another (very admiring) plug from the BBC

Comment just attached, by “Malcolm”, to my posting here a while back entitled Austrianism as Number Two:

Newsnight has just introduced its story on Ed Milliband’s decision today to back the government’s pay freeze by playing the Keynes v Hayek video from Econstories.tv

The narrator even described it as a “fabulous” video that is “easily the most entertaining explanation of the issues” – as closely as I can remember the wording, anyway.

I realise I’m commenting on a posting that’s six months old, but I’m hoping Brian, as the original author, gets automatically notified of comments. That the video is being used to give context to a now-current news item is certainly consonant with Brian’s original theory about Austrianism as the new #2 (with apologies to The Prisoner).

I did get automatically notified of this comment. Many thanks for the kind thought. However, I also clocked this Newsnight snippet myself, and added an off topic bit in a comment I also added to the earlier posting today about SOPA, which Newsnight is also reporting on, thanks to the Wikipedia black-out that Rob Fisher noted.

The more I ponder those Keynes v Hayek videos, the more of a stroke of total genius I believe them to be. They play especially well with the BBC, because the BBC is never happier than when explaining an issue in terms of competing arguments. Yes, the BBC is often “biased”, in the sense that you get a definite idea of which team they may prefer (which may not be yours), and which team they choose to give the last word to. But the “other” team often gets a more than fair crack of the whip.

As I made clear in that earlier posting of mine, the real sufferers from this kind of bias are the “other other” teams, so to speak, the ones who don’t even get a look in, the ones who are shown as being not even wrong, on account of not even existing.

To quote Rob Fisher in the posting immediately below, about Detlev Schlichter’s performance on the BBC’s “Start The Week” show yesterday morning:

All in all not a bad day for the spreading of Austrian ideas.

Which adds up to two consecutive not bad days for the spreading of Austrian ideas.

Detlev Schlichter starting the week next week

Incoming from Detlev Schlichter:

Just a heads-up in case you are interested, I will be one of four guests on Andrew Marr’s show Start the Week on BBC Radio Four on Monday, 16th January. The program starts at 9 am but there are various ‘listen again’ facilities, and it will also be published as a podcast. The topic is the financial crisis, and the other guests are The Economist’s Philip Coggan (author recently of  Paper Promises), Angela Knight, chief executive of the British Bankers’ Association, and the Labour life peer Maurice Glasman.

I am interested.

Beating Bill O’Reilly with DIY publishing

Dymaxicon doesn’t accept ‘submissions’. I’m not a particularly submissive person, and I have always resented that writers were always cast in a submissive role… no one should ever be in the position of accepting or rejecting.

So says California-based Samizdatista Hillary Johnson about Dymaxicon, the new model publishing company she set up as an imprint of Agile Learning Labs. Yes, a software development coaching firm is its own publisher – and is putting titles on the market that cover everything from gardening to scrum (the geeky kind, not the rugby kind). Free from the politics and restraints of traditional publishers, Johnson is highly selective about the titles Dymaxicon puts out, and her gamut-running taste leads to releases such as a graphic novel telling the true story of two teenagers on a killing spree in the 1950s:

The model is simple: No one makes money unless the books sell, and Dymaxicon does a straight 50/50 split with authors. The publisher earns its half by editing the work, formatting it for a range of electronic reading devices and apps, marketing the work (including creative, easily shareable book trailers), and making sure the entire distribution process runs smoothly. Titles are available both in electronic form and, for more money, as hard copies.

So what kind of results are Johnson and her authors getting with this approach?

Nancy Rommelmann, another friend of Samizdata, has released one novel and one essay with Dymaxicon. The Bad Mother quickly became a cult favorite novel, and was downloaded more than 1,000 times within hours of Dymaxicon launching a promotional giveaway (you can still get it for free as I type). Her essay on growing up as a rebellious teen in 1970s Brooklyn, The Queens of Montague Street, hit number seven – and is still climbing – on Amazon’s bestseller list of biographies and memoirs of journalists, topping titles by Bill O’Reilly, Anderson Cooper, and Barbara Walters, among many other celebrities. It was also named the number one long-form read of the week by top online outlet Longreads, with dozens of other blogs lauding the work as well worth the 99 cent price.

David Swinson, a former police detective, film producer and music promoter who released his first novel for Dymaxicon after a career of working with the likes of Nick Cave, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Social Distortion, saw his book A Detailed Man rise to the number one spot on Amazon’s list of bestselling noir titles. The murder mystery also hit Amazon’s Top 100 overall list of Kindle bestsellers.

The fact is, you can publish your writing on Amazon if you have 99 cents. (If you are an Amazon Prime member, it is free.) Yes, blogging has enabled anyone to publish their thoughts without cost for years now, but putting your writing into a digestible format and capitalizing on Amazon’s distribution platform is kind of a big deal. Just because it is not difficult to do does not mean it is easy to do well – which is where a publisher like Dymaxicon comes in. This new model means that revenue-sucking intermediaries like agents can be bypassed completely, as can dealing with traditional publishing houses (if one was ever lucky enough to get that far in the first place). As Johnson says:

The way literature gets produced in our world seems positively medieval. Not to mention anti-creative. Publishers are gate-keepers, deciding who gets to be heard, and the process of putting a book out is glacially slow, linear, and hierarchical.

Not anymore, though. So if you have always fancied yourself a novelist in the making, or think the series of email rants you send friends might make for compelling content to read as a collection, consider making an author of yourself. All you have to lose is the expired excuse that it is hard to get published.

Facts and attitudes

This morning I was prodded by the scourge of epidemiocracy, Chris Snowden, to read this piece by Theodore Dalrymple. What most struck me was not the main argument (I find predictable agreement almost as wearing as disagreement) but this piece of supplementary information:

A higher proportion of the Dutch population smokes than average for a developed country (27 percent), and fewer Dutch people are aware of secondhand, or second-lung, smoke — that breathed in from other people’s tobacco — than any other comparable country.

Why should that be? I think it demands an explanation. Certainly the Dutch population cannot easily be classed as ill-educated or poorly-informed. (I have been sworn at by a drunk tramp on an Amsterdam tram who switched instantly to English invective when he realised that it was going to be more effective in my case.) My mind leapfrogged towards ideas about the Dutch liberal tradition. They choose not to know, because they do not like to hassle people about their private behaviour, perhaps…

Unfortunately there are no sources quoted. When I looked for stats and background info, I found something even odder. That remarkable factoid contains no truth. → Continue reading: Facts and attitudes

Finding new things to say about Kim Jong Il being dead

We haven’t here done a Kim Jong Il is dead posting until now, probably because what else is there to say besides Kim Jong Il is dead? A new Kim Jong has been installed. Un. From Il, to Un. In English it sounds like going from sick to nothing. North Korea, presently terrible, will either get a bit better, or a bit worse, or a lot worse, or stay much the same. Or, if it gets really lucky, a lot better! Will paid North Korea watchers, experts in North Korean things, do any better than that? I doubt it.

I have called Kim Jong Il Kim Jong Il. Others call him Kim Jong-Il with a hyphen, or Kim Jong-il, with a small i for il. Until today I never knew of this confusion. Blog and learn.

My favourite of the Kim Jong Il is dead postings that I have seen so far is this one, at Mick Hartley’s blog, which features the very last Kim Jong Il picture: King Jong Il looking at toilet paper.

I wrote all that last night, but Mick Hartley now has another Kim Jong Il is dead posting up, in which he quotes somebody called Simon Winchester saying this:

India’s attempt to go it alone failed. So, it seems, has Burma’s. Perhaps inevitably, North Korea’s attempt appears to be tottering. But seeing how South Korea has turned out – its Koreanness utterly submerged in neon, hip-hop and every imaginable American influence, a romantic can allow himself a small measure of melancholy: North Korea, for all its faults, is undeniably still Korea, a place uniquely representative of an ancient and rather remarkable Asian culture. And that, in a world otherwise rendered so bland, is perhaps no bad thing.

Or then again, perhaps … not. No bad thing? Competition for commenters: concoct morally disgusting sentences which begin with “For all its faults …”. You’ll struggle to top that one. These obscene ravings are currently behind the Times pay wall, hence no link, although Hartley does supply one.

Says Hartley:

Better a starving slave state, it seems, than this ghastly modern Americanised culture.

Conservative romanticism raised to a truly idiotic level.

Commenter Martin Adamson adds:

And it’s not even remotely true on its own terms. The architecture of Pyongyang is Moscow 1952. The mass displays are China 1964. Painting is Soviet Academy 1936. Music is Gang of Four Operas 1974. Dress is Bucharest 1988 etc etc.

Assuming this is the Simon Winchester in question, it seems that:

Simon Winchester is a best-selling British author living in Massachusetts and New York City.

Heartfelt apologies from Britain to Massachusetts and New York City. Apparently American culture is itself sufficiently un-Americanised for Winchester to find it livable in. Winchester has a new book out, which looks rather creepy. Let’s all not buy it.

My disquiet at Detlev Schlichter’s appearance on the Keiser Report

Most readers will know about Detlev Schlichter and his book Paper Money Collapse. Some readers will know about Max Keiser who presents The Keiser Report on Russia Today. Yes, Russia Today. Doesn’t sound good does it?

Well, it is not all bad. Keiser does predict global economic collapse (the non-badness here being that his prediction is (I think) correct). He does blame central banks and their printing of money. He does point out that what we are seeing at the moment is very definitely not capitalism. He does interview a good number of libertarians such as Peter Schiff. And he does advocate the ownership of gold and silver.

But then things start to go downhill again. He forever blames the global situation on “banksters” and their “fraudulent” ways. While apparently being in favour of capitalism he still manages to lambast any attempt to control government spending. The UK coalition government’s austerity programme, Wisconsin governor Scott Walker and the Tea Party have all been criticised by him. He also seems to believe in global warming or to be more accurate: CAGWIT (that’s my new acronym: Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming Inspired Tyranny, by the way). And he interviews a whole bunch of nutters including Keynesians and anti-Israelis.

The other night he interviewed the distinctly non-nutty Detlev Schlichter. The good news is that Schlichter managed to get most of his main points across (now if only he were allowed to do that on the BBC!)…

…The bad news is that during the interview Keiser made his usual remarks about fraud (at about 20:00). And Schlichter said nothing or, at least, nothing in response. Now I appreciate that Schlichter is new to this kind of thing and that he has a book to sell but I think he should have at least said something. To acquiesce while Keiser makes his outrageous claims, to my mind, gives the impression of agreement.

Why paper money is collapsing

Paul Mason, BBC Newsnight’s economics editor (and the guy who fronted that Keynes v Hayek radio show we’ve blogged about here), picks Detlev Schlichter’s Paper Money Collapse as one of his five economics books to give people for Christmas.

Mason begins his Guardian piece thus:

Two questions predominate in this year’s slew of books on economics. The first is the most obvious: how do we get out of this mess? It’s a question that has set authors along many roads but they all lead to the same destination: a bigger role for the state and the need for renewed international co-operation.

Which, alas, explains why Detlev Schlichter is so pessimistic about good sense prevailing in financial policy before ruin engulfs us all. The world’s rulers have pushed the world slowly but surely into a huge hole, and all that Mason’s authors (aside from Schlichter) can recommend is digging the hole ever deeper.

A “bigger role for the state” is not the solution to the world’s problems just now. That is the problem, and it has been for many decades.

At least Schlichter’s kind of thinking is getting around, and, as this piece by Mason proves, in some somewhat surprising places. Mason may not fully understand Austrian economics to the point of actually agreeing with it, but he does seem (as I said towards the end of this earlier posting) to respect it. He knows it is saying something important.

Schlichter has been unwavering in his pessimism about the world getting “out of this mess” and he is being proved more right with every week that passes. When total ruin does arrive, we can only hope that he and people with similar opinions to his will then be listened to rather more.