A perfect example.

I can still hardly believe it myself. Cannot stop grinning :-) http://www.samizdata.net/2016/06/i-should-have-believed-what/

I can still hardly believe it :-)

Hmmmm.... raw meat ;-)

There are a few things wrong with the Libby Purves article. >>"It matters, because many of these show-pony protesters have real influence" The election result suggests otherwise. >>"being rightly admired for entertainment or artistic work or ebullient personalities" No, being wrongly admired. Reinhard Heydrich was a superb violinist yet somehow I cannot bring myself to admire him. Ideas have consequences and people who give voice to thuggish evil ideas should be treated with disdain, even if they are good at pretending to be someone else (i.e. an actor) or are ebullient (is that really a reason to admire someone?) or being artistic. These things pale compared to wanting to see other people robbed and controlled. When a thug wants to debate, well fine. But if he gets in my face, I spit in his followed by a fist if the message need repeating. And I really don't care how charming or artistic they are when it suits them.

"What matters is not so much who owns the assets but the quality of asset management." Well no, not really. There are oh so many differences between me owning the cow and the state giving me the milk. Political motivations and commercial motivations are materially different, and a state owned asset is always... and I do means always... ultimately a creature of political forces. I think it is a fallacy to think a given management team with a given quality of management skill will not be materially affected by whether or not it operates underpinned by a politically delimited or commercially delimited set of axioms. Most importantly these axioms *will* change over time. In the final analysis, regardless of how savvy the first iteration of a state managed institution is, over time it becomes more and more a creature of political convenience as surely as night follows day. In some societies that process might take only a few years, or it may take several generations, but it *is* inevitable. There is no ring fence that will not be climbed over eventually. And that does not even touch on the moral issues involving ownership, but I know better than to go there ;-)

My comment on that Daily Mail article you linked to was picking up on this: "Brooke liked to compartmentalise his life" Yes it is called "being English". Nothing wrong with that. Not everyone needs to know you are obsessed with growing marrows, or shagging sheep, or singing Anglo-Saxon drinking songs. Indeed it is a nasty modern failing to inflict everything you are upon everyone you know.

"Nor should we expect companies to support freedom. Those bloggers who have criticized newspapers for not reprinting Charlie Hebdo's cartoons miss the point – that people become bosses by surrendering principle to pragmatism, which is no basis for a vigorous defence of freedom" I disagree with it comes to the Fourth Estate. It is not a job like being a baker or delivery driver or banker. Freedom of expression lies at the very heart of western civilisation and if journalists will not take risks for that then they should find some safer job to do or expect to be criticised for their lack of courage. But if they do take up the pen, they should be held to certain standards socially and if they lack the fortitude for the job, then they have no business saying "Je suis Charlie" because they ain't unless they republish something calculated to offend certain sensibilities.

That is why I like having a group blog, less pressure to jump on the soapbox quite so often :D Anyway, just poke me at any time in the future if you ever want to take me up on the offer.

I think you greatly underestimate the value of expressing your thoughts. I hope you change your mind eventually but all the best to you regardless of what you ultimately decide to do. Indeed if you even want a by-line at Samizdata if you ever get the occasional urge to say what needs saying, just let me know.

If resources actually mattered much to national prosperity, Japan would be the poorest nation on earth.

I have never seen the issue as one of 'Scottish' independence as much as 'English' independence.

Well I'd say wait a couple years and then odds are you will be about 10% of the entire Tory Party and thus well positioned to shift them to more rational policies.

Sam Bowman's view are why I am so in favour of the private ownership of firearms. When he (theoretically) points his (theoretical) gun at me to force me to risk my life to save another, I would say "Yes sir... oh and do you also want me to rescue that burning baby over there?" And when he turns to look, I would (theoretically) produce my (theoretical) handgun and put two (theoretical) 40 cal rounds in the fucker's chest and then one in his head. And then I might actually go rescue the (theoretically) drowning baby and thereby have done two good things in a single day.

Interesting. I also wrote about that some years ago. http://www.samizdata.net/2003/05/libertarian-socialism/

Clearly a case of "Life imitates The Onion". Truly beyond parody.

I thought the trailer was excellent and it got me quite interested in this project.

What connotations are those?

This is thigh slappingly great stuff :-) Let the serpent eat its own tail and choke to death.