Natalie Solent

Politics, news, libertarianism, Science Fiction, religion, sewing. You got a problem, bud? I like sewing.

E-mail: nataliesolent-at-aol-dot-com (I assume it's OK to quote senders by name.)

Back to main blog

RSS thingy


Jane's Blogosphere: blogtrack for Natalie Solent.



Links

( 'Nother Solent is this blog's good twin. Same words, searchable archives, RSS feed. Provided by a benefactor, to whom thanks.
I also sometimes write for Samizdata and Biased BBC.)


The Old Comrades:



November 2001 December 2001 January 2002 February 2002 March 2002 April 2002 May 2002 June 2002 July 2002 August 2002 September 2002 October 2002 November 2002 December 2002 January 2003 February 2003 March 2003 April 2003 May 2003 June 2003 July 2003 August 2003 September 2003 October 2003 November 2003 December 2003 January 2004 February 2004 March 2004 April 2004 May 2004 June 2004 July 2004 August 2004 September 2004 October 2004 November 2004 December 2004 January 2005 February 2005 March 2005 April 2005 May 2005 June 2005 July 2005 August 2005 September 2005 October 2005 November 2005 December 2005 January 2006 February 2006 March 2006 April 2006 May 2006 June 2006 July 2006 August 2006 September 2006 October 2006 November 2006 December 2006 January 2007 February 2007 March 2007 April 2007 May 2007 June 2007 August 2007 October 2007 February 2008 April 2008 May 2008 June 2008 July 2008 September 2008 October 2008 November 2008 December 2008 January 2009 March 2009 May 2009 June 2009 July 2009 August 2009 October 2009 January 2010 March 2010 May 2010 June 2010 July 2010 August 2010 September 2010 October 2010 November 2010 December 2010 January 2011 February 2011 April 2011 June 2011 August 2011 September 2011 October 2011 November 2011 January 2012 February 2012 March 2012 May 2012

This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?

Wednesday, July 13, 2005
 
Another day, another horror. Suicide bomber massacres children in Iraq. Think of it as an opportunity for the people of Iraq to meet their future rulers, if trainee Guardian journalist Dilpazier Aslam has his way.


Tuesday, July 12, 2005
 
A farewell to arms. England's Sword has been laid down. That's Iain Murray's fine blog, not the armed forces of the Crown. (Those aren't scheduled to be disbanded until circa 2015.) Iain says that another blog with an as-yet undisclosed theme may spring up in its place.

In case you're wondering - the paucity of posts over the last few days does not mean I am thinking of following suit. It's just a minor case of blogger's block, compounded by in-tray returnitus.



Saturday, July 09, 2005
 
Hostes humanis generis.
...the innocent, the old, the young, people of any class, any faith, any colour, with only the common feature of being in the wrong place when the appointed time comes, and of being human beings - with their lives, with their hopes, with the people they love and who will grieve for them. The murderers strike regardless. Count the ways...
- Normblog


 
I have not had time to post recently, for quite mundane reasons - the sort of workaday preoccupations that, for an unknown number of Londoners, abruptly ceased to matter on Thursday morning.

I am behind on my email. Theirs will be read by other eyes.

I haven't got done all I wanted to do. They never will.



Friday, July 01, 2005
 
Apologies. I'm having a busy few days. No time to blog. If your time is valuable, or you do not like kamikaze watermelons, do not go here.


Wednesday, June 29, 2005
 
Fighting the last war. The Bunster himself - to whom I denied a link in that last post on the grounds that too many links would spoil the aesthetics - has a neato quotable line:
I also expect that many leftists have had the psyches shaped by the battles of their teenage years, and for many of them hard-core Christianity was the enemy in those days, whereas Islam hardly figured, and they’re still fighting those battles
Talking of old battles¹, I have been thinking recently of all the harm done to Iraq by French Resistance movies. Go back one generation further than the one mentioned by Blithering Bunny, and you find teenagers who grew up in the shadow of WWII. The fact that their fathers saved the world² naturally put them in a bad mood, but they didn't go so far as to wish the Nazis had won. The next best thing was thinking that the uncool Dad-like way of fighting Nazis was to do it in itchy uniforms. The cool way was to wear neckerchiefs and excitingly tight black sweaters and ambush German patrols.

(Don't take this as slagging off the French Resistance. France did have to pass through a period of reassessment in which the myth of a nation united in defiance was exploded. However I think the cynicism has gone too far, and we are in danger of forgetting real heroism.)

The end result was that all the soldiers vs irregulars movies made after 1945 have uniforms on the bad guys. All very understandable, but the effect on the impressionable minds of our intellectual class has been deleterious.

On the subject of world affairs³, Normblog writes:

I think many who say they think better of China than of the US wouldn't put their money where that part of their mouth is if it was a matter of where they had to live, or if they had to seek redress for an injustice done to them, or if they were to be tried for something they didn't do, or in terms of their opportunities for free expression and political association, and so forth.


¹This phrase was awarded an Honourable Mention in the 2005 Golden Paperclip Award for Most Tenuous Connecting Text.

²Does not apply to Germans.

³First Prize.



 
"How much are you paying Steyn?" asks Blithering Bunny.

Six hundred quatloos.



Monday, June 27, 2005
 
What's wrong with compulsory purchase? US bloggers are up in arms regarding the Kelo case which appears to allow local governments to use compulsory purchase, or eminent domain as they call it in the US*, to grab land not for roads or railways but to increase tax revenue. Crooked Timber's Kieran Healy had a post up that quoted Marx in an almost entirely irrelevant way.

So what is wrong with compulsory purchase? After all, the householders are paid, aren't they? I was impressed by the explanation in the comment to Kieran Healy's post made by "g":

It’s not exactly theft (or the abolition of property) either, though. Perhaps it might be illuminating to consider other cases in which (1) sometimes someone does X to someone else and pays for it, and that isn’t a crime; (2) sometimes someone does X to someone else uncompensated, and that is a crime; and see how it looks when (3) someone does X to someone against their will but compensates them (presumably at what some third party determines to be the market rate).

– X is “having sex with”. Case 1 is prostitution, which is less clearly acceptable than (other?) commerce but generally regarded as a matter for the consciences of the individuals involved. Case 2 is rape. Case 3 looks a lot more like rape than like prostitution to me.

– X is “demanding labour from”. Case 1 is employment, which few seem to mind much. Case 2 is kidnap and slavery, or something of the kind. Case 3 is, I suppose, kidnap and indentured servitude of some sort. Again, seems much nearer to 2 than to 1.

Anyone got an example where 3 isn’t much nearer 2 than 1?

*I fail see to where eminence comes into it.


 
Read Tim Worstall's Britblog roundup or you won't have read it. Staying with TW, yes, this is better.