The Early Days of a Better Nation |
Ken MacLeod's comments. “If these are the early days of a better nation, there must be hope, and a hope of peace is as good as any, and far better than a hollow hoarding greed or the dry lies of an aweless god.”—Graydon Saunders Contact: kenneth dot m dot macleod at gmail dot com Blog-related emails may be quoted unless you ask otherwise.
Emergency Links
LINKS
Self-promotion
The Human Genre Project
Comrades and friends
Colleagues
Genomics
Edinburgh
Writers Blog
Editor Blogs
Publisher Blogs
Brother Blogs
Skiffy
Brits Blog
' ... a treeless, flowerless land, formed out of the refuse of the Universe, and inhabited by the very bastards of Creation'
Amazing Things
Faith
Reason
Evolution
War and Revolution
Mutualist Militants
Democratic Socialists
Impossibilists and Ilk
Viva La Quarta
Communist Parties
Other revolutionaries
Radical Resources
Readable Reds
For the sake of the argument
|
Sunday, March 02, 2008
It's the little things that'll do it, you know. When the revolution comes, it'll be fuelled by tiny peeves. Some that I'm saving wood for barricades over: Pointlessly bilingual signage, now infesting the best small country in the world. Foods now with reduced salt/fat, in accordance with Government/EU guidelines. This has made several traditional brands of pie uneatable (not enough shortening in the pastry), and ruined salted peanuts. Bars without ashtrays. Mind you, it's amazing how much roomier pubs have become. And quieter. And one that has nothing to do with politics: book review sections of broadsheet and Sunday papers that every so often are devoted entirely to children's books. I read review sections to see what smart adults are thinking about. Children's books are important. If I want reviews of them, I could buy Parenting or Mother and Baby. (In theory. I never have, and have no idea what books if any they review.) 34 Comments:Sorry, Farah. I expressed that that badly. What I should have said was that I buy papers with review sections for a general update on what's going on in literature generally. I don't mind reviews of children's books being there, and maybe they should do that more. I mind the entire book review section being taken over by them from time to time. (The Indie is a serial offender in this respect.) I would mind just as much if it were taken over from time to time by sport books, or war books, or SF for that matter.
I'm conservative about some things.
I actually agree with you entirely - even with the cigarette thing (which is almost unheard of in my Province). F.O.R.E.S.T. - when they don't try to dispute the health risks of smoking - actually seems completely reasonable to me. I find it interesting that as people in the western world are having less and less children, we are seeing more and more children's books. I think there's a belief amongst writers, that writing for children is easy. How many Dr. Seuss quality writers do you know?
Steven,
I have no sympathy on the smoking ban, and I don't see how anyone can even hope to spin it as a libertarian issue. The basic principle limiting liberty that even libertarians recognize is "My freedom to swing my fist stops at the end of your nose."
How widespread is this dual language signing? I was under the impression that Scottish Gaelic has never been spoken in central Scotland so it would be pretty stupid to have these signs there.
A children's bookseller writes: Ken, if an issue is occasionally given over to a particular genre - so what? Why can't you wait a week to read the next set of reviews? Children's literature is not a ghetto and interest in it isn't limited to parenting magazines (which are not, I should add, likely to provide particularly good coverage of children's literature). The smart adults will still be there next weekend. Even as tiny peeves go, it's pretty tiny, no?
I have some sympathy about the children's writing point. Because I'd rather there was a children's book (or two) every week that one was worth reviewing, rather than specials to deal with the subject separately.
You can no longer buy pies with sufficient shortening or peanuts with enough salt? That's the first _genuine_ case of Liberal Fascism I've run into... I understand the annoyance of dual language signing. but what would your preferred solution be? English-spelling signs, or Gaelic? and if the latter, any consequences, such as teaching the general population how to pronounce gaelic, or different fonts, etc?
It is a Libertarian issue, but in a different way from the one you imagine; first and foremost, it is up to the business owner whether or not people should be allowed to partake in a perfectly legal vice within the confines of his or her establishment.
On the other hand, as a libertarian, I don't think that smoking should be allowed in buildings open to the public, as a default option. Let me offer an analogy: I walk into a department store and, without warning, a store employee steps up and sprays me with perfume, causing me to go around the rest of the day smelling of something I didn't choose. On libertarian grounds, it's hard to see that as anything but a violation of my rights—a petty initiation of force. But cigarette smoke also leaves my clothes, hair, and skin smelling of something I don't want and would not choose. Another view would be that if people want to smoke they can do so in the comfort of their own homes. And therefore they are not unaccetably restricted in their liberty, being possessed of choice and all that. I wasn't referring to smokers proper, but rather to business owners - who ARE unreasonably limited in their liberty.
Then surely they have the liberty to pursue some other business? They have that existential choice?
I just stumbled across this:
Surely it is far more reasonable to say that we ought to be allowed to masturbate in enclosed public space than we ought to be able to smoke.
"Let me offer an analogy: I walk into a department store and, without warning, a store employee steps up and sprays me with perfume, causing me to go around the rest of the day smelling of something I didn't choose. On libertarian grounds, it's hard to see that as anything but a violation of my rights—a petty initiation of force." Actually, Andrew, libertarians are entirely in favour of people's being free to masturbate in certain enclosed 'public spaces' (i.e., in this context, private property open to members of the public), such as the inside of clubs where (so I am led to belive) that sort of thing goes on. The issue is informed consent and property rights - which apply just as much to collectives and clubs.
However, I think you can take it that second hand smoke is (unless otherwise indicated) a reasonably foreseeable consequence of entering a public place, and thus not an assault as there is implicit consent to it.
Yes, but why would a libertarian - not someone who calls themself liberian but is in fact a self-interested advocate of smoking or someone who believes, in a neo-feudal fashion, that rights and liberties are derived from control over propety rather than by virtue of humanness or personhood - demand that one seeks the consent of others to masturbate in public? Forget the enclosed space thing - if one can smoke in street one ought be able to wank in the street. Indeed, the latter has a better libertarian case than the former. You don't think people should have the right to masturbate in the street? I don't think I'd walk over to help the guy out, but I think that disdain ought to be punishment enough.
Andrew, many libertarian thinkers argue that (the desirability of a right to) control over property is derived from requirements of humanness or personhood. Some would also argue that streets could be private property, and that the regulation of these streets could be left to the street owners. I've imagined such an arrangement in my novel, The Star Fraction. Whether it would actually work out that way, or work at all, is of course a different matter, but such thought experiments can help to stimulate the imagination.
I have a moderate case of asthma. I am more than just "inconvenienced" by people smoking around me, it can and has caused me to have an attack which in extreme circumstances could be life threatening. I accept the fact that people have the right to do as they please for the most part. I don't want to prevent people from smoking, say in a bar or restaurant I just want to keep them from smoking where I have to be like the bus or at my place of employment.
See a city bus (which is a city property) is a perfectly reasonable place to restrict smoking, and I don't know where you work, but assuming it's a retail-store, an office-building or a warehouse, then most employers will prefer to restrict smoking aswell - as it can drive away customers, damage the wares or yellow and damage office equipment. Oban Accommodation Offthemainroad.co.uk provides beautiful holiday place in Scotland, self catering accommodation in Scotland, self catering UK, self catering accommodation Oban, luxury self catering accommodation UK, self catering cottages in Scotland
|
Apparently I'm not a smart adult?
By Farah, at Sunday, March 02, 2008 12:38:00 pm