Political Geek Code, AKA: Stross Code
Lewis Hutton
truly represent the way we see our political views. So here is an
opportunity to redress the balance and to twist the words of Burns, make
others see us as we see ourselves. Presented below is the Stross Code.
It was developed by Charlie Stross on the newsgroup soc.history.what-if.
If you've not encountered a Geek code before then it's really very
simple that meaningless string of characters below are my ratings. Or
at least the ones I'd give myself.
S++/S-!CF++瘢++RS A@@@ C@ D@@@ E@@ F@ G%% H@@ L@@ M@@ O%%% P@ R@/% S@@@
T@@ U@ W@@ T@@ Z@/%
What does it mean well you have to read the document below.
Lewis.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The USENET politics code, draft 0.02: Charlie Stross (2001)
(NOTE: this code deliberately _avoids_ using any political buzz-words that
I'm familiar with. If you spot any, please let me know so that I can remove
them!)
First come five major categories. You probably have a stance on all of
these axes. Pick your positions and separate them with spaces. If you
vary between two (such as S++ and S-), separate them with a slash,
thus: S++/S-.
S Society. You know; they're all around us. But how important is it,
really?
S++++ The individual only exists as part of a broader human society;
their goals and aspirations are only valid insofar as they advance
society's goals
S+++ Society is important and has a right to override individual
preferences or wants where appropriate.
S++ Society is important, but individuals have rights too, and there
is a balancing point between the two -- although an individuals
rights stop at the end of their nose, and society has to
look after
everything else.
S+ Society is just a useful social construct; it's made up of people,
and people come first.
S- Society is an emergent phenomenon that arises from interactions
among people. It has no independent existence without the
willing participation of individuals.
S-- Society is all too often used as an excuse to limit individual
rights; we need to be careful about throwing this term around in
public.
S--- ... it's spelt "sheeple"
S---- There is no such thing as society
C Church politics. Should it have any place in government?
C++++ I am the pope/ayatollah/chief rabbi! You betcha!
C+++ The [insert holy book] tells us how we should live our lives,
and we ought to legislate its provisions into law and live by
them. Religious observation and education should be compulsory.
C++ In general, the [insert holy book] is a good guide to life,
though I figure as this is an enlightened age we can replace
"stoning to death" with five years hard labour. (And that bit
about not wearing mixed fibres -- drop it.) Religious observance
should be encouraged, and irreligous education discouraged.
C+ I believe in [insert holy book] and will live by it, but I
don't think non-religionists need to be bound by it. (It's their
soul, right?) Religious education and observance is a personal
matter.
!C I am an atheist.
?C I think I might be an agnostic, but I'm not sure.
C- It's a good idea to keep priests away from the education system
and government. Separation of church and state.
C-- Religion, based on prehistoric irrationalism, has no place in
the running of a modern state. Laws and values should be based
on introspective ethical scrutiny, not superstition.
C--- Mandating religious education or observance is a tool of
oppression! Religion is irrational guff! In fact, we should be
targeting education to innoculate kids against the virus of
pernicious superstition. (And close the churches.)
C---- Kill the priests.
F Force Majeure. Does might make right, at national level?
F++++ I've got an H-bomb, so bend and spread 'em. (Alternatively:
"What do we want? Lebensraum! Where do we want it? Ost! When
do we want it? Now!")
F+++ There are of course rules of civilized warfare, but if our
economic or political interests are threatened we reserve the
right to defend them by sending an aircraft carrier or organizing
a discreet coup d'etat. And we'll probably exercise that right --
frequently. If we _don't_ have that kind of arsenal, we'll send
terrorists.
F++ We have armed forces to defend ourselves against attack, and if
you can show us a UN resolution we'll lend you a bomber squadron
or two. But in general we don't invade other countries and we
don't send terrorists.
F+ Our constitution forbids us from operating away from home. So
sorry, UN security council.
F- We used to have an army, but we caught them planning a coup so
we took away their guns and loaned them to the UN on peacekeeping
duties for the next forty years.
F-- If you invade us we'll all sit down. And hold our breath until we
turn blue. (You'll be sorry.)
F--- We don't have an army -- but all independent-minded people pack
automatic weapons, and some of the neighbours have fully privately
owned tactical nukes. Invade us at your peril.
I Individuality. You know how important you are. But does everyone else?
I++++ I am the Quonster's pedigreed consultant. Fear me.
I+++ Individuals have inviolable rights. If you try to violate my
rights you are attacking me and I can exercise the right to
self-defense.
I++ All people have rights, but there are common goods that can be
degraded by the unhindered exercise of private rights -- for
example, by polluting a common resource such as the atmosphere.
We therefore concede that some common goods must override
individual rights, but we'd rather this was the exception than
the rule.
I+ You have rights, but if you abuse them we may have to take them
away from you.
I- Rights are just a legalistic construct. If you get in our great
nation's way, you have only yourself to blame.
I-- Your body belongs to the state; we know what's best for you. Do
as you're told and nothing nasty will happen. Or else.
I--- I am the Quonster.
R Rights. This is a difficult one ...
R! I believe in absolute, "natural" rights that exist in and of
themselves.
RS I believe rights exist by implied social contract; they're a
legal construct that makes it possible for people to coexist.
R- I don't believe in rights.
RA I believe all animals have rights, too.
Now let's consider some more clearly defined areas. A right is prefixed
with a lowercase "r", then the right's identifying letter, then a score
from @@@@ to %%%%. A question mark indicates uncertainty; for example,
rA@@@? indicates a broadly positive stance on child destruction, with
some uncertainty. An exclamation mark indicates total disinterest; for
example, rA! indicates "not interested". Two scores separated by a slash
(e.g. @@/%%%%) mean opinion veers between these two extremes.
Note: the use of @ and % is an attempt to get away from any psychological
association between positive and negative attributes which may be ascribed
to some belief. (I switched to it because I caught myself ascribing +/- to
my own pet positions. Let me know if it causes problems.)
You can miss out any of the categories you can't be bothered with.
Here are the categories:
A Abortion.
@@@@ pro-child destruction
...
%%%% anti-freedom
C Communism
I was going to provide a scale here, but it's virtually impossible to
get any two socialists, communists, or claret-swilling social democrats
to agree on what is, or is not, leftism without employing surreal number
theory to follow the branches and schisms. So just feel free to use this
one as you will:
@@@@ I am Karl Marx/Leon Trotsky
...
%%%% I am Joe McCarthy/Tony Blair[*]
D Drugs (recreational)
@@@@ Legalize everything! Heroin, cocaine, you name it! For free!
...
%%%% The War on Drugs has gone soft! Mandatory blood tests in shopping
malls, death penalty for repeat offenders! Ban coffee!!
E Environment.
@@@@ The environment is more important than us humans. We need to
minimize our impact by any means necessary.
...
%%%% "I drive a 50's gas-guzzler and add tetraethyl lead to my gas 'cuz
I can't wait for that greenhouse effect to get here! Shot any
whales
lately?"
F Futurism (confidence in the future; transhumanism; belief in the
positive transforming effects of new technology)
@@@@ The future's so bright my uploaded transhuman AI's gotta
wear shades
...
%%%% We're all gonna DIE!!!! Of poisoning!!! By genetically modified
peanuts!!!
G Guns (Personal weapons ownership -- not just firearms)
@@@@ I want my own SCUD-B! Death to noisy poodles, and their owners!
...
%%%% Ban all toothbrushes! They're potentially murderous weapons, in
the hands of a psychopath!
H Healthcare
@@@@ Healthcare is a basic right that should be provided by the state.
...
%%%% Provision of healthcare is an individual's personal responsibility.
L Libertarianism
@@@@ I am L. Neil Smith! Get off my land!
...
%%%% We know where you live: we know where your dog goes to school.
Just you wait, there's a black helicopter with your name on the
pick-up list ...
M Free market economics.
@@@@ Austrian school
...
%%%% Soviet central planning school
O Objectivism
@@@@ I am Ayn Rand! Worship me!
...
%%%% Rand is nearly as funny as Marx. Groucho Marx.
P Pork barrel (Government spending)
@@@@ Big government spending! Pyramids on the moon! An aircraft
carrier in every cooking pot!
...
%%%% The government should put every penny it receives in a piggy
bank, for use in event of a really major disaster. Then shoot
anyone who tries to spend it.
R Racial/Ethnic identity politics.
@@@@ Adolf Hitler
...
%%%% Colour-blind
S Free Speech.
@@@@ Absolutely no censorship of any kind, ever, under any
circumstances.
@@@ Opt-out for national security
@@ Sometimes it's okay to censor pornographers/undesirables
...
%%%% State censorship of all media is a good idea. Please read my mail!
T Science/Technology spending
@@@@ Big science funding is one of those things government is good at;
let's go back to the moon!
...
%%%% The invisible hand will provide. If it won't, who needs it? It's
obviously useless.
U Union rights
@@@@ I'm a member of a trades union. Achieve strength through
collective
bargaining! Don't let management trample all over you -- strike if
necessary, and strike often!
...
%%%% Trade unions are gangsters; shoot 'em all and abolish workplace
safety rules and minimum wage while you're at it.
W Welfare
@@@@ Cradle-to-grave education, unemployment and disability insurance,
and pensions, to be provided by the state. (Sod the income
tax bill,
at least I'll never starve.)
...
%%%% Why should I pay to support a bunch of feckless workshy layabouts?
Let 'em buy insurance for themselves! If they're starving, put 'em
to work!
X Tax
@@@@ I'm willing to pay more tax -- lots if necessary -- for the
betterment of my society
...
%%%% Tax is an iniquitous abomination that can best be dealt with by
putting government on a subscription -- charitable -- basis.
Z Evangelism
How willing are you to share your beliefs with others? (Think of this as
your "evangelism quotient").
@@@@ I want to spread the good news around and will do so even if you
try to shut me up
...
%%%% Discussing politics on the net is boring and boorish. Desist.
John Duffey
Lewis Hutton <clo...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> What does it mean well you have to read the document below.
Well, I did start to try and work out one of those for myself,
but fell down at several of the hurdles. By the end of it, I'd
broken both my arms and my nose.
Who the hell is Quonster?
Who the hell is L Neil Smith?
What the hell is the Austrian school of economics?
Who is Ayn Rand?
John
--
Lewis Hutton
from John Duffey <jdu...@freeuk.com> contains these words:
> In article <200208041...@zetnet.co.uk>,
> Lewis Hutton <clo...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> > What does it mean well you have to read the document below.
> Well, I did start to try and work out one of those for myself,
> but fell down at several of the hurdles. By the end of it, I'd
> broken both my arms and my nose.
You didn't think of typing them into Google?
> Who the hell is Quonster?
Probably the only one that really needs an explanation and I'm not sure
I can. Quonster was a... well troll is too strong a word for him. He
was very strange and I'm damned if I can really describe him, it's been
too long since I read any post he made. You could always Google for
some of his posts.
It was an in joke at the time and one that is now incomprehensible.
> Who the hell is L Neil Smith?
Libertarian writer. Advocate of abolition of government, believes that
g-control is a huge injustice almost as much as the imposition of taxes.
A couple of links from my own quick search on Google. The first is the
man's own web page.
http://www.zolatimes.com/V2.16/NEILSMITH.html
> What the hell is the Austrian school of economics?
Well its pure laissez faire capitalism. No government restrictions on
the economy whatsoever. Most Austrian School economists would welcome a
return to commodity based money (gold standard). and so on.
Again a couple of links, sorry they are really dry, but I couldn't see a
simple overview in my quick search. The first is the main group or body
that promotes the School the second is a rebuttle.
http://www.mises.org/austrian.asp
http://www.korpios.org/resurgent/L-ausmain.htm
> Who is Ayn Rand?
Author of such classics as the Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged. She
developed a philosophy called objectivism. It is best described as the
antithesis of hardline communism and about as practical. While
communism is ultimately a very selfless philosophy where every action is
made for the good of the community, objectivism is a very selfish one
where the individual is paramount.
It's probably better if you ignore the objectivism question, the
philosophy is only really well known in the United States.
The link below will give you a flavour of who she was, I didn't see a
decent critcism of Ayn Rand and her philosophy in my search, partly
because its either exhaulted or reviled. The one below is a rosy view
of the concept.
--
Lewis
John Duffey
<clo...@zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> > Who is Ayn Rand?
> Author of such classics as the Fountainhead and Atlas
> Shrugged. She developed a philosophy called objectivism.
Just come across this article linked to from
http://www.fark.com/ bizarrely under the "Hero" tag.
http://www.aynrand.org/medialink/loosingthewar.shtml
Am I right in thinking that this guy isn't promoting anything
short of the total annihilation of anyone who's even thought
about wearing a headscarf?
John
--
Steve Brooks
My mum's going to be pretty cut up about that.
--
SB
Frank Peelo
wrote:
The demonisation of Islam is ironic, given that historically Islam has
been more tolerant than, say, Christianity. Not that that's saying
much.
Frank