When I was a teenager, my mom gave me some simple advice about marriage. It was,"Never do anything once, that you don't want to do for the rest of your life." Take out the trash, whatever. Do it once and you own it.
Modern parallel: Never give the government power, that you don't want it to have forever.
Getting this power back will require nothing less than a revolution. Hopefully it is a peaceful one, at the hands of a hundred million people around the world that have had enough, and want their world back. In the US, a new constitutional convention basically going back to the original and getting rid of 200 years of 'jurisprudence' starting with Marbury v Madison. And taking the limitations of the enumerated powers seriously.
I mentioned this elsewhere, and a reader commented that many of these 'velvet revolutions' are actually subverted by powerful interests. Which may be true, but at least some of them were genuine. We can hope, and one important thing is to build community and then stage a perhaps spontaneous show of power, once the community is large enough.
Agreed. I love bad cat, but I think it's wishful thinking to believe that most ANYone running for office in our current system, regardless of how sincerely good their intentions are, won't ultimately cave to the much larger, lizard-people interests trying to sway him or her.
P.S. Thank you, El Gato Malo, for this: "this modern whitewash of 'fascism is right wing' is simply wrong." I've gotten so tired of hearing foolish leftists telling us for 30 years about "right-wing fascists."
Not just 30 years, but more like 80 years! The "Fascists are far right" big lie was devised by FDR's people late in the Second World War to distance FDR from his prior admiration for Stalin, Mussolini, and even Hitler.
Fascists hated intellectuals, communists, minorities, and unions. Their key feature is one party nationalism working in cooperation with business class elites. So this does not describe FDR at all. While you can find some comparisons with big government programs... FDRs programs served the working class farmers and industrial workers who were marginalized by the Great Depression. Like I commented before FDR was a democratic socialist for which there are a wide body of proponents and thinkers from the early part of the 20th century, one important one being RH Tawney. Also note an actual fascist plot to overthrow FDR as described in general Smeedly Butler's testimony. Smearing FDR as a communist or a fascist is the recent work of libertarians who as we know are opposed to to big government of any flavor. I hate seeing FDR getting smeared I think he's one of our countries greatest presidents
What is wrong with being opposed to big government of any flavor?
Nazism was described as a kind of Fascism, even though it's correct description was National Socialism. Mussolini's Fascism would be recognized in South Korea as "Crony Capitalism" Either means "you own the businesses as long as you do what we want.
Even Putin's reconstructed Russia is somewhere between Fascism and Crony Capitalism, hence the oligarchs..... until they fall out of favor.
"it's wishful thinking to believe that most ANYone running for office in our current system, regardless of how sincerely good their intentions are, won't ultimately cave to the much larger, lizard-people interests trying to sway him or her."
If as you say is true, war is at hand. Start shooting first, early and relentlessly. OR get involved and move the 'ball' as far as you can and then someone else pick it up and run with it, so on and so on until we arrive at the society that can live with itself peaceably, honestly and freely.
As I just wrote in another comment, when you realize this is the reality, you understand you're in the garbage compactor like in the scene in Star Wars A New Hope.
We need every hand, every resource, with all of our will, pushing back. I've written articles and am devoting my Substack to what that looks like. What IS the middle, and how do we push back? I HAVE to believe we're not too late, as grim as the hour looks. But we're going to need all the courage, all the determination, all the intention, and as much clear coordination as possible.
Since power is never surrendered voluntarily, there cannot be/never have been peaceful revolutions to recover it. Those with the power control all the levers and institutions of State. And with respect to separation of powers in our alleged democratic States: Executive; Legislature; Judiciary - there is no better example of an incestuous relationship and one which will guard the status quo.
Nobody said it would be easy. But there are many, many more of 'us' than 'them' -- and a lot of 'them' at the lower echelons are more like 'us' than they realize. Yet.
The power that governments and bureaucracies, corporations and NGO's have is BUILT of power that we, individually, have surrendered (or have forgotten to hang on to). Perhaps it is we, individually, who need to remember to never surrender the powers (which though small, individually, are real) which belong to us, nor our effort, nor our energy, nor our care and attention, to entities larger than ourselves.
Once you have universal suffrage to elect government, tax revenues cease to be about funding essential services but become a slush fund for the elected to use to bribe voters. Voters understand this and elections become auctions where votes are sold to the highest bidder. Voters then, increasingly expect others (via the State) to provide for them what they do not provide for themselves, and so become increasingly dependent on the State which becomes empowered whilst ‘We The People’ become infantilised and impotent.
"'We The People' become infantilised and impotent" - ie. we surrendered our power. What stops us retaining it, instead? Each day, a new day, a new way.
What stops anyone from giving up a drug? Addiction. ‘We The People’ are addicted to the Welfare State… we’ll give up cigarettes, booze, drugs - tomorrow - after just one more smoke, Scotch, fix.
Amazingly, many, many people have kicked addictions. What stops a person needing a drug is the power to achieve satisfactions that are real. Satisfyingly real relationships with real people who have real faces. Satisfyingly real opportunities to be skillfully useful to others and be respected for it. Real satisfactions of the human kind, of which drugs can only ever provide a pale imitation.
Never do anything once, that you don't want to do for the rest of your life." Take out the trash, whatever. Do it once and you own it.
Sorry but this is absolutely horrible advice for marriage. If this happens to you I can only tell you one thing: you chose the wrong person! The advice should be that before marriage if a task gets stuck to you then run and never marry that person!
Yes. I spent Monday arguing to a Fed Soc audience that the answer to social media censorship is NOT regulation. Not even “common carrier.” Sue them, preferably privately, excise the cronyist cancer, and stitch up the patient.
More on point: I was disappointed to see Dinesh D’Souza comment that it was fine for SCOTUS to uphold the vaccine mandates for healthcare workers, so long as the OSHA mandate was struck down. Not one inch.
It told me that SCOTUS paid no attention to the science in the brief. I wasn’t surprised but it tells me that any outcome is possible, regardless (of anything else).
I think you're missing the forest for the trees. Whether the jabs work was never the point. The central question is whether we have an indvidual right to refuse medical treatment we don't want. It doesn't matter if the jab freshens breath or grants superpowers. I have the right to say no.
The admin used legal pretenses to try to work around that question while at the same time trying to remove that right. The court then made a political decision to split the baby. It refused the pretense in the OSHA decision, but allowed it for CMS.
If nothing else we should be very aware of the fact there is no such thing as "free" federal money. It has chains attached.
We’re on the same page. That SCOTUS didn’t toss the mandates period was more than disappointing (though not a surprise).
And you’re right, our bodily autonomy beats any arguments at all about “does it work to protect others?”.
I failed to make your correct & substantive point. It’s also in international human rights agreements between >190 countries. They’re OUR human rights. They don’t belong to governments to choose to waive or not.
I don’t waver from this, while also telling those who don’t buy what we’re saying about article 6, human rights & bodily autonomy, that the darn things do not do any of the things they appear to think they do.
I think the answer to the question, “if the vaccines did markedly reduce transmission, should the state have the right to waive your right of bodily autonomy?” is NO.
The idea that it would be selfish not to get vaccinated under the scenario immediately above is silly.
I’m a thoughtful person & I’d take reasonable steps to minimise risk of harming others. I do that in other aspects of life. The best way to do that is to keep away from others if I’m symptomatic. And I do. So stick your “vaccine mandates”. Govt simply doesn’t hold the waiver of my / our inalienable human rights. And no, it’s not selfish to insist on deciding each for ourselves.
I just want us to be careful. When we slip into the merits in a legal context, we effectively cede there is a role for the government in those determinations.
D’Sousa was speaking only of the legal argument, not whether it was a good idea. I assure you he doesn’t believe in mandates.
The point about suing these scumbags is a good one, and we need to be able to do it, which is why these organizations calling themselves platforms but behaving as publishers need to have the Section 230 umbrella of immunity ripped from their hands.
So educate me, why did he think it was legally right to uphold the CMS mandate but not OSHA? Neither makes sense with a leaky vaccine. Also unsafe. But the intellectual argument justice Kagan spouted (I wrote to down because it was so absurd): “You have to get vaccinated so that you’re not transmitting the disease that can kill elderly Medicare patients, that can kill sick Medicaid patients. I mean, that seems like a pretty basic infection prevention measure.”
Even Fauci and Bourla don’t claim the so-called vaccines sterilize, I.e prevent transmission. And the multiple proven cases of transmission in fully or mostly vaccinated populations (I.e, e.g. Australia, Israel, Gibraltar, many cities in Ireland, MY OWN office (where all that came down with covid in our mini pandemic were fully vaccinated except one who caught it in a different city, fully separated from our work over Xmas and isolated a full 10 days. Everyone else was vaccinated).
So Kagan’s argument doesn’t hold water. I called SCOTUS offices to protest the stupidity.
Oh and while I must test every week without symptoms , my closest coworker was allowed to sit beside me ALL day today and walk in and out of the office with over the top congestion, coughing, etc. (she DID have to test negative however). I am not a fear monger and advised my boss I do not care (I really don’t, if I get it I get it) but the unscientific discrimination? And this stupid 5 day “ok you can go back to work”? Huh?
Disclaimer - I’m not a lawyer. But the argument was like this: OSHA has no authority to regulate healthcare for the whole country, which was the *effect* of the order, due to the fact that there was no escape from it - if you were employed by any company of any size, you were subject. On the other hand, the Feds had the authority to regulate healthcare companies that are *tied to the Feds via Medicare*. Note in this circumstance, healthcare providers can escape the rule by not taking Fed money, and a number of healthcare workers I know did just that (and are in fact financially better off and happier as a result). This is the wages of giving the government financial responsibility for healthcare - they usurp all responsibility.
I understand the "take the money and pay the price" argument (same reason private schools don't participate in federal milk programs) but in reality the vast majority of health care workers in the US are captured by hospitals and clinics that accept federal money. Less than 1% of physicians in US are not registered Medicare providers. There are approximately 163 million americans on Medicare, Medicaid and health exchange. I personally have not seen a nurse hang out a shingle on their own advertising for cash only and private insurance payments. In some very large cities I'm sure there are a few such jobs but in the overall health care delivery system this is a very small fraction.
This is the exact and main reason there has been very little push back from hospitals and physicians against federal overreach.
Bottom line, no matter what the reasoning, what is being done to health care workers not wanting the jab in the US is an abomination. Americans should not have tolerated it. Truckers wouldn't have.
It must just be a lot more prevalent here in Southern California than it is elsewhere. There are now a number of organizations here with doctors who bill customers a yearly fee and offer unlimited GP care under that fee, which is surprisingly inexpensive. My former GP does this - he quit his regular practice after Obamacare forced him to spend, and I quote, “more than 50% of my time on paperwork.” Most of them do house calls. This phenomenon has been accelerated by the COVID lunacy.
Right, these systems work (and are fantastic!) in large urban areas like SoCal but statistically don’t employee many health care workers. There are a large number of entire states that will never have these types of practices. What really drives the core of health care everywhere in the US are services like emergency rooms, urgent care clinics, cancer care centers, surgical services (the “shit, I have to go to a doctor/hospital things in life) - all tied to hospital and clinics which participate with the feds to survive. Added to the 163 million above are 10% of US pop that don’t have $ or insurance that wind up needing care.
“There are approximately 163 million americans on Medicare, Medicaid and health exchange.” - this is a critical point. Service costs in all such industries are driven by the largest customer bloc. In American healthcare, that bloc is the government under Medicare.
That distinction is not properly an all-or-nothing one. For more, read Clarence Thomas’s statement regarding denial of certiorari in Malwarebytes vs. Enigma.
Well that’s what I get for not reading the law. I agree with Thomas in his opinion. I was unaware that they took what would have been a very clear law and instantly watered it down with that subsection containing words like “good faith”. In any case, a law intended to allow a company like AT&T to move data without regard for the content has been instead turned on its head to allow tyrants and scumbags to nearly completely purge thoughtcrime from “platforms” that are nearly ubiquitous and universal is certainly unintended. The distinction should be clarified, and companies such as Facebook and Twitter should be designated accordingly - they are *not* platforms as originally intended in the law.
Clarence Thomas in the end suggested cutting the Gordian knot and invoked "common carrier" as the simplest solution. What exactly are the grounds for these private suits?
Moreover, when the state is enlisting social media to act as an enforcement arm for what the state wants censored, private suits that somehow excise crony cancer seems a bit unrealistic. I suspect expecting any significant relief from what after all are the state's courts and defendants with inexhaustible pockets is even more so.
This war will either be won by the rise of free market alternatives to Big Tech, which is possible but seems unlikely, a sea change in present electoral politics, likewise unlikely though possible, or a significant conflict, perhaps largely peaceful as standard politics dissolve and recoalesce into something different and more workable, or, given the totalitarian proclivities of our domestic enemies, a kinetic resolution.
We'll see which occurs, but I would not bet against the last.
Common carrier defence works because the supplier is not responsible for content - example a phone company, postal service - over which it has no control and therefore cannot be held accountable in law. However that argument is weakened for social media by the companies themselves because over the last few years they have taken control of content and assumed responsibility for it with their censorship and ‘fact checking’.
It needs a test case to be brought by somebody with deep pockets.
I was a Jorgensen voter, but would love to see the Trump lawsuits (or similar) pursued using the state action theory, combined with Justice Thomas’s interpretation of Section 230.
I suspect even stronger arguments might be made by those whose businesses were built on these platforms. The platforms offered themselves as a place to build a business, and many did so and were quite successful, only to see their entire futures wiped out in an instant due to some faceless twit’s snap decision behind an impenetrable wall, without any recourse or review.
That's literally the grounds on which Crowder was suing either Facebook or Youtube, I forget which. "You took our money and promised the advertising would grow our channel, then you went behind our back and throttled us. This is a breach of contract."
Ah, well now I responded to him. I would like to find D’Souza’s original comment, but he posts a lot. It was something along the lines of, “it’s ok to let them have that little bit.” I disagree.
"Big win on #vaccinemandates! No Biden federal mandate for private companies. Happily #SCOTUS comes through 6-3. No big deal the Court allowed mandates for federally-funded health care centers. We’ll give them a crumb if we can have the rest of the cake"
As an unvaccinated HCW who has stayed healthy for the past 5 years!!!! I can say that’s disgusting of him. I posted Justice Kagans stupid and illogical reasoning (her quote) on this blog elsewhere but I’ll summarize here , she said HCWs should be vaxxed to “prevent transmission.... I mean that’s...basic infection prevention measure”. The VACCINES DO NOT STERILIZE! How many times do I have to shout that at them. Even Fauci/Bourla don’t say they do. Even those two!
“federally funded” is the key in that opinion. Dancing with the devil has consequences. The good news is that healthcare workers and companies have the option to divorce themselves from that funding. There is, in other words, a choice, unlike the OSHA rule.
Thanks to nakedemperor for the post. That truly is chilling.
I also see that governments are almost quietly going about trying to change things (I think of so called US election reform laws and the recent effort by dems to stop the filibuster).
I tried to find online coverage of the latter since I’m here in US and almost nothing.
Is UK press covering the human rights laws changes?
I like to envision the political spectrum as a horizontal line. At one end there is no State, and at the other a total State.
When seen this way, it matters not which end is which, only the increasing powers usurped by the state, which is a zero sum game: every power the state gains directly reduces our freedom.
Using this rubric, there is no real distinction between the "far right" and the "far left". They are all in favor of an omnipotent State, which of course is controlled by them for their own benefit, at the expense of the liberty and prosperity of the rest of us.
The ass and the elephant are in complete agreement on this. NAP libertarians are equidistant from both.
Much like the "political compass" did... they put a left/right axis of socially progressive vs conservative, then added a vertical axis ranging from totalitarian to anarchist. The second axis is by far the most important.
Galt's Gulch ended up being the Bohemian Grove. You are right gato, and we need to recognise that this is a journey of endless steps, and we have barely taken the first one. The Trucker Protest here in Canada is one of the first actions in North America that might have an impact, and it seems to be sparking others around the world (I note that Europe has been far more vigorous in protests than complacent NA - (the opposite of what I had expected). Heartened by several countries in Europe dropping the vaxpass, which is critical.
IKR, I have been astounded about the total and utter lack of large amounts of pushback from demonstrators. But, I'm old and, I guess, think the ideals of the 60s/70s still exist.
Far Left and Far Right are COLLECTIVISTS. That's the proper spectrum for this discussion: individual liberty on one end, collectivist authoritarians on the other. Whether the collective centers on race, or class, or nationality or whatever. It's the essential characteristic of that group of people, whether fascist or communist.
Where I live, there's a guy running for county treasurer for the sole purpose of eliminating the office of county treasurer and saving the county $500,000/year. It's a completely useless office and everyone knows it. Best of all, he's got a good shot at winning.
Antony Sutton was a darling of the conservatives in the 70’s. That is until he started writing books on how the west funded the start up of the Soviet Union and how the west funded Hitler and Germany. How corporate America couldn’t wait to invest in the captive market of the Soviet Union.
These weren’t novels, they were fact based books with with plenty of names, dates and details. The Hoover institute, his employer asked him desist. He resolved that by self publishing.
There are plenty of lectures still available online, for how long who knows. It’s horrendous to think how the greed motive will allow such rationalizations as to work against the best interests of your country.
Anyone who buys into the left right paradigm is fooling themselves terribly. These people have no allegiance.
I think of the left/right thing as reins. Purely a control structure, to steer the dumb animals who pull their cart. Caroll Quigley has a few pointed paragraphs about all that.
The only way to change any nation is the cross.. sin was defeated on the cross, those who cling to the cross know they have died to sin... they no longer want evil..But desire good...,
Jesus said it is out of the heart that evil proceeds....unless our hearts are broken made tender, and focused on Jesus... we tend to evil..be it self righteousness (far right) or no moral boundaries (far left)...but unless we accept responsibility for our own sin... nothing around us really changes beyond the next administration...
It is a nation that forgets God that tends to evil.. when we fear God we know we all face judgment for our actions... here and beyond death... it’s is that fear of the Lord that keeps men humble... they know every thought, every action is being recorded and weighed in the balance...
Regardless of any system a man who truly fears God respects and does only good to his neighbour, he knows he will be held accountable so strives to do good.. but unless you face your own sinfulness, .. blessed are the poor in spirit, and grieve at your own inadequacy to be good, blessed are they who mourn...then you realise you can only do good by cooperating with Christ..
Left right Center are just perspective Jesus came in grace and truth.. we fight over what is true and forget we all need grace... the right focus on truth, the left grace.. we need both to grow up..
Only God has the power and strength to defeat your lizard people, those who worship power in this life, but fail to see life after death is what is most important..its they who need to see “what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but forfeits his soul.”..
Gates will meet his maker.. Biden too they will regret the choices they made..
Nice post. Remember Jesus refused to play political games even when urged on by his apostles. Jesus was all powerful and could have ruled Jerusalem, Rome and the entire world with the blink of an eye.
Instead Jesus died a poor abandoned criminal. He now rules Heaven and earth. Power is in humility and a life doing no harm to others. If only that was still taught to people the world would be a better place.
But Joshua did not want that. Even though his brother, the Roman Emperor thought he was a threat to his rule (and had Joshua killed shortly after his return from India).
Caesarian/Joshua was a man who had a message, but like most good men with a message, he was subverted, killed, and his message hijacked. He hadn't even died before this occurred.
Except "Christianity" was what the Ba'al Cultists hijacked from Joshua as he was dying on the cross. "The Magdalene," and not Pontus Pilate, was the ultimate betrayer, since she created "Christ" (which is not a name, but a job title) by "annointing" Joshua with oil (Christ simply means "annointed of Ba'al") in her capacity as Priestess (Temple Prostitute) of Ba'al.
The very notion that "Christianity" would have been left unsubverted by the servants of Satan is...beyond ludicrous. The greatest trick Satan (and his minion Lucifer) ever contrived, was not to convince the world he did not exist, but that "Christianity" was not his creation.
This is the "apocalypse." Which simply means unveiling. Quite the twist ending, and I doubt many that called themselves "Christians" will be able to face reality that they have been worshipping an Egyptian Sun-God ("Amen-Ra") this entire time (do you not listen to the words being said when you say "In the Name of God, Amen?")
You keep saying "God," but fail to Name him. Name the God, otherwise, like mis-addressed letters, your prayer energy will be diverted.
You have been deceived, but that is what the Father (of Lies) does for a living.
You now know. What you do with it is up to you.
Reject Christianity, but retain the teachings of Joshua.
I'm sorry. I truly am. But better to learn this now, than later. Time grows short. And we don't need or want another theocracy. America was not founded as a theocracy, and specifically and explicitly stipulated that "Congress shall make no law" regarding establishment of a State Religion. The problems we face today are -because- of the Pagan Cult that was established in the "District of Isis," a grotty little Independent City State that calls itself "United States" (pursuant to 26 USC 7701, look for yourself).
Maryland needs to finally ram through the retrocession, take back the swampland that the DC Pirate Base has been using for ill for the past 232 years, and kick all the criminal inhabitants back to whence they came.
A very good and prescient newsletter, el gato. I'm a (former) left wing Democratic voter but I've abandoned the party after they went off the deep end with destroying small business, crushing an entire generation's education, and enlisting Big Tech to disseminate their Orwellian disinformation. Those on the right are not immune to going off the deep end either. Everyone, beware.
If only that mattered. Whoever gets in will just play the same stupid games. All they will say is 'we must heal so we are keeping everything the same.' Fauci will still be in control no matter who you vote for. I still pray for his death every day.
When I was a teenager, my mom gave me some simple advice about marriage. It was,"Never do anything once, that you don't want to do for the rest of your life." Take out the trash, whatever. Do it once and you own it.
Modern parallel: Never give the government power, that you don't want it to have forever.
Getting this power back will require nothing less than a revolution. Hopefully it is a peaceful one, at the hands of a hundred million people around the world that have had enough, and want their world back. In the US, a new constitutional convention basically going back to the original and getting rid of 200 years of 'jurisprudence' starting with Marbury v Madison. And taking the limitations of the enumerated powers seriously.
while i support your hope its peaceful, they wont allow that
According to this BBC review, 3.5% is the magic number.
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20190513-it-only-takes-35-of-people-to-change-the-world
I mentioned this elsewhere, and a reader commented that many of these 'velvet revolutions' are actually subverted by powerful interests. Which may be true, but at least some of them were genuine. We can hope, and one important thing is to build community and then stage a perhaps spontaneous show of power, once the community is large enough.
Agreed. I love bad cat, but I think it's wishful thinking to believe that most ANYone running for office in our current system, regardless of how sincerely good their intentions are, won't ultimately cave to the much larger, lizard-people interests trying to sway him or her.
P.S. Thank you, El Gato Malo, for this: "this modern whitewash of 'fascism is right wing' is simply wrong." I've gotten so tired of hearing foolish leftists telling us for 30 years about "right-wing fascists."
Not just 30 years, but more like 80 years! The "Fascists are far right" big lie was devised by FDR's people late in the Second World War to distance FDR from his prior admiration for Stalin, Mussolini, and even Hitler.
Fascists hated intellectuals, communists, minorities, and unions. Their key feature is one party nationalism working in cooperation with business class elites. So this does not describe FDR at all. While you can find some comparisons with big government programs... FDRs programs served the working class farmers and industrial workers who were marginalized by the Great Depression. Like I commented before FDR was a democratic socialist for which there are a wide body of proponents and thinkers from the early part of the 20th century, one important one being RH Tawney. Also note an actual fascist plot to overthrow FDR as described in general Smeedly Butler's testimony. Smearing FDR as a communist or a fascist is the recent work of libertarians who as we know are opposed to to big government of any flavor. I hate seeing FDR getting smeared I think he's one of our countries greatest presidents
What is wrong with being opposed to big government of any flavor?
Nazism was described as a kind of Fascism, even though it's correct description was National Socialism. Mussolini's Fascism would be recognized in South Korea as "Crony Capitalism" Either means "you own the businesses as long as you do what we want.
Even Putin's reconstructed Russia is somewhere between Fascism and Crony Capitalism, hence the oligarchs..... until they fall out of favor.
"it's wishful thinking to believe that most ANYone running for office in our current system, regardless of how sincerely good their intentions are, won't ultimately cave to the much larger, lizard-people interests trying to sway him or her."
If as you say is true, war is at hand. Start shooting first, early and relentlessly. OR get involved and move the 'ball' as far as you can and then someone else pick it up and run with it, so on and so on until we arrive at the society that can live with itself peaceably, honestly and freely.
as per The Cat.
no one can be trusted with the kind of power currently invested in our leviathans.
It can’t be fixed . It needs to be ended. Dead on !
As I just wrote in another comment, when you realize this is the reality, you understand you're in the garbage compactor like in the scene in Star Wars A New Hope.
We need every hand, every resource, with all of our will, pushing back. I've written articles and am devoting my Substack to what that looks like. What IS the middle, and how do we push back? I HAVE to believe we're not too late, as grim as the hour looks. But we're going to need all the courage, all the determination, all the intention, and as much clear coordination as possible.
bherr.substack.com/p/meet-me-in-the-middle
Since power is never surrendered voluntarily, there cannot be/never have been peaceful revolutions to recover it. Those with the power control all the levers and institutions of State. And with respect to separation of powers in our alleged democratic States: Executive; Legislature; Judiciary - there is no better example of an incestuous relationship and one which will guard the status quo.
Nobody said it would be easy. But there are many, many more of 'us' than 'them' -- and a lot of 'them' at the lower echelons are more like 'us' than they realize. Yet.
The power that governments and bureaucracies, corporations and NGO's have is BUILT of power that we, individually, have surrendered (or have forgotten to hang on to). Perhaps it is we, individually, who need to remember to never surrender the powers (which though small, individually, are real) which belong to us, nor our effort, nor our energy, nor our care and attention, to entities larger than ourselves.
Once you have universal suffrage to elect government, tax revenues cease to be about funding essential services but become a slush fund for the elected to use to bribe voters. Voters understand this and elections become auctions where votes are sold to the highest bidder. Voters then, increasingly expect others (via the State) to provide for them what they do not provide for themselves, and so become increasingly dependent on the State which becomes empowered whilst ‘We The People’ become infantilised and impotent.
"'We The People' become infantilised and impotent" - ie. we surrendered our power. What stops us retaining it, instead? Each day, a new day, a new way.
What stops anyone from giving up a drug? Addiction. ‘We The People’ are addicted to the Welfare State… we’ll give up cigarettes, booze, drugs - tomorrow - after just one more smoke, Scotch, fix.
Amazingly, many, many people have kicked addictions. What stops a person needing a drug is the power to achieve satisfactions that are real. Satisfyingly real relationships with real people who have real faces. Satisfyingly real opportunities to be skillfully useful to others and be respected for it. Real satisfactions of the human kind, of which drugs can only ever provide a pale imitation.
Never do anything once, that you don't want to do for the rest of your life." Take out the trash, whatever. Do it once and you own it.
Sorry but this is absolutely horrible advice for marriage. If this happens to you I can only tell you one thing: you chose the wrong person! The advice should be that before marriage if a task gets stuck to you then run and never marry that person!
Yes. I spent Monday arguing to a Fed Soc audience that the answer to social media censorship is NOT regulation. Not even “common carrier.” Sue them, preferably privately, excise the cronyist cancer, and stitch up the patient.
More on point: I was disappointed to see Dinesh D’Souza comment that it was fine for SCOTUS to uphold the vaccine mandates for healthcare workers, so long as the OSHA mandate was struck down. Not one inch.
It told me that SCOTUS paid no attention to the science in the brief. I wasn’t surprised but it tells me that any outcome is possible, regardless (of anything else).
That became obvious as soon as Sotomayor opened her mouth 🤦♀️
I think you're missing the forest for the trees. Whether the jabs work was never the point. The central question is whether we have an indvidual right to refuse medical treatment we don't want. It doesn't matter if the jab freshens breath or grants superpowers. I have the right to say no.
The admin used legal pretenses to try to work around that question while at the same time trying to remove that right. The court then made a political decision to split the baby. It refused the pretense in the OSHA decision, but allowed it for CMS.
If nothing else we should be very aware of the fact there is no such thing as "free" federal money. It has chains attached.
We’re on the same page. That SCOTUS didn’t toss the mandates period was more than disappointing (though not a surprise).
And you’re right, our bodily autonomy beats any arguments at all about “does it work to protect others?”.
I failed to make your correct & substantive point. It’s also in international human rights agreements between >190 countries. They’re OUR human rights. They don’t belong to governments to choose to waive or not.
I don’t waver from this, while also telling those who don’t buy what we’re saying about article 6, human rights & bodily autonomy, that the darn things do not do any of the things they appear to think they do.
I think the answer to the question, “if the vaccines did markedly reduce transmission, should the state have the right to waive your right of bodily autonomy?” is NO.
The idea that it would be selfish not to get vaccinated under the scenario immediately above is silly.
I’m a thoughtful person & I’d take reasonable steps to minimise risk of harming others. I do that in other aspects of life. The best way to do that is to keep away from others if I’m symptomatic. And I do. So stick your “vaccine mandates”. Govt simply doesn’t hold the waiver of my / our inalienable human rights. And no, it’s not selfish to insist on deciding each for ourselves.
Thanks for the prompt!
Mike
❤️🙏🤗
And thank you for the work you've done.
I just want us to be careful. When we slip into the merits in a legal context, we effectively cede there is a role for the government in those determinations.
amen ~ no is no!
That’s what happens when your Justices do anything but pay attention to the law.
D’Sousa was speaking only of the legal argument, not whether it was a good idea. I assure you he doesn’t believe in mandates.
The point about suing these scumbags is a good one, and we need to be able to do it, which is why these organizations calling themselves platforms but behaving as publishers need to have the Section 230 umbrella of immunity ripped from their hands.
So educate me, why did he think it was legally right to uphold the CMS mandate but not OSHA? Neither makes sense with a leaky vaccine. Also unsafe. But the intellectual argument justice Kagan spouted (I wrote to down because it was so absurd): “You have to get vaccinated so that you’re not transmitting the disease that can kill elderly Medicare patients, that can kill sick Medicaid patients. I mean, that seems like a pretty basic infection prevention measure.”
Even Fauci and Bourla don’t claim the so-called vaccines sterilize, I.e prevent transmission. And the multiple proven cases of transmission in fully or mostly vaccinated populations (I.e, e.g. Australia, Israel, Gibraltar, many cities in Ireland, MY OWN office (where all that came down with covid in our mini pandemic were fully vaccinated except one who caught it in a different city, fully separated from our work over Xmas and isolated a full 10 days. Everyone else was vaccinated).
So Kagan’s argument doesn’t hold water. I called SCOTUS offices to protest the stupidity.
Oh and while I must test every week without symptoms , my closest coworker was allowed to sit beside me ALL day today and walk in and out of the office with over the top congestion, coughing, etc. (she DID have to test negative however). I am not a fear monger and advised my boss I do not care (I really don’t, if I get it I get it) but the unscientific discrimination? And this stupid 5 day “ok you can go back to work”? Huh?
Disclaimer - I’m not a lawyer. But the argument was like this: OSHA has no authority to regulate healthcare for the whole country, which was the *effect* of the order, due to the fact that there was no escape from it - if you were employed by any company of any size, you were subject. On the other hand, the Feds had the authority to regulate healthcare companies that are *tied to the Feds via Medicare*. Note in this circumstance, healthcare providers can escape the rule by not taking Fed money, and a number of healthcare workers I know did just that (and are in fact financially better off and happier as a result). This is the wages of giving the government financial responsibility for healthcare - they usurp all responsibility.
Take the King's shilling, and you must obey the King's rules...
I understand the "take the money and pay the price" argument (same reason private schools don't participate in federal milk programs) but in reality the vast majority of health care workers in the US are captured by hospitals and clinics that accept federal money. Less than 1% of physicians in US are not registered Medicare providers. There are approximately 163 million americans on Medicare, Medicaid and health exchange. I personally have not seen a nurse hang out a shingle on their own advertising for cash only and private insurance payments. In some very large cities I'm sure there are a few such jobs but in the overall health care delivery system this is a very small fraction.
This is the exact and main reason there has been very little push back from hospitals and physicians against federal overreach.
Bottom line, no matter what the reasoning, what is being done to health care workers not wanting the jab in the US is an abomination. Americans should not have tolerated it. Truckers wouldn't have.
It must just be a lot more prevalent here in Southern California than it is elsewhere. There are now a number of organizations here with doctors who bill customers a yearly fee and offer unlimited GP care under that fee, which is surprisingly inexpensive. My former GP does this - he quit his regular practice after Obamacare forced him to spend, and I quote, “more than 50% of my time on paperwork.” Most of them do house calls. This phenomenon has been accelerated by the COVID lunacy.
Right, these systems work (and are fantastic!) in large urban areas like SoCal but statistically don’t employee many health care workers. There are a large number of entire states that will never have these types of practices. What really drives the core of health care everywhere in the US are services like emergency rooms, urgent care clinics, cancer care centers, surgical services (the “shit, I have to go to a doctor/hospital things in life) - all tied to hospital and clinics which participate with the feds to survive. Added to the 163 million above are 10% of US pop that don’t have $ or insurance that wind up needing care.
“There are approximately 163 million americans on Medicare, Medicaid and health exchange.” - this is a critical point. Service costs in all such industries are driven by the largest customer bloc. In American healthcare, that bloc is the government under Medicare.
That’s the problem: if there’s authority to make a decision, the Justices won’t second-guess how the decision is made.
That distinction is not properly an all-or-nothing one. For more, read Clarence Thomas’s statement regarding denial of certiorari in Malwarebytes vs. Enigma.
Well that’s what I get for not reading the law. I agree with Thomas in his opinion. I was unaware that they took what would have been a very clear law and instantly watered it down with that subsection containing words like “good faith”. In any case, a law intended to allow a company like AT&T to move data without regard for the content has been instead turned on its head to allow tyrants and scumbags to nearly completely purge thoughtcrime from “platforms” that are nearly ubiquitous and universal is certainly unintended. The distinction should be clarified, and companies such as Facebook and Twitter should be designated accordingly - they are *not* platforms as originally intended in the law.
They are mouthpieces for the totalitarian gov't in charge.
Clarence Thomas in the end suggested cutting the Gordian knot and invoked "common carrier" as the simplest solution. What exactly are the grounds for these private suits?
Moreover, when the state is enlisting social media to act as an enforcement arm for what the state wants censored, private suits that somehow excise crony cancer seems a bit unrealistic. I suspect expecting any significant relief from what after all are the state's courts and defendants with inexhaustible pockets is even more so.
This war will either be won by the rise of free market alternatives to Big Tech, which is possible but seems unlikely, a sea change in present electoral politics, likewise unlikely though possible, or a significant conflict, perhaps largely peaceful as standard politics dissolve and recoalesce into something different and more workable, or, given the totalitarian proclivities of our domestic enemies, a kinetic resolution.
We'll see which occurs, but I would not bet against the last.
Common carrier defence works because the supplier is not responsible for content - example a phone company, postal service - over which it has no control and therefore cannot be held accountable in law. However that argument is weakened for social media by the companies themselves because over the last few years they have taken control of content and assumed responsibility for it with their censorship and ‘fact checking’.
It needs a test case to be brought by somebody with deep pockets.
I was a Jorgensen voter, but would love to see the Trump lawsuits (or similar) pursued using the state action theory, combined with Justice Thomas’s interpretation of Section 230.
They sold themselves as platforms and then performed an enormous bait and switch. They should have never been designated so.
“ What exactly are the grounds for these private suits? ”
First Amendment violation, using the “state action” theory put forth last year by Rubenfeld and Ramaswamy.
I suspect even stronger arguments might be made by those whose businesses were built on these platforms. The platforms offered themselves as a place to build a business, and many did so and were quite successful, only to see their entire futures wiped out in an instant due to some faceless twit’s snap decision behind an impenetrable wall, without any recourse or review.
That's literally the grounds on which Crowder was suing either Facebook or Youtube, I forget which. "You took our money and promised the advertising would grow our channel, then you went behind our back and throttled us. This is a breach of contract."
The enemy will not be satisfied until it’s the last, so, necessarily, it will eventually be so.
😲
Which?
I was responding to what you said about D’Souza, but now I’m more confused after hoppah’s response ;-)
Ah, well now I responded to him. I would like to find D’Souza’s original comment, but he posts a lot. It was something along the lines of, “it’s ok to let them have that little bit.” I disagree.
I was disgusted when I read this as well.
D'Souza's tweet 1/13/22:
"Big win on #vaccinemandates! No Biden federal mandate for private companies. Happily #SCOTUS comes through 6-3. No big deal the Court allowed mandates for federally-funded health care centers. We’ll give them a crumb if we can have the rest of the cake"
First they came for the healthcare workers...
As an unvaccinated HCW who has stayed healthy for the past 5 years!!!! I can say that’s disgusting of him. I posted Justice Kagans stupid and illogical reasoning (her quote) on this blog elsewhere but I’ll summarize here , she said HCWs should be vaxxed to “prevent transmission.... I mean that’s...basic infection prevention measure”. The VACCINES DO NOT STERILIZE! How many times do I have to shout that at them. Even Fauci/Bourla don’t say they do. Even those two!
Thanks for tracking that down!
“federally funded” is the key in that opinion. Dancing with the devil has consequences. The good news is that healthcare workers and companies have the option to divorce themselves from that funding. There is, in other words, a choice, unlike the OSHA rule.
*gasp* That’s even worse than I imagined.
Great tracking, TrackCat!
Rather magnanimous of him to "give them a crumb" of other people's rights, is it not?
Par for the course with his sort.
D’Souza is just another Red Team warmonger, a statist to the core.
"Iraq is part of a legitimate American effort not to have democracy everywhere but to have democracy somewhere."
~ Dinesh D’Souza
Right, seeing the original quote would be clarifying, but I 100% agree with you if that is what he said.
Even any “legal” concession. Nope.
The best way to control social media is stop using it, or move to platforms other than the market dominators.
Did he? 😠
Dsouza embarrassed himself by not having the balls to publicly dispute the crooked election . He sold out.
Until then I admired him ; since then, I ignore him . IMO so should most .
As ever Orwell was on point.
'The real division is not between conservatives and revolutionaries but between authoritarians and libertarians.'
Another grand-slam dunk, el gato! 👏⚾️🎇🏀🙌🔥
On a related note, I wanted to alert everyone to this alarming news about the “proposed removal of human rights in the UK for the greater good”:
https://nakedemperor.substack.com/p/the-proposed-removal-of-human-rights
The UK government is accepting responses through March 8. No doubt this will become a new entry in my Letters series …
Thanks to nakedemperor for the post. That truly is chilling.
I also see that governments are almost quietly going about trying to change things (I think of so called US election reform laws and the recent effort by dems to stop the filibuster).
I tried to find online coverage of the latter since I’m here in US and almost nothing.
Is UK press covering the human rights laws changes?
Ps I recommend we all read nakedemporers post
Chilling, indeed.
I’m in the US, too, so I can’t answer your question about the UK press.
BTW, did you see this news?
“Wisconsin Assembly votes unanimously to withdraw Biden’s 2020 electoral votes”:
https://nationalfile.com/wisconsin-assembly-unanimously-votes-withdraw-bidens-2020-electoral-votes/
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2022/01/huge-breaking-news-wisconsin-assembly-votes-withdraw-10-electors-joe-biden-2020-election-video/
But there was zero fraud and only a right-wing terrorist would suggest that there was.
🤗
🤗
I'm not ignoring you Margaret Anna, for some reason pushing the ❤ isn't working on some posts.
Haha, I noticed that, too, but I think it’s just a display issue because the heart shows up when I refresh. Still, hope they get the glitch fixed.
Ok. So now it worked. 🙄🤷♀️
Just a superb essay, gato.
I like to envision the political spectrum as a horizontal line. At one end there is no State, and at the other a total State.
When seen this way, it matters not which end is which, only the increasing powers usurped by the state, which is a zero sum game: every power the state gains directly reduces our freedom.
Using this rubric, there is no real distinction between the "far right" and the "far left". They are all in favor of an omnipotent State, which of course is controlled by them for their own benefit, at the expense of the liberty and prosperity of the rest of us.
The ass and the elephant are in complete agreement on this. NAP libertarians are equidistant from both.
Bingo.
Much like the "political compass" did... they put a left/right axis of socially progressive vs conservative, then added a vertical axis ranging from totalitarian to anarchist. The second axis is by far the most important.
I posit that the “progressive vs conservative” axis is a smokescreen and the other is all that matters.
Galt's Gulch ended up being the Bohemian Grove. You are right gato, and we need to recognise that this is a journey of endless steps, and we have barely taken the first one. The Trucker Protest here in Canada is one of the first actions in North America that might have an impact, and it seems to be sparking others around the world (I note that Europe has been far more vigorous in protests than complacent NA - (the opposite of what I had expected). Heartened by several countries in Europe dropping the vaxpass, which is critical.
IKR, I have been astounded about the total and utter lack of large amounts of pushback from demonstrators. But, I'm old and, I guess, think the ideals of the 60s/70s still exist.
Is it just me, or has the direct "like" button disappeared on the bottom of the substack emails?
I get quite a few substack emails daily. It seems to have disappeared from them all sometime yesterday and for some authors the day before.
Oh yeah, good catch! That’s not good. Can you notify Substack tech support about it?
Better that the authors make a fuss than me. :)
Haha, fair enough.
It's still on the top.
That one hasn't been working for me today. When I reach the article, the like is not lit.
It would seem then that Substack wants you on substack instead of just liking from your email provider.
Looks like it's gone from there now as well. Not showing up for me anyway.
Not on mine either. ???
Odd choice, never like it when features are removed.
Are we all wondering if Substack is caving to outside pressure?
hopefully not. It's a nice way to disseminate valuable information. :) Not a big change, but one nonetheless.
yep
"it’s not right vs left. it’s authoritarian vs liberty."
----------------
Same as it ever was.
And ever will be.
Far Left and Far Right are COLLECTIVISTS. That's the proper spectrum for this discussion: individual liberty on one end, collectivist authoritarians on the other. Whether the collective centers on race, or class, or nationality or whatever. It's the essential characteristic of that group of people, whether fascist or communist.
This the most correct thing that has ever been written. Whether by cat or by human.
Where I live, there's a guy running for county treasurer for the sole purpose of eliminating the office of county treasurer and saving the county $500,000/year. It's a completely useless office and everyone knows it. Best of all, he's got a good shot at winning.
Is his name Ron Swanson?
I thought the same thing! 🤣
Antony Sutton was a darling of the conservatives in the 70’s. That is until he started writing books on how the west funded the start up of the Soviet Union and how the west funded Hitler and Germany. How corporate America couldn’t wait to invest in the captive market of the Soviet Union.
These weren’t novels, they were fact based books with with plenty of names, dates and details. The Hoover institute, his employer asked him desist. He resolved that by self publishing.
There are plenty of lectures still available online, for how long who knows. It’s horrendous to think how the greed motive will allow such rationalizations as to work against the best interests of your country.
Anyone who buys into the left right paradigm is fooling themselves terribly. These people have no allegiance.
I think of the left/right thing as reins. Purely a control structure, to steer the dumb animals who pull their cart. Caroll Quigley has a few pointed paragraphs about all that.
The only way to change any nation is the cross.. sin was defeated on the cross, those who cling to the cross know they have died to sin... they no longer want evil..But desire good...,
Jesus said it is out of the heart that evil proceeds....unless our hearts are broken made tender, and focused on Jesus... we tend to evil..be it self righteousness (far right) or no moral boundaries (far left)...but unless we accept responsibility for our own sin... nothing around us really changes beyond the next administration...
It is a nation that forgets God that tends to evil.. when we fear God we know we all face judgment for our actions... here and beyond death... it’s is that fear of the Lord that keeps men humble... they know every thought, every action is being recorded and weighed in the balance...
Regardless of any system a man who truly fears God respects and does only good to his neighbour, he knows he will be held accountable so strives to do good.. but unless you face your own sinfulness, .. blessed are the poor in spirit, and grieve at your own inadequacy to be good, blessed are they who mourn...then you realise you can only do good by cooperating with Christ..
Left right Center are just perspective Jesus came in grace and truth.. we fight over what is true and forget we all need grace... the right focus on truth, the left grace.. we need both to grow up..
Only God has the power and strength to defeat your lizard people, those who worship power in this life, but fail to see life after death is what is most important..its they who need to see “what does it profit a man if he gains the whole world but forfeits his soul.”..
Gates will meet his maker.. Biden too they will regret the choices they made..
It’s the fear of the Lord that brings wisdom...
Nice post. Remember Jesus refused to play political games even when urged on by his apostles. Jesus was all powerful and could have ruled Jerusalem, Rome and the entire world with the blink of an eye.
Instead Jesus died a poor abandoned criminal. He now rules Heaven and earth. Power is in humility and a life doing no harm to others. If only that was still taught to people the world would be a better place.
But Joshua did not want that. Even though his brother, the Roman Emperor thought he was a threat to his rule (and had Joshua killed shortly after his return from India).
Caesarian/Joshua was a man who had a message, but like most good men with a message, he was subverted, killed, and his message hijacked. He hadn't even died before this occurred.
Except "Christianity" was what the Ba'al Cultists hijacked from Joshua as he was dying on the cross. "The Magdalene," and not Pontus Pilate, was the ultimate betrayer, since she created "Christ" (which is not a name, but a job title) by "annointing" Joshua with oil (Christ simply means "annointed of Ba'al") in her capacity as Priestess (Temple Prostitute) of Ba'al.
The very notion that "Christianity" would have been left unsubverted by the servants of Satan is...beyond ludicrous. The greatest trick Satan (and his minion Lucifer) ever contrived, was not to convince the world he did not exist, but that "Christianity" was not his creation.
This is the "apocalypse." Which simply means unveiling. Quite the twist ending, and I doubt many that called themselves "Christians" will be able to face reality that they have been worshipping an Egyptian Sun-God ("Amen-Ra") this entire time (do you not listen to the words being said when you say "In the Name of God, Amen?")
You keep saying "God," but fail to Name him. Name the God, otherwise, like mis-addressed letters, your prayer energy will be diverted.
You have been deceived, but that is what the Father (of Lies) does for a living.
You now know. What you do with it is up to you.
Reject Christianity, but retain the teachings of Joshua.
I'm sorry. I truly am. But better to learn this now, than later. Time grows short. And we don't need or want another theocracy. America was not founded as a theocracy, and specifically and explicitly stipulated that "Congress shall make no law" regarding establishment of a State Religion. The problems we face today are -because- of the Pagan Cult that was established in the "District of Isis," a grotty little Independent City State that calls itself "United States" (pursuant to 26 USC 7701, look for yourself).
Maryland needs to finally ram through the retrocession, take back the swampland that the DC Pirate Base has been using for ill for the past 232 years, and kick all the criminal inhabitants back to whence they came.
This is the way.
How do we get rid of the Patriot Act? That’s the carte blanche permission slip for all this authoritarian crap right now.
A very good and prescient newsletter, el gato. I'm a (former) left wing Democratic voter but I've abandoned the party after they went off the deep end with destroying small business, crushing an entire generation's education, and enlisting Big Tech to disseminate their Orwellian disinformation. Those on the right are not immune to going off the deep end either. Everyone, beware.
Start here: vote out every incumbent who implemented or went along with lockdowns, mandates and masks.
If only that mattered. Whoever gets in will just play the same stupid games. All they will say is 'we must heal so we are keeping everything the same.' Fauci will still be in control no matter who you vote for. I still pray for his death every day.