Writing on the Double Yellow Line

Militant moderate, unwilling to concede any longer the terms of debate to the strident ideologues on the fringe. If you are a Democrat or a Republican, you're an ideologue. If you're a "moderate" who votes a nearly straight party-ticket, you're still an ideologue, but you at least have the decency to be ashamed of your ideology. ...and you're lying in the meantime.

Name:
Location: Illinois, United States

Wednesday, September 23, 2020

The Great Maskerade

The Great Maskerade

©2020  Ross Williams

 

 

 

 

Another virtue signal has been blinking recently, ostensibly aimed at those who fail or refuse to accept the GroupThink of the modern “progressive” [ironic term] socialist infantilism infecting this nation.  In all actuality, it serves in the form of hopeful lamb’s blood upon the lintel for the secular socialist Passover now occurring in various parts of the nation, and is a text-dense polemic that begins “We Believe…”.  You’ll see these in front yards and pasted on the inside of shop windows as you drive around town, often next to the laughably hypocritical Hate Has No Home Here.  The signs cannot be read while driving because the printing is too small, and there’s too much of it.  The left cannot only not meme, they also can’t make effective political signage.

The first pious scold under “We Believe” − and there’s 6 or 8 of them, depending on which version of the sign you happen to run across − is usually “Black Lives Matter”.  Just a head’s up, homie: when the riots come to your town, this will not save you, nor will it prevent your business or residence from suddenly and mysteriously catching a flammable dose of peaceful protest.  However, an AR-15 might just do the trick.  Pro tip: sit on the roof.


“We” also, according to these signs, “Believe No Human Is Illegal”.  Yet many of the things they do may be.  Such as… and I’ll just leave this out there… crossing borders without permission, when such permission is required to cross a border.

Some also claim “We Believe Water Is Life”.  And, well, wine is mostly water; vita vinum, after all, so … okay, fine.  I’ll give you that one.


But among the superficial slogans that appears is “Science Is Real”.  …this, coming from the portion of our political spectrum that will gladly inform you, whether you ask or not, that there are 57 genders.  I had a brief internet conversation with someone citing this infantile list of sneers and asked what, specifically, was meant by this particular scold.  Two things, I was told.  First, “global warming is happening”, and second, “covid is real and not a hoax”.

I replied, well, first, the scientific method is real, as well, and when the global warmers back up their computer-generated hypothesis with even one predicted result which actually happens as predicted − in the real world and not on a computer that has been gamed to giving desired results − then we’ll talk.   But not before.  And second, of course Shanghai Shivers is real; it’s the hysteria that’s the hoax.

The conversation was ended at that point because I referred to Hong Kong Fluey in a “racist” manner and he wasn’t going to indulge me further.  So be it.  I’d have ended up giving him essentially the same lecture I’ve written out dozens of times already.

 

SARS-Cov2, the bug that causes the Hubei Heaves, is an actual virus.  It is from one of the families of virus that cause − in humans − the upper respiratory malady called a cold.  All types of cold have the potential to migrate into the lungs and cause an infection there.  A lung infection is called pneumonia, and it is the manner in which colds and influenza kill most people.  Some types of cold are more dangerous than others, and migrate into the lungs far easier.  This virus appears to be one of them, but being a more serious variety of cold does not stop it from being a cold.  When the pneumonia is caused by a virus it is very serious indeed.  I say all this because this is the science, and science is real.

 

If nothing is known about a specific cold virus, then it is scientifically reasonable to make assumptions about it based on other cold viruses until such time as more information is learned about the new cold virus.  In January of 2020 almost nothing was known about the cold virus which causes Shanghai Shivers.  It is reasonable, then, to assume that it will behave similarly to other cold viruses of its family.  Other viruses in this family − indeed all such upper respiratory infections − cause particular hardship on the old, the young, and those whose immune systems are depleted by other illnesses.  …which is why you don’t put infected people into nursing homes full of those almost certain to be significantly more impacted than the general public.  And when governors, and their “public health” directors, force infected patients into nursing homes with uninfected residents, the scientifically expected result is disaster.  Science is, after all, real.  And disaster is what occurred.

What is also real is that the public policy actions of a handful of democrat governors, on the advice of their “public health” “experts”, was a significant inspiration in the deaths of tens of thousands, roughly half of our national deaths.  What is also real is that none of those public officials are being investigated for criminally negligent homicide − they knew better than to put sick people in with high-risk healthy people, and they did it anyway.  And what is further real is that these democrat politicians are being lauded by the press because while they were busy killing America’s old people by the tens of thousands, they were making snide comments about Donnie Combover.  Tens of thousands of people died as a direct result of democrat policies, but the public criticism of the Orange Man made it all worthwhile.

 

Because political science is also real.

 

Being all about the science, “public health” “experts” are fully aware that sunshine is murder on viruses.  It is especially the ultraviolet portion of the electromagnetic spectrum that kills viruses.  So did “public health” “experts” advise that people spend as much time outside as they can, partaking of public parks, outdoor public swimming pools, daytime sporting events, the beach, and the like?  Were indoor tanning salons declared an “essential business”?  Were they forced to stay open and even extend their hours?  No, people were anti-scientifically told, “Stay Home, Save Lives”.  Because political science is more real, and far more important, than real science.


Not only does sunshine kill viruses through UV radiation, but it creates a biochemical reaction in a person’s skin that creates a hormone − a secosteroid − called vitamin D.  Vitamin D prevents viruses from being able to replicate, especially when combined with the mineral zinc, and is an essential component of a person’s immune system.  Because this is the science, and because science is so real, politicians and their “public health” “experts” have recommended that everyone spend as much time in the sun as possible, even to the point of risking sunburn.  Didn’t they?  No.  Because the reality of modern science depends on whose politics benefit from it.

 

Chlorine is an even greater killer of viruses than ultraviolet light is, which is why “public health” “experts” have advised everyone to go spend the day at any of a million hyper-chlorinated public swimming pools.  Especially the outdoor public pools.  …except they haven’t.  Because they continue to be all about the political science.

 

Despite not being as fatal to viruses as ultraviolet light and chlorine, salt water is exceptionally harmful to viruses.  Which is why governors of coastal states, at the advice of their “public health” “experts” so keen on science, have ordered all salt water beaches to remain open and accessible to the public − particularly during the day, in order to get the double benefit of UV light, and the triple benefit of biosynthesis of vitamin D − throughout this ordeal.  …except they haven’t.  Real science once again became secondary to political power.

 

Alcohol doesn’t do an awful lot to viruses.  It kills bacteria like nobody’s business, but doesn’t even make a virus dizzy.  That is the science.  Hand sanitizer is nothing but jellied alcohol.  Yet, politicians, on the advice of their scientifically adept “public health” “experts” have mandated hand sanitizer to be used before entering a wide assortment of public buildings − like schools and hospitals.  More “real science”.  So, since alcohol is so effective in their new-fangled notion of science, wither bars and the internal application of alcohol?  It seems the denial of science only works when it can serve the purpose of increasing government power.

 

…which brings us to masks.  A full century of science has told us that wearing face masks for “public health” prophylaxis is either pointless or counter-productive.  The purpose of face masks is to prevent a surgeon’s saliva or booger flakes from falling out of his face and into the open wounds of the anesthetized patient on his operating table.  Saliva and boogers carry viruses and bacteria, and if they were to enter the open wounds of a patient, it would bypass that patient’s normal immune system barriers.  Coupled with the trauma of having an open wound, the additional pathogens may prove fatal.

 

Yet that science was completely rewritten in March of 2020.  Not because the science itself had changed.  The science was, and remains, identical: it is pointless at best and counter-productive at worst for the general public to wear masks for “public health”.  What changed was the political science.  “Public health” “experts” are now advising − and politicians [particularly democrat politicians] are demanding − that masks be worn in public.

 

The wording of the recommendation is critical.  A recent statement I came across declared “If worn properly, a face mask can reduce the likelihood of infection between 50 and 85 percent.”  All some people will see is, “masks reduce infection by 50-85%.”  But the key words are “if worn properly.”

 

And the science tells us that outside of a surgical or other highly controlled medical setting, masks are not worn properly.  Ever.

Usually, the improper wear doesn’t amount to much, hence the wearing being pointless.  They don’t often do any particular harm, but they also don’t do any good.

 

In order to wear a mask properly, several necessary and mandatory steps must be taken:

1] Scrub your hands with soap in the manner described on all the new hand-washing bulletins posted above the sinks in public restrooms.  Twenty seconds, minimum, under the nails, and halfway to the elbows.

2] You must get a mask without touching anything except the mask.  If you touch anything − the box the mask comes in, the counter the box is sitting on, your hair as you loop it over your ears − your hands and the mask they are touching are now unsanitary and must be disposed of.  Return to step 1.

3] Once the mask is in place over your mouth and nose, it must never be touched.  By anything.  You pull it down to expose your nose, or to lollygag around your throat as you drive your car past all the pretentious “We Believe Science Is Real” signs, the mask is now unsanitary; go to step 1.  If you rub your nose with your wrist because your nose itches … go to step 1.  ANYthing … go to step 1.

 

Failure to rigidly follow these three steps will mean, in all likelihood, that your mask will not accomplish what you fervently believe it will accomplish.  To wit: keeping you safe from others’ germs and others safe from yours.  But it will also, in all likelihood, not do any harm.  What will do harm is when any of the first three steps are violated and the mask gets saturated.  And it will become saturated.   Exhale on a mirror if you need to know why.

 

4] When saturated, the mask must be discarded and replaced starting from step 1.  Saturation means the fibers of the mask will collect viruses and bacteria from the environment.  A saturated mask becomes a fabric petri dish worn on your face.  This does cause harm… to the one wearing it.

But of course this is all science and not political science, and the ones exhorting others that “Science is Real” want everyone to ignore science and just put on a mask that science doesn’t justify.  “Get over it”.  Do you want to know how to get over a disease?

 

By getting over it.  Catch it, become ill with it, develop antibodies to it and survive it.  There is no other way.  When enough individuals do this, it’s called Herd Immunity.  Enough people have to be immune to it that when it comes around again − and it will come around again − there won’t be enough people who can get sick that it will devastate an entire community, let alone the world.  Those who claim to be “public health” “experts” seem to believe that if we simply hide in our basements long enough, like Creepy Joe has been doing, the virus causing Hubei Heaves will simply give up looking for us and leave.  That’s not how disease works.  But they wouldn’t know, since it involves understanding real science and not political science.

 

You don't acquire herd immunity without the herd getting sick in the first place.

 

What we're doing by trying to hide from it is prolonging its presence, and making otherwise healthy people unhealthy by depleting their immune systems through arbitrary − and scientifically unsound − "public health" policy. People are not simply going to keep catching the scary new disease, but because they have a weakened immune system they're going to catch every other disease as well.

 

This disease is here, and it's here forever. The sooner we understand that and get on with life the sooner it's going to be irrelevant.  And if you wouldn’t stack the ill in nursing homes to infect those with already weak immune systems, almost no one would die from it.

 

Friday, August 14, 2020

Civil War 2.0

 

Civil War 2.0

©2020  Ross Williams

 

 

Every once in a while, if you spend any amount of time on the internet or have an email acquaintance with a philosophical bent towards “progressive” [ironic term] politics, you’ll be confronted with a whiny list of gripes describing how the police response to recent riots in several major American cities fail to follow the Geneva Convention [always a singular citation], and that therefore American cops are war criminals.  So there.

Only one problem with this theory: it is monumentally flawed.

First, there are multiple Geneva Conventions.  Four, to be exact.

The first covers wounded and ill soldiers on the battlefield and those who are there to care for them.


The second extends to sailors stranded at sea or shipwrecked, and those caring for them.


The third is the one most people know about, dealing with prisoners of war and who can, who must and who cannot be considered as same.


The fourth deals with civilians and their “artifacts”.

Second, the Geneva Conventions, or GenCons, apply only to military or paramilitary actions recognized as “war”.  They do not apply to law enforcement, or domestic disturbances which fall short of an outright rebellion.  A rebellion would be considered, relative to the GenCons, a civil war, and thus the GenCons would apply if the nation fighting the civil war has signed onto them.

Third, and finally, the current domestic instability occurring in many major American cities are generally considered to fall significantly short of a rebellion at the moment, and thus the GenCons would not, in fact, apply.  The riots are properly, and currently, law enforcement actions − even if many law enforcers are willfully derelict in their duties.

These whiny, faux-pious denunciations claiming cops to be war criminals is a backhanded admission that the fascists of Auntie Fey and the socialists of BLM are actually at war against the United States, a condition that many, including myself, have suggested is their actual intent if not their current undertaking.  I’ve often stumbled upon someone idly asking when we’re going to see our Firing On Fort Sumter Moment; I reply that I believe we already have − we just don’t realize it yet.


Indeed, the Geneva Conventions themselves would support this.  The GenCons note that the provisions of the Geneva Conventions shall apply − quote − to all cases of declared war or of any other armed conflict which may arise between two or more of the High Contracting Parties, even if the state of war is not recognized by one of them.  It is painfully clear that a state of war is not recognized by the United States, itself.

It is also painfully clear that the fascists of Auntie Fey are not among the High Contracting Parties.  No matter; the GenCons then go on to explain that you only really need one side of a war being party to the GenCons for them to apply.  Maybe.  There are exceptions.  What would be the fun of law if there were no exceptions? 

What is thoroughly unclear is what constitutes a “state of war” under International Law.  All IntLaw references recognize that a state of war exists at the moment of a declaration of war, but that an outright declaration is quite unnecessary if one is being fought.  War is war, and declarations are politics.  It seems to be, like pornography, another in the “I can’t define it, but I know it when I see it” constructs.

Even so, many individuals involved in the current rioting have openly declared war on the “systemically racist” and abusively capitalist United States.  Do these individuals speak for their larger organizations?  … organizations which have the stated purpose of dismantling western civilization in general and the United States in particular?

Or, in the case of Auntie Fey, do they speak for the larger un-membered, dues-less, leaderless, structure-less non-organization?  Their actions certainly suggest so.  One such group of separatist rioters even went so far as to declare itself independent, and not in a Conch Republic kinda way, where they immediately surrendered and applied for US foreign aid.  They set up shop on the slopes of downtown Seattle, established an independent “noble anarchy” − which was given over almost immediately to a strongarm dictator and his henchmen, and there they stayed.  …until they started killing each other and they were rounded up by the Seattle police who decided to stop being derelict.


But let’s just suppose that the fascists of Auntie Fey and the socialists of BLM actually do start waging what the international Rules of War and the United States might recognize as war.  What would that mean from a practical, GenCons-obedient standpoint?

Among the first things that must happen is that the fascists of Auntie Fey and the socialists of BLM must create and maintain a military structure for their organizations, establishing a chain of command in which a superior is responsible for the conduct of his subordinates.  Additionally, they must start wearing uniforms, or adopting some other “fixed, distinctive sign recognizable at a distance” to identify them as legitimate Cosplayers of War.  They must also carry their arms openly, and obey all the rules of war.  This last would likely be the biggest problem for the socialist-fascists, given their repeated ignorant whinings about war criminals sans war.

Of course, there’s no shortage of folks who’d be willing to sign up to fight these wheezy wankers in their own militias, and they’d have the same requirements placed upon them.  These potential future enemies of today’s rioters are generally known [mostly by leftists] by their collective name, “Boogaloo Boys”. They are considered “anti-government extremists” by the same people who are now going out of their way to torch government buildings, fight cops in the streets and demand the destruction of the United States. It should be noted that the Boogaloo Boys have never done these, nor declared any intention to.

Generally speaking, the Boogs, to the degree they cohesively exist outside the febrile imaginations of leftists as anything other than regular 2nd Amendment aficionados, would be better armed, better trained, already more or less regimented, with camouflage gear making them highly recognizable on the largely urban battlefield and, given that many are veterans in the first place, sufficiently aware of the rules of war that it wouldn’t be a burden for them to learn.

If this actually were a war, the cops − and all others stepping up to put down the SoyBoi Rebellion − would stop using tear gas and rubber bullets.  They’d use real bullets, and lots of them.  The moment an Indianapolis street bandito pointed a gun at a car attempting to get down the avenue toward home would be his last.  He could be shot as an enemy combatant.  So could anyone with him.  And there would be no repercussions for anyone, because it is war.  Due Process doesn’t exist in war.  Civil rights are irrelevant in combat.  The enemy soldier is your judge and jury.

You wanna wage war?  Alrighty then: this is war.


The second you don your twin flag Auntie Fey emblem, or arrange B, L and M in alphabetical order, and step from your mommy’s basement into open air you can be shot.  Repeatedly.  Like how Quentin Tarantino or Sam Peckinpah would do it if they were directing.  Hell, you can be shot while still getting dressed.  By the enemy standing on your mommy’s basement steps.  Univited.  There are no property rights in war, either.  Isn’t that preferable to the tear gas you whine about as being a war crime?

You can be captured.  In which case, your whimpers about “unmarked vans” are simply pampered suburbanite Karening.  Go complain to the manager of the war you started if you don’t like the service.  Be glad it isn’t the cattle car you’ve already declared you’d use on everyone who doesn’t think like you as you send us off to your gulags for re-education.

If captured, your detention and the location of same are of no consequence to anyone, least of all you.  You are entitled to send and receive mail from family and have assembly line medical checkups, and as long as that happens you’ve got almost no platform for legitimate complaint under the rules of war.  You can be held without charge for as long as the state of war exists.  Just remember, soldier: name, rank and serial number.


So, how badly do you want to play war?

In war, if you don’t want to play by the rules, the other side doesn’t have to either.


Most importantly, if you want to play soldier but don’t openly advertise yourself to be a combatant, not only can you be shot on sight just as a legitimate combatant would, but if you try to surrender you can still be shot.  The GenCons provide no protections for those who do not play war properly.  And there’s really no excuse for not doing it properly, since the IntLaw concept of “proper” war is so wide.

It’s time to shit or get off the pot, boys and girls.  Either start the war you’re pretentiously claiming the cops are fighting unfairly, or quit crying about being arrested as the criminal assholes you are.  At this point, that’s all you are and you need to be thankful for that.

Wednesday, June 24, 2020

Conversation with a Fraudulent Voter


Conversation with a Fraudulent Voter
©2020  Ross Williams



I have an acquaintance who styles himself a “progressive” [ironic term] liberal.  He was whining the other day about Donnie Combover “and his horde of bigots” being against mail-in voting.  He [my acquaintance] wanted to vote by mail.  This, as closely as I recall the flow of discussion, is how the conversation went.

I asked him, you DO realize that you can request an absentee ballot, right?

Oh, but that’s not the same thing.

Really?  What’s the difference?

It’s not vote by mail. [He shot me a look of puzzlement over my missing his QED]

You request an absentee ballot, you fill it out, you get it notarized and you mail it back.  It’s exactly vote by mail.

But I’m not allowed to.

So … you don’t qualify for absentee voting.

What do you mean?

In order to vote absentee, most states require you to fall into one of several categories.  Like military service.  If your home of record, the place where you enlisted, is in one state but you are stationed in another or overseas, you can absentee vote in the ‘home of record’ state.  Most states I know of also extend that to anyone with a “permanent residence” in-state but who is working out of state − long-haul truckers, for example.  People on vacation… people in the hospital… invalids at home… [I ran out of the qualifications I could recall from my own absentee voting days when I was in the Air Force stationed in Alabama but voting in New York].

Yeah.  See?  That’s unfair to people.

What?!  How?

Some people just want to vote by mail.

…and others just want money to magically appear in their pockets without having to work for it, too.  [He shot me another “look”.  We’d had this conversation before]

You’re missing the point.

…the point being that you “don’t wanna”.  No, I get that.  Isn’t there “early voting” in this state? [We live in Illinois, and I could swear we’re an “early voting” state]  I think there is.  Check into it.

That’s also not the same thing.

[I laughed at him].  Except for being wrong, you’re exactly right.  What part of “early voting”, which is done by mail, doesn’t qualify as “vote by mail”?

[He glared at me]

You tell your local election people, “Hey, I wanna vote early!” and they send you a ballot, you fill it out, have it notarized, and you mail it back in.  You just voted by mail.  No real reason is needed.

Not everyone can do that, though. It’s not fair.

You mean the people who don’t live in “early voting” states?

Even if you do, it’s not fair.

How can it not be ‘fair’?  It’s exactly what you say you want.

No it isn’t.  You still have to prove who you are.

This isn’t fair?

No, it’s not.

To whom?

To people who don’t have ID, for one…

Who doesn’t have ID?

LOTSA people!  Not everyone drives, you know.  Some people are too poor to have cars.

Oh, right, poor people.  Are these poor people on ‘welfare’? Medicaid?

Yeah…

Both ‘welfare’ and Medicaid provide ID cards.  I believe the ID card for Medicaid is a photo ID, as well.

You’re missing the point.

You mentioned that before, and no I’m not.  You are objecting to having the ballot notarized.

Of course.

Not having a ballot notarized would allow someone − like me, perhaps − to request a dozen ballots to the same address, under different names.  The election people don’t know who lives with me.  Hey!  We’re a commune!  Almost everywhere in the US has mail-in voter registration.  I can just make up a dozen different names of my fellow commune-ists, register them all to vote, and then request early voting ballots for each of them.  Because I don’t have to prove who I am before mailing them in, I get to vote a dozen times.

[He glared at me again]

Do you want this libertarian to be voting twelve times against your candidate?  Would that be fair?

[Silence]

Oh, and, hey!  The folks in Hong Kong are actually quite libertarian as well what with their anti-Chinese Communism protests and whatnot.  I could just sneak a dozen of them into the country to come live with me.  They could register to vote by mail, and since they don’t have to prove they’re allowed to vote they could vote libertarian by mail as well.  Would THIS be fair?

[He rolled his eyes at me]

Or do you only want people who’d vote like you to be able to do this?

[He walked away]

[I think I understood his point]

Wednesday, June 03, 2020

On the Old Becoming New Again


On the Old Becoming New Again
©2020  Ross Williams



A number of years ago, there was a misfit gaggle of disgruntleds calling themselves Occupy Wall Street who had a whole lot of spare time and nothing to fill it with.  They descended upon city streets the nation over and − in an apparent attempt to fill their souls with metaphoric substance − filled the streets with snack food wrappers while bitching about the companies which made those snack foods.  At some point, one of their lot issued a rambling set of demands.

There is, today, another misfit gaggle of disgruntleds calling themselves antifa who similarly have a whole bunch of spare time and nothing to fill it with.  They, similarly, descend upon America’s city streets from time to time with nail-studded two-by-fours and ski masks and − in apparent attempt to fill their own souls for what is otherwise lacking − beat up the first old man they can find.  One of their pseudo-political lot recently issued his own rambling set of demands, prefacing it with a screedish polemic infused with logical inconsistency, factual error and laughable contradiction.  The inspiration for this manifesto is that antifa has been designated as a domestic terrorist organization due in no small part to its involvement with certain social goings-on that are dominating today’s news.  The writer found this designation upsetting.

In fact, that was his first whine: antifa can’t be a terrorist organization because “’Antifa’ isn’t an organization. There’s no membership, no meetings, no dues, no rules, no leaders, no structure. It is, literally, an idea and nothing more.  So there.  I guess.

The manifesto’s prologue continued to explain − incorrectly − that antifa is a brand spanking new concept, a “neologism” in the author’s I’m a college kid double majoring in English Lit and PoliSci terminology.  He might have been better served to take a few classes on the history of the 20th century, for he’d have learned that antifa [the term itself is a communist-style portmanteau of “anti” and “fascist” which literary form was used extensively by Orwell in his “1984”] has been around for nearly a century.  There’s nothing neologist about it.  It was created as a communist response to the rise of fascism in Germany, because the communists were upset that the fascists took the initiative in the interregnum and the communists hadn’t.  antifa is historically predicated upon socialist outrage at not being able to impose their own version of fascistic control.

…which will become readily apparent as the demands of the non-organizational organization are listed.  Not to foreshadow, or anything.

Indeed, the modern antifa uses as its symbol, its flag, its central, collective identifying mark, the encircled double flag, made unique so as to be completely different by having the flags pointing the opposite direction.  Nobody will ever be the wiser.  Because organizations-that-aren’t absolutely need to have a banner to collect under and by which to recognize one’s fellows whose only quality is − “literally” − “an idea”…

The pique of prologue ended, the erstwhile Engels hits his topic sentence:

Thus:
“AntiFa supports and defends the right of all people to live free from oppressive abuse of power, whether that power is unjustly derived from wealth, status as an employer, or political popularity.

As far as this goes, I [the libertarian] am immediately intrigued.  I might have said this.  In fact, in so many words [and typically many many many more words], I have.  Over and over and over and over and over and over again.  But I’ve come to realize that almost everyone − including several who call themselves libertarians − don’t really mean what they say when they say things like this.  Their sentiments rely on heavily constrained notions of what “oppression” and “abuse of power” entail.

The phrase “oppressive abuse of power” is redundant.  In order to have abuse of power, the power allowed to be exercised must be defined and the action taken must be outside of that definition.  All oppression is from abuse of power; all abuse of power is oppressive. 

In recent circumstances, though, many [in some quarters, most] people view oppression as mere “inconvenience” if the exercise of undefined power has a really good reason behind it [where “really good reason” is entirely subjectively determinable].  And, well, if you wish to advertise yourself as an authoritarian hypocrite, I’m fine describing you that way.

At any rate, several paragraphs of pontificatory polemic later, we finally arrive at the non-organizational organization’s demands.  In order.

Universal single payer health care, without regard for citizenship status

In other words, the government confiscates the healthcare system, from top to bottom, and parcels it out as it sees fit.  Ignoring for the moment that in every instance of this happening elsewhere [and it exists almost universally in every nation in the world] it ends up becoming a two-tiered healthcare system where medical attention is divvied up based upon political preferment [and where political preferment is wholly dependent upon how much money the government has in its preference of some over others], we have the undeniable reality that most of the “without regard for citizenship status” people who would be domestically served by such policy have come from nations which have such a wondrous policy themselves, and in which [these people typically claim] they could not get served because service is reserved for those with political preferment.

Additionally, such a policy here would be outside the definition of political power, thus constituting an abuse of same and become − by definition − oppressive. 

To the degree that such a system here would be materially different from those nominally identical systems elsewhere, it would be entirely derived of the wealth our nation has, which has been pre-labeled categorically unjust.

And, finally, it would be built upon political popularity.

So, sorry, princess, no can do.  You made the bed, you gotta lie in it.

Universal basic income WITH a federal job guarantee, under which the federal government becomes the “employer of last resort.” Involuntary unemployment is a function of profiteering by fascist capitalist oligarchs who are willing to sacrifice the lives of others for their own enrichment. It must end

Forgetting for a moment the matter of where the money for such “basic income” would come from, UBI effectively precludes a minimum wage.  If I am a ‘fascist capitalist oligarch’ in an economic system with UBI, I am paying my employees nothing, or next-to, and allowing them to live off UBI.  I’ll only get richer.  But hey, I’ll employ a whole passel of otherwise unemployables at zero wages.  Their choice to not take me up on it is entirely voluntary on their part.  Don’t like it? go work for the government.

Keep in mind, though, that forgoing the opportunity to work for me at my wages, you’ll be adding to the number of those working for the government.  Laws of economics being what they are, and since you’re already being paid by the government, your chances of being paid more by the government just because you work for them is virtually nil.  This is the historical standard of all such governments having zero-unemployment baselines: slave labor.

I seriously doubt this is what was intended, and points again to a lack of historical knowledge.

Additionally, it would violate the “abuse of power” thing as the government has no defined authority to compel any part of this.  And oppressive government compulsion is what it would take.

The abolition of “right to work laws” which do exactly the opposite of ensuring anyone’s right to work

“Right to work” laws simply allow for the voluntary decertification of unions when its membership determines that the union is seeking its own self-service at the expense [and from the wages] of its members, as well as an employer’s right to hire whom he wants at whatever wage the employer and employee agree is fair.  Such laws tend, over time, to increase the numbers of those employed, and thus would dispute, in practice, the assertion of their opposing ends.

The right of union employees to decertify − or simply leave − their union is a right guaranteed by the denunciation of power imbalances based upon wealth [unions are extremely wealthy] and political popularity [compulsory unionism is extremely politically popular, particularly among a certain population].  To prohibit decertification or depopulating unions would require a power the government wasn’t defined to have, and thus be an oppressive abuse.

Additionally, since the purposes of unionism has been to secure wages − which are no longer an issue due to UBI − and benefits − which are almost entirely moot with the adoption of universal healthcare − the purpose behind opposing Right To Work is rendered effectively void.

Publicly funded higher education

For what purpose?  Everyone is getting UBI now.  Everyone has a job now. 

True, they aren’t really being paid for the job they do since there was no whine about minimum wage, and the fallback is a job for the government being paid what the government will have the means to pay … which will quickly become zero over UBI.  If anyone now wants a job where an actual skill is involved and which a ‘fascist capitalist oligarch’ would pay in excess of UBI, he should do that on his own since he will [presumptively] transfer the knowledge obtained into greater remunerative capacity. …which is otherwise known as becoming a ‘fascist capitalist oligarch’.

They can damwell pay their own way.  No?

Robust and effective social welfare programs to include child care, education, employment training and counseling, parenting skills training, and life skills training including fiscal education

Such social welfare, as such, is now absolutely obsolete.  Any decent ‘fascist capitalist oligarch’ worth his salt would open up a day care facility [et al] in every one-stoplight town, paying zero wages.  In the absence of a ‘fascist capitalist oligarch’ doing so, we’re back to the government doing it with slave labor.

In any event, it’s no longer necessary.

A requirement that functional proficiency in media, political, and economic literacy be demonstrated to graduate high school

[N.B. I seriously tried not to laugh out loud at this; I was unsuccessful]

“Functional proficiency” in these areas would preclude every single of the other childish demands being made, most in having “functional” economic literacy. 

2+2 continues to not equal 22.

The creation of a publicly funded non-partisan media source to serve as the primary source of government information, to be overseen and managed day to day by a coalition of well-known communicators, political scientists, and other experts in propaganda to strip ALL bias from official information before it is broadcast

State media.  Cool.  That always works well.

A “non-partisan” media would − by definition − be obliged to quibble about UBI and where the money for it would come from; universal healthcare and where the money for it would come from, as well as be required to point out the failures of it to provide universal care in the face of politically preferred care; the oppressive shortcomings of imposing compulsory unionism; the vapidity of “free” college education and its source of funding; …

In short, a “non-partisan” source for government information would deny the validity of the other demands; upholding the other demands would deny a non-partisan source of information.

You can’t have both, buckwheat.

Federal charges of treason filed against anyone willfully and knowingly attempting to minimize public perception of the impact and risks of the coronavirus

A state media “strip[ped] of ALL bias” makes this impossible.

Managing “public perception” is the very basis of the propaganda you claim to be combating … which we effectively have already, particularly on this specific subject.  “Well-known communicators, political scientists and other experts” have deplatformed and cancel-culted nearly everyone violating the newly-minted GroupThink upon Shanghai Shivers, and imposed policies that violate the defined powers to that effect, thus becoming oppression based on wealth and political popularity.

Reform of whistleblower laws to ensure they have teeth, and particularly to ensure that a whistleblower, acting in good faith, is not identified to the public, ever

A whistleblower, acting in good faith, who cannot blow a whistle on the GroupThink over Hong Kong Fluey without risking federal treason charges cannot be a whistleblower, and this law would have no “teeth”.  A whistleblower, acting in good faith, who can blow a whistle on the GroupThink over Hubei Heaves without risking treason charges invalidates the treasonousness of quibbling the Wu Flu narrative.

If the definition of “good faith” is determined by whether or not a statement or action supports or contravenes the political establishment, then the political establishment is imposing “oppressive abuse of power … unjustly derived of … political popularity.”

By definition.

Yikes.

I had a dog about twenty years ago that, in the hours before taking a road trip with me, caught and ate [whole] a mole.  Two hours into the road trip she barfed it all over the front passenger seat.  The semi-digested mole was more cohesive than this jeremiad.  It also looked and smelled better.  I certainly hope this isn’t antifa’s brain trust.  I suspect, though, that I’m going to be desperately disappointed in that hope.

There is little here but a self-pitying justification for imposing a list of arbitrary oppressions by authoritarian means, in exactly the way fascists would themselves do it, while concurrently claiming to be against what they would declaratively do.

Yet “Antifa” means “Anti-Fascism.” The only position that opposes that is fascism.

What better way to sum up a caricature of political deep-thought than with a cartoon:
“We have met the enemy and he is us.”
-W Kelly, “Pogo”



Friday, January 24, 2020

The Case Against Humanity


The Case Against Humanity

©2020  Ross Williams




I am a Cubs fan.  My wife is a Cubs fan, and our son wears his baseball glove most of the year flopping himself around the house making dazzling, if imaginary, catches like his hero, Javier Baez.  When I point out that Albert Almora makes catches equally impressive, he just looks bored.  When I remind him that Jason Heyward has the hardware for his defense he simply looks puzzled.  He loves Javy, accurately and without false modesty described on a current Cubs t-shirt as “your favorite player’s favorite player.”

So I saved my money, cleared it with my wife, and we took him out of school for a day so we could have a family vacation at the 2020 Cubs Convention.   We took the train from Alton to Chicago, and Ubered to the Sheraton Grand.  The event was, in a few ways, a pleasant departure from the four or five previous Cubs Conventions my wife and I had attended at the Chicago Hilton and Towers in the years before our son was born.

Many presentations, panels and autograph sessions were held in what can only politely be described as cinderblock bunkers when the Hilton hosted it.  The Sheraton only had a few autograph lines in their sub-basement parking garage; the rest were in paneled ballrooms.  So good on the Sheraton for that.  Good also was the check-in procedure.  But I’m not here to praise Caesar and his legions, just to cut him to ribbons.

The first set of gripes has to be lodged against individual people, fellow Cubs fans in this case, though their antisocial behaviors are not unique to being Cubs fans.  I will only briefly mention the mopey children who decide they’re tired of standing in lines and flop themselves down on the floor where ever they happen to be, effectively blocking the foot traffic of a couple thousand people per pout.  …and the parents of these children who don’t drag those children to their feet by the scruff of their necks.  …and those who carry expandable chairs with them where ever they go so they don’t need to stand in lines at all, but can instead block the foot traffic of a couple thousand people at a time themselves.

Those people are positively pedestrian, and they’re everywhere.  I’m talking about the world revolves around me assholes who think it’s perfectly acceptable behavior to do any of the following:

1] clean out the ice machines on multiple floors filling your wheeled cooler so you can sit through a panel discussion without having to get up and get a concession stand beer or wine cooler, and dislodging two to three rows of spectators as you wheel your contraption around.  I get your distaste for hotels’ captive audience pricing, but you can surely manage to wait until the end of the presentation before resupplying your buzz.  Or maybe you can’t, in which case… seek help.

2] cart your child around in a Cadillac Stroller − which, we’ve all noticed − absolutely never contains your child who never leaves your arms [and usually desperately needs a new diaper] and which, instead, is used to commandeer large amounts of territory that you don’t strictly use and which other people might, if it weren’t being taken up with your Cadillac Stroller.  Here’s a hint, young parents: a child young enough to use a stroller is one that is too young to benefit from attending a convention of any sort.  Here’s another hint: what do you think grandparents are for?

3] lug your autographable items, souvenir purchases and the various other flotsam of convention attendance in a four-wheel wagon.  As if that wasn’t rude enough, you typically drive against the flow of traffic, and into shins, knees, children, decorative columns, signage and potted plants.  This ends up knocking over children, oldsters, potted plants and signs.  …that those you’ve left in your wake must pick up for you because you’re too callous to even consider that you’ve upended anyone, let alone everyone.

4] haul your booty around in an overstuffed backpack that you swing with reckless abandon behind you at chest level [head level on kids] into the same children, oldsters and signs with the same end result obtained by the asshole with the wagon.

5] station one member of your party at the entrance of a popular panel discussion two hours before it starts with an armful of coats, hats, pennants or other such items in order to reserve an entire row of seats at the front of the assembly so that the rest of the group can stroll in at their leisure and claim seats that were denied to everyone else because they were “saved”.

6] march your group of five into a row of seats with three empty chairs somewhere in the middle of the row, and then ”politely” request those on either side kindly move down in order to accommodate your brood.  This has the effect of pushing those on each end out of their seats altogether.  But that isn’t your problem, is it?

It was the episode recounted just above in #6 which dovetails quite nicely into the next phase of gripes about humanity emanating from the 2020 Cubs Convention: institutional, arbitrary caprice.  It seems to only happen to me.  I can literally be standing in the middle of a group of fifty people all doing the same non-offensive thing, and usually consisting of simply standing there, and I − me, singularly, solely, personally, alone − will be told that I cannot be doing what fifty other people are doing.  This dictum will apply to no one else.  I will usually then be told that if I do not leave, I will be forcibly removed.

The reason my wife and I had stopped going to the Cubs Convention a decade ago was because this very thing happened at the Chicago Hilton.  My wife was standing in an exclusive line to get an autograph from a popular player of the time [I forget who it was].  Naturally, a photo-taker could not be in the line because … well, there is no plausible explanation ever given.  You just can’t.  However, the velvet roped area to the side of each exclusive autograph line was used by picture-takers.

I was my wife’s designated picture-taker, and I was in the area to the side with the digital camera. There was a gaggle of easily a hundred other people, all with cameras and all shadowing spouses or children as they wound their way back and forth in their velvet rope queue.  I was chatting with my wife periodically during the slow march about what we wanted to do next and whatnot.  Suddenly, I was accosted by an older woman wearing an “event staff”-type shirt.  She’d had to wade through about 75 people to get to me, and she informed me that I could not be there.

“I’m going to be taking her picture,” I replied, nodding in the direction of my wife.

“This line isn’t for photography,” she replied; “you have to leave.”

“There’s a hundred people here with cameras all waiting their turn to take pictures.  Are you going to make them leave, too?”  Everyone else around me with a camera was watching and listening and trying to appear invisible as I implicated them in my apparent conspiracy to commit unlawful photography.

“You have to leave.  If you don’t leave I’ll get security to remove you.”

I erupted in a “Fuck you, bitch!” and left, telling my wife that I’d be up in the room when she got done.  The other picture-takers were neither threatened nor removed.

I saw the same woman several more times during the remainder of that Convention and each time I greeted her with a “Am I permitted to be here?” or “Am I allowed to buy this t-shirt?”  She always smirked in response.

We went to a Cubs game at Wrigley that year or possibly the year after, and she worked as an usher at Wrigley Field.  Coincidentally, she was handling a section of the stands near where we were seated.  On my way to the concession stand one time I happened across her and asked, “Hey, remember me?  Am I allowed to be here?”  She didn’t recognize me and looked puzzled, whereas I tend not to forget imperious assholes who go out of their way to single me out as a target for their authoritarian assholery.

At any rate, this happened once again − twice, actually − at this Convention at the Sheraton Grand, the first time as a result of the episode with the supremely inconsiderate family of five described earlier.  The three empty seats in the row were one on my left and two on my right as the five − two parents and three sulking teenagers − came elbowing their way in.  “Could you all please move down a seat so we can all fit in here,” came the faux-polite pseudo-request from the mother.

I responded by getting up and leaving altogether.  Let everyone else sort out who will be dislodged.  I went to the back to join a group of eight people all standing − literally − shoulder to shoulder behind the back row of the audience watching the last few minutes of a presentation and waiting our turn to find a seat.  My wife had asked me to get a seat for the next panel that was about to start.  A woman with a red “security” polo shirt came up behind me, ignoring the three people on my left and the four people on my right, and touched my left shoulder, “You’re going to have to move… we’re trying to keep this lane open…”.

I briefly looked, as my gaze passed to the “security” woman, at the three gentlemen on my left with whom I was rubbing a shoulder, none of whom were less than 275 pounds and all of whom had a waist size at or above 50.  Two of them looked curiously in my direction.  I weigh 150 pounds fully dressed and soaking wet.  If you want to keep a lane open, toots, I’m not the problem.  Yet she was not addressing anyone else.  Only me.

I didn’t have time for her petty authoritarian horseshit, so I stormed out.  My wife was next door at the children’s game room, filled with face painters, washable tattoo artists, balloon animal engineers, a batting cage and other such activities.  I found her and informed her that no, I could not get us seats at the next event in the ballroom because it was filled with assholes of every variety.  In the end it was moot, because our seven year old was too engrossed in playing whiffle ball with, at that point, Koyie Hill, an ex-Cubs catcher.

The next such incident was at the very same kids game room on Sunday, the last day of the Convention, literally ten minutes before the whole thing ended at noon.  Coincidentally, or not, hotel checkout was also at noon.  Our son was taking part in the pro player coaching event where Cubs rookies and bullpen pitchers were taking groups of kids through some of the exercises ball players go through.  In order to save time, I went up to our room and collected coats, hats, luggage, backpacks and all the rest of our haul.  I met my wife back in the kids room about 11:45 when the player coaching ended, wearing my heavy winter coat and my leather cowboy hat.  Afterward, two of the four players who’d been doing the coaching stuck around to give autographs to kids.  Twelve to fifteen hotel staff, many of whom had blue “Guest Services” polos while the rest were wearing “2020 Cubs Convention” t-shirts, remained behind and were standing around in groups of two or three, chatting with each other, oblivious and ignoring everything around them.

We dug the baseball and the Sharpie out of the bag and gave it to the boy.  I pointed him at James Norwood and said, “Go get his autograph!”  My son had been too involved in doing his pro ballplayer exercise that he didn’t pay attention to the player who had been instructing him; he had no idea who I was pointing at.  My son was not alone in confusion.  A half dozen kids had no idea who they were to get autographs from, and their fathers went out to the kid-only area with them pointing them in the right direction.

So I walked into the kid zone with the other fathers and pointed my son’s face at Mr Norwood.  My son soon returned with a fresh, drying autograph on his baseball, and looked blankly around, pointing at various Hotel Staff gentlemen, most of whom were young Hispanic kids.  “Is he a player?” my son timidly asked.

“No kiddo, the player’s the guy in the striped Cubs jersey over there who’s signing stuff.”  I think it was Brad Wieck, but he didn’t turn his back to me so I couldn’t see the name across his shoulders.  They all look the same: young, tall, athletic build, scruffy beard.  At that moment, one of the Guest Services girls in the polo shirt pulled herself away from her sidebar conversation and told me, “Sir, you can’t be out here.  This is for kids only to get autographs.”

I pointedly informed her, “I’m not getting autographs, I’m pointing my son at the folks he needs to get autographs from, because no one else is doing that.”

She seemed taken aback by this and actually started doing her job at that point − she was the only one of the hotel staff to do so; the rest were still engrossed in chit-chat.  She marshalled kids to the two remaining players in the room.  She occasionally ran across another father just idly standing by his child and shooed him away as well, so I was not the only one [this time] to be singled out for unnecessary approbation.

But lookit; I get it.  You’ve been doing crowd control for two solid days on several thousand people a large portion of whom are the rude, self-absorbed assholes I mentioned at the start of this.  You’re on the downhill side of your duties, and you can see the end of your personal tunnel.  But trust me, you can keep focus for another few minutes.  Do your goddamned job.

If you can’t focus and do your goddamned job for another ten minutes and someone steps in to do it for you, you are in no legitimate position to get huffy about it.  Period.  The proper response is to say “thank you.”

In anticipation of this: you’re welcome.

Also needing to thank me is the delivery driver for Sarpino’s, because I was not the one waiting for the pizza and chicken fingers when it finally arrived… nearly three hours after we ordered it.  My wife took over for me a half hour before you got there, and she is much too nice to say what needed to be said.

The final gripe goes to hotel restaurants which think so much of the quality of their food that they insist on charging a family of three $75 for $15-worth of scrambled eggs and pancakes.  When someone orders their bacon crisp, make it crisp; it’s not difficult.  But just in case you’re confused by the concept, crisp bacon does not bend when you hold it by one end.  It will, though, snap in half.
 
This year, 2020, is an election year.  My disdain for the human race has been growing steadily for decades, and my encounters with large groups of people and human institutions only accelerate that.  This experience was no different.  This year I’m voting for the flaming comet to put an end to the self-serving assholery of individuals and the arbitrary capriciousness of those who “just follow the rules” when it suits them [and only when it suits them], and who can’t be bothered to do what they’re being paid to do.

Good riddance to you all.