..returning to normal??

I'm in a weird mood at the moment. I instinctively feel like we're over the hump with all this Coronavirus stuff. I've no doubt it'll continue rumbling on in various forms, but I feel like the wind is out of its sails. I can't really imagine where it can go from here to accelerate the narrative. Contrariwise though common sense tells me that things will ramp up again as we approach the US election in the autumn. It's been such a busy year it would be naive to think otherwise.

So I'm in limbo a little bit. I could do with actually getting a job and focusing on my own life. Perhaps it's time to get back to normal.

Worldwide Trends Are Not Trending

I've just discovered that the 'worldwide trends' option on Twitter has been removed. Apparently they removed it on May 1st. It very much sums up the attitude of the 'liberal' globalist mind. Believing in one-world globalism ..but only when it suits them.

Obviously it's easier to manage the information people consume if you can keep them compartmentalised. With people ignorant of what's going on in other countries. Conversely, of course, it doesn't stop them from pushing the global hashtags they want us to see and embrace.

(Today it's World Environment Day)

In fact, this was what inspired me to check the worldwide trends this morning. I thought "what else is going on around the world?", but no, it seems I can't do that now.

I published an article on here a good while back titled Globalism vs Globalism. Stating in effect that we're seeing a battle between two world visions. Rather than a battle between globalism and nationalism, as it's often portrayed. In this case the 'globalists' at Twitter clearly prefer national boxes when it comes to what information we can explore.

Facebook Riots II

I'll post again today. This one can count as tomorrow's. It follows on nicely from my earlier post where I was talking about losing Facebook friends because of arguments over lock down and the BLM riots.

Anyway, it's happened again, another casualty. I actually feel much worse about this one. A woman I used to work with - a lovely woman, very nice person - sided with the guy who'd essentially implied that I was a racist for not supporting the Black Lives Matter campaign. She hearted one of his comments (how dare she!) and then left a comment on another post of mine saying she supported 'taking the knee'.

Of course, I replied. I tried to be nice, but I also argued my case fairly strongly. Basically saying that BLM misrepresents black people, that lots of black people don't support it, and that the media push it to effectively pit black and white people against each other to push various agendas. I kind of regret doing this now though, as not long afterwards she deactivated her account. She'd been sharing quite a lot of Black Lives Matter stuff, so I guess she was quite invested in it and found the criticism a little too harsh. Again, the other guy just unfriended me - he was always a bit of a self-interested person - but she's far too nice to do that. So I guess she's just took a break and deactivated in a fit of pique.

I feel a bit bad. Then again though it does really irk me when people imply that you're racist. Especially when they know you in real life and have firsthand experience of you being a decent person. Of course, the way these things are loaded up by the media, with very slick and emotion-heavy campaigns, it means it's hard not to come across as some sort of heartless bad guy when you counter the overall narrative like this. So I guess it's totally understandable why people get like this. It's really not their fault.

It's one of these things where it's hard not to wonder if you're doing the right thing in voicing your opinion. Is it really worth breaking so many eggs when the mainstream narrative is so dominant?

It was the same with the election before Christmas. It was certainly no fun promoting the Brexit Party when people were so quick to throw the "racist" label at you because of it. It definitely had a personal cost. Of course, with these things there's also often a quite large group of people out there who may agree with what you say, but who don't raise their heads above the parapet for this very reason. So maybe someone has to voice these things out loud. Perhaps it is the right thing to do after all. Hopefully the woman will return to Facebook and I can apologise to her. I think I'm running out of rope with people though. I'll be all out of people to proselytise to if it keeps going on this way. 2020 really is quite a brutal year.

Also, to add, it was announced today that from June the 15th face masks will become compulsory on public transport in the UK. Which is disappointing - though not in the least bit surprising to me. If I have to wear one myself at any point it will severely dent my pride. It's an act of submission. Like taking the knee in fact. I understand only too well what it signifies. I'm actually not even sure I'll physically be able to wear one. I fear my pride will kick in and I'll just point blank refuse. Good job I like walking :)

Then again though, given my recent defeats on Facebook, I'm now beginning to think it might just be better to keep my head down, stop causing trouble and just accept the semi-slave status we're all being conditioned into. I can claim the UBI, get myself a nice plush micro-pod, and then purchase a high-end cybernetic girlfriend. Maybe I can get a black one to prove to everyone how un-racist I am.

Facebook Riots

Well, unsurprisingly we had some rioting in London yesterday. It's easy to see how much this is being stirred up by the media. Sadly though too many people are too dim to see this, so get carried along for the ride. I'm beginning to fear for the rest of 2020.

I always try to help dampen these things down on Twitter, Facebook and elsewhere, but it really is a thankless task. I effectively got accused of being a racist yesterday, or at least of being "ignorant" in that regard, by a former work colleague after I'd posted something disparaging about Black Lives Matter. We had a bit of a back and forth, and it finally resulted in him unfriending me 😅

I really do wonder if it's worth it. I lost a few arguing over the lock down too.

Perhaps I have to streamline my tactics a bit more, and be a bit more nuanced. Either way I think it's probably best I take a break for a few days 😅 I'd love to have my own desert island where I wouldn't have to deal with all these people.

Bend The Knee

I've just seen an article suggesting that Brits should 'take the knee' on their doorsteps tonight at 6 pm to show solidarity with Black Lives Matter. I'm constantly reminded of Daenerys Targaryen from Game of Thrones. Wanting everyone to bend the knee, and threatening to torch entire cities if people refused.

Of course, it's very much akin to the doorstep clapping for the NHS. Choreographed Soviet mind slush.

Sit. Good dog.

News at Ten

I also watched ITV's News at Ten last night. Normally I don't watch the news in this way, so it was a novel experience. I only caught it as the TV was on that channel when I turned it on. Anyway, I was shocked by just how biased it was. Perhaps it was always this bad and I've just lost my immunity to it. Either way it was pretty galling.

• The US protests and riots covered with a distinct anti-Trump bias.
• Then the Black Lives Matter issue in the UK mixed in with the idea that 'BAME' people are more likely to die from Coronavirus. Talk about fanning the flames.
• Then it moved onto Brazil's Coronavirus response and how terrible Bolsonaro is (there are of course anti-racism protests there now too I see).

It was quite incredible. Not just for its bias, but also for its blatancy and lack of intelligence. I think even the dimmest of people would gauge that there was some kind of political agenda at play. In fact, this lack of intelligence does give me some hope actually. The mainstream media, like the Democrats in America, are so truly incompetent and lacking in self-awareness that even with the odds stacked in their favour they'll still somehow misplay their hand.

Also, on a side note, the fact that BAME people are more likely to "die from Covid" is simply due to the relative poverty. Poorer people die younger. It's similar here in my area. The local media point at certain locations and say "this postcode has a higher than average rate of Covid, etc". It's always the poorer areas. So this is another thing that illustrates that we're just dealing with something approximating a regular flu here. Likewise with the age of the those dying of Covid (I've moved from calling it Coronavirus to Covid here in this article haven't I lol - I can't make up my mind). The average age of death tends to hover around the average age at which people normally die anyway. Again, showing everything is in fact quite normal.

Outside of the media induced hysteria that is.

..the riots and whatnot

Nothing much to post today. Just as well really. The big thing is the trouble in the US - the riots and whatnot. It angers me a little seeing what's going on there. It's clearly all about going after Trump (at least in my opinion). The people fanning the flames in the media and elsewhere don't give a damn about the people caught up in it all. It's pretty bad.

I've been arguing about it a little on Twitter today. I'm not sure whether I should be doing it or not, but I feel like if I can make even just a few people think twice about going out and rioting it might make a difference. I always fear that I may just be making things worse though. Obviously there may be things going on beyond my knowledge or understanding. Especially given it's happening all the way across the sea in America.

Also, my pinned tweet at the moment has a little bit of a Christian theme. I think one of the people I was arguing with thought I was some kind of fundamentalist Christian because of it.

This was posted in relation to the way Covid has forcibly separated people. It was part genuine sentiment, but also a deliberate attempt on my part to remind anyone visiting my profile that there are higher and more timeless things in this world. That all power and legitimacy doesn't begin and end with government.

I might need to change it now though, as a "religious fundamentalist" look probably isn't going to help if I'm going to be arguing with Trump-hating atheists. I might have more influence if I take on a more classically European appearance. Try to garner the appearance of an intellectual 😅

We Need Drunk-Rollerskating Laws

Hopefully this'll be a nice short little post. It's just more getting my ducks in a row type stuff. Here goes.

Begin.

Regarding the Coronavirus one argument that repeatedly pops up when you're arguing in favour of civil liberties is the drink-driving one. People will often say;

"..but we infringe people's civil liberties to stop them drink-driving because it's too risky. Do you want to make drink driving legal again??"

(Oftentimes they will use "speed limit" laws instead of drink-driving, but it's essentially the same point.)

This is quite a good argument to be fair, and it can be a difficult one to counter, as pretty much everyone agrees that drink-driving should be illegal. So it then sets the precedent for laws to be set based upon a "potential" risk to other people. As opposed to normal laws that essentially forbid people from directly transgressing another person's liberties.

Live and let live is the usual rule of thumb ..BUT, we can't just let people drink-drive as it's clearly too dangerous to others. So we put aside this rule and use force against a person to forbid them from doing it. Even though they haven't actually done anything to anyone else yet.

So it's a tricky conundrum. We want to uphold live and let live to the maximum, but it's very hard to make a case against drink-driving laws in all good faith. Of course, there are plenty of issues like this, where we may want to prohibit certain things "to protect" society. So usually it's a balancing act. We try to offset the wider benefits for society against the infringements they place upon the individual.

So what about the lock down laws?

On the issue of balance it's quite easy to contrast the drink-driving laws with the draconian lock down laws. Not being able to drink whilst driving is a very minor and specific infringement. Not being able to leave your home or meet your friends and family is a major and far reaching one. I tend to use the word egregious when arguing with people :) I think it's very much justified.

Another is the process by which such laws have come about. Has there been due process, are there adequate checks and balances? Again, the difference is quite striking. Laws regarding motor vehicles have developed over time. We've had debates and arguments over decades that have led us to this point. Whereas the lock down laws have come into effect pretty much overnight. With little real debate. They're also completely unprecedented in this country. Likewise when you remove basic rights like this it makes it difficult for people to hold their governments to account. Not being able to drink-drive doesn't impede me from taking action to keep my government in check. Not being able to leave my home most certainly does. So it increases the "risk" of tyranny and all the bad things that may follow from that.

The above arguments are the ones I've generally been using when confronting this. They're fairly good and sensible arguments, but if you're debating someone who literally believes Covid-19 is the end of the world it can be difficult, as they believe the scale of the threat justifies the severity of the infringements.

Another argument?

However, there's a further argument - the reason for this very post in fact. I'm not quite sure how useful it is just yet, or how I'd work it into a compelling response, but it's worth exploring. So I'll run through it here. It essentially centres round the fact that a vehicle accentuates the powers of the person driving it, and hugely limits the other person's ability to "avoid" that person.

Normally, using the live and let live rule, we can make the argument.

"If you don't like what I'm doing you can just stay away from me".

So as a libertarian it's quite easy to make your case. In fact, the reason opponents choose the drink-driving example is because many of the other examples are easily batted away like this.

The other classic example that comes up is the smoking ban, which is fairly weak. Firstly we don't actually ban smoking outside in public. So even that classic case of nanny-ism doesn't come anywhere near the Corona strictures. Then on top of that it's easy to make a case for why businesses and venues should be allowed to have smoking. Again, no one's forcing anyone to go into a bar where people are smoking. If you don't like it don't go. Let people who are happy to take the risk enjoy themselves.

The same applies to most "risky" choices. Of course, I would apply it to face masks too :)

"If you don't like the fact that I'm not wearing a face mask you can avoid me. No one's forcing you to come near me!"

With cars though the power and speed of the vehicle accentuates things so much that it's much harder to make this argument. If you're walking down the road and a car comes veering at you at 80 mph then yes, technically, you're free to move out of the way, but the speed of the car makes it near impossible. A human can't compete with a car. Plus the force of the car means that if it does hit you you're highly likely to die or be seriously injured. So these things help to justify the preemptive or "preventative" nature of laws forbidding drink-driving or excessive speed.

The car in a way gives the human driving it an agency beyond what a human would naturally have. So it's a bit of an unnatural situation. It's a little similar to the argument about gun rights in that sense. Another issue that very much falls into this category of debate. Lock down lovers could raise this argument in the UK too, but oddly they haven't so far. Perhaps they fear their opponents might argue in favour 😅 ..I'm quite tempted to myself given the imposition of this lock down (!)

So anyway, perhaps it's technologies that amplify human agency to an extreme extent that really give libertarians a headache.

For instance, we don't need laws against drink-rollerskating as the speed and weight they add to the person skating isn't especially excessive. We can keep out of their way, and if we can't it's probably not going to be the end of the world. (Though I'm sure in this age of health and safety there are no doubt numerous rules and regulations about where you can and can't roller skate, and under what circumstances sadly.)

So maybe I can develop an argument that plays upon this unnatural extreme factor.

... Wow, I've been going quite a while. I always say "hopefully this'll be a short post" but that never happens. I better draw a line under things before I go on for any longer.