Tag: decline and fall

The new Spanish Inquisition

Zerohedge reports on some new Spanish laws:

1. If you photograph security personnel and then share these images on social media: up to €30.000 fine (particularly if photo exposes violence used against a member of the public). This fine could increase depending on the number of Instagram or social media followers you have.
2. Tweet or retweet information or the “location of an organized protest” can now be interpreted as an act of terrorism as it incites others to “commit a crime” (now that “demonstrating” in many ways has become a crime). Sound “1984”-ish? Read about Orwell and his time in Spain.
3. Snowden-like whistle blowing is now defined as an act of terrorism. If you write for a local publication, be careful what you print, whom you speak to, and whether the government is listening.
4. Visiting or consulting terrorist websites – even for investigative purposes – can be interpreted as an act of terrorism. Make sure you use “Tor” browser, reject cookies, and don’t allow pop-ups. Not to mention, don’t post it on your Facebook timeline!
5. Be careful with the royal jokes! Any satirical
comment against the royal family is a new crime “against the Crown”. For
example, “What did Leticia and the Bishop have to say after they ––“
(SORRY CENSORED).
6. No more hassling elected members of the government or
local authorities – even if they say one thing in order to be elected,
but then go and do the exact opposite. Confronting them about
this hypocritical behavior. Even if you see them in the street chatting
to a street cleaner, dining at their favorite expensive restaurant, or
having their shoes shined by that physics graduate who cannot find a
decent job in the country, hassling them about their behavior is now a
criminal offence.
7. Has your local river been so polluted by that plastic factory
along the edge that all life has extinguished? Well, tough! Greenpeace
or similar protests are now finable from €601–€30.000.
8. Protests in a spontaneous way outside Parliament are now illegal.
For example if Parliament passes a hugely unpopular bill, or are
debating something extremely important to you or your community, it is
now finable from €601 – €30.000. Tip: Use Google Maps to protest just
around the corner – but don’t tweet the location!
9. Obstructing an officer in the course of their business, “resisting
arrest”, refusing to leave a demonstration when told, or getting in the
way of a swinging baton are all now finable offences from €601 –
€30.000.
10. Showing lack of respect to officers of the law is an immediate fine of €100 – €600.
Answering back, asking a disrespectful question, making a funny face,
showing your bottom to an officer of the law, or telling him/her that
their breath reminds you of your dog’s underparts is now, sadly, not
advisable.
11. Occupying, squatting, or refusing to leave an office, business,
bank or other place until your complaint has been heard as a protest is
now a €100 – €600 fine (no more flash mobs).
12. Digital protests: Writing something that could technically “disturb the peace” is a now a crime. Bloggers beware, for no one has yet defined whose peace you could be disturbing.

Looks like the USA doesn’t have the only government that is actively preparing to face widespread civil unrest. I wonder why that might be?

Good news for rebels

Considering that the US military is in the process of running exercises to practice fighting against the American people, this announcement is probably good news for the millions of Americans who have been gunning up for the past decade:

The Pentagon announced Monday that it will allow transgender members of the military to serve openly starting next year, marking an end to a long-standing policy that barred them from the armed forces.

In an echo of the Defense Department’s repeal of the ban on gays in uniform four years ago, Defense Secretary Ashton B. Carter said he had directed the armed forces to devise new rules over the next six months that would allow transgender troops to serve, except in situations “where objective, practical impediments are identified.”

“We must ensure that everyone who’s able and willing to serve has the full and equal opportunity to do so, and we must treat all our people with the dignity and respect they deserve,” Carter said in a statement. He called the military’s current regulations “outdated” and said they were “causing uncertainty that distracts commanders from our core missions.”

Carter also issued a directive that would make it more difficult to discharge transgender personnel over the next six months while the new rules are being established, requiring all such cases to be reviewed by a senior Pentagon official. The Pentagon took a similar interim approach to freeze the discharges of gay troops while it was preparing to lift that ban five years ago.

As an added bonus, we should stop hearing about there being too few women in the Navy SEALs and other elite forces. Just put a few of them in dresses, call them ladies, and the problem, such as it is, is solved.

One thing I didn’t realize when reading about the historical collapse of empires is how damned farcical it is. Heinlein’s Crazy Years are upon us, and they are considerably crazier than he’d ever imagined.

Daneistocracy in Europe

The abject surrender of the Greek government demonstrates the growing irrelevance of democracy, not only in Europe, but across the West:

Less than a week after they triumphantly gave international creditors a bloody nose by rejecting a harsh austerity plan, angry and bewildered Greeks are left wondering how they now find themselves swallowing an even worse deal.

In a nationwide referendum just last Sunday, nearly 62 per cent of voters rejected an austerity deal that had been offered by the European Commission, International Monetary Fund and European Central Bank.

There were scenes of wild jubilation across the country.

In Athens’ Syntagma Square, the Greek answer to Trafalgar Square, thousands of joyous ‘No’ voters hugged and kissed each other, waved Greece’s national flag and swigged cans of beer.

“It was an expression of the will of the people,” Manos Agelidis, 27, a biomedical engineering PhD student, told The Telegraph as he celebrated with friends.

Fast forward just a few days, however, and Alexis Tsipras, the prime minister, did the unthinkable.

On Thursday, with a deadline imposed by the creditors looming, he buckled.

His radical Left-wing Syriza government, which came to power in January on the unrealistic promise of putting an end to austerity and the country’s six-year long economic nightmare, put forward a plan that promises spending cuts of €12 billion in return for a third international bail-out, this time worth €53.5 billion (£38.4bn).

The European Union is not only post-democratic, it is openly and avowedly anti-democratic. It has continued to override the expressed will of the Irish, French, British, Italian, and Greek people by putting pressure on the elected representatives to subvert the will of the people.

This is why direct democracy is the only form of democracy that may still be considered viable. The idea of representative democracy is that the limits it places on democracy will be in the long term interests of the nation, but the way it has easily been subverted in the interests of the financial powers demonstrates that representative democracy is actually more susceptible to corruption and subversion than direct democracy.

Mob rule has its own flaws, but it is certainly to be preferred to creditor rule, or daneistocracy. And that is what representative democracy now amounts to, as the elected representatives of countries such as Greece agree to give up their national sovereignty just to keep the credit money spigot flowing.

Zerohedge add that the Eurozone is no longer a voluntary union:

Despite the euphoria in global equity markets, The FT’s Wolfgang Munchau – once one of the keenest euro enthusiasts – warns regime change is coming in Europe. The actions of the creditors has “destroyed the eurozone as we know it and demolished the idea of a monetary union as a step towards a democratic political union,” Munchau exclaims, fearing they have “demoted the eurozone into a toxic fixed exchange-rate system, with a shared single currency, run in the interests of Germany, held together by the threat of absolute destitution for those who challenge the prevailing order.” He concludes rather ominously, “we will soon be asking ourselves whether this new eurozone, in which the strong push around the weak, can be sustainable.”

The Rainbow Nazis attack conscience

And, incidentally, civilization. That certainly didn’t take long:

The American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky has filed a lawsuit on behalf of four Rowan County couples, two same-gender couples and two opposite-gender couples, denied marriage licenses by County Clerk Kim Davis, a press release from the ACLU confirms.

Davis is standing firm on her decision to stop issuing marriage licenses, despite dozens of protesters who gathered outside the courthouse.

“My conscience will not allow me to issue a license for a same sex couple,” says Kim Davis, “because I know that God ordained marriage from the very foundation of this world to be between a man and a woman.”

In explaining the ACLU’s decision to file suit on the couples’ behalf, ACLU of Kentucky Cooperating Attorney Laura Landenwich stated, “Ms. Davis has the absolute right to believe whatever she wants about God, faith, and religion, but as a government official who swore an oath to uphold the law, she cannot pick and choose who she is going to serve, or which duties her office will perform based on her religious beliefs.”

The Rainbow Nazis really appear to be hell-bent on seeing the establishment of a post-democratic American theocracy. Because that’s what is most likely going to come out of this Sodom and Gomorrahstan totalitarianism in the end. They’re like children who can’t resist pushing until they discover where the limits are.

Within a year, they’ll be attacking priests and pastors too.

It appears that it won’t be all that much longer before everyone discovers what happens when enough people stop consenting to the consensual fiction known as “the law”.

Yes, polygamy is next

Remember when all the pro-homogamy SJWs claimed that it totally would NEVER lead to polygamy and you were a homophobic bigot if you expected that it would? Yeah, guess what. I know you’ll be shocked to hear this, but they appear to have lied.

NOW that the dust is settling from the Supreme Court’s decision in Obergefell v. Hodges, which recognized a right to same-sex marriage, there are new questions. In particular, could the decision presage a constitutional right to plural marriage? If there is no magic power in opposite sexes when it comes to marriage, is there any magic power in the number two?

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr.’s dissent in Obergefell raised this very question, intending to show how radical the majority’s decision could become. But the issue was hard to discuss candidly while same-sex marriage was still pending, because both sides knew that association with plural marriage, a more unpopular cause, could have stymied progress for gay rights. (Opponents of same-sex marriage had reasons to emphasize the association, while supporters had reasons to play it down.) With same-sex marriage on the books, we can now ask whether polyamorous relationships should be next.

There is a very good argument that they should. Justice Anthony M. Kennedy’s majority opinion in Obergefell did not focus primarily on the issue of sexual orientation. Instead, its main focus was on a “fundamental right to marry” — a right that he said could not be limited to rigid historical definitions or left to the legislative process. That right was about autonomy and fulfillment, about child rearing and the social order. By those lights, groups of adults who have profound polyamorous attachments and wish to build families and join the community have a strong claim to a right to marry.

And while Justice Kennedy’s opinion does not explicitly discuss this possibility, it is easy to see how future generations could read his language to include polyamory or plural marriage. Earlier court decisions about marriage, Justice Kennedy wrote, had “presumed a relationship involving opposite-sex partners,” but now we understand that the presumption was wrong. Similarly, while Justice Kennedy’s opinion repeatedly presumes that marriage involves two people, it is not hard to imagine another justice in 20 or 40 years saying that the assumption is similarly unenlightened.

I find it hard to get worked up about these things now that the die is so clearly cast. The civilizational foundations have already been sufficiently undermined, so all they’re quibbling about now is the exact shape that the wreckage will eventually take.

Don’t worry about the politics anymore. At this point, you should be preparing for the inevitable politics by other means that are on the way.

I used to wonder what the historians meant when they wrote that “all Europe was waiting for war” in the years leading up to WWI. Now, I finally get it. The good news, to the extent that one can consider it good news, is that the financial elite has proved they can kick a can that looked to be unkickable, so we should be able to make it to 2033 or thereabouts as I’ve repeatedly predicted.

Anti-Confederate, pro-Islamic State

Walmart endorses ISIS:

Given the many national chains that stopped selling confederate flags after the Charleston, South Carolina, church massacre, Chuck Netzhammer couldn’t have been too surprised that Walmart denied his request to create a cake bearing the image of the confederate flag.

But a day later, Netzhammer decided to put the store’s convictions to the test.

He said he submitted another cake request to the Walmart in Slidell, Louisiana, on Friday — this time with the Islamic State flag on top.

Surely a no-no for Walmart, yes?

Nope.

To Netzhammer’s shock, Walmart put together the cake with the Islamic State flag.

The USA is obviously well into the “decline” part of “decline-and-fall”.

UPDATE: Walmart regrets being caught out and YouTube tries to help them cover it up:

“Our talented bakery associates take pride in what they create for our customers. It’s unfortunate one customer thought to take advantage of an associate who did not know the flag and its meaning,” said John Forrest Ales, a spokesman for Walmart. “This cake should not have been made, and we apologize for the mistake.”

At 10:15 p.m. ET Monday, the video was removed from YouTube with the statement, “This video has been removed as a violation of YouTube’s policy against spam, scams, and commercially deceptive content.”

Animal Firm

Rand Paul observes some legal rights are more equal than others:

While I disagree with Supreme Court’s redefinition of marriage, I believe that all Americans have the right to contract.

The Constitution is silent on the question of marriage because marriage has always been a local issue. Our founding fathers went to the local courthouse to be married, not to Washington, D.C.

I’ve often said I don’t want my guns or my marriage registered in Washington.

Those who disagree with the recent Supreme Court ruling argue that the court should not overturn the will of legislative majorities. Those who favor the Supreme Court ruling argue that the 14th Amendment protects rights from legislative majorities.

Do consenting adults have a right to contract with other consenting adults? Supporters of the Supreme Court’s decision argue yes but they argue no when it comes to economic liberties, like contracts regarding wages.

It seems some rights are more equal than others.

I think Friday’s Supreme Court decision was the biggest step the USA has taken towards theocracy in some time. I already converted from pure abstract libertarianism to National Libertarianism some time ago for purely practical reasons; events had made it sufficiently obvious that the abstract position simply could not function in the real world.

Now I find myself wondering if even this more practical and pragmatic approach is logically consistent with real-world human behavior. It may be that if John Adams is correct and there is no system of government that can survive an insufficiently moral people, what the progressives think of as a linear progression will turn out to be even more cyclical than I had imagined. We know, per Cicero, that democracy leads to aristocracy. But does cultural degeneracy precede theocracy? Or is it simply the decline into low paganism that I have anticipated?

White Christian conservative attachment to the Constitution and traditional American ideals such as representative democracy are consequences of their deeper attachments. Once those connections severed, they are simply a larger, more dedicated, more effective, and better-armed group playing the game of power. I tend to doubt post-democracy is going to be all that those celebrating it now believe it will be.

Don’t mess with Texas

The Texas governor fires a warning shot:

“The Supreme Court has abandoned its role as an impartial judicial arbiter and has become an unelected nine-member legislature. Five Justices on the Supreme Court have imposed on the entire country their personal views on an issue that the Constitution and the Court’s previous decisions reserve to the people of the States.

“Despite the Supreme Court’s rulings, Texans’ fundamental right to religious liberty remains protected. No Texan is required by the Supreme Court’s decision to act contrary to his or her religious beliefs regarding marriage.

“The Texas Constitution guarantees that ‘[n]o human authority ought, in any case whatsoever, to control or interfere with the rights of conscience in matters of religion.’ The First Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees the free exercise of religion; and the Texas Religious Freedom Restoration Act, combined with the newly enacted Pastor Protection Act, provide robust legal protections to Texans whose faith commands them to adhere to the traditional understanding of marriage.

“As I have done in the past, I will continue to defend the religious liberties of all Texans—including those whose conscience dictates that marriage is only the union of one man and one woman. Later today, I will be issuing a directive to state agencies instructing them to prioritize the protection of Texans’ religious liberties.”
– Gov. Greg Abbott, Texas

Not bad. I’d rather see the governor declare independence, but it’s a start.

More emanations and penumbras

And thus ends the last pretense of democracy in America:

The Supreme Court has declared that same-sex couples have a right to marry anywhere in the United States. Gay and lesbian couples already can marry in 36 states and the District of Columbia. The court’s ruling on Friday means the remaining 14 states, in the South and Midwest, will have to stop enforcing their bans on same-sex marriage.

Five people can declare a fish to be a horse if they like, but that doesn’t make it so. What’s so tragic about the abandonment of both traditional morality and the last vestiges of democracy in America is that it was done for such a petty little cause.

I observed that America was dead 11 years ago in a column entitled “You Can’t Fix a Corpse”. This is just the corpse beginning to stink.

It’s wryly amusing to recall all those Republicans who swore that the solution was to elect Republicans so they could nominate Supreme Court Justices. How did that work out for you, especially in light of what I predicted back in 2004.

Any last vestiges of hope in the Republican Party have been shattered by
the current regime, wherein a Republican President, Republican House,
Republican Senate and Republican-nominated Supreme Court have
demonstrated that they have zero interest in the timeless vision of
America’s founders. Supporting them in the hopes that they will revive
American liberties is akin to hoping that shock paddles will suffice to
revive a month-old corpse. American freedom is not only dead, it has
been rotting for some time.

The misrule of law

And the rule of lying men. This should suffice to explode any last lingering doubts about the survival of the rule of law in the USA:

“Congress passed the Affordable Care Act to improve health insurance markets, not to destroy them,” Roberts wrote in the majority opinion. “If at all possible, we must interpret the Act in a way that is consistent with the former, and avoids the latter.”

Roberts continued, “In this instance, the context and structure of the Act compel us to depart from what would otherwise be the most natural reading of the pertinent statutory phrase.”

In a dissent he summarized from the bench, Justice Antonin Scalia said, “We should start calling this law SCOTUScare.” Using the acronym for the Supreme Court, Scalia said his colleagues have twice stepped in to save the law from what Scalia considered worthy challenges.

“The Court holds that when the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act says ‘Exchange established by the State’ it means ‘Exchange established by the State or the Federal Government.’ That is of course quite absurd, and the Court’s 21 pages of explanation make it no less so,” Scalia wrote.

Scalia added, “Words no longer have meaning if an Exchange that is not established by a State is ‘established by the State.’ It is hard to come up with a clearer way to limit tax credits to state Exchanges than to use the words ‘established by the State.’ And it is hard to come up with a reason to include the words ‘by the State’ other than the purpose of limiting credits to state Exchanges.”

The USA presently enjoys not only the rule of men, but the rule of lying men rather than law. And, needless to say, Chief Justice Roberts helpfully demonstrates that electing more Republicans is not going to solve the problem.