Reasons To Stay

I often make throwaway comments about how I could live in France, or the Britishland, or Vienna — usually when looking at some café street scene, or a magnificent pub, or a lovely country cottage.  I love Montreal, and Paris, and London, and Vienna, and, and, and…

The plain fact of the matter is that I couldn’t live in any of those places — spend a vacation there, a week or two, maybe even a month — but not forever.

People often say in Comments to one of these posts that they couldn’t go there because of the gun laws — which is a perfectly good reason — or because they can’t speak the language — also a good reason, because if you can’t read the newspapers or watch the television, you fell terribly isolated after a while.

It goes deeper than that.  Even if we take language out of the discussion, that would leave us with only a few spots available, i.e. the English-language (Anglosphere) countries.  (I’m going to ignore countries that speak English as a matter of course — India, South Africa and so on — because ugh.)

And since the Covid bullshit has happened, the Anglosphere hasn’t been looking that hot, either.  Whether it’s masked mandates, lockdowns or the thuggish actions of the police when suppressing demonstrations in Australia, New Zealand and lately, Canada;  or whether it’s the intrusive British cops arresting people for posting “hate speech” on the Internet, they’re all awful.  This website, for example, wouldn’t last longer than about a week in most of the Anglosphere, because to the authorities I would be completely disqualified from the “right” to express myself because of the hate, misogyny, racism, and [insert current favorite here]  that litters the landscape of this corner of the Internet.

Let’s not even go into my feelings towards government:

Now layer horrible gun laws over all of that, and it becomes really clear that when it comes to personal freedom, none of the people living in those countries have any.  Oh sure, you’re “allowed” to own a shotgun in Britain, as long as it isn’t semi-automatic, and also in Australia, as long as you keep it locked in a safe all day, and oh by the way, your shotgun can be taken away from you at any time or for any reason by the State, because they know that you own one.  Let’s not even speak about handguns, or semi-auto centerfire — I’m sorry, I mean “assault” — rifles.

Derek Hunter talks about all this, and here’s a good excerpt:

It’s easy to look at Canada, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, etc., and think they’re just like us because we have so much in common. We speak the same language, enjoy many of the same movies and much of the same music .

But there’s significantly more we do not share than we do. First and foremost, among them is our commitment to individual liberty.

One thing to notice about the coverage of the Canadian Freedom Convoy is how the American media, particularly from conservative outlets, didn’t reflect the will of Canadians. You’d think Justin Trudeau going full totalitarian, turning into a little Fidel Castro would bring about a collapse in his popularity, but it hasn’t. Most Canadians were upset he didn’t act sooner.

If Trudeau were really unpopular, Parliament would hold a vote of no confidence and force a new election. There isn’t even talk of that. They don’t have to wait 4 years to rid themselves of a leader, they could do it in a few weeks. That they haven’t even tried tells you something.

Canada is not like the United States. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms grants Canadians various rights that, if you don’t think about it, are similar in a lot of ways to the rights we enjoy here. But there’s a major difference.

Our Constitution grants exactly zero rights to anyone, it acknowledges the rights with which we were born and denies the federal government the ability to infringe upon them. The Canadian Charter gives citizens certain rights, explicitly. If a government can grant rights, there is no justification for them not being able to take them away, temporarily or permanently.

When Trudeau invoked emergency powers, US conservatives recoiled in horror. Canadians did not.

And:

It’s easy to look at Canada, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, etc., and think they’re just like us because we have so much in common. We speak the same language, enjoy many of the same movies and much of the same music.

But there’s significantly more we do not share than we do. First and foremost, among them is our commitment to individual liberty.

Yeah, discussion of freedom and freedoms in places outside the U.S. always involves a significant number of asterisks, much as it will when the same topics come up with our own Left — the European wannabes.  You can own this gun but not that gun, can publish this idea but not that idea, can donate money to this cause but not that cause — the list is endless.

Even here, we have allowed our freedoms to be compromised — but at the back, there’s always the bedrock of the Constitution to fall back on — which is why the Left wants to denigrate it and make it malleable.

Oh, and one last thing:  to all those people who think that if our government were to become as totalitarian as, say, Canada’s, let us be under no misapprehensions about the role of the police (and armed forces) when it does eventually turn to enforcement of the oppression.  The Canadian and Australian police have shown us exactly how they’d behave — and I don’t want to hear any guff about how our cops are different from theirs, because I’m not prepared to test that, nor give anyone the benefit of the doubt.

More likely, law enforcement will do exactly what they did in Portland (stand back when Leftist paramilitaries burn, loot and attack government buildings) and in Ottawa — bring violence to a peaceful protest because those were their orders.

I’d like to believe differently, but I’m afraid I can’t — not when there’s so much evidence at hand.

I feel that at some point, I and many people like me are going to be backed into a corner.  I have no idea what will happen when that becomes intolerable.  But there’s always history (and note the emphases I’ve added):

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.–That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, —That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

There it is, right there, and the rest of the Anglosphere has no such rationale.

So here we stay.

Misguided Rant

I thoroughly enjoyed reading this rant, as I do most that are aimed at government of any race, creed, color or nationality, but Insane Bob seems to have missed the point.

He devotes a great deal of time talking about the U.S. declaring war on Canada, e.g.:

The real danger of a war between our nations is that we both see internal security risks, and our central governments may no longer be absolutely able to bind our respective peoples to peace. Again, infantry and the population infantry is recruited from can be similar. Our unofficial irregular forces could war against Canada, and Canadian unofficial irregular forces could war against America, and it could prove quite messy. From my perspective, if my folks kill off the Canadian government, and Canadians kill off the US jerks, that would be about the nicest possible outcome. Wars are never that convenient for anyone. Better that folks don’t get that agitated.

As I see it, most ordinary Americans — if faced with the choice — would rather go to war against our own government than against Canada, present company included.

And as Mr. Free Market put it to me during a semi-drunken phone call last night:  how bad does the Canadian government have to be, to have pissed off the nicest, politest people on the planet?

They’re so nice that SoyBoy Trudeau is highly unlikely to have a Ceaușescu Moment, even though it could be argued that he deserves one:

Our own Gummint lackeys?  I’ll get back to you on that.  In the meantime:

Thoughtcrime

In the dystopian novel  Nineteen Eighty-Four  (1949), by George Orwell, the Thought Police (Thinkpol) are the secret police of the superstate, who discover and punish thoughtcrime, personal and political thoughts unapproved by the regime. The Thinkpol use criminal psychology and omnipresent surveillance via informers, telescreens, cameras, and microphones, to monitor the citizens and arrest all those who have committed thoughtcrime in challenge to the status quo authority.

And right on cue, the modern-day version of the Thinkpol emerges, brought to you by another of the Alphabet Gestapo, our comrades at the Department of Homeland Security:

MDM is a term developed by the DHS Cybersecurity Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) to replace the old-fashioned phrase “foreign influence.” Now let us caveat that the U.S. government does indeed have a responsibility to monitor and to identify foreign influence operations. This was the remit of the Reagan-era Active Measures Working Group, which worked tirelessly to identify Soviet lies being spread to undermine the United States’ global standing in the world, and then countered them with the truth.

But under the latest iteration, DHS is no longer concerned solely with enemy lies spread abroad, but increasingly with information spread by “domestic threat actors” (read: American citizens). And no longer are they merely concerned with disinformation, false material spread to manipulate an opponent, but with misinformation, which DHS considers information that is false but not intended to cause harm, and “mal-information,” which means information which is true but the government considers harmful anyway.

I added the emphasis, because that’s an extremely interesting concept.  A couple of interesting questions arise from this.

  • Who defines what is “harmful”, and by what parameters?
  • What are the penalties for disseminating this so-called “mal-information”?
  • Should the DHS be abolished?
  • Has anyone in Congress done anything to stop this?  and
  • Has the time come for us to begin the mass hangings?

I need to get over to the range.  Excuse me.

Damn Immigrants

…coming over here, sleeping with our Murkin wimmins, taking our jobs, and now (gasp) wanting to destroy our beloved Department of Alcohol, Tobacco & Firearms:

Born an Englishman but a U.S. citizen since 2006, Martin Hyde knew the danger such lists pose. He’d seen how they had been misused in England, Australia and elsewhere.

“When a government has a list of the people who own guns, it almost always leads to confiscation,” Hyde said. “When I saw this, I knew the ATF had to go – it has to be abolished or broken up. Besides, no one makes a better case for abolishing the ATF than the ATF.

“I grew up in London without the right to keep and bear arms. Englishmen were never unarmed; we were disarmed by the government. Americans don’t understand what that’s like, thankfully. Our Second Amendment prohibits the government from disarming the people, and it needs to be protected – enshrined, if you will.”

And yes, he’s become a keen gun owner since becoming a citizen.

Helpless Laughter

Larry Correia has already warned the Left about getting what they seem to wish for;  and now some creature named Michael Anton done an article, only to be brutally Fiskicated by Ian Gruene.  (Insty already linked to it, but I can’t resist piling on.)  A sample, talking about the great “right wing militant” trope:

But this question also depends on what you consider “right wing insurrection”. If you are talking about a half-dozen fruitcakes with an underpants-gnomes plan then no there won’t be many. Mostly because troublesome fruitcakes are a very small problem no matter what the subject is.

On the other hand if you are talking about people who think most or all of the U.S. government need to be killed, I have bad news for you. A large swath of the country considers that question settled and are now concerned with the doctrinal issues of whether it is best to follow the teachings of St. Augusto of the Whirling Blades, or St. Tepes of the Artificial Forest.

For those to whom the latter references are unfamiliar (and bless your innocent little hearts), allow me to represent them in pics:

Anyway, follow the link and have a chuckle.

Priceless Scandi

Oh yeah, baby

Finland Anti-Lockdown Convoy Hits Helsinki

Helsinki saw dozens of motor vehicles clog its streets on Friday evening, sparked by the nation’s lockdown rules, as well as the rising cost of fuel in the country.

Police initially tried to stifle the protest before it occurred, implementing a ban on heavy goods vehicles — a class which includes a wide variety of trucks — without a permit from the city centre.

That’s excellent news.  But here’s my absolute favorite part:

However, according to a report from Finnish public broadcaster Yle Uutiset, this did not stop the protest from going ahead, with dozens of vehicles, including motor homes, cars, vans, and at least one mobile sauna, streaming into the city centre for the demonstration.

A mobile sauna?   The only way this shindig could have been more Finnish was if Mika Häkonnen had been part of the parade, riding a reindeer.

Bravo, ystäväni.