Our power-drunk dictators want us locked down forever:
I am so surprised – NOT. The state of Victoria has a handful of new Rona cases and the Dictator For Life Dan Andrews does exactly what we knew he would do: he is imprisoning us once again! This is now our FIFTH lockdown. This megalomaniac is absolutely drunk on power and control.
Simply consider one front page newspaper headline: “Melbourne braces for lockdown after two new cases.” TWO new cases? It’s the end of the world as we know it! And lockdown is the only response these dunces can come up with? They are completely mad! The whole lot of them. Good grief.
Never mind that one expert study after another has found that lockdowns not only do not help, but they actually make things worse. But given that our overlords are NOT running on good science or sound medicine, but on a sheer lust for power, of course they will ignore the facts and the evidence.
This is all about milking a crisis for all it’s worth. I have said this often now, but it must again be restated here. If you want the perfect recipe for perennial tyranny, simply follow this formula:
-Have power-drunk rulers exploit or create a crisis.
-Imprison the people ‘for their own good’.
-Throw them crumbs now and then (‘you can now travel 10km, not just 5km’).
-Tell them that taking away their freedoms and basic human rights is to ‘keep them safe’.
-The masses of sheeple will love it and plead for more.
-And there you have it: dictatorship for life!
And Victoria is a perfect example of this, although all the other states are doing their best to do just the same. Indeed, with Gladys in NSW also now fully pushing the hysteria and panic porn, it seems there is zero difference between Labor, Liberal or the Greens. They are all power-mad and utter control freaks.
The Liberal Party used to be the party of limited government, personal responsibility and genuine choice. Now it seems to be as bad as all the others. People are looking for alternatives. It is possible that the Liberal Democratic Party might step in to fill the vacuum.
Last night on Sky News Cory Bernardi spoke to Victorian Liberal Democrat David Limbrick about this:
Sky News host Cory Bernardi says he hopes the “reincarnated” Liberal Democratic Party will “fit the bill” to be a vanguard for liberty loving citizens. “A group of concerned citizens with longstanding links to the Liberal and Nationals are getting behind a push to rebuild the Liberal Democratic Party,” Mr Bernardi said.
“We need a consistent and principled voice for freedom and liberty in our parliament. We need a vanguard to stick up for the liberty loving citizens who are actually sceptical about an all-powerful government.
“Will the reincarnated LDP fit that bill and do the current circumstances give it a prospect of greater electoral success? I don’t know the answer to that … but I certainly hope someone is successful in this space because it is so important.” https://www.skynews.com.au/opinion/australia-needs-a-vanguard-to-stick-up-for-liberty-loving-citizens-bernardi/video/0ba3894c9e0697ee0c47cb581615e870
It is hoped that there are enough freedom-loving Australians left for a party like this to get new or renewed traction. Time will tell. But here is a fundamental truth about freedom that you can bank on: it is very difficult to establish and maintain, but very easy to lose.
Speaking of all this, a very important article appeared last year which is worth referring to here. Jonathan Lange penned a piece last July entitled “We Didn’t Love Freedom Enough.” It begins this way:
In the opening chapter of the Gulag Archipelago, Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn recounts how the Bolshevik security “organs” arrested millions of Russian citizens by secret midnight raids. The arrests rarely happened in the light of day. Nor did they round up all their targets at once.
People were picked off one at a time. “Blue caps” would burst into an apartment in the dead of night and spend hours rifling through personal possessions looking for whatever they thought useful to gin up charges against the unfortunate target. They would leave before dawn with the arrested individual in tow.
No guns or shackles would be visible as they walked down the corridor. After being terrorized for hours the target would meekly walk past neighbors without any sign that he was being taken by force. Neighbors might know it. They might have heard the midnight crash of the door across the hall. But, to a man, they fearfully averted their eyes and pretended not to know.
Terror was the tool. Many, accused of crimes against the state, were randomly allowed to walk free. But they lived in constant fear of re-arrest. So, also, family members left behind never knew when the door might burst open again for another search of the apartment and another person to disappear into the maw of the secret prison system.
These arrests filled the prisons and labor camps of the Soviet Union and robbed family after family of mothers and fathers, sisters and brothers. With each person carted off to the camps, the people’s ability and will to resist was further drained.
After recounting this pattern of events, Solzhenitsyn penned a remarkably moving passage marveling at the universal lack of resistance. “And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?”
What is it about the human heart that prevented this most reasonable of responses? Why is it that nobody thought of it until they were in the camps and it was too late? From our comfortable vantage point, we can easily call them foolish. But would we do any better? More to the point, are we?
When the enemies of freedom come, they cannot devour an entire people by direct power. They must first divide before they can conquer. Division can be created in two ways: hatred and fear.
Hatred is created by inventing ever-new categories of people, and setting them against one another. That’s the essence of identity politics. The motto printed on every American coin, e pluribus unum (out of many, one), is what built America. To tear down any society, it must first be divided.
Once stripped of unity, people are easier to manipulate with fear. When every man is for himself, all that is needed to maneuver people into silence is a threat against their income or good name coupled with the vague promise that if they don’t make a fuss, they will not be bothered.
“Making a fuss” is then defined as defending your fellow citizen against unjust accusations. Those intent on tearing down a society cannot tolerate one citizen defending another. They must make public examples of a few people, so that the rest will be too afraid to stand together. That’s the recipe for a reign of terror. All it takes to counter the terror is the simple resolve to be united.
“If…if…,” Solzhenitsyn continued. “If only we had stood together against the common threat, we could easily have defeated it. So, why didn’t we?” He answered, “We didn’t love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation…. We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”
“We didn’t love freedom enough,” and for that reason, “deserved everything that happened.” These are powerful words. They challenge us today. Do we love freedom enough? How much are we willing to risk to defend it? https://kemmerergazette.com/article/we-didnt-love-freedom-enough
In the face of yet more health fascism in Victoria and beyond, let me repeat those last two questions:
Do we love freedom enough?
How much are we willing to risk to defend it?
[1380 words]