‘Taking Down’ Authority

This needs to be a short post because I go on holiday in the early hours of Tuesday. I have a lot to do tomorrow in preparation. So, I hope that this post will not be rambling.

‘Authority’ takes many forms. For example, I have a chart which shows how to cure tobacco. It says (put briefly) that the leaves collected from the plants should be stacked in a barn in a certain way, and that fires should be used to raise the temperature inside he barn to about 37C. As a result, the leaves will ferment and turn starches into sugars, and go yellow. But (OMG!), it is not as simple as that. No. Academics and Experts got involved. And “Universities”. These people, who had never in their lives worked in tobacco, produced charts and measurements and decreed ‘THE WAY TO DO IT’. They wrote books.

I should imagine that farmers and curers of tobacco did not give a shit what Professor and Experts said. They would have gone on doing what they know works – open some ventilation slats if the temp/humidity is too high and close them if too low. Raise the temp if too low and cool it down if too high.

What is critical to understand is that not all the crop being cured would turn out to be perfect. That is why tobacco was graded. Curers knew what would be considered to be ‘Class A’ tobacco, ‘Class B’, tobacco and so on. Buyers checked the ‘Class’ which were provided in bales by Growers. There was nothing secretive about it. The various ‘Classes’ had their prices.

It is almost certain that Tobacco Control has obliterated any sort of care over the quality of tobacco. If that is true, then Tobacco Control might well be responsible for the presence of excessive toxins in tobacco company products. I mean, why should tobacco companies bother about quality when the “professors and experts” say that quality of tobacco has no importance? It is as though Banana Control said that the straightness of bananas was more important than the taste.

—-

The ‘authorities’ which say that the straightness of bananas is more important than the taste can be taken down. I shall explain how.

Years ago, I went with seven other people to play golf in Scotland over a long weekend. One of the courses that we played was the ‘Kings’ course at St Andrews. It is a bloody tricky course, not much different to the Old Course. Anyway, I got a bit pissed that night and decided to take a walk in the fresh air. It was about 11 pm and there was still some light in the sky. I walked up the 1st hole and crossed to the 18th tee. I looked down the 18th and went “Wow!” in my mind. It was wonderful to observe.

Unfortunately, about the same time, I became desperate for a pee. Well, you tell me, what better place to make ‘your mark’ but on the Championship Tee of the 18th hole of the Old Course? The competition started about two weeks later, but I failed to see, on the TV, a brown mark where I piddled.

====

TAKING DOWN AUTHORITY.

There must come a time when ‘professorial’ authority will collapse. There must come a time when it will be seen that these people have no experience in the world in which they claim ‘expertise’. They may have read books, and they may have assessed the actual statistics produced by other incompetents, but they have no personal experience whatsoever. Would you trust these ‘Academics’ to declare the aircraft upon which you are about to fly 1000 miles to be safe? How could they know? Well, perhaps, they could do a study, and they could arrive a the conclusion that two incidents occurred at Manchester as compared with Birmingham, but because Manchester is twice as big as Birmingham, then that incident is only half an incident.

The incident of my pissing on the Championship Tee of the 18th at St Andrews is only a tiny bit of what smokers can achieve if they wish to. But it needs to be positive and not negative. Thus, smokers could create a bank account to receive charitable contributions from smokers to McMillan. At least that charity has not vilified smokers to the best of my knowledge.

—-

So, Yes, it is possible that a SMOKER CHARITY could be created. How odd is it that Tobacco Companies did not create such a charity decades ago? Umm…. Perhaps we should think again. Perhaps they could not. Perhaps their ‘business model’ was entirely as described by Tobacco Control, and was correct as described. Perhaps, in Tobacco Companies, anyone who said, “There is something wrong” was sacked. We do not know.

What has become obvious to me is that the FCTC has little to do with health. It has more to do with destroying tobacco companies, and that is all.

—–

‘Taking Down Authority’ requires millions of disobediences. Authority only has strength because of willingness to obey. It was not the will of smokers which was hit by the smoking ban, it was the WILL of pub owners and others. It was their WILL which was co-opted to punish smokers and they complied willingly. I remember the last night of the publicans at my local. They had given up because they could not make it pay. I was a rebel. On that night, which was a bit of a party, at the very last thing, I deliberately took out a cig and lit it. Bearing in mind that it was there very last night, would you not think that they might have ignored it, or given me an ashtray? NO!! One of the sisters strived valiantly to grab the cig from my mouth! But it was their last night! No way was it possible for the police to target that place!

Is it any wonder that those sisters could not make a go of the pub?

—-

To ‘take down authority’, you need to want to. I don’t think that The People of the UK are anywhere near doing so at the moment, as witnessed by the publicans’ willingness to be thugs. When publicans accept a dictat to chuck their best customers out of their pubs by force, they accepted that they were State apparatchiks.

What more needs to be said? It is simple. Someone, somewhere need only open a bar for smokers, staffed by smokers. A Tobacco Company ought to facilitate it, if only to call out the frenzied fanatics. No violence is needed, even though precipitated by TC. Indeed, the bar need not actually open for business!

So TAKING DOWN AUTHORITY is easy enough by disobedience. But there is another strata. It is about making politicians responsible, personally, for the consequences of their actions. They cannot any longer be allowed to make laws and then walk away.

Advertisements

6 Responses to “‘Taking Down’ Authority”

  1. Rose Says:

    Thus, smokers could create a bank account to receive charitable contributions from smokers to McMillan. At least that charity has not vilified smokers to the best of my knowledge

    I thought this one was quite memorable

    Britons ‘spend 315 days hungover’
    9th September 2014

    “THE average Briton spends almost a year of their lives nursing a hangover, a charity has said.

    Macmillan Cancer Support has estimated that people spend 315 days of their lives battling with headaches and nausea caused by drinking”
    http://www.southwalesargus.co.uk/news/11461042.Britons__spend_315_days_hungover_/

    • junican Says:

      I’m inclined to say,”So what?” Because you have a hangover does not mean that you are dead. In any case, most people overindulge when they are not working the next day, so they are hungover in their own time. What’s the problem?

      • Rose Says:

        “Britons ‘spend 315 days hungover’

        Being a non drinking Briton, I was deeply insulted and that story travelled round the world.

    • nisakiman Says:

      315 days hungover? Well, I’m really not sure how they work that out at all.

      I’m a fairly heavy, daily drinker (although I rarely drink during the day – just in the evenings), and I would say that I suffer a hangover no more than two or three times a year. I continue to drink up to the point when I go to bed (about 1.30), and when I get up at 6.30, I’m fine. No hangover and raring to go.

      Methinks there is more than a tad of exaggeration in those figures.

  2. frosty Says:

    Pedantic i know but Manchester is no where near as big as Birmingham.

Comments are closed.


%d bloggers like this: