The Use of Force

Parents find themselves caring for little animals in the first few years of their children’s existence. That is especially noticeable when parents have children in quick succession so that there is barely twelve months difference in their ages.

Babies are intelligent. I witnessed this directly with my third child, another girl, not that that matters. I witnessed it one Saturday afternoon when I was relaxing and watching the TV. I saw these amazing events.

The child was so young that she could not walk. I cannot put an actual age on it, but suppose we say one year old. I do not know. What happened was that she sort of crawled to the couch. On the couch, were three cushions. She tested each cushion by placing her head on it. She selected one specific cushion, climbed onto the couch and settled herself with her head on that cushion. That particular cushion was the softest one.

I was truly and absolutely amazed that a child of that age could show such an ability to reason, even though she could hardly talk and could not walk. The incident opened my eyes. Babies are intelligent.

But they are still little animals.

I suppose that we could say that, as children, these humans are not so much ‘childish’ as ‘animalistic’. The latent animal, from which we evolved, still exhibits itself in childhood. Small children do not have ethics. They grab what they want. That is their nature. Every single parent knows this.

It is a matter of fact that parents, since forever, have disciplined young children physically by administering a smack. That is what such children understand. But there is more to it. The ‘Smack’ is a one off. It is not like torture. There is no continuing pain. A ‘smack’ works because it creates a shock.


I suppose that it is a sad reflection upon the human condition at this time, that adults are seen to need ‘smacks’ to alter their behaviour. I suppose that the first ‘smack’ in recent times was the smoking ban. But smokers continued to misbehave, and so the display ban occurred. And yet smokers were still disobedient, and so the ‘smack’ of Plain Packaging was introduced. With the best will in the world, it is beyond understanding how PP can administer a ‘smack’ to smokers or would-be smokers.


A favourite saying of Tobacco Control Zealots is, “Increase tobacco taxes to deter children from smoking”.

The reality has nothing to do with children. That is, the second half of that statement is a non-sequitur. How can that statement be true if children have no money to buy cigs in the first place? I f they have the money, why should a tax increase deter them?


But my primary consideration is the use of force. Most of the time, the use of force is disguised. Smoking bans are the use of force. Excessive tobacco taxes are the use of force. It is important to understand that alcohol taxes are a different thing.

Once the use of FORCE enters into Government, there is no other direction that The State can go into other than fascism and totalitarianism.

Nothing else is possible.


It is to be hoped that ONE MP might see the whole picture, but I doubt it.


7 Responses to “The Use of Force”

  1. michaeljmcfadden Says:

    Well scoped as usual Junican. The manipulation of our behavior through punishments is indeed just stepping around on the upper edges of a slope…

    MJM, who was also amazed at your tale about the 1 year old! Very interesting!

    • junican Says:

      I forgot to mention that daughter A almost completely avoided crawling by shuffling around on her bum. It was all very amusing. But, although she went from shuffling around on her bum to walking, she could pull herself up to stand on her legs while testing the cushions. She could also climb onto the couch.
      She is now 48, but is still comically different. Just as she tested the cushions to find the perfect one, she fills her house with comically cute, but tasteful, artefacts. For example, and only one example, on table in her sitting room, there stands a small statue of Buddha. It is only about 4″ high. What the f**k?!

  2. Timothy Goodacre Says:

    Yes and as taxation increases and becomes unreasonable we will all find a way around paying that tax won’t we.

  3. cherie79 Says:

    Most of us already have found ways to avoid excessive taxation.

    • michaeljmcfadden Says:

      I began rolling my own in 1998 when the Master Settlement Agreement dictated that smokers should pay an extra 50 cents/pack to pay for their own persecution. I’d say that by this point I’ve saved…. hmm…. about $18,000.

    • junican Says:

      Avoid the word ‘avoid’. It is not quite as bad as ‘evade’, but it is worth avoiding the word ‘avoid’.
      What we are doing is paying the taxes which are demanded depending upon location and product. I buy cigs in Spain where they are about half UK price. I could go to Prague where they cost about a third. There are other sources where the appropriate taxes have been paid.
      Thus, we do not ‘evade’ or ‘avoid’ taxes. We pay what is demanded. It is just that we choose where we pay taxes and what we pay taxes upon.
      It is important not to engage in criminal activity.
      Well, not as long as their are other ways.

      • cherie79 Says:

        All my cigarettes and tobacco are bought quite legally abroad so perhaps avoid is not the right word but even if the price was similar I would still object to contributing to my own persecution by ignorant, lying ‘health professionals’ who seem to control our spineless politicians.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: