The Denormalisation of Non-Smokers

I just love that heading, don’t you?
What has been happening over the last thirty years or so? Literally, billions of pounds of taxpayers’ money has been spent on demonising smoking, but who are the people who have been most affected by the demonisation? A good question, do you not think?
There is no way of knowing if that demonisation has been what has caused a reduction in smoking prevalence. I personally think that cost has been a huge factor. But cost is not demonisation. It is force. Demonisation demands the creation of fear – cost is not fear. It is more akin to pain. Fear and Force are two different things, even though they are related. Force is physical but fear is psychological.
The more that you think about it, the clearer that it becomes that the demonisation of smoking has not really been aimed at smokers. Taxation has been aimed at smokers. The demonisation has been aimed at non-smokers. In effect, the demonisation has taken the form of: “Look at those disgusting, filthy, stinking, poor plebs who smoke tobacco! Are we non-smokers far more superior? We can go inside buildings but they have to stand outside like lepers of old. Mock them, for that is all they deserve”. ‘Mock’ means ‘belittle’, so hand-waving falls into that category. It signals that the waver is superior. The smoker may be wealthier, healthier, prettier than the hand-waver, but the hand-waver feels superior. It would be comical if a sixteen stone, six foot six inch smokers told a hand-waver how cheap, ill and ugly he/she looked. As a scrawny, nine-stone weakling of an advanced age (although still a ‘pretty’ male), I prefer to just smile. But I must admit that it has been a long time since anyone who passed me to enter the pub actually hand-waved. But that is because hardly anyone enters the pub any more. The hand-wavers have disappeared.
Why have they disappeared? The probability is that their wonderful ideal of a smoke-free pub turned out to be boring for them, since they relied upon risk-taking smokers to provide their amusement. Those people have been denormalised and rendered ‘fun-free’. A weird thing happened when the smoking ban took effect. Pub A (the one which catered for the younger element) continued to have plenty of activity. Pub B (the one which was quieter and more to the liking of older people) suffered. But, gradually, Pub B is becoming more popular. Pub A is almost always empty, although it still seems to do well for afternoon/evening meals. I have swapped my allegiance from pub A to pub B, and so have several others who used to frequent Pub A. Pub A is on the point of changing ownership, which suggests that its present owners (a pubco) want rid.
The ‘Public’ is fickle. It can be affected strongly by ‘demonisation’, as the German people were regarding anti-antisemitism. But such demonisation soon loses it effect unless it is constantly renewed and upgraded.
You can easily understand why ASH ET AL have to find new demonisations, since they would have no purpose otherwise. That is why they had to demonise the packet in which cigs are contained. But, as they have said again and again, that demonisation is aimed at non-smokers to deter them from smoking. They have said so, again and again. They want to denormalise non-smokers. They want to make non-smokers believe that innocent-looking packaging means safety. Anything in a package without a big red X. or medical porn is safe in every respect. Thus, I could eat the 20 kilos of sand which I have just bought because its packaging does not have pictures of medical porn.
But the REAL problem is Government. It is not that Cameron and co are stupid; it is that they do not see the nuances. Increasing tobacco taxes will reduce smoking to an extent, but the politicians refuse to let it into their minds that they are persecuting smokers. ASH ET AL know very well that raising taxes is persecution. And they know very well, as they demonise smokers, that they are ‘denormalising’ non-smokers.
I have some good ideas from time to time, but this is one of my best. It is easy to see how politicians can fall for it, if they do not understand. Think of the words. DEMONISE tobacco smoke, and consequentially, smokers. Force smokers out of the public eye and public places. DENORMALISE non-smokers by aggressively terrifying them. FORCE smokers to stop smoking via enormous ‘sin’ taxes.
And that, in its own way, is why Brexit is so important. At the moment, individual councils are being harangued by TC Demons to ban smoking in the open air, and some of them are are being overwhelmed by the demands. That can only be the case by virtue of ‘virtue signalling’. If the same procedure happened in the EU, which it does, then decisions would be set in stone, and would be irreversible for ever.
That is why I personally have voted ‘Out’. I do not want decisions to be set in stone for ever, especially when the people who made those decisions can walk away and get another position in Government, as happened with Soubry MP. She signed the UK up to the TPD without knowing what was in it.
I’m beginning to think that an awful lot of MPs are Demons. I do not exclude MPs who are for Brexit from that description. But you might reasonably ask what I mean by the word ‘demon’. Demons do not necessarily have to be evil. They can be mischievous. But, most importantly, they are constructs of the human mind. As far as I know, and as far has been demonstrated, throughout the enormously massive Universe, there is only one ‘intelligence’, which is human intelligence. There is no other. “Ah!”, you might say, “but another intelligent species might exist”. True, but, if another intelligent species has <em>already existed, </em>why have we not had radio wave transmissions from them?  It is there that we come up against time-scales. A civilisation which existed millions of years ago might well have sent out intelligent radio waves, but there were no intelligent humans on the Earth to know about them.
I mention that only to illustrate the criticality of time-scales. For example, a person might actually drop dead on the street because he inhaled a whiff of tobacco smoke. It could happen, but, although there is such a risk, there is no recorded happening of such an event in human history. Perhaps Aliens from Alpha Centauri reported such a case.


So ignore the gruesome politicians, but remember them. Remember their medical porn, their sin taxes, their corruption, their quiescence, their ‘not-me-gov’ excuses. “The sins of the father will afflict his sons” (very roughly!) applies.

Our parliamentary system stinks. I do not know what the remedy is, but there must be a remedy. Perhaps that remedy lies in election manifestos, or in what individual candidates declare that they intend to support.

What is obvious is that we can no longer tolerate ‘carte blanche’ when we elect MPs. In my constituency, my MP must explain how his Party intends to improve conditions, and not how his party intends to persecute smokers.



%d bloggers like this: