Being ‘Pro-Active’

It is very hard to get laws repealed. It is even harder to get the EU to withdraw a directive. Those directives are written in stone. But as we have seen with the ecig directive, there is MASSIVE opposition, even amongst Health Zealots. Is there any chance that that directive will be amended or repealed? I think that the answer is, “NO!” Not a chance in hell. Have any directives ever been repealed?

I wonder how many new laws have been created over the last several decades? I know that there have been thousands, but could that number be millions? It does not matter that much whether it is thousands or millions. The important thing is that such laws have to be enforced. The more that the everyday lives of citizens are controlled by laws, the more effort is needed to ensure that the control is effective. More police, more environmental officers, more auditors, more civil servants, more courts and lawyers.

The situation has become so ‘top-heavy’ that costs have outstripped resources. The police are wasting vast amounts of time looking for ‘hate speech’ on the net, or at least dealing with reports of such speech.

But what is even worse is that trivialities supersede serious crimes. A case in point has been the ‘up-skirt’ hysteria. (Silly boys using mobile phones to take a flash pic of women’s underclothes in the street by positioning the phone under the woman’s skirt). Yes, it is a nasty thing to do, but silly boys do silly things, as do silly girls. I remember once seeing a pic on Facebook (I think!) taken by a girl of a massive ‘bulge’ in a youth’s trousers. What is the difference?

The awful thing is that TobCON has used fake stats to promote ‘proactive’ prohibitions and persecution, and that politicians have passed even more laws. Even worse is that the EU, WHO, UN are in charge of getting those laws passed.

The cost of the EU, WHO, UN is stratospheric.  All their treaties and directives impose enormous costs. And, inevitably, those cost fall upon the poorest people in wealthy nations. They do not fall upon wealthy internationalists.

A new way of thinking is needed. And it must be bottom up and not top down. I am experiencing this need myself at the moment. It is difficult to explain. Herself had to be rushed to hospital a couple of months ago due to complications of Multiple Sclerosis. She nearly died, but the NHS saved her life. Since she came home, not a single medic, including her GP, has displayed the slightest interest in her plight.

I do not blame those people. Their work-load increases daily via laws.

If a political party declared in its manifesto that it would do nothing for five years but reduce the laws on the statute book by 90% (provided that that included repealing anti-smoker laws), then I would vote for that Party.

It is not about ‘Marxism’, ‘Capitalism’, ‘Communism’ or any other ‘ism’. It is about people doing as they wish, even if what they do is dangerous, such as mountain climbing or rolling cheeses down hillsides.

So, being ‘proactive’ does not necessarily mean marching about. It just as much means  opposing strenuously by any means within ones capability.


6 Responses to “Being ‘Pro-Active’”

  1. Smoking Lamp Says:

    Smoking bans were imposed using fraudulent data. The proactive element amounted to rolling over opposition through intimidation and lies. The same is now happening with the whole range of lifestyle control crusades. The controllers won’t repeal their dictates on their won. They will have to be forced to do so through political action. They are smug in their power and control and likely won’t see the backlash approach; but ‘Thermidor’ always arrives when the revolutionary ‘elite’ least expects it!

    • junican Says:

      I agree. But the likely overturning will probably come from an unexpected direction. Even studies which show that SHS does not cause damage have not changed a thing. The propaganda goes on and on.
      No. Changes in Gov policies will only happen when their is a massive groundswell of lobbying by those businesses which are affected – pubs, clubs, restaurants, airports, etc. The wishes of ordinary people do not matter. The smoking bans were aimed at businesses and not smokers.

  2. Carol42 Says:

    I remember when your GP would visit in hospital and when you came home would follow up with visits. When I had major cancer surgery I never heard from anyone until I had to call my GP out when I had a reaction to morphine. I could have been dead for all they knew.

    • junican Says:

      Exactly. I personally do not demand massive intervention. That would be the worst scenario. Perhaps a visit once every three months to check blood pressure etc and perhaps do a blood test would be enough. But the reality is that GPs and all medics are being put under such enormous pressure to stop people eating too much and smoking, or enjoying any other pleasures, that they have no time for follow-ups.

      • Carol42 Says:

        Even a phone call to ask if I was ok would have been appreciated. I didn’t see a doctor until I was able to get to the surgery after about six weeks. It was a bit frightening not knowing if everything was going ok and getting no help.

      • junican Says:

        That is a serious ‘qualitative’ problem.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: