The EU

Google says the EU requires a notice of cookie use (by Google) and says they have posted a notice. I don't see it. If cookies bother you, go elsewhere. If the EU bothers you, emigrate. If you live outside the EU, don't go there.

Tuesday, April 27, 2021

The Rule of Law For Now


For John, BLUFWhile most of us tend to follow the law, some like to abuse the law to achieve higher goals.  In the process they alienate those who believe in the rule of law fr all.  This can lead to a breakdown in the Rule of Law, which will be bad for everyone.  Nothing to see here; just move along.




Here is the sub-headline:

From Town Hall, by Columnist Kurt Schlichter, 26 Apr 2021, 12:01 AM.

Here is the lede plus two:

You can’t win, but that’s all part of the plan.

Reason, rules, processes – these are the foundations of a free society, which is why the cultural left is so dead set against them.  A citizen needs to be able to rely on clear rules and fixed processes to vindicate his rights in order to have any rights.  But the rights of free citizens – your rights – are an obstacle to the Lil’ Stalins who yearn to rule over us.  If the liberal establishment can create a society where you can’t appeal to facts, evidence, or law, then – until the peasants' revolt – its poobahs can wield undisputed, undiluted authority.  That’s their dream, a country where you live in terror of them because you can never be sure that what you are doing or failing to do is suddenly going to be criminalized.

Take the whole imbroglio about Stabby Girl, the teen psycho in Ohio who decided to filet a girl in front of a cop.  Not surprisingly, to people who aren’t idiots, the officer ventilated her, saving the life of the innocent victim.  But then, of course, the establishment and the media – including America’s #1 Matlock superfan – weighed in on how stopping this future felon was racist racism of racismness.  Normal people were baffled, but then, it’s only if you haven’t been paying attention that you might think that non-criminal black lives matter to Black Lives Matter.

I think he has some important points.

I especially liked this sentence, later in the essay:

There’s this basic Anglo-American premise in law – I know we’re supposed to pretend that our political and legal culture didn’t come down to us [from] the British Isles but it did – that you can use deadly force in the defense of yourself or another when some bad actor is trying to cause death or great bodily harm.
That seems pretty straight forward.  However, we need agreement on how the system should work.  It appears we don't have that agreement.  Moreover, it is not clear that those presuming to speak for Blacks speak for all Blacks.

The author worries that while one side is firmly bound by rules and obligations, the other is makung it up as it goes along.

Eventually, you will inevitably reach a breaking point.  And that’s coming.  Then the bad guys are going to miss the rules that they still expect to protect them.
Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

No comments: