The American Revolution Begins

For John, BLUF:  I think I had been fuzzy about the sequences of events in the American Revolution, but this helps to make it clearer,  The British march on Lexington and Concord and then later comes the Declaration of Independence.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Today Should Be a National Holiday:  An Annual Tradition.

Here is the sub-headline:

If there were any justice today would be a national holiday at least as big as Independence Day.  I’m not kidding.

From The Writer in Black, by Writer David L. Burkhead, 18 April 2021.

Here is the lede plus two:

Back in the 1770’s an unrest that had started more than a century before–with Colonial reaction to the English Civil War, the Catholic reign of James II, and the Glorious Revolution that followed–was growing in the American colonies, at least those along the Atlantic Seaboard from New Hampshire down through Georgia.  Protests over taxes imposed without the taxed having any voice in the matter, complaints about a distant monarch and legislative body making rules and laws over people to whom they are not beholden.

There had been clashes which fed that unrest, including the famous “Boston Massacre” where British troops fired into a rioting mob resulting in several deaths.  Think of it as the Kent State of the 18th century.

In an effort to quell the unrest, or at least have it be less of a threat to British officials, General Thomas Gage, Military governor of Massachusetts, under orders to take decisive action against the colonists, decided to confiscate firearms and ammunition from certain groups in the colony.  His forces marched on the night of April 18, 1775.

This is about the Battles of Lexington and Concord, which played out on the 19th of April 1775.  When Poet Henry Wadsworth Longfellow wrote about Paul Revere and his mission to warn every Middlesex village and farm he is talking about the County in which I now live, and proudly so.

A lesson to be learned is that soldiers shooting into a crowd of rioters doesn't always work out well for the Government then in power.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Saying No to Deplatforming Andy Ngo

For John, BLUF:  If there is no Free Speech then we lose our Republic and become just like all those other Oligarchies.  As an inheriter of all those Anglo-Saxon efforts toward the "Rights of Englishment" I am embarrassed.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

NYT Reporter Warns Conservative Writer Andy Ngo is a ‘Real Threat’, Should Be Censored on Twitter

From Yahoo News, by Reporter Carl Samson, 11 January 2021, at 7:01 PM EST.

Here is the lede:

Sarah Jeong, the New York Times reporter who made headlines in 2018 for antagonizing white people, has branded conservative journalist Andy Ngo "dangerous" and called for his censorship on Twitter.  In a tweet posted on Jan. 9, Jeong cited a thread from Donovan Farley, another journalist who claimed that Ngo repeatedly "willfully deceives his followers into a frenzy that results in death and rape threats" for journalists and "anyone else" supposedly targeted by his "scorn."

This desire for censorship is a bad sign in our democracy.  It smacks of authoritarianism.  Who is to decide what can and cannot be said?  Who is to decide when a riot is a good riot (see 2020) and when it is a bad riot (6 January 20212)?

Mr Jim Lyons, recently reëlected Chairman of the Massachusetts Republican Party, said this today:

It is clear that those who stand for freedom of speech will be targeted for deletion no matter how big or how small.  Unless you fall into line with Joe Biden and Nancy Pelosi’s rhetoric, be prepared to be ostracized and de-platformed.

I think the press-room gang at The Old Gray Lady think a little too much of themselves.  It is like they think that a Press Pass that identifies them as from the NYT indicates that they are a special breed, set apart from us mere plebs.

De-platform yourself.  Find alternative ways of exchanging information.  Sure, Parler has been squashed, but it may well come back.  And, there is always the old fashioned letter and the telephone text message.  And after COVID-19 subsides, there is always having a face to face conversation at Eienstein's Bagels, where all the best people go.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Crushing Dissent at UMass Amherst

For John, BLUF:  While I have my doubts about academic freedom over the years, it has always been a conceit of the academics that academic freedom existed.  Maybe it does, somewhere.  As for UMass Amherst, it is doubtful.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Criminalizing Dissent

The funny thing is it is the student who is being attacked for dissent, dissent against the current political orthodoxy of the faculty.

From The American Thinker, by Lawyers Karen D. Hurvitz and Ilya I. Feoktistov, 16 February 2020.

Here is the lede plus one:

Louis Shenker, a 21-year-old junior at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, just wanted his MAGA hat back from the graduate student who ripped it off his head on campus.  He wore the hat to a December 6, 2018 protest organized by the university’s graduate student union against Trump and local police.  Video shows that when Louis, who is 5’6’’ and 140 pounds, arrived wearing the MAGA hat and holding a large sign, he was immediately surrounded by a hostile mob of older grad students cursing at him and calling him a white supremacist.  A woman lunged from the mob and snatched Louis’s MAGA hat.  Careful not to get caught on camera hitting Louis with their hands, they instead mobbed him like a colony of enraged penguins, using their bodies to push him from all sides, occasionally pecking at his head with their cardboard signs, and chanting in unison:  “THE PEOPLE, UNITED, WILL NEVER BE DEFEATED.”

“Get the f**k out of here, you shouldn’t be in an anti-racist march!” screamed the hat thief.  A soft-spoken professor in the crowd warned Louis:  “It’s actually dangerous for you to come by yourself like that.”  As the protesters began to march and Louis tried to keep up while pleading for his hat, many of them, including several graduate student union members dressed in United Auto Workers gear, elbowed Louis into walls, lampposts, and other obstacles.  “You act like a Nazi, you’re going to get treated like a Nazi,” a female protester yelled at the Jewish grandson of Holocaust victims.  Louis left without his hat.

A month later, Louis was horrified to recognize the woman who stole his MAGA hat as Beth Peller, a 36-year-old grad student who would be teaching his mandatory freshman writing class.  Louis could not change his schedule, so he shaved his head and mustache, prayed that she would not recognize him, and wrote the essays she assigned with the correct leftist opinions she all but demanded.  Beth regaled her students with war stories about her time organizing violent anarchist movements, but never recognized the seemingly complaisant student as her victim from the protest.  Louis got an A.

And on it goes, until the University made it impossible for him to take his finals and he was, effectively, expelled from the University.♠  At least he has lawyers and the basic Rights of Englishmen still apply.

Shouldn't UMass Amherst be working on changing its name, as it changed its mascot due to being embarrassed by the past actions of Field Marshal Jeffery Amherst, 1st Baron Amherst, KB, after whom the whole shoot'ed match is named.

As a Massachusetts Resident, and as an American, I am embarrassed by UMass Amherst.  What is the head of the UMass System, President Marty Meehan, doing here?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠ On the other hand, it may be lucky for him.  He could end up going to a serious university.

Misunderstanding the British Election

For John, BLUF:  I know there are people who think we would be better off with a government more like Venezuela, but frankly those folks have a solution for making all equal (except for the leaders) by making everyone poor.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Misreading the British Elections

Here is the sub-headline:

Corbyn is no Sanders, Johnson is no Trump

From Commonweal Magazine, by Associate Editor Matthew Sitman, 24 December 2019.

Here is the lede plus one:

In the weeks leading up to the Conservative Party’s triumph in the British elections earlier this month, there were just enough glimmers of hope to let Labour partisans nurture what, deep down, they probably knew were unrealistic dreams of an upset—anecdotes about surging voter registration, talk of armies of canvassers, a bit of movement in the polls.  In the end, that only made the final results more stunning.  Boris Johnson will lead a commanding majority in Parliament with a mandate, as his campaign slogan went, to “get Brexit done.”

The vote tallies had barely been announced when pundits began churning out dire warnings about what this meant for Democrats in the United States: See what happens when you move too far left?  In the Atlantic, Yascha Mounk gravely suggested that if Democrats “position themselves outside of America’s cultural mainstream, they may suffer the same dismal fate as Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour Party.”  In New York magazine, Andrew Sullivan admonished them to “ignore the woke.”  The New York Times rushed out an article about the “ominous signs” centrist politicians like Joe Biden and Rahm Emanual saw in Labour’s defeat.  Roger Cohen, also in the New York Times, published a column titled “Boris Johnson and the Coming Trump Victory in 2020.”  His colleague Bret Stephens seemed to agree, concluding that to oppose Trump with “progressive primal screams is to ensure his re-election.”

Not much of this was serious analysis. It’s true that Donald Trump could win again in November, especially in the absence of an economic downturn.  But the direct comparisons between U.S. politics and what happened in Great Britain strain credulity.  Most of all, Jeremy Corbyn was a deeply unpopular candidate, quite apart from his politics.  His approval rating going into the election was forty points underwater.  While some of this surely was due to an onslaught of negative press, including charges of anti-Semitism, it’s also true that Corbyn could seem evasive in his answers about Brexit, allowing his position to be tagged as “dither and delay”—during his final debate with Johnson, he refused to say whether he would campaign for or against the deal he promised he would negotiate with Brussels and put to a second referendum.  Bernie Sanders, often compared to Corbyn, is viewed quite differently.  As Eric Levitz pointed out, he’s “more than 15 times as popular as his British comrade.”

There’s little evidence that Labour’s leftwing agenda should be blamed for their loss. One exit poll found that only 12 percent of respondents cited the party’s economic policies as the reason they didn’t vote for Labour, while 43 percent said it was because of the party’s leadership.  Polling on the Labour platform was summarized this way by the Independent:  “The public are absolutely not scared of government intervention and quite like Labour's socialist platform.  These policies individually range from quite popular to ridiculously popular.”  Proposals to raise taxes on the rich and nationalize railways and water companies, for example, garnered broad support. Whatever else this means, it certainly doesn’t prove that Democrats should tack to the center instead of embracing a wealth tax, Medicare for All, or the Green New Deal.

When Trump runs for re-election, he’ll no longer be a blank screen onto which voters can project their hopes, but a candidate who has to defend a record of astonishing cruelty, incompetence, and pathetic obedience to the demands of corporations and plutocrats.

There is at least one lesson Democrats should take away from the British elections, however: rightwing populism remains a potent political force.

Why is populism "Right Wing"?.nbsp; Using left and right to describe parties is not very accurate.  For example, the Nazis, socialists of a different rank as described as "right wing".  Are they?  If murder is the criteria, they are more like Communists.

It is like using "red" and "Blue" to describe US political parties.  In the course of my life Red has almost always been the part of Revolution.  Are the Republicans, the GOP, the revolutionaries?

But most of all, the working class in the United States is rapidly becoming more diverse—in a decade or two, half of it will be people of color.  Much of the commentary on the British elections has simply erased this fact, treating the aging white population of a small island as representative of our own electorate.  Lacking a controversy as galvanizing as Brexit, and faced with the prospect of the United States becoming a majority-minority country within many of our lifetimes, the GOP increasingly relies on undemocratic institutions such as the Electoral College, the Senate, and the courts, as well as assaults on voting rights and foreign interference in elections, to cling to power.  If Trump wins again, it will not look like the wave that delivered Johnson his impressive majority.  It’s more likely that he’ll win while receiving millions fewer votes than his Democratic opponent—an prospect that reveals a different task for those who want to see him defeated.

I was wondering if Mr Sitman was a racist, since he seems to be viewing politics through the lens of race and ethnicity.  Then I cheated and looked up the word.  The word suggests that one views one's own race as inherently superior to other races.  That doesn't seem to be Mr Sitman.  He seems to view politics in terms of the balance of races, rather than through the lens of The Declaration of Independence.  Where Mr Sitman and I differ is that he seems to think that all left wing views and political systems are equal and I believe we have a very good system and we should be looking for immigrants who wish to benefit from it and sustain it.  To be blunt, I want some semblance of an Anglo-Saxon form of Government, something that caters to what we call The Rights of Englishmen.

The other way Mr Sitman goes wrong is in understanding today's political situation.  As Reporter Silena Zito keeps pointing out, it wasn't that Mr Treump (or Mr Boris Johnson) created a political moment.  Rather, they stumbled upon it and exploited the moment.  Here is a column that talks to the, "The Town That Wouldn't Be Passed By".  We are still a fairly high trust society.  I don't wish to see the US become more like Latin American societies, especially Mexico, with not only a drug cartel society, but an avocado cartel society.♠

As for the sub headline, I think Mr Jeremy Corbyn is a disaster and an anti-semite.  As for Senator Sanders, some of his associates are anti-semites and his proposals are a disaster for the American economy and the American People.

Regards  —  Cliff

♠  A couple of weeks ago an avocado cartel shot up some town in Mexico, asserting their authority.  What can you do?  Boycott guacamole and vote Republican in November 2020.

Victory in Britian

For John, BLUF:  I am not sure how Boris Johnson and Donald Trump are linked, but, in my mind, they are.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Brexit endgame:  British voters back Boris and Brexit

As Guido said:

Boris Wins Stonking Victory

From Brookings Institution, by Brookings Fellow Amanda Sloat, 13 December 2019.

Here is the lede plus one:

After years of parliamentary gridlock, British voters spoke decisively in the December 12 general election.  The Conservative Party led by Prime Minister Boris Johnson returned to power with a sizable majority, enabling it to move forward with Brexit by the January 31 deadline and set the domestic policy agenda for the next five years and likely beyond.  The Labour Party suffered its worst defeat in modern history, with many blaming the unpopularity of leader Jeremy Corbyn.  The outcome also raises questions about the constitutional future of the United Kingdom, particularly in Scotland and Northern Ireland.

I am happy for BoJo's win.  it makes me think of the song There'll Always Be An England.

I think this is a win for the Rights of Englishmen.  This may be strange to the bien-pensant.  This is about the right to chose, even if our "betters" think we are choosing poorly.

Is this an indicator for 2020?  It is possible.

Regards  —  Cliff

Be Safe, But Not Rigid

For John, BLUF:  The right to not use the handrail affirmed in Canada.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Canadian woman arrested for not holding escalator handrail awarded $20G in damages

From Fox News, by Miss Nicole Darrah, 1 December 2019.

Here is the lede plus one:

A Canadian woman who was arrested for not holding on to an escalator handrail has been awarded $20,000 in damages by the nation's Supreme Court.

Bela Kosoian was riding an escalator at the Montmorency Montreal Metro station in Laval, Quebec, in 2009 when an officer stopped her because she wasn't holding on to a handrail, as she was looking through her purse.  A sign that stated "caution" and "hold handrail" was located near the escalator.

And here is the Supreme Court of Canada:

This case was about civil liability for doing something wrong.  In a free and democratic society, police officers can’t interfere with people’s freedoms except where the law says so.  They have to know the law and act within it.

Earlier we talked about Canada's abhorrence of Free Speech.  Here we see that the Canadians have not totally forgotten about the Rights of Englishmen, and kudos to them for that.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Fragile Society

For John, BLUF:  The evolution of our political culture, our culture as a whole, has depended on free speech and free debate.  I guess the bien-pennant think we have arrived at our destination and now is the time to shut up those who dissent.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Canadian Comedian Ordered to Pay $35,000 over a Joke

From PJ Media! By Mr Matt Margolis, 30 November 2019.

Here is the lede:

Canadian comedian Mike Ward has lost his appeal and has been ordered by a Quebec judge to pay $35,000 because of a joke he told about a disabled boy.

It would appear Mr Ward is a jerk.  On the other hand, if it was the US, one would hope the First Amendment protected Mr Ward's right to be a jerk.

Does he owe the boy and his Mother an apology?  Of course he does, but it is not the job of the Government to make sure it happens.  It is our job, as friends and neighbors, and consumers of humor, to nudge Mr Ward.  Not Force him.  Boycott him.  Ignore him.  Pray for him.  Pray with him.

But, alas, Mr Ward lives in Canada, which has no First Amendment, nor a semblance of one.  Is this the result of Canada's attempts to accommodate Quebec?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Gun Grabbing

For John, BLUF:  I wonder if Beto saw this, or Senator E Warren.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

New Zealand’s Gun Confiscation Shaping Up To Be Massive Failure

From Bearing Arms, by Blogger Cam Edwards, 4 November 2019.

Here is the lede plus three:

New Zealand’s gun grab, instituted in the wake of the Christchurch massacre, isn’t going so great.  In fact, with less than two months to go before the government-imposed deadline, fewer than 20% of the estimated number of banned firearms have been handed over.

New Zealand Police Minister Stuart Nash announced this week that more than 32,000 prohibited weapons have been returned to the government since collections began in mid-July.  Some estimates put the number of newly-banned military-style semi-automatic rifles in the country at up to 175,000.

This would suggest a compliance rate, so far, as low as 18 percent, 16 weeks into the buyback program.  With seven weeks left to go until the amnesty period ends, if the current rate of return holds, the New Zealand government is on track to collect around 50,000 prohibited weapons pursuant to the buyback.  That would impute a final compliance rate of around 29 percent, at the lower end, which would represent a modest but tangible success for policymakers.

A “modest but tangible success”?  I think it’s more like a complete failure.  Let’s say when the deadline passes less than one third of the banned firearms have been turned in.  What exactly has been accomplished, other than the compensated confiscation of a few thousand firearms and the criminalization of tens of thousands of otherwise law-abiding citizens?

There is no "Second Amendment" in New Zealand, explicitly enumerating the right to bear arms as a Right of the People, and yet tens of thousands of Kiwis are keeping their guns, rather than turning them in.

I wonder, if they are listening, what message Democrats take away from this?

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Brexit Alive

For John, BLUF:  Brexit, which has been counted down and out several times, and which opponents try to frustrate at every turn, seems to be creeping ahead.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

PUNDITS WERE CERTAIN BORIS WOULDN’T GET A RENEGOTIATION

From Order Order, the blog of Guido Fawkes, 11 October 2019.

Here is the lede:

The state of Brexit negotiations still remains unclear, with only slivers of information leaking to the press, however what does now look certain is Boris has forced the EU to prise open the Withdrawal Agreement and renegotiate – the precise thing we were told by the anti-Brexit punditry and MPs was under no circumstances going to happy.  That was just a Boris fantasy.  Guido thought it appropriate to revisit some of these cracking and emphatic predictions from this country’s top Europe pundits:

And, if you go to Guido's Blog you can see his examples.

Interestingly, this 11th of October is the Anniversary of the Ordinances of 1311, which built on the Magna Carta. The Ordinances of 1311 were eventually overturned some 11 years later.  However, they were an important step toward the idea of a limited monarchy and the rise of the House of Commons.

One of the things that might be helping The Honorable Boris Johnson (BoJo), the British Prime Minister, in his fight with the European Union is his threat to fight from inside the EU, upsetting the current applecart.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Confronting the FBI

For John, BLUF:  Frankly the Security State has gotten a little out of hand and needs to be reigned in.  Normally we would expect the Democrats to do that, but today it isn't politically expedient for them to do so.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Don't Click Here, It Is Just Gossip

While the revelations in the article may be important in helping us understand the limits we wish to place on our intelligence agencies, including the FBI, they do dishonor to some who have gone before us, and whom we have, in the past, honored.

From the [salacious] UK Daily Mail, by Reporter Jack Newman, 26 May 2019.

The actions of the FBI in wiretapping folks like Dr Martin Luther King, Charlie Chaplin, Malcolm X, Ernest Hemingway, Muhammad Ali, Jane Fonda, John Lennon, Paul Robeson, while perhaps important in a few cases, became too wide spread to be supportive of the First Amendment.  What we do in private should be allowed to stay private.  If we are doing wrong in private it is not the job of the police to vet each of us for all possible crime, but for the person harmed to stand up and say so, allowing a legitimate investigation  This goes along with that quaint Common Law belief in "innocent until proven guilty".

The story is that President Nixon was afraid to fire FBI Director J Edgar Hoover, for what Secrets Director Hoover might hold.

But, back to the article, we need to confront the assertion of Lord Acton:

Great men are almost always bad men.

Lord Acton, Letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton, 3 April 1887.

We believe President George Washington was a great man and also a good man.  And we think the same of President Abraham Lincoln.  When I was in Grade School, in the late 1940s and early 1950s we thought the same of Presidents Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D Roosevelt.  Today, President Woodrow Wilson not so much.

Hat tip to Ann Althouse.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Acting in Bad Faith

For John, BLUF:  This cowering before Social Justice Warriors, before the mob, is terrible.  It could cost the Democrats the Election on 2020.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

RISE OF THE ACADEMIC TOTALITARIANS

From InstaPundit, by Professor Glenn Reynolds, 12 May 2019.

Professor Reynolds was blogging about an article in The College Fix on the imbroglio at Harvard over one of Harvard Law's Professors being on the Harvey Weinstein defense team.

BREAKING: Harvard dean representing Harvey Weinstein is removed from position

Here is the lede plus two:

Harvard’s Winthrop House faculty dean, Ronald Sullivan, will not be returning to his position after his term expires at the end June.

So announced Dean of the College Rakesh Khurana Saturday morning in an email to House affiliates, reports The Harvard Crimson.

Sullivan is the embattled dean representing Hollywood mogul Harvey Weinstein, who stands accused of multiple instances of sexual assault.  Sullivan’s decision to take on Weinstein as a client has resulted in a tumultuous few months as #MeToo activists and others — including the student paper The Crimson — have trashed the professor and called for his ouster.

Maybe Dean Sullivan is doing a poor job as Dean, but to drop him in apparent response to the #MeToo movement is Unamerican and corrosive to our understanding of the Rights of Englishmen, including the right to a defense in court.

From a tweet by Mr Charles C W Cooke:

The idea that a defense lawyer is "condoning" the alleged crimes committed by his client, as opposed to demanding the state fulfill its role in proving them, is disgusting and dangerous.

From the comments at InstaPundit:  “Fair is fair, now we get to blacklist the lawyers that defend Comey, Strzok, and Hillary.”

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Real Drama

For John, BLUF:  I am for Brexit because I can't see how the British tradition of Common Law and the Rights of Englishmen can long under side beside with the Continental idea of Civil Law.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Moment of reckoning arrives as PM tries to sell Brexit deal to cabinet

Here is the sub-headline:

Theresa May hopes to secure support for the ‘product’, but tougher challenges await

From The Guardian, by Political Editor Heather Stewart, 13 November 2018.

Here is the lede plus five:

In the two years and four months since she arrived in Downing Street, Theresa May has become adept at kicking the Brexit can down the road – postponing the inevitable confrontation with the Tory right wing, and her intransigent DUP bedfellows.

She can delay no longer. Key cabinet ministers were summoned to No 10 on Tuesday night and a reading room was set up for them to pore over what May’s deputy, David Lidington, last week called the “product”.

For some weeks now, Brussels has been signalling the key obstacle to finalising a text of the withdrawal agreement – the divorce deal between the UK and the EU – lay not in EU27 capitals, but in Westminster.

The prime minister will learn on Wednesday around the cabinet table whether she has secured the backing of her ministers for the painstakingly drafted text and, most crucially, the Irish backstop.

Leave-minded ministers, not least the Brexit secretary, Dominic Raab, are known to have significant concerns about whether, and how, the UK will be able to extricate itself from what is meant to be a temporary, insurance arrangement but many fear risks becoming Britain’s de facto long-term trading relationship with the EU.

After weeks of increasingly bloodcurdling rumours about resignations and pizza plots, Downing Street is braced for resignations.  May could probably withstand losing a minister or two, as she did when David Davis and Boris Johnson walked out after Chequers.

The reason the establishment, the elite, dislikes Brexit, is because its success would indicate the hoi polloi, the common people, might, and could, take things into their own hands.

Heaven forfend.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

There In Spirit

For John, BLUF:  We should be careful to not lose our political heritage in a narrow rejection of our common history.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

This is the Feast of Crispin

Posted at Cat Rotator's Quarterly on October 25, 2018 by TXRed.

Here is the lede:

Ah, October 25, one of those dates that means a lot to a very few people.  A date immortalized by one of the greatest poems in English, a poem we don’t recall as poetry.

This is about the Battle of Agincourt, and King Henry the Fifth's speech.

We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;

[The whole speech is on video at the link.]

Progressives assert that there is "White Privilege" in this nation, holding back others.  I would assert that they miss the fact that what bouys our spirits is Anglo-Saxon privilege, a privilege available to all, "we band of brothers (and sisters)," regardless of race, color or creed.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crispin_and_Crispinian

Watch What You Say in France

For John, BLUF:  Is this very "Soviet-like" or is it just very "European-like"?  Over there they don't make a fetish of free speech, the way we do in the AngloSphere.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Marine Le Pen furious after being ordered to undergo psychiatric tests

Here is the sub-headline:

Marine Le Pen, the leader of the French far right has been left shocked and furious after a court ordered her to be examined by a psychiatrist to determine if she "is capable of understanding remarks and answering questions".

From The Local/AFP, by Reporter Ben McPartland, 20 September 2018.

Here is the lede plus four:

Le Pen, who is head of the former National Front party - now National Rally (Rassemblement National) revealed on Twitter her shock and anger at being ordered to undertake a psychiatric assessment.

The unusual summoning is in relation to Le Pen having tweeted out gruesome propaganda images from terror group Isis that showed the bodies of people having been executed by the so-called Islamic State.

In March Le Pen was charged with circulating "violent messages that incite terrorism or pornography or seriously harm human dignity" and that can be viewed by a minor.

And as part of their investigation it appears magistrates in Nanterre near Paris have ordered Le Pen to visit a psychiatrist for an expert assessment.

"I thought I had been through it all: well, no! For denouncing the horrors of Daesh (Isis) by tweets the "justice system" has referred me for a psychiatric assessment. How far will they go?!" she said on Thursday.

The really scary part is that with the World Wide Web it is possible for European nations to impose their totalitarian rules on the rest of us.

Hat tip to the Drudge Report.

Regards  —  Cliff

Wanting to Breath Free

For John, BLUF:  The Brits have found, once again, that the Continent is not a place that values individual freedom.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

May challenges EU as Brexit talks hit 'impasse', sterling tumbles

"Sterling" is the nickname for the British currency, the British Pound note.

From Reuters, by Reporters Guy Faulconbridge and Andrew MacAskill, 21 September 2018.

Here is the lede plus three:

British Prime Minister Theresa May said on Friday that Brexit talks with the European Union had hit an impasse, defiantly challenging the bloc to come up with its own plans a day after EU leaders savaged her proposals.

At a summit in Austria on Thursday, EU leaders rejected May’s “Chequers” plan, saying she needed to give ground on trade and customs arrangements for the UK border with Ireland.

The British media said the response had left her proposals in tatters, and May angrily struck back in a televised address from her Downing Street office, saying neither side should expect the impossible from the other.

“Throughout this process, I have treated the EU with nothing but respect,” May said.  “The UK expects the same. A good relationship at the end of this process depends on it.”

The last paragraph of the article is the best:

“The referendum was the largest democratic exercise this country has ever undergone,” said May, who has repeatedly ruled out a second vote following the original 2016 referendum.  “To deny its legitimacy or frustrate its result threatens public trust in our democracy.”

SHACK!

On the nose!

People calling for a "second" vote are the clueless cousins of Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan.  Remember his line?

Democracy is like a streetcar.  When you come to your stop, you get off.

We, here in these United States, need to get around this by leaving as much as we can to the individual states.  Then, if you don't like the laws in Massachusetts, or Montana, you can move to another state.  People not all being alike, it is good to leave room for variability.  And for the fabled Rights of Englishmen.

Hat tip to the Drudge Report.

Regards  —  Cliff

Loss of Rights

For John, BLUF:  I don't care what this person did, this process is wrong.  What we have is an In Camera judicial activity that is reminiscent of the work of the Star Chamber.  Doing bad while thinking they are doing good.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

URGENT: Tommy Robinson is in prison — help us challenge the judge's gag order banning reporting on it

From The Rebel, by Canadian Ezra Levant, this long weekend.

Basically, Mr Levant is raising money to help someone in England who was whisked off the streets, given an unfamiliar lawyer, tried and sentenced, all in a day.  And, the court issued a gag order to stop the British Press from reporting on this.

I thought BREXIT was important for the protection of the Rights of Englishmen, but apparently the British Government is intent on destroying those rights.  The scary thought is that it might be because of a coverup of sexual misconduct, or what I assume you and I would consider sexual misconduct.

I keep hoping that there is a rational explanation for all of this, but I fear there is not.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Anti-Blasphemy LawsRules

For John, BLUF:  The PC Police are out of hand.  Freedom, and thus democracy and economic growth, are at risk.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

Samizdata quote of the day

From Samizdata, posted by Mr Perry de Havilland (London), 15 March 2018.

Here it is:

In Britain in the 21st century you can be punished for mocking gods.  You can be expelled from the kingdom, frozen out, if you dare to diss Allah.  Perversely adopting medieval Islamic blasphemy laws, modern Britain has made it clear that it will tolerate no individual who says scurrilous or reviling things about the Islamic god or prophet.  Witness the authorities’ refusal to grant entrance to the nation to the alt-right Christian YouTuber Lauren Southern.  Her crime?  She once distributed a leaflet in Luton with the words ‘Allah is gay, Allah is trans, Allah is lesbian…’, and according to the letter she received from the Home Office informing her of her ban from Britain, such behaviour poses a ‘threat to the fundamental interests of [British] society’.

This is a very serious matter and the lack of outrage about it in the mainstream press, not least among those who call themselves liberal, is deeply disturbing.

– Brendan O’Neill

Much as I applaud The United Kingdom for moving to leave the European Union (BREXIT), I think this kind of high handedness to be appalling.

Regards  —  Cliff

Personal Freedom Requires Economic Freedom

For John, BLUF:  The more the Government controls your life, the less freedom you have.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

I Grew Up in a Communist System. Here’s What Americans Don’t Understand About Freedom

Here is the sub-headline:

Only in a free-market system can we truly achieve individual liberty and human flourishing.

From The Foundation for Economic Education, by Carmen Alexe, 9 March 2018.

Here is the lede plus three:

Individual freedom can only exist in the context of free-market capitalism.  Personal freedom thrives in capitalism, declines in government-regulated economies, and vanishes in communism.  Aside from better economic and legislative policies, what America needs is a more intense appreciation for individual freedom and capitalism.

I was born and raised in communist Romania during the Cold War, a country in which the government owned all the resources and means of production.  The state controlled almost every aspect of our lives: our education, our job placement, the time of day we could have hot water, and what we were allowed to say.

Like the rest of the Eastern European countries, Romania was often referred to as a communist country.  In school, we were taught it was a socialist country.  Its name prior to the 1989 Revolution to overthrow the Ceausescu regime was the Socialist Republic of Romania.

From an economic standpoint, a petty fraction of property was still privately owned.  In a communist system, all property is owned by the state.  So if it wasn't a true communist economy, its heavy central planning and the application of a totalitarian control over the Romanian citizenry made this nation rightfully gain its title of a communist country.

Notwithstanding Mr Karl Marx working in the British Museum, and the existence of the British Labor Party, Communism is not compatible with the Rights of Englishmen.

Regards  —  Cliff

President Hillary Clinton

For John, BLUF:  This is alternative history (alt history).  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

The Woman in the High Castle

From American Greatness, by Mr Roger Kimball, 5 March 2018.

Here is the lede plus one:

In a dystopian fantasy in The New York Times at the end of the year, the columnist Bret Stephens reminded us of the horror that might have been:

Tax cuts. Deregulation. More for the military; less for the United Nations.  The Islamic State crushed in its heartland.  Assad hit with cruise missiles.  Troops to Afghanistan.  Arms for Ukraine.  A tougher approach to North Korea.  Jerusalem recognized as Israel’s capital.  The Iran deal decertified.  Title IX kangaroo courts on campus condemned.  Yes to Keystone.  No to Paris.  Wall Street roaring and consumer confidence high. And, of course, Neil Gorsuch on the Supreme Court.

Thank God, as Stephens himself so forcefully predicted, Donald Trump was crushed in the November 2016 election and the nation was spared those and other right-wing depredations.

Instead, Hillary Rodham Clinton, in the landslide that everyone who was anyone predicted, was elected the 45th president of the United States and lost no time in fulfilling her campaign promises—and even going beyond what she had promised in many areas.

Yes, a President Hillary Clinton would be concerning.  And damaging to our Republic and our Freedoms, our Rights as Englishmen, in the name of making the nation better.

Hat tip to the InstaPundit.

Regards  —  Cliff

Fishing Expeditions

For John, BLUF:  Keeping the powers of the police within reasonable limits is important to our democracy.  Nothing to see here; just move along.

---

This is from the UK, but it is still a good point, and our sense of law and the "Rights of Englishmen" comes to us from that fabled isle.

Never mind Damian Green, do you want the cops to have this power over you?

This post to Samizdata is from Ms Natalie Solent (Essex), 1 December 2017.

Here is the lede plus one:

David Davis, the Secretary of State for Exiting the European Union has threatened to resign if Damian Green (the First Secretary of State, effectively Deputy Prime Minister) is sacked unfairly.  Why, you may ask, is Davis – a Brexiteer – willing to put Theresa May’s already shaky government at risk for the sake of a Remainer like Green?

The Guardian link above explains it better than I can:

The Brexit secretary believes his cabinet colleague is the victim of a police vendetta and made it clear to Theresa May that he would be willing to leave the government if he felt Green had been unfairly treated.

The threat emerged only hours after a former Metropolitan police detective came forward with fresh claims implying that Green himself had been viewing pornography found on his workplace computer when police raided his Commons office in November 2008.

Green was a shadow Home Office minister at the time and was under investigation because he had received a series of sensitive Home Office leaks.  He denies viewing pornography on his parliamentary computer.

At the time, the Conservatives were fighting some of the Labour government’s law and order measures on libertarian grounds and Davis was a strong backer of Green’s work.

Here is the thing.  We have, in our own way, become a very prudish society.  And, subpoenas have become fishing licenses.  It would be better if we limited a subpoena and the results collected from raids under a subpoena to the topic of the subpoena.

And, yes, retired policemen (and others) should not be telling tales out of school.

Regards  —  Cliff