Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Antipodes's avatar

Masks are a visual sign of compliance. That is their true strength, the ability of random strangers to assess you visually.

I reckon you were too polite when asked "Where is your mask"?

I had 2 responses

1 - hard, firm, but polite "NO". That's it, no other words needed. Used if the asker was uncertain or polite about asking. They usually gave up and moved on.

2 - firm and menacing "Fuck Off". That was for mask nazi's exercising their power of new found intimidation. They usually tried something else to back their power, upon which a 2nd "Fuck Off" generally popped their self importance bubble.

But at all times, when moving maskless, do it confidently, and with purpose. If you get the stink eye, stare them down with your best "you want to challenge me?" look.

I gave up trying to explain how useless the mask was after I realised and important rule of thumb.

The level of interaction with MSM and Social Media was/is proportional to their belief in the mask. Try that assessment on the people you know who went maskless, you will be surprised at the correlation.

Expand full comment
Fager 132's avatar

"We can’t have every individual make up their own mind about following the law. That’s not how the law works."

Here in the US, at its founding, that was exactly how the law worked. Every adult American was expected to understand that freedom was man's birthright and to understand how proposed laws either respected or violated his rights. There was never an expectation that people would docilely sit around until a court told them whether they were free or not. The premise was that they already were, by their very nature as human beings. The people were expected to know that.

The Founders were very clear about it in their writings: "If a law is unjust, a man is not only right to disobey it, he is obligated to do so." "There is nothing that will destroy liberty more than a prevailing opinion that it is better tamely to submit than nobly assert and vindicate our privileges." "An act of usurpation is not obligatory; it is not law, and any man may be justified in his resistance." "The violation of a law does not constitute a crime where the law is bad." "That which is not just, is not law; and that which is not law, ought not to be obeyed." "The limits of tyrants are prescribed by the endurance of those whom they oppress." And: "Men cannot be enslaved politically until they have been disarmed ideologically. When they are so disarmed, it is the victims who take the lead in the process of their own destruction."

That 90% who took off the slave rags at the first opportunity: They're both the victims and their own destroyers. No one rules if no one obeys. Your presumptive rulers in Australia understand that. They are cashing in on your ideological disarmament. The aphorism among American gun owners is that guns don't kill people. People kill people. What Americans have forgotten is that paper doesn't guarantee their rights. People guarantee their rights and they do it through defiance and non-compliance. It's awkward? It's embarrassing? It's painful? Yes. But the alternative is worse, because compliance just makes the boot on your neck stomp harder. The time to say "no" is now, before saying "no" requires risking more than just awkwardness: before it requires risking your life.

Expand full comment
13 more comments...

No posts