A Good Society
If we don't want state control and coercive manipulation, what do we want? We need to pick out the best of old and new together.
Draft from Rosie:
We see that what lockdown does to people is morally wrong.
Lockdowns treat people like cattle: the government provides food, protection from disease (so they pretend) whether wanted or not, and something to occupy the time via digital technology. But people are humans and not cattle. Instead our aim is to revive, regrow and restore the societies in which we live around the places in which we live, and to reconnect people to one another within their neighbourhood.
We look to beauty as something that unites us, where beauty thrills the soul and gives meaning to life, something that is created by the interaction between the human spirit and the material world. We
pursue objective truth through logic and robust discourse. We seek high standards, competence, detailed knowledge and understanding of cause and effect, creativity, and the pursuit of personal growth and
moral goodness. We expect to live in freedom within limits, and with responsibility and trustworthiness.
By giving priority to this concept of beauty, which includes truth and logic, we can create a future, that is, a continuity that outlives us as individuals. When faced with a difficult choice, we can see more clearly the right answer.
We acknowledge the central paradox of human existence, that we are capable of the sublime and yet are deeply flawed. The truth is that appalling things happen, and somehow, through a process of
transfiguration, the truth of what happened can be included within this concept of ‘beauty that includes truth’. Through this process, wrongs no longer bind the present nor define the future, and we recognise the
hard task for those individuals affected directly or through empathy. ‘Beauty’ is not static, not set in stone, but includes a process, the perspective of time.
We look to friendship, home and family. Living within a neighbourhood, we avoid the many divisions that have caused isolation and loneliness and destruction, where all can, potentially and in theory at least, be
friends with one another. Friendship is loyal and accepting. Friends are allowed to make mistakes, and to be wrong, and to challenge those mistakes; to try again, where every day is a fresh start. This concept of friendship includes our families and our own selves.
To avoid selfish blindness, and to build a society that is nice to live in, we do not neglect compassion, yet perceive that there are practical limitations to compassion, be that want of time, space, health,
resources, energy or the realities of life. What we might wish to do, what ideals we might dream of, may have unwanted consequences and we have a responsibility to assess those consequences before we act.
We look to the ancient Common Law of England, which resembles Natural Law. It believes in the sovereignty of the individual, that is, their freedom to choose while taking responsibility for how they choose. It affirms the distinct roles of the law makers, the executive, and the law enforcers, and the citizens who hold these people and institutions to account for their actions; in particular we note that the state is separate from the police who are citizens in uniform as originally described by Robert Peel, and more recently in speeches and essays by Lord Sumption. (Refs needed)
We take responsibility for our own wellbeing and our own lives looks to healthy lifestyles and a strong immune system and to the medical approach advocated by Docs4OpenDebate, mediated by trained and caring professionals, and not one-size-fits-all application of medical interventions.
To overcome the divisions within modern society search for what unites people, what we agree on, in a constructive dialogue of common sense.
'Beauty' (which includes the ideals of right behaviour) takes priority over 'friendship' because otherwise people are led to do what is wrong, wrong for themselves and for society as a whole, for the sake of short-term ease and a quiet life. An obvious example from 2020 is the pressure on healthy people to undertake an invasive test for 'covid19' despite this being harmful to themselves and costly to society. If priorities of right and wrong had been established, people would quickly be able to see that mass testing, which has been sold to the public as a moral-good, is in fact a moral-bad.
Why Compassion must take bottom priority: otherwise we have the lure of communism and ‘kindness’ where good intentions lead to bad consequences for (a) not having been thought through, (b) being at odds with the physical reality of the material/human world, (c) lack of resources, be that physical or emotional or whatever. The unnatural elevation of compassion to the highest priority leads to the phenomenon of virtue signalling and the hypocrisy of expecting other people to make sacrifices they won’t make themselves. Life without compassion is unbearable, but it needs keeping in its place.
+ + + + + +
Paul summarises what faces us and what we need to do, first to counter our problems, second to solve them in the long-term:
“Good people have to start tacking this problem head on, otherwise the world as you and I knew it will be lost. The problem is nothing to do with a virus. The gloves have to come off now .....
.... learn something about how subversion tactics are being used to destabilise whole countries and wreck civil society”
I concur here 100%.
It is proving hard enough, in the area of the wider public, to convince people of the uselessness of the PCR tests; or that of masks; or of quarantine. But let us look ahead to a time when those battles have been won and governments have been forced to backtrack.
Four or five things are terrifying. One is the total overreach of governments, with (for example) Macron imposing a nighttime curfew even longer than that under the Nazi occupation. The monstrosity of compulsory masks even for small children and in the open air.
The second is the docility of so many of our co-citizens, some of whom have joined in the authoritarianism.
The third is the systematic suppression of criticism voiced by the best qualified and most independent scientists and the supression of protest, added to by persistent propaganda designed to cause panic. That is, suppression which has included straight censorship but also intimidation and blatant disregard for civil rights.
Against this background it makes sense to talk of a coup d’état across Western culture.
We are – will be – accused of being conspiracy theorists. But the hypothesis is substantially proven. Our detractors & opponents (or rather: enemies) have all the moral and intellectual integrity of Holocaust deniers. Indeed, with the remnants of democracy and the Enlightenment tradition being destroyed, it is a Holocaust we are facing. With a novel high-tech vaccination possibly even one that, through sterilisation, will decimate our population. The events of 1939 to 1945 in the Städtle of eastern Europe were not just massacres, but the elimination of an entire culture. It is now our culture, in both the narrower and wider senses of the word, that is being targeted for destruction.
It is not credible to attribute these developments merely to hysteria and groupthink among our governing classes and the mainstream media.
Looking to the deeper causes, we must ascertain that:
1. Our parliamentarians have failed in their most basic duties.
2. The editors and journalists of the mass media have failed in their most basic duties.
3. The courts, too, have largely failed in their most basic duties: these are now the only remaining bulwark short of raw livic, since civil disobedience is being strangled by overblown fines, themselves enforceable only by state violence.
4. Many professionals from other walks of life have failed in their most basic duties.
It is imperative that, even if the measures are ended in the next few months (and I fear they will continue), these failings be addressed. First they must be addressed by Nuremburg-style trials. Similar penalties for the guilty would also be warranted.
However, we must look to the structures which have allowed this to come to pass.
As most of you know, the design of such structues was the main topic of my 2015 German book.
We must ascertain that political parties have failed; that they subvert democracy. I have explained in detail how parliaments can be truly representative, without parties, at
We must also ascertain that there has been widespread moral collapse in the professions. There is no systematic cultivation of truthfulness. What checks & balances exist have themselves been subverted. No memory is kept alive of when individuals bravely do right, or when scoundrels commit wrong. Recourse to the law is too complicated, uncertain and protracted to offer any remedy. Poor conduct must be nipped in the bud long before it deteriorates to criminality. But there are, at present, no effective mechanisms for this. This was the task I set myself with said book. The essence in English is at http://www.klasseverantwortung.de/english (various articles there, others are on other subjects). Briefly, in moral matters each profession must be overseen by members of other professions. Morality, as largely a matter of good judgement, is also a learning process, for which rules are stepping stones, not stones for lapidation.
Anyone in a position of responsibility must fear being, by due process, being found seriously wanting in their conduct. An accountant who is leaned on to fiddle the books, a scientist who is instructed not to speak out, a medic who is told to hold their silence, a journalist who does propaganda instead of reporting – all these and more must be terrified of being subservient to the powers that be because there will be a separate power which is able to deprive them of their livelihood, whether for a while or for ever.
In particular, persons of proven bad character must be excluded from earning in a profession. We do need to reinstate the notion of evil, which is something that goes far beyond human weakness and error. What we are witnessing now is indeed evil.
In view of the failure of many high court judges to protect our civil liberties, there must afterwards be a re-examination of their legitimacy. In parts of the USA some judges are elected, which strikes me as odd. However, it must be made possible, as a kind of impeachment, for judges to be deselected by popular vote.
PAUL at Beaumont
Sunday, 13 December 2020