"Failing democracy before democracy fails you"

Today is the first anniversary of the Jeppestown Massacre

A moment of news last year that otherwise is meaningless.

It represents an event. Four Police workers died. About three times that number of bad persons died, in a hours long shootout that following an abortive robbery be an incompetent heist gang.

I suppose one could argue that if three times the number of bad guys die for each good guy the world will eventually run out of bad guys: unless the ratio of bad guys to good guys is four to one or five to one or more likely nowadays about a hundred to one.

This is the core Achilles heel weakness of a democratic system modelled on the lines of the more open hearted so-called “liberal ethic.”  All political systems are flawed and ours is no exception so when I see a banner headline that says “Failing democracy before democracy fails you.” I have to comment on the issue of social cause given as the motivation for the headline. The writer of the M&G headline thasst fuelled this blog suggests that more social causes of crime should be explored. There are those who believe that what he calls tough measures are far too soft.

What are “social causes” and should they be given special attention as an excuse for excusing the otherwise inexcusable: “I’m sorry. I couldn’t help murdering that little baby. I had a hard life. I was abused and I needed the money because my dysfunctional past left me without any, nor the non-killing skills to acquire some. Oh boo hoo…. Save me.”

The argument against goes: “Well fuck you…!”

Treat em harsh but do it nicely.

 The problem for the first group … the so called “Bleeding heart liberals.” Is that unpleasant crime seems to be on the up and up. One home of this philosophy over the past six decades  sees a place like Britain reeling under social unrest amongst the working classes in the form of binge drinking and so called “Yob” behaviour. Decades of “niceness” has bred a society that is apparently,  in large part, dysfunctional. [What does this mean this “Dysfunctional?”]

If this policy of being “nice” to the poor and the indigent; and indulgent to the recalcitrant was going to work, in the sense of creating a more caring society, then it has plainly failed. This means that one either has to become more indulgent of those who transgress, on the grounds that it will take many generations to create ‘nicer’ people. Or, accept that people don’t change and giving them latitude merely feeds their sense of being right all along. The political climate seems to be moving away from that more indulgent route. It is possible that we are witness to the cracking. We begin to crack an ever ready whip.

However as usual the whip is being cracked against the good guys. Consider how the present regime is making it more and more difficult for a private citizen to legitimately own a handgun [while making it possible for the bad guy to own many].

In the same way the new censorship authority created under the new Publications Act is bullying the art movie-loving citizen.

Some new Puritan has decided that an award winning movie dealing with the scourge of child abuse and misogynistic behaviour, “The Bog of Beasts” by a Brazilian film production company which was due to be shown at an Arts Festival at a coastal city is evil, reveals scenes that could apparentlty promotye paedophilia and therefopre must be banned ffrom sight..

This is the first act in the new censorship regime that will gradually snuff out the voice of freedom, heralded by the event of 27 April 1994. [see my blog: the Zanufication of it all]. In the same way that freedom is not advanced by disarming the citizen, no society has ever became more liberated by censoring what citizens may read or think.

This Publications Act has been amended to drive sex and corruption out of consciousness: it is a move by the nannies who have come to haunt our later lives. Meanwhile out there child rape is an epidemic one is told and apparently all other forms of rape are pretty high on the hit parade of crime, along with murder and general brutality. All of this criminal activity was occurring on a considerable scale, apparently, in the bad days of the former evil regime when censorship rules made even this present modest move towards the abyss seem pedestrian so one can hardly blame the material for causing an upsurge in violence against women and children. [The new regime frequently uses the notion that criminal activity was widespread in the Dispossession era when all this porno stuff was banned and banned and banned. So this makes it hard to justify the notion that the presence of porn promotes rape and sodomy.]

We need to be vigilant to see whether stopping a handful of serious movie buffs from getting a fix in the Bog of Beasts actually results in a fourfold decrease in the aforementioned crimes.

Viva real bloggers

The Blogospherian.