Showing posts with label fascism. Show all posts
Showing posts with label fascism. Show all posts

Sunday, 9 December 2012

CANADIAN FASCISM IN THE NAME OF HEALTH, SAFETY AND SECURITY


''Writer/Director Kevin P. Miller (GENERATION RX) exposes how Canadians are being stripped of their personal sovereignty by government agencies — and how free trade deals and other international agreements imperil Canadian democracy.''

Friday, 23 September 2011

GUEST POST - COLLUSION

Guest Post from Andrew Phillips - Ontario Libertarian Party 

Collusion 

USA Today Article

As Jonah Goldberg points out in a book you should all read Liberal Fascism , ".. perhaps the best modern example of fascism at work is the collusion of government and the tobacco companies". In the 90's the tobacco companies were demonized for selling "the only product which, if used properly, will kill you". Bill Clinton and Al Gore staked vast amounts of political capital in their war against "Big Tobacco".

Out of this environment sprang forth the - unconstitutional - tobacco settlement whereby "Big Tobacco" agreed to pay $246 billion to state governments. They were also forced to take out ads disparaging their own products and pay for educational efforts to dissuade children from ever becoming their customers. The reason, quite simply, is that it was in their interests. They not only had their lawsuits settled; they bought approval of a new illegal cartel. "Big Tobacco" raised prices above the costs imposed by the settlement; guaranteeing a tidy profit.

Smaller companies who did not agree to the settlement are still forced to make large escrow payments. When these firms started to thrive; cutting into the market share of the big tobacco companies ; state governments jumped in and ordered them to make even larger payments . The government in effect enforces a system by which small businesses are crushed in order to maintain the high profits of "Big Tobacco".

Now you might think this is all fine. But how - exactly - is this a free market approach? How - exactly - is this unlike the corporatism of Fascist Italy, Nazi Germany, and Hugh Johnson's NRA? They have done this before folks and it worked once before so they're doing it again. So ignore the cries of rage from Big Tobacco they're in on the game. And for the sake of your children and their future read the book.

Andrew Phillips

Wednesday, 7 September 2011

BRAVE NEW WORLD - HATCHERIES ANYONE?

The Daily Mail in the UK reports that four children will be taken away from their family risking to never see them again because they are fat and the parents failed to follow the health board’s ultimatum to bring their children’s weight under control.

If the article is accurate and truthful, how can such drastic measures possibly be justified? What good will it do the children if they can no longer see their parents? Not one word in that article about any of the children suffering illnesses because of their weight. According to the article, this decision seems to be based on weight alone. Irrelevant to the Health Department whether that extra weight makes the kids sick now, in the future or never. If the kids are healthy, why would the Health Department choose to cause severe psychological trauma to the children that they will undoubtedly carry all their lives, to perhaps save them from a future illness that might or might not happen? If not outright eugenics, this health board's decision frighteningly resembles it.

Some of the 1005 comments from the readers attempt to compare overweight with underweight and seem to suggest that nobody would have criticized the social workers if the kids were being starved to death by their parents. But there is no possible comparison. Starving a child qualifies as deliberate harm and abuse because it causes certain and immediate harm as opposed to obesity that might possibly cause harm if it persists for long periods of time. Comparing apples to apples, would it be justifiable for the health board to remove a child from his parents if the child was skinny yet he showed no signs of ill health? Not having the ideal weight is not a disease in itself, only a risk factor. If we were to remove children from their loving parents for every risk they take while their children are in their custody, the government would have more children under their care than they would possibly have the resources to handle. Brave New World hatcheries anyone?

The only encouraging sign about this story is that most commentators are outraged at the Health Department’s decision, as they should be.