As IF Times

A few months ago, an ‘organic’, but somehow well orchestrated national protest consumed all the media headlines with the catchy slogan of  ‘No Kings’.  This of course was not a protest against kings per se, but was targeting the policies of one individual they considered to be acting as a king, that is, Donald Trump.

It sounds good; a protest against someone who autocratically imposes his will upon his subjects and who restricts the rights and privileges of his people.  But as in all protest movements by the left, there is usually more thought put in to creating the jingoistic war cry than the actual substance of the underlying cause.  Take for example, Black Lives Matter, a movement intended to galvanize a particular constituency politically but which was entirely non-sensical.  In reality, the movement was all about Black Lives Better and this movement was used as a sledgehammer to cow the larger population against pushing back against obvious racial crimes.  Objective crime statistics over decades showed that Blacks were disproportionately represented in crime statistics as a percentage of population.  This fact is blithely ignored by the deluded movement.

On to the No Kings protest.  Recently, the present Regent of the UK, King Charles, paid a state visit to the United States, a former vassal colony but one that turfed the Brits in an independence war exactly 250 years ago.  In fact, this can be considered the preeminent No Kings protest because the colonies decided that they really did not care for the way the Kings and Queens were running things, especially by imposing non representative taxation and thus they fought a war to have…no kings.

America was the first nation ever in history to endow its own citizens with the ability to rise to the level of their own efforts, without the advantage of birthright as has been (and still is) the case in most nations until then.  Mere citizens could be elected to high office solely on their appeal to their constituents, not because they happened to be the scions of rich dudes from past conquests.

The very notion of someone being entitled to rights, privileges, wealth and power just because their ancestors won some battles centuries ago is absurd in this modern age….or should be.  Most monarchs today live their privileged lives solely through the support of taxes by their loyal subjects and are largely ceremonial in their positions, much like vases in a curios cabinet…and just as useful. They really are human museum pieces representing an archaic history which, while amusing, is of no real consequence to anyone today.  Of course, people still sit in rapt attention when these regents make a well-crafted speech, but the fact is, it’s like consulting a magic 8 ball as far as any real wisdom is concerned.

Let’s pick on King Charles as an example. On his recent visit to the United States, he made a speech about the historical connection between the UK and the United States and their shared history and traditions.  This is somewhat reminiscent of a spouse talking about their romantic history before the acrimonious divorce.  Many residual royalists swooned in reverence at his articulate delivery as compared to the oaf sitting in the President’s office.

The reality was that the visit was not a social call.  It was a personal plea to have the United States continue to deliver military funding to the European cause since the Europeans are in dire straits.  Under Charle’s watch, the UK’s influence had collapsed in the realms of industry, of trade and of the military.  Their role as a finance capital is in serious jeopardy. The nation itself is on the verge of civil war not helped by the King’s embrace of Muslims.  This civil war will be inflamed by the speech made by Charles in the weeks after his visit announcing that the UK will implement nationwide digital ID’s.  Apparently, this was so that ‘everyone would be equal’.  This might have been taken more seriously had he not been wearing a jewel encrusted crown, wearing an ermine cape, sitting on the regal throne.

The pearl clutchers and hand wringers in the United States are in perma critique mode as to their own nation without understanding that the US is still the freest nation on earth.  This is in no part due to the help of globalists who are tirelessly trying to bring their own brands of kings and queens with their associated levels of inequality back to the US.

We can see this brand of ‘Royal’ behavior in the nation to the north, Canada, still a vassal state to Britain. We can observe that elections are manipulated, certain people are given more rights than others and speech is increasingly being stifled with the help of compliant state media.  They even have the King’s representative whose position is like the vase in the cabinet mentioned earlier but nonetheless commands a royal salary, allowance, housing and oh, a pension for life, informing the public that they need to tighten their belts. Where are the No Kings protestors?

The public have hopefully become fatigued by the protest flavor of the day, telling them how and what to think. The collapse of credibility of mass media has made the bleats of the day as just so much noise.  Ironically, they are correct in this particular bleat, they just targeted wrongly.  We don’t need Kings.

One of the most common justifications for any and most political policies today is that such implementation is to ensure ‘safety’. This seems to be the method by which all politicians have figured out is a means of passing laws which would otherwise be unpalatable.

The most famous justification came in the aftermath of the attacks on New York in 2001.  Following the discovery of a would be terrorist who apparently had hidden a bomb in his shoe, the entire planet started a protocol of airport security screening which exists to this day.  Thus began a couple of decades of shoe removal, x-ray scanning and pat downs at airport terminals. Though there has been no record of any further terrorist efforts thwarted by such security, millions of nail clippers and water bottles have been confiscated.  But the procedure has taken a life of its own as everyone routinely accepts the procedure because it’s for their safety.  Thus, a muti-billion dollar bureaucracy is now an essential part of daily life.  Only now, it’s become worse, because now, electronic iris scans are virtually mandatory…for your safety.

As recently as only a few years ago, the world was paralyzed by an apparently dangerous virus which necessitated draconian measures of isolation and protection for…your safety.  Regardless of how non-sensical or invasive the protocols were, people were obliged to follow the new safety rules to be able to move about in society.  As the ensuing years have passed, it’s become evident just how preposterous those edicts were.  Recall standing six feet apart at the airline counter, but then only to sit elbow to armpit next to someone on the plane for 5 hours.  Or to mask up upon entering a restaurant, but then able to de-mask once seated.

Related to this was the over the top response to peaceful protesters in Ottawa who didn’t happen to agree with the government’s draconian edicts.  Police were sent out to trample protestors…for their safety.

When politicians run for office, they are often known to invoke the ‘for your safety’ card in proposing new rules just to live in society, as if they were protecting people from some cataclysmic danger.  We will soon see the push for central bank digital currencies…to protect the public of course.  We now have cars that monitor your driving habits…again for public safety.

How did civilization survive through the eons without pearl clutchers restraining us at every opportunity?  I can make the argument that this is a phenomenon related to females and female leaders.  The very idea of safety resonates more with the female populace than it does for males.  It is not in the nature of most men to do things based on the safety of a particular action. I will wager that everything from seatbelts to helmets and airbags have at their roots an appeal to women’s notions of safety.  If you’ve ever shopped for any baby product, safety is the number one selling feature above all.

Men don’t generally worry about safety as it relates to ascending or descending a mountain.  Safety doesn’t hold them back from exploring new lands or to go up in a rocket to other planets.  Safety doesn’t hold them back from spending vast sums on capital projects and risky ventures.  In the grand scheme of things, all great things have been accomplished by doing things outside of the confines of safety.   Civilization is not about safety.

But somehow over the years, the overriding aspect of ‘safety’ is baked into so much of our everyday lives that innovation and freedom are stifled, leading to a flaccid and fearful society.   Where?  Well Canada is a prime example of a smothering nanny culture.  The present environment of creeping big government has been increasingly responsible for the dearth of innovation and ambition.  Young, ambitious people are leaving to more hospitable nations. According to Statistics Canada, record numbers of people are leaving Canada within 2 years of arriving.  Of course there are other issues as well such as high housing costs, but much of that could be mitigated by policies aimed at growth instead of protectionism and alarmism.  Protecting everything under the guise of safety leads to a stagnant nation which will not grow and will in fact shrink.

Masculine sensibilities must return.  There has to be a preference for growth and risk taking in order for any civilization to progress.  Looking backwards and being fearful of every path taken will lead to insular and stagnant societies.  We don’t need to be protected at every step in our lives.  We have become prisoners of the safety lie.

Maybe the pundits were right. Maybe the guardrails should be taken off to cull the herd of the terminally inept.

Addendum.  Just a day after this was published, Senator Tammi Duckworth urges re-instatement of shoes off policy at airport security points. They are caricatures of themselves.