Texas: Citizens Spying on One Another: Remember Communism?
I'd hate to guess how many times in human history governments kept control of people by having their own secret spies scattered around among ordinary citizens. It must be the most common form of control ever devised.
Communism, at least what we heard about here in the West, was all about this, Communist cells were formed. They covered every neighborhood. Operating at their best every citizen had someone watching them for signs of disloyalty. Russia had them, China, Cuba and so on.
While I don't claim to know much about the French Revolution, the fictional portrayal in Tale of Two Cities had the revolutionaries watching in neighborhoods. In the story the spy was a lady who ran a wine shop.
In the book, 1984, the government watched and reported on everyone.
In a report today, Christianpost.com published a story that seemed to imply something incorrectly. Christianpost loves stories about persecuted Christians. Somewhere a story that two elderly men who are Christian clergy were arrested in the East African country of Eritrea. The story said it was due to persecution of Christians.
Looking into to it, however, we learn Christianity is the dominant religion in Eritrea. Suspicion turns to the type of government there. There has never been an election of a President or Parliament. It has always been run as a dictatorship.
The dictatorship's means of holding control over its people is one of citizen spies placed in every nook and cranny of its population, There are roughly five million people in Eritrea but even at that size it dictatorship has been able to maintain absolution control.
Anti abortion zealots of Texas, and across the U.S., are delighted with the law passed there. It rewards any citizen who turns in another citizen that helped a woman get an abortion.
Any of us not consumed by anti abortion politics should be very alarmed at the communist/dictatorship policy endorsed by the Texas legislators and Governor.
Yet, California lost a Congressional seat in the latest census period while Texas gained 2 seats. It seems Texas is an attractive State. Even women migrate to Texas in great numbers. Do you expect an exodus of Texas women after this piece of law? I don't. It couldn't be you are fearmongering?!
ReplyDeleteYes. This is the part of the law that I zeroed in on, and I think I posted about it here previously. This is the reason why the concept of "cause of action" exists. In order to sue in civil court, a plaintiff must first provide a statement alleging personal damages. That is the bare minimal requirement for a civil suit.
ReplyDeleteSince that doesn't exist, the law is un-enforceable.
What we've learned about these types of "bounty" laws in the past is that they are extremely effective at bringing innocent people to justice. That happens to be an extremely effective way to eliminate opposition.
That's the way North Korea does it, anyway.
It looks like the Chicago Mayor agrees with me on how to fight crime, i.e. with criminal prosecution and lawsuits.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.foxnews.com/us/chicago-gun-violence-mayor-lori-lightfoot-bloodshed-gangs
There is a "cause of action" if someone has been harmed. Gangs harm. Drugs harm, Abortion harms.
Matt "Abortion harms."
DeleteBut, we are to celebrate the doctors who performed abortions that were killed by anti abortion crazies, right?
So the City of Chicago will be suing the gangs for a redress of damages caused by the gangs to the City. Sounds logical and plausible.
DeleteEmpowering citizens to sue gangs when there are no direct damages against the citizens who are bringing the lawsuit falls outside of the jurisdiction of a civil court.
In other words, if I rob Peter, Paul can't sue me for it.
questions for Jon. how many abortion docs have been killed by pro-life crazies? 1,000? 10,000? five maybe? who is cerebrating the death of those five or so? how many women have been severely harmed by abortion docs? a few hundred probably? of course the last question doesn't figure in the calculus: pro-life people always lie about such things? Jon, tho' is a sterling teller of truth?
ReplyDeletetsm "how many women have been severely harmed by abortion docs? a few hundred probably?"
ReplyDeleteThere you go your well oiled false and misleading hints. You are making an indirect statement that having an abortion is dangerous. Statistically, having an abortion is safer than giving birth. Doesn't your religion frown on lying?
tsm -- I should not have assumed you were lying. There is another alternative, you are very uninformed. Here is an article which explains the facts, pregnancy is more dangerous than abortion. https://www.salon.com/2021/09/11/pregnancy-is-much-more-dangerous-than-abortion-meaning-abortion-bans-like-texas-will-be-deadly/
ReplyDeleteso it's OK to seriously harm a few on the assumption that there would be greater harm if pregnancies were brought to term. the point is that abortion is not as safe as folks like you would tell us that it is. and Salon is trusted medical journal? that's news to me. you keep harping on the dangers of birth issue. now, please tell the world what, in medical practice today, makes birth so hazardous. maybe in Louis IX's day your claim would be demonstrably true. but today. let's have some hard facts, not PP propaganda.
Deletetsm "...and Salon is a trusted medical journal?" The numbers quoted were from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). They are 0.44 deaths from abortion for 100,000 abortions. For births it is 20.1 per 100,000 births. Not even close. I've asked you so many times, and I'm asking again, please don't use this space for making ridiculous statements.
ReplyDeleteChildbirth is somewhat dangerous and, for the sake of argument, more dangerous than abortion in terms of maternal mortality. So, your solution is wiping out the human species because it is safer!? Even Joe Biden is mumbling to himself that you make no sense.
ReplyDeleteMatt "So, your solution is wiping out the human species because it is safer?" I've found a way to push your buttons and those of others anti abortion zealots. It is to point out a claim pro lifers have made for decades is absolutely false. For decades they have claimed abortions are dangerous to women and women should avoid them for their own safety. Now we know that is false. Giving birth is far more dangerous. If one presents that fact certain anti abortion zealots get all red in the face and rage here.
DeleteUsing Jon's so-called logic as it might pertain to cancer and guns. If we just shot people in the head when they were diagnosed with cancer we could wipe out cancer deaths overnight. If we just aborted every pregnant woman once she became pregnant we could wipe out maternal mortality due to pregnancy and childbirth. Brilliant. I know why I didn't think of that at first. You're a genius, Jon. I am in the presence of a big thinker.
ReplyDelete