Reasons Why Pre-Crime Should Be Punished

A great article but I wish you used the common phrase “thought crimes”, which are a critical part of fascism: Reduce dissent by forbidding criticism of the government. The punishment starts with ridicule and escalates to doxxing, protests, character attacks, cancellations, other persecution, prosecution and lawfare, fines, imprisonment and ultimately death.

Another description is “free speech, as long as you agree with the government”

I only object to “Pre Crime” because when skimming through article titles this morning I assumed the article was about crime and I wasn’t interested.

After reading many mediocre articles, I decided that Briggs guy is a smart guy, so I wondered what he had to say about crime. That’s when I found out this article was about government control and censorship of contrary beliefs. A subject I am studying and discussing in 2024 as a result of finding out that just being Donald Trump has become a felony in several states and DC.

Didn’t Jimmy Carter admit he’d felt “lust in his heart”?

Yes! Sound idea Briggs! We have lots of charts and statistics and historical data demonstrating that politicians are more ‘at-risk’ of pre-crime, and then actual crime! We can even create a model! They love those! And the model will be calibrated carefully to say Arif Virani is going to be a hate-criminal! It’s a near certainty that someday he will! And so will so many others!

This Arif fella sounds like someone who’ll one day soon scream “Free Palestine!” and blow up the Israeli Embassy! Or at least push a kippa-wearer on the street. Search their online social media history and start making accusations in public, NOW! We must go after them! I am offended already!

DO NOT STOP! HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE!

Brian: “Didn’t Jimmy Carter admit he’d felt ‘lust in his heart’?”

In the current era, that would only be a crime if he were to be so transphobic as to say his lusts did not extended to men who pretend to be women.

I’ve pretty much reached the point that talk is useless. We’ve known all this for centuries
from Nebuchadnezzar II to Mao and history is simply repeating itself today. Face it the normal
condition of humanity is slavery and complacency. As long as the caloric intake is maintained
just above starvation levels humanity is prepared to suffer any number of indignities and insult.
The only time you will really have problems is when you’re punitively starved for months in the
gulag. This will only occur a decade after they’ve completely destroyed the market economy and
have their boot firmly in place on your throat. Americans will meekly disarm when the SWAT
team shows up. As it is insurrectionists get a shower a week and 2700 calories a day; life is good.
If you want to see the future watch what is happening in China today as their partners in crime
deconstruct society and return it Maoism. They’ve stolen so much that now have to steal everything.
The good news with compliance that chip in your brain will ease the pain and your navel gazing days
are behind you. It’s an amazing thing people still don’t see this freight train coming and they’ll be even
more puzzled when it arrives at their station.

Brian: “Didn’t Jimmy Carter admit he’d felt ‘lust in his heart’?”

In the current era, that would only be a crime if he were to [] say his lusts did not extended to other men, much less men who pretend to be women or women who pretend to be men.

One must not discriminate on account of sex OR gender identity. Such as we’ve been ordered to comply…

Ann

My comment got eaten, I’ll try again:

It’s my understanding that in addition to a lengthy prison sentence, possibly life in prison, the Thought Criminal will be forced to pay a fine of $70K, with $50K going to The State and $20K going to the accuser, as a reward or finder’s fee for turning in their neighbor. Furthermore, the accuser will be allowed to remain anonymous.

Political Conflict in the Age of Psychic Warfare

A recent piece from eugyppiusshows what this looks like at the level of an individual state: Germany announces wide-ranging plans to restrict the speech, travel and economic activity of political dissidents, in order to better control the “thought and speech patterns” of its own people. Germany is essentially an American vassal state: while the DDR might have been liberated from the USSR after it withdrew and then collapsed, the Bundesrepublik is still very much under American occupation, ruled on behalf of Washington by satraps who maintain a fig leaf of democratic sovereignty. eugyppius’ piece is a close-up, state-level view of what the German branch of the globalist entity has planned for the next phase of the Great Shuttening. ‘Right-wing extremists’, which simply means ‘opponents of the Regime’, are to have their lives interfered with in a myriad of ways. They’re to be excised entirely from social media. They’re to be banned from international travel. Their businesses – restaurants, web development agencies, trucking firms, whatever – are to be regulated into bankruptcy via weaponization of the supposedly apolitical arms of the administrative state. They’re to be denied banking services, and thus frozen out of the economy, unable to transact. If necessary, their political parties – in the case of Germany, the populist Alternative für Deutschland – are to be banned and forcibly dissolved.

This type of lawfare and administrative harassment is not specific or original to Germany (nor, of course, does eugyppius claim that it is). American authorities have been punishing dissidents with the no-fly list for years; many have suggested that the no-fly list has been an effective means of pressuring dissident thought leaders to turn Federal informant or agent. Travel restrictions were also used as a pressure tactic in Canada, where Canadian citizens who refused the gene therapy injections were prohibited from boarding aircraft or boats; since the US border was closed to the unshot, medical dissidents were de facto prevented from leaving Canada entirely. Bank account freezes were used against the Canadian Freedom Convoy, and debanking has also been used in the United Kingdom, most infamously in the case of UKIP leader Nigel Farage, although he is far from the only case. As to mobilization of the regulatory apparatus, the hostile use of the Internal Revenue Service against Republican-aligned organizations and businesses was established practice under the Obama administration.

Clampdowns on speech are also being actively pursued throughout the Western world. In the United States, where the First Amendment provides nominal protection for speech, the Biden administration is attempting to imprison Douglass Mackey under the pretext of ‘election interference’. Twitter anon L0m3z provides the infuriating details of this farcical prosecution in If Memes Are Illegal, All Speech Will Become Illegal. Mackey has been indicted under a law developed for use against the Ku Klux Klan for making a joke that, the state is arguing, deterred people from voting; even more absurd is that the Florida resident was dragged into the unfriendly venue of a New York City court, with the state’s excuse being, essentially, that Twitter is available in New York City. If Mackey’s appeal fails, the Regime will have set the precedent that essentially any speech can prosecuted as ‘election interference’, in whichever venue the Regime feels will be friendliest to its case.

Anglosphere countries that lack Constitutional protections for speech are seeing the development of legal frameworks designed to ban ‘hate speech’, a vaguely defined term that means ‘speech the Regime hates’. In the United Kingdom it’s become common for the police to knock on people’s doors to give them a talking-to for online ‘non-crime hate incidents’, while many have been dragged into court for crossing this line. In Ireland, the government has introduced a bill that would make it illegal merely to have ‘hateful content’ on one’s hard drive. As Chris Braydescribes in Earth to Canada, the Trudeau government has introduced a bill that will make convictions for online hate speech punishable by life imprisonment.

As eugyppius shows with unambiguous quotes from Regime apparat-chicks, all of these measures are quite explicitly intended to fence off discourse in order to control the inner psychic landscape of the population, moulding it into a shape amenable to Regime goals. To take the example of prosecutions for hate speech or election interference, it seems unlikely that the Regime has the resources to remand every malcontent who mouths off on the Internet to Federal custody; instead, the intent is intimidation, making a high-profile example of a few in order to encouragez les autres to preemptively silence themselves.

Curation of the public discourse makes a self-referential parody of democracy: the legitimacy of the Regime nominally rests upon the will of the People, but the will of the People is whatever the Regime wills the people to will. In a sense, this has been the case in industrial technocracies more or less since their inception. Whoever controls the organs of opinion formation – the news and entertainment media, the schools, the universities – controls the mass mind, and therefore controls politics. The openly totalitarian regimes of the Democratic People’s Republics did this blatantly, with direct state management of the press and the academy; the more subtle liberal democracies did this behind the scenes, with nominally independent, private media and universities manipulated via back-channel communications, government grants, intelligence agency inserts (e.g. Project Mockingbird) and so on. The Great Shuttening is partly a reaction to the loss of influence of these legacy institutions, and a panicked attempt to assert control over the unruly many-to-many communications networks that have been displacing them.

https://barsoom.substack.com/p/political-conflict-in-the-age-of

And therefore, the most vital step of the Reconquista, our Global Holy Crusade, will be to take back the holy lands of academics, the press, and all educational institutions and put them back under the rule of the Catholic Church.

Who will decide what hate speech is? I once wrote, in response to a comment on Quora, the seemingly benign sentence, “Women are not oppressed.” That’s all. Quora suspended me for “hate speech”. The woke live in a world carpeted with eggshells.

Let us embrace it!

Pre-Crime & associated punishement quite clearly establishes the precedent for considering as reality, pre-reality. And, naturally, as with pre-crime, pre-reality brings with it all the consequences that we would typically associate only with reality.

For instance, I am a pre-billionaire….as are most of you, I’d guess. But as pre-billionaires, we should be due all the associated accolades and spending abilities that any post-billionaire would actually have. That means, of course, that we’d receive actual, real bills for spending like an actual/real billionaire, but luckily we’d be able to pay those bills with pre-income.

I mean, what could be better than that?

If pushed to actually transfer real funds, we could always claim to be pre-dead and thereby transfer all our existing debts to our pre-inheritance kids.

A very cool idea now that I think about it.

But enough thinking. I’m gonna get a ticket to Vegas and celebrate my pre-starting QB role in pre-winning next year’s superbowl! After all, if I actually wait to be named the starting QB and then wait to actually win it, heck — I’m pre-dead already, I can’t afford to wait!

Very clever! The Canadian government won’t have to pay for concentration camps. They’ll just use our own dwellings, and fine us for the privilege.

“But the bill stops short of introducing age verification for porn sites to stop children accessing explicit adult material.”
Wheew, at least we can protect people who encourage children to mutilate themselves.

(1) The Human Rights act now has this provision: “(1), a person communicates or causes to be communicated hate speech so long as the hate speech remains public and the person can remove or block access to it.”
Everything you have EVER said that might offend someone is now permanently subject to sanction

“(8)?The Commission may deal with a complaint in relation to a discriminatory practice described in section 13 without disclosing, to the person against whom the complaint was filed or to any other person, the identity of the alleged victim, the individual or group of individuals that has filed the complaint ”
They can ANONYMOUSLY file complaints

They are Amending the Youth Criminal justice act “810.?012 (recognizance — fear of hate propaganda offence or hate crime)Insertion end” FEAR of ate propaganda? By a youth? Talk about putting weapons into the hands of children.
On the subject of complexity, this paragraph goes onto say “If the young person fails or refuses to enter into a recognizance referred to in any of those sections, the court may impose any one of the sanctions set out in subsection 42(2) etc etc”

Who can keep up with this except someone with a victim consciousness? What they are trying to establish is that Canada is not a nation and laws are being crafted to ensure that cannot be reversed. We have 1 million foreign born students living here. But don’t let that fool you: This country will self-segregate. It’s not because we’re not nice. It’s because that’s what I’m seeing see in a multinational society.

My primary concern with legislation like this are the terms of art like “discrimination” or “hate”. What precisely does that mean? These are implicitly words that allude to “systemic” problems.
Personally, I think the actions of Canada

I really must keep closer tabs on Canadian Parliament and Senate activity. It is an impossible job. The text of these bills are full of amendments to other bills which adds complexity in interpreting them. I think many of you can understand why I believe the more complicated our legislation becomes, the more subject it is to arbitrary enforcement. Now we must furthermore understand WHO is enforcing these laws in any given areal

https://www.ourcommons.ca/ https://openparliament.ca/ for the federal government alone includes all the testimony, all the debates, all the briefs.

The real difficulty is in keeping track of the cumulative effect of all the Amendments. One of the most egregious pieces of legislation Is the Canada Equity Employment act.

The original act was in place since 1995, but changes were made to it that not only made affirmative action mandatory, all federally regulated businesses were subject to audits to ensure there was “proportionate” representation from all non-white male groups. It would be up to enforcement to decide whether to make that determination based on the overall population or the population in the workforce.

Furthermore, in meeting these standards, retainment would have be considered by offering raises and promotions.