Slouching to Babylon

This world is full of those who seek the approval of others rather than doing what is right. They either argue from authority – the UN resolutions, court rulings, or human defined rights or they argue from relativism. Authority means that they are left trying to deal with the source of authority, and from that they may find Christ.

But relativism is worse, for it is no place to argue from. There is no wrong, nor right. There is only what is approved, as the Cranky Professor points out.

Moral relativism in all its forms says that moral principles and moral descriptions are determined and validated by human acceptance. For instance, the action of torturing children for fun is neither immutably wrong (or right) for the relativist. Whether the action is right or wrong depends on whether an individual or group of individuals approve of this behavior. If individuals accept torturing children as morally right then it is objectively morally right to do it in those instances. If an individual or group of people don’t approve of torturing children then the action is said to be wrong. Moral relativism works like William of Ockham’s Divine Command theory where virtually all types of action are not necessarily right or wrong, they are only right or wrong if someone wills them to be right or wrong. However, instead of God determining the moral code like in Ockham’s theory, for the relativist it is rather people that determine the moral code.

Understanding the notion of moral relativism should already elucidate the person with good sense why it is not a sound theory.
-- The Cranky Professor (guest post at Matt Brigg's blog)

This is as wrong as utilitarianism, or libertarianism. There is wisdom in one unifying principle. However, relativism is more wrong than others, for it will require the truth is suppressed: not all ways of living are equally right, or even equally healthy, and this must be suppressed by a stultifying bureaux or five.

The liberterian right in NZ get many things wrong, but they are right on this one. The UN has no business telling sovereign states how to regulate their immigration rules.

The darkest aspect of the Compact is Objective 17 which deals with shaping public perceptions on migration through childhood education, the media, and public information campaigns.

It implores nations to use “awareness-raising campaigns” to “inform public perceptions regarding the positive contributions of safe, orderly and regular migration”. This provides the perfect opportunity for propagandists at the Human Rights Commission to tell New Zealanders what to do and think.

The Compact would require New Zealand to “enact, implement or maintain legislation that penalises hate crimes” without specifying exactly what constitutes a hate crime. In countries where hate-speech laws have been enacted, they are being used to silence and bully political opponents. Those who define intolerance are always the last people you would ever want to have such power.

The UN also wants tougher media regulation, including by “sensitizing and educating media professionals on migration-related issues and terminology, investing in ethical reporting standards and advertising, and stopping allocation of public funding or material support to media outlets that systematically promote intolerance”. Journalists who report inconvenient facts about migration could find themselves persona non grata.
--Steven Berry, ACT, via Whale Oil

Of course, this is apparent to anyone who thinks, French included.

Along with this, the cost of living is incredibly high while salaries are painfully low, especially in larger cities like Paris. The myth of government-ordered 35 hour work weeks isn't the reality for most salaried French people. Taxes eat huge chunks of their money and the French are fed up with making the same amount in their salaries as those who don't work at all and rely on government assistance.

Parts of France are also filled with unassimilated migrants. These migrants get government assistance as well. A large part of the French are sick of paying for migrants when French people are suffering as well. There are areas that have stopped being culturally French and cities the French avoid for holidays because of the migrant problem.

In addition to this, retired people have been lodging their dissatisfaction with their retirement pensions (one woman in a video circulating around French Facebook confronts Macron about having to live off of 500€ a month) and Macron's reactions have been condescending across the board. He currently has about a 26% approval rating.

All of this started bubbling up a few weeks ago as the protests began with the gilets jaunes in November. The protests last weekend got violent. Statues at the Arc De Triomphe were broken; the Arc was defaced. In Marseille, an 80 year old woman was killed as she was closing her shutters. The police threw a tear gas canister at her window. While outside of larger cities, many police officers and firefighters are taking off their helmets and/or standing in solidarity with the gilets jaunes. There have been reports that they have also refused to shake Macron's hand and have turned their backs to government officials while serving in official capacities.

On Monday (December 2), there was a protest by the ambulances in Paris. They stood at Concorde with lights flashing and sirens sounding. Truck drivers have also showed their solidarity. They have also driven through Paris with lights flashing to show their dissatisfaction. Roads have been closed down by gilets jaunes and they are blocking access of oil in both ports and at stations. As of posting, over 650 stations are on a list of facing shortages or out of fuel. During yesterday's news cycle, many truck drivers were seen disrupting broadcasts by honking in solidarity with the gilets jaunes.

On Tuesday (December 3), the French government spoke about their plans for "appeasement" of the gilets jaunes. Their offer was to postpone the start date of 3 taxes (related to fuel). This offer has been scoffed at by the gilets jaunes, who have called it "crumbs" as the taxes haven't even been implemented yet and the offer does nothing to address the issues regarding cost of living.

Along with this, the French have begun demanding that Macron refuse to sign the UN Migration Act on December 10. This has begun appearing across the Facebook groups and events but has not been widely reported in the French media as far as I can tell.

This has culminated in everything from demands Macron step down to the creation of the 6th Republic. There are protests planned for Saturday across France. The protestors are calling the Paris protests ACT 4. They are quoting from the French National Anthem ("Aux Armes Citoyens") and planning to protest at Bastille. The medical community is also participating in the protests on Saturday.

TLDR: This is bigger than taxes. These aren't your usual French protests.

Photo by Jim Kalligas / Unsplash

Matt Briggs comments -- referring to a professor facing the sack because he deadnamed someone who wants to redefine their gender -- that the established religion will try to win us over by any means necessary.

Well, Bauer’s religion is the dominant one, in no danger of fading to a mere remnant, as is Meriwether’s. He may as well laugh. I have no wisdom to offer on the success of the lawsuit, but I can note that World War T is accelerating, as regular readers know (the phrase is Steve Sailer’s). Normal people are being persuaded bit by bit, through the blunt force trauma of repetition, to think maybe they are the ones who are insane for insisting on Reality. They (the normies) don’t think they are completely crazy yet, but they’re beginning to hold back protestations, if only a little. Propaganda works. Terror works. Our enemies never sleep.
Matt Briggs
What such forget is that by any means necessary works both ways. The Yellow Jackets in France came from such. Brexit came from such. Trump came from such.

Far better that we allow people the ability to be wrong, and preach what is right.