This is San Francisco this morning, a veritable hellscape.
Make of it what you will,
LSP
In England, from Monday, we are introducing the rule of 6. You must not meet socially in groups of more than 6 - and if you do, you will be breaking the law.— Boris Johnson (@BorisJohnson) September 9, 2020
We must do what is necessary to stop the spread of the virus and save lives. pic.twitter.com/tKWa9sK1wr
Johnny Cash Version SOUND ON pic.twitter.com/ZBkQ3VG0Yy— Robert Philmore (@PhilmoreRobert) September 6, 2020
The mob is acting in the confident knowledge that ‘the law’ (establishment, media, etc.) will allow them free reign. The diners are reluctant (even those too few who are capable) to react offensively in the sure knowledge that ‘they’ will be arrested.
The predictable outcome is that: 1) the mob ‘will’ escalate (as the Stanford experiments demonstrated) until someone is seriously injured or killed ; and/or 2) the victims will contain somebody, or more likely a group, who are both physically and (more importantly) mentally capable and who feel their life (or those of loved ones) are at risk, they have no options left, and who then react.
People, thankfully, are not generally capable of deliberately severely harming others. You need to either be ‘an exception’ (ie. mentally ill) or be ‘conditioned’ to do so (not surprisingly the ‘scrappers’ and ‘brawlers’ of adolescence, “guilty M’Lord”, already partially conditioned are much more easily trained). The mobs are not just working through that conditioning process, but are being allowed, even encouraged, to do so consequence free.
Are you, and all the rest of the ‘normals’ out there, ready and willing to face that demon? Ask any military vet, whose been ‘up close and personal’, and they’ll tell you, you really, really aren’t (yet). (Are you, not just willing, but capable of emulating a particular favourite [and toasted in the mess on more than one occasion] of that Ranger who, in an ultimate life/death struggle, stabbed the insurgent to death with ‘his MRE spoon’? It's not the weapon, it's the man wielding it.).
It’s why young Mr. Rittenhouse impressed me so much. The aplomb, the deliberate assurance of a much more experienced man in a definitive ‘it’s raining a$$holes’ situation, indicates to me he’s one of Heredotus’ 1%. Most will not react even close to so well … without a lot more training.
Men fail so often to repent their real sins that the occasional repentance of an imaginary sin might appear almost desirable. But what actually happens (I have watched it happening) to the youthful national penitent is a little more complicated than that. England is not a natural agent, but a civil society. When we speak of England’s actions we mean the actions of the British government. The young man who is called upon to repent of England’s foreign policy is really being called upon to repent the acts of his neighbor; for a foreign secretary or a cabinet minister is certainly a neighbor. And repentance presupposes condemnation. The first and fatal charm of national repentance is, therefore, the encouragement it gives us to turn from the bitter task of repenting our own sins to the congenial one of bewailing—but, first, of denouncing—the conduct of others. If it were clear to the young that this is what he is doing, no doubt he would remember the law of charity.
Unfortunately the very terms in which national repentance is recommended to him conceal its true nature. By a dangerous figure of speech, he calls the government not “they” but “we.” And since, as penitents, we are not encouraged to be charitable to our own sins, nor to give ourselves the benefit of any doubt, a government which is called “we” is ipso facto placed beyond the sphere of charity or even of justice. You can say anything you please about it. You can indulge in the popular vice of detraction without restraint, and yet feel all the time that you are practicing contrition. A group of such young penitents will say, “Let us repent our national sins”; what they mean is, “Let us attribute to our neighbor (even our Christian neighbor) in the cabinet, whenever we disagree with him, every abominable motive that Satan can suggest to our fancy.”