Sad thing is, you can be in the right legally and rules-wise and even praxis-wise and the bureaucrat can still say "No", and you can take them to court for appeal and review, and get the court to say you were right all along, and the bureaucrat still says "No", forcing you to go to court again and again.
Becuase: if the bureaucrat has political protection, and/or the case is political, then what the law says and what the court says is immaterial to reality; the state's bureaucrats and goons (aka police) will obey orders from their bosses, all the way from the top.
And even if you win all the way and even if you're awarded damages, they will still get you any which way they can:
Social Services/Child Protection Services investigating your family
Psychiatric evaluation as ordered by court
Public insurance/welfare suddenly stops working
Police start pulling you over/stopping you for inspection whenever they see you
Blacklisting re: career, social circles
Audits
And of course, as happened to a Swedish nurse that was decreed a "right-wing nationalist racist and conspiracy-theorist" by state media at the height of Covid, for her questioning the eifficiency of mRNA-vaccinations:
She won her defamation suit against state media.
And then the state court ruled that since she had brought the suit, despite her winning and against legal praxis (but the law, technically speaking) she had to pay for the state media company's legal costs.
She was awarded ca 150 000:- in damages (ca $15 000 for those unfamiliar with SEK). And is supposed to pay millions in legal fees for the state media's lawyers, who presented their bills after the fact.
And they sicced CPR on her, and they tried to revoke her license to practice as an RN.
She had to emigrate to Finland for it to stop.
I bring her up because that is the price, under "soft totalitarianism", of resisting and being succesful at it. I could also mention Karl Hedin who was framed by police and prosecutor, them having coerced a false witness to plant evidence in Hedin's clothing and home. It all came out, and... Hedin has received no damages, no apologies.
And the two police and the prosecutor are still working - the investigation against them was simply dropped due to the matter being ruled not serious enough.
That's the reality of it - as Havel well knew. That is the cost one may face.
No arguments here, esp. as these cases aren't, exactly, singular--but we're not in the A is for Action part (three) just yet.
There's also no escaping: move to a neighbouring country (that, ideally, accepts your credentials) that's in the same 'club' doesn't mean you're going to be left in peace.
The thing that immediately comes to mind are, of course, Franz Kafka's The Trial and, perhaps a tad less intuitively, Milton Mayer's They Thought They Were Free about 'regular' people in Hitler's Germany.
Being free, I would argue, isn't that much about someone, anyone, incl. 'the state', affirming your freedom. Being free is, fundamentally, a state of mind, and once reached, yes, there may be limiting factors, such as debts, taxes, bureaucratic shenanigans, etc., but they™ cannot render your mind un-free.
And having others run hoops around me for that, well that's a price I submit anyone who aspires to being free should be willing to pay.
Being free certainly is a state of mind; the ugly corollary to that is, you can think you are free and you can be conditioned to think you are free, when you really aren't.
Look at islamic states. esp. women from there, for the perfect example: they will scream their heads off insisting they are free-er than Western women, while Western women will similarly scream about being free since they now have to go into student-debt, mortgages, car-loans, loans to buy all the household items they need/want, and work full-time jobs or more.
However, one cannot think oneself free. One can try but best case is becoming an Original, a Kuf, worst case is going insane
Yes, I'm mostly focusing on the "action"-part. Were I to make such a schema as OODA, I'd instead call it the ADOO, or maybe A DODO ;)
Of course one cannot 'think oneself free', but I consider freedom a state mind that, while it may be broken by coercive (invasive and non-invasive) means, the trick appears, to me, to remain unbroken.
it's not so much to 'think you are free', but rather to think freely. and being creative. hand and feet I'm dependent on The State, yet I can think freely, read what I want, find and contemplate on what knowledge I seek - and in the mean time having a ball with you all at this excellent site.
Short of time to write more but love your mini-series ☃️
Sad thing is, you can be in the right legally and rules-wise and even praxis-wise and the bureaucrat can still say "No", and you can take them to court for appeal and review, and get the court to say you were right all along, and the bureaucrat still says "No", forcing you to go to court again and again.
Becuase: if the bureaucrat has political protection, and/or the case is political, then what the law says and what the court says is immaterial to reality; the state's bureaucrats and goons (aka police) will obey orders from their bosses, all the way from the top.
And even if you win all the way and even if you're awarded damages, they will still get you any which way they can:
Social Services/Child Protection Services investigating your family
Psychiatric evaluation as ordered by court
Public insurance/welfare suddenly stops working
Police start pulling you over/stopping you for inspection whenever they see you
Blacklisting re: career, social circles
Audits
And of course, as happened to a Swedish nurse that was decreed a "right-wing nationalist racist and conspiracy-theorist" by state media at the height of Covid, for her questioning the eifficiency of mRNA-vaccinations:
She won her defamation suit against state media.
And then the state court ruled that since she had brought the suit, despite her winning and against legal praxis (but the law, technically speaking) she had to pay for the state media company's legal costs.
She was awarded ca 150 000:- in damages (ca $15 000 for those unfamiliar with SEK). And is supposed to pay millions in legal fees for the state media's lawyers, who presented their bills after the fact.
And they sicced CPR on her, and they tried to revoke her license to practice as an RN.
She had to emigrate to Finland for it to stop.
I bring her up because that is the price, under "soft totalitarianism", of resisting and being succesful at it. I could also mention Karl Hedin who was framed by police and prosecutor, them having coerced a false witness to plant evidence in Hedin's clothing and home. It all came out, and... Hedin has received no damages, no apologies.
And the two police and the prosecutor are still working - the investigation against them was simply dropped due to the matter being ruled not serious enough.
That's the reality of it - as Havel well knew. That is the cost one may face.
Being free isn't free.
No arguments here, esp. as these cases aren't, exactly, singular--but we're not in the A is for Action part (three) just yet.
There's also no escaping: move to a neighbouring country (that, ideally, accepts your credentials) that's in the same 'club' doesn't mean you're going to be left in peace.
The thing that immediately comes to mind are, of course, Franz Kafka's The Trial and, perhaps a tad less intuitively, Milton Mayer's They Thought They Were Free about 'regular' people in Hitler's Germany.
Being free, I would argue, isn't that much about someone, anyone, incl. 'the state', affirming your freedom. Being free is, fundamentally, a state of mind, and once reached, yes, there may be limiting factors, such as debts, taxes, bureaucratic shenanigans, etc., but they™ cannot render your mind un-free.
And having others run hoops around me for that, well that's a price I submit anyone who aspires to being free should be willing to pay.
Being free certainly is a state of mind; the ugly corollary to that is, you can think you are free and you can be conditioned to think you are free, when you really aren't.
Look at islamic states. esp. women from there, for the perfect example: they will scream their heads off insisting they are free-er than Western women, while Western women will similarly scream about being free since they now have to go into student-debt, mortgages, car-loans, loans to buy all the household items they need/want, and work full-time jobs or more.
However, one cannot think oneself free. One can try but best case is becoming an Original, a Kuf, worst case is going insane
Yes, I'm mostly focusing on the "action"-part. Were I to make such a schema as OODA, I'd instead call it the ADOO, or maybe A DODO ;)
Of course one cannot 'think oneself free', but I consider freedom a state mind that, while it may be broken by coercive (invasive and non-invasive) means, the trick appears, to me, to remain unbroken.
it's not so much to 'think you are free', but rather to think freely. and being creative. hand and feet I'm dependent on The State, yet I can think freely, read what I want, find and contemplate on what knowledge I seek - and in the mean time having a ball with you all at this excellent site.
Appreciation and blessings from Sydney Aus.