Posted by alexandra_k on April 2, 2022, at 17:01:34
with the proportion of 'eligible' who have been vaccinated.
also with growing domestic terrorists who don't acknowledge the legitimacy of the nz government, anymore.
i know that it is highly unlikely that we are accurately reporting our vaccination numbers.
but i do think that the nz parliament and government and media think that, somehow, it is ideal to try and convey a proportion that is very very high around 90 or 95 per cent...
and that they think that because the proportion is so high they are justified in very harsh measures, indeed, for the teeny tiny minority that they don't care about at all - because the nz government does not care about minorities.
___
perhaps you have heard of the case of the lonesome stranger.
it goes like this...
utilitarianism is a moral view that says (roughly) that the right thing to do is the thing is the thing that promotes the good for the greatest number of people.
so...
suppose that there is a town and various bad things happened. the sherrif knows that the person responsible is dead or whatever and so the things won't be happening anymore. but the townspeople don't know that / won't believe that and they want to see someone held to account. otherwise they will riot and many innocent lives will be lost.
so then a lonesome stranger wanders into town. we are supposed to believe that nobody loves him and nobody will miss him when he's gone.
the idea is that utilitarianism says the morally right thing to do is for the sherrif to say that the lonesome stranger is the guilty party and hold him publically accountable.
sacrifice the one in order to save the many.
no minority rights. do whatever will appease the angry mob because it is the angry mob.
__
most people think that the options are as follows:
1) It shows utilitarianism to be insufficient or inadequate as a moral theory or to capture morality.
2) More needs to be said about how it is that utilitarianism can capture minority rights. For example, you might say that it is about following a moral rule which, when followed across the board in all circumstances would result in the good for the greatest number of people. So, for example, since every single individual in the group... Well, if you think it is okay to stomp on the rights of one individual then you think it is okay to stomp on the rights of every-one individual and then you think it is okay to stomping (by simple addition) on the rights of every-one individual.
I'm not sure that is entirely satisfactory. But both of the above ways of responding to the problem are ways that incorporate... show understanding of... ethics and morality and rights...
The new zealand way of responding, however, is to say that since utilitarianism (rule by angry mob) says it is okay to dismiss or disregard minorities... It is okay to dismiss or disregard minorities!
In fact,,, Insofar as any moral theory says it is not okay to dismiss or disregard minorities down with morality!!!
It is inadquate as a theory of the aims and goals and aspirations and reality of the NZ government.
And everybody knows the NZ government gets to dictate the actions and responsibilities and housing arrangements and employment arrangement etc etc of every citizen that there is in NZ (and everyone else as well).
Allllllll of the tax money for them (whatever they want whenever they want because they want) and NONE of the social services.
They broke the social contract.
now they are getting to the point where they are going to blataently imprison anybody who says that they have in fact broken the social contract when they repeatedly choose to employ and re-employ and re-depoloy murderers and rapists and torturers to 'work' in educaiton and health and childcare and...
the Auckland District Health Board keeps sending me invoices saying that I owe them more than $5,000 for Legal Costs since they chose to hire a Queens Counsel Lawyer to file a motion to have my proceedings against them struck out.
My proceedings against them were that I had file not evidence from my health record that they involutnarily detained me in conditions amounting to torture (by UN standards). They wrote in my notes that I wanted to leave but I was not allowed to leave the hospital because I was being held under the Mental Health Act with 'voluntary' status. That is to say they refuse to accept that the government doesn't get to stipulate what the citizens have 'voluntarily' chosen.
Just because the NZ government got 2 NZ government employees to sign that you have been consented for euthanasia does not mean the person who has been consented themselves gave the consent.
The courts refuse to acknowledge or accept this.
We dont' have a judiciary.
_______________________________________
Kahn Academy says that the social contract is when individuals give up certain rightst ha they have (to punish others, particularly) in exchange for the government running a judiciary, particularly.
But the NZ government has failed to run a competent judiciary, particularlly.
So they broke the social contract.
Read the judgements around my cases from the High Court and Court of Appeal and Supreme Court Justices.
They order the victims of wrongdoing to pay the courts.
Costs were awarded AGAINST ME when the judge said that on the basis of the evidence I supplied (my file notes) there was enoguh eviene for the case to proceed. It seems as though I may have been unlawfully detained by the ADHB.
Una Jagose (solicitor general) and David Parker (something else to do with law-general) refuse to get government prosecution to prosecute the case.
Meredith Connell (the only firm allowed to prosecute in auckland) claims to be 'conflicted out' of prosecuting anything to do with health or prosecuting anybody employed in the heatlh sector.
____________
There is no health system.
There is no legal system.
The results of election make no difference because the 'judiciary' and the ministry officials all stay the same...
the make up of parliament doesn't change much.
but parliament is irrelevant since it doesn't matter what laws they do or do not pass since teh judiciary refuses to uphold the laws.
there's nothing here.
poster:alexandra_k
thread:1119233
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/babble/social/20220213/msgs/1119233.html