Kinda Trumpy

The world needs more — a LOT more — of this:

Right-wing nationalist Jair Bolsonaro, who has vowed to crack down on political corruption, violent crime and ignite a moribund economy with deregulation and fiscal discipline, after being sworn in as Brazil’s president today.
The former Army captain and seven-term fringe congressman rode a wave of anti-establishment anger to became Brazil’s first far-right president since a military dictatorship gave way to civilian rule three decades ago.
Addressing a joint session of Congress minutes after taking the oath of office, Bolsonaro, a former Army captain and admirer of the country’s 1964-1985 military dictatorship, vowed to adhere to democratic norms.
He said his government would be guided by the promises he made to Brazilian voters fed up with graft, high levels of violent crime and a still-sputtering economy.
‘I will work tirelessly so that Brazil reaches its destiny,’ Bolsonaro said after being sworn in. ‘My vow is to strengthen Brazil’s democracy.’
On the economic front, the new leader promised to ‘create a new virtuous cycle to open markets’ and ‘carry out important structural reforms’ to shore up a yawning public deficit.

And it gets better:

Last week, the former army captain said that upon taking office he would issue a decree guaranteeing Brazilians without a criminal history the ability to possess firearms. During the campaign, Bolsonaro argued that one way to confront street crime would be to arm more citizens.
Possession of firearms is currently tightly restricted in Brazil, though drug traffickers and other criminal gangs are heavily armed with automatic weapons. Brazil is the annual world leader in total homicides – more than 63,000 in 2017 – and a majority are from firearms.
Bolsonaro has frequently argued that police who fatally shoot criminals during operations should be decorated, not prosecuted. To that end, he has said they should be shielded from prosecution, possibly by having such cases be investigated in a separate process outside the criminal justice system.
Such ideas terrify human rights groups and people who live in poor neighborhoods, where shootouts between police and traffickers often leave criminals, officers and innocent bystanders dead. Some Brazilian police forces, particularly in Rio de Janeiro, are already among the most lethal in the world.
Bolsonaro has frequently expressed adoration for U.S. President Donald Trump, and he is poised to follow him in foreign policy. He has promised to move the Brazilian Embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem; push back on China, Brazil’s largest foreign investor; ditch regional trade treaties he thinks are bad deals for Brazil; and take a hard line on leftist governments, including that of neighboring Venezuela.

All excellent stuff.

Anyone seen his Missus, by the way?

I think he has the right perspective on just about everything.

Solutions

The late (and much-missed) Col. Jeff Cooper once said this about violence:

“One bleeding-heart type asked me in a recent interview if I did not agree that ‘violence begets violence.’  I told him that it is my earnest endeavor to see that it does.  I would like very much to ensure — and in some cases I have — that any man who offers violence to his fellow citizen begets a whole lot more in return than he can enjoy.”

[pauses to let the applause die down]

So when you set yourself up as a “saboteur” — of a perfectly-legal institution, mind you — and part of your modus operandi  is violence, do not be surprised if violence is visited on you in turn.  Such as in this instance:

Hunt saboteurs claim they were attacked after one suffered a bloody eye as violence broke out between supporters and placard-wielding protesters during traditional Boxing Day hunts around the country.
Riders with packs of hounds – following scent trails laid in advance to comply with the 2004 Hunting Act forbidding the hunting of foxes with hounds – set out under cloudy skies this morning in order to maintain the tradition.
But scenes of chaos erupted in Elham, Kent, as a saboteur was hospitalised after allegedly being thrown in front of a passing car ‘that deliberately swerved’ before being punched and kicked by a group of hunt supporters.
A hunt saboteur posted an image of his bloodied eye after allegedly being ambushed by ‘two or more men’, according to the Hunt Saboteurs Association.
A spokesperson for the group said: ‘A group of drunken hunt supporters attacked the saboteurs and their vehicle as they tried to leave’.
And the group claimed a 19-year-old female demonstrator was allegedly punched in the face by a hunt supporter in Tenterden, while a band that had turned up to play reportedly had their equipment damaged.

And we have this as evidence:

But let’s make sure that we don’t just see pics of the loonies.  Here are a couple of the hunt supporters:

And for my Murkin Readers unfamiliar with the ancient custom, let’s make one thing perfectly clear about all this protesting:  it has nothing  to do with protecting foxes, although that’s the pretense.

It has everything  to do with with abolishing an activity largely enjoyed by the upper- and upper-middle classes — in other words, it’s a class  issue.

The very fact that hunting was originally banned by a Labour government headed by the loathsome Tony Blair is sufficient proof thereof.

And all I can say to the hunt supporters is:  keep up the good work of thrashing the “sabos” at every opportunity.

Still Revolting

…and it doesn’t seem like the 21st-century French Revolution is going to end anytime soon, either.

It doesn’t look like there is anything President Macron can do to appease the mob because their protest has no focal point. The demonstrations are an expression of the frustration and anger felt by ordinary Frenchmen at how the government has taken them for granted in creating policies and new taxes they feel they were not consulted on. From refugees to a falling standard of living, the French people feel betrayed and no government giveaways are going to assuage their anger.

For details on the policies and new taxes, feel free to peruse Erik’s take at No Paseran!

I think the events Over There reveal a systemic difference between the U.S. and France.  In Europe, the people basically let the elites run all over them (for hundreds of years Euros seem to have had little problem with their “betters” telling them what to do) right up until the situation becomes intolerable, and then they explode:  heads roll, protesters take to the streets, whatever.

On our side of The Pond, we Murkins just elect people like Trump from time to time, to try to reverse the trend of oppression.  This seems to let some of the steam out of popular resentment — which is also why we respond so strongly when the elected fail or falter in their mission.

I’m not sure that Murkins have the spunk to rise up as violently as the Frogs.  Perhaps it’s because we have so many guns — not that we’re ready to use them, but their very presence acts as a damper on ourselves.  Instead of rioting, we form a Tea Party movement and get politicians to follow its precepts.

It’s one thing to march in yellow vests, blockade streets, break windows and deface monuments.  It’s another thing altogether to break out the AKs and ARs and start a truly  violent revolution.  That’s not to say we couldn’t, under truly intolerable circumstances, but I think we all agree that most of us — even the most fire-breathing — would shrink from taking that final, and very deadly step until that time.

Under these circumstances, our government and elites should be grateful  for the Second Amendment instead of trying to shut it down all the time.  That said, our elites would ultimately prefer that the State is the repository of all guns so that they and only they can go to the guns, which of course is the current state of affairs in Europe.

An interesting mental game is to wonder what the gilets jaunes would do if France had a Second Amendment as robust as ours or whether, if they did, the State would be as oppressive towards them as it has been.

And now, if you’ll excuse me, I think I’ll head off to the range.  All this intellectual activity requires some physical release.

The Dying Of The Light

[This should have appeared over a week ago, but I screwed up the posting date thingy, sorry.  It’s still relevant, and now updated.]

From the Diplomad, talking about the revolting French:

France is in real trouble. I mean REAL trouble.  That once great country, in fact, is dying.  It, along with most of the rest of Europe, has a worthless leadership class that, as we saw at the WWI commemorations, sees nationalism as a bad thing. That leadership argues that true patriotism means going along with the elite’s efforts to kill the sense, the very idea of nation;  it means allowing one’s culture, traditions, and history to be wiped away, and rewritten to justify the on-going social, economic and political destruction.  To object, for example, to the importation of hundreds-of-thousands of poor, illiterate and often violent migrants from some of the most failed countries on earth, many espousing an ideology of hatred for all that France and Western Civilization represent, makes you a vile racist and a deplorable, one who should not be heard, a “far right” pariah.  In other words, Citizen, fermé la bouche and let your betters decide for you.  Nothing to see, keep moving. Leadership should be left to the professionals;  do not attempt decision-making at home . . .

Before any of us start to crow at the Frogs’ expense, however, look carefully at the words “true patriotism means going along with the elite’s efforts to kill the sense, the very idea of nation;  it means allowing one’s culture, traditions, and history to be wiped away, and rewritten to justify the on-going social, economic and political destruction”  and try to deny that this is precisely what our own “leadership” class — political, academia and corporate — is doing to the United States[Hint:  you’ll fail]

Now go and buy some more ammo.

(Some of you may wonder why I haven’t suggested also buying a hi-viz jacket as used by the French protesters.  That’s because we Murkins don’t do hi-viz — we do camo.)

Mum’s Car

My mother once had one of these:

Owners of Morris Minors (boasting a top speed of just 63mph, and taking more than 30 seconds to get to 60mph) are among the most prolific drug and drink drivers, a new study suggests.

And it looked exactly like this one:

I think hers had a single windshield, not a split one, but I could be wrong.  She loved it dearly, and was distraught when my father secretly sold it, replacing it with one of these:

She kept the Austin-Healey for almost a year, then forced my father to get rid of it, “because the men keep looking at me and flirting” — which tells you all about my mother.  Its replacement?  An Austin 1100:

…which she kept for years until I wrecked it in 1971 (sorry, Ma).

Anyway, about that drunken Morris Minor driver thing:  I suspect that it’s because most Minor drivers today are old farts, who suffer from impaired reflexes and decaying driving skills as well as a tendency to drink lots of gin.

I want to drive a Morris Minor then, because I fit the profile perfectly.  But I want the Traveller model, complete with wood (which is real wood, by the way):

I bet I could pull the chicks* with that beauty, big time.


* of my own vintage, that is.

Snatchers

Some Brit toffs just got married at the groom’s future digs (which he gets when his dad snuffs it), said shack being so vast that no ground-level photo can quite do it justice :

Now ordinarily I am disinterested in the couplings of nobility;  the nuptials of Lady Fontinella Waxwork-ffolkes and Lord Beastly Stiff-Upper-Lypp pass by my gaze unnoticed, and even Prince Harry’s marriage would have been disregarded by me but for the fact that the poor royal ginger ended up with some foul feminist Hollywood slag and was therefore only worthy of comment insofar as I predict that this unfortunate alliance will not end well (you heard it here 455th).

Anyway, the thing which caught my idle glance in the above report was this unfortunate description:

“George, the Marquess of Blandford, 26, married childhood sweetheart Camilla Thorp, 31”

Say what?  I’m assuming / hoping that he wasn’t 5 years old, and she 10 when they became sweethearts… oh wait, it turns out that they met ten years ago when he was 16 (not really a “child”, was he?) and she ummmm…. carry the two, 21.  That’s a fair age difference but not overly so.

Phew.  I am relieved.  Of course, had this liaison been consummated in Murka, she’d have been facing statutory rape charges at some point (assuming that they’d started bonking soon after first meeting, as seems to be the custom these days), but I suppose the aristocracy has a much more benign attitude towards this kind of thing so it’s okay, albeit risky.  (Remember that Chinless Charles married Super-Sloane-Ranger Di when he was in his thirties and she yet in her teens, and we all know how that turned out.)  Also, the Dukes of Marlborough are outrageously wealthy, thanks to Great-Grandpappy Marlborough marrying a Vanderbilt girl, so maybe there’s a different rule for the rich when it comes to bonking sixteen-year-olds.

Anyway:  congratulations and good luck to the happy couple, who seem to be quite charming.  And as wedding pics go, you have to admit that this isn’t one of yer ordinary backgrounds:

And all over Britain can be heard the gnashing of desperate debutante teeth as another eligible “catch” escapes their hooks.


Another age-distinct couple got married recently, and their backdrop was also rather special:

That’s the Umaid Bhawan palace in Jodhpur, but it’s not likely to be owned by either the bride or groom anytime in the future, as they are neither royal not even noble.  Like we couldn’t tell (note the bride’s ceremonial hand tattoo UGH):

Anyway, he is someone called Nick Jonas, a one-time (or current?) pop star of whom I know nothing except that like the future duke (above), he’s 26.  His bride, like the Royal Ginger’s wife, is some houri actress named Priyanka Chopra, and who like the Marchioness Blandford is older than her husband, but she by some ten summers.

At least this couple are not “childhood sweethearts”:  the thought of a twenty-one-year old woman bonking an eleven-year-old boy… well, you know.

This marriage, I give a couple of years.  Call it a hunch.