Surviving (and defying) the coronavirus police state: an introduction

Today the UK Government begins to push a fetid turd of legislation through the rancid organs of the public face of its power, the Westminster Parliament, to push against the sphincter of Royal Assent by the end of the week. The reference, of course, is to the Coronavirus Bill, a litany of unlawfulness and a power grab dressed up as measures to protect public health. And the anus of UK Government will no doubt offer no resistance to its dropping into a splattered, stinking blight upon the mown lawn of English birth rights; it had no problem in the past, after all, in treasonously assenting to the rule of Britons by a foreign power.

As it was conceived, or coagulating in the ulcerous belly of UK Government, this bill was already creating a lot of anxiety about what it meant as a monstrous affront to civil liberties, and when it is born, or crapped out, decent people who, though they may not be hypnotised by corporate-media, are yet likely to suffer from a prejudice whereby it is perceived as being restrictive to basic freedom.

However, what good folks need to remember is that there is nothing new under the sun. There is a big difference between legislation and law, and the UK Government exists and survives by routinely creating legislation, which is policy for agenda, as synthetic faux law and placing it between the people and the real thing. Consequently, birth rights are not appreciated nor insisted upon.

Now, it is true that in an environment where legislation is the be all and end all because of the monopoly of force owned by the state, law has little weight when it is appealed to in encounters with the enforcers of policy (police), and the government’s courts of “justice”, and ultimately there will often be a punishment by insisting on one’s rights over legislation according to law, and insisting on being beholden uniquely to law. However, this does not alter the fact that the THE LAW has an innate quality wholly without reference to the legalistic machinations of men deployed to enrich themselves, and there is yet a saving grace in the British legal system in that it does concede to this primariness, although it is difficult to perceive it.

The UK Government abides by the rules of the universe, because there is no real power without it somehow being built upon law, and so UK Government acts to deceive so that rights are surrendered, and the people who would have been insisting upon them are instead volunteering into a domain whereby legislation applies. What it all boils down to is a matter of consent, and what we are going to do in the course of a forthcoming limited series at FBEL is to look at the Coronavirus Bill from this perspective, but mostly – because refusing consent, by the looks of it (or at least, that is what has been threatened), will quickly lead to the authorities having to commit common assault (which will be accounted for at a later date), we will be looking at the smart way to navigate in the immediate and new legislated environment.

To lead into and set us up for the next article, which will be about the powers of police to take a person to a place to be screened and assessed for coronavirus infection, we will take particular note, and learn the lesson proffered by the incident, that the Isle of Man police decided not to prosecute a man, who might have threatened to become a cause célèbre as the first person arrested by coronavirus empowered police, who had failed to abide by an order to self-isolate.

Part One: When suspected of infectiousness by police (link)

Further reading:

The police as militia, and the “policing by consent” deception (link)

Zealots for criminalisation by Equality and Diversity (police) suddenly favour upholding the law: how big the coming crisis? (link)

A dose of Gandhi’s Swaraj to cure the British Government (link)