Is the law creating the problem, and then enacting super normal force to solve the problem it just created?

Is the law creating the problem, and then enacting super normal force to solve the problem it just created?

Then it goes on to say "it's all necessary to stop everything going out of control", apparently without caring about the inevitable destructive and widespread consequences on the division of the population being governed.

Is this apparently deliberate government action a Visionary Rumour?

Our think tank has a classification for this activity - we call it a Visionary Rumour. Where an unconscious, collective group of people, who have the power to do so, creates an existential threat, where none really exists. This group is not self aware of its action in creating the artificial problem. Its only instinct is that the people need an existential threat within which to live. For brevity, I've written about why I believe the collective so badly needs visionary rumours elsewhere.

Government is not evil, yet it still acts with unjust power because the individuals in it are not directly conscious of its actions

If this were an individual acting it out in public they would be immediately sectioned under the mental health act as clinically neurotic. In a criminal court of law they would be deemed a psychopath given the enormous damage being done and the astounding lack of care for its people, this not being a medical condition per se.

But this is government of all party's as a group representing the collective of people. So its hard to pin any such charges on the group. You cannot justly indict a whole group of people if its not directly conscious of itself and its activity. Only an individual is conscious of its actions. A group cannot act consciously, but it can only act with enormous power, justly or unjustly, if its the governing authority of a nation.

Yes, there are more individuals within government who are overtly anti semitic or anti white than anti any other race. If this were a collective activity, thats is to say yet another visionary rumour, it would not be unfair to say that the plight of white people has the potential to be the new apartheid. There are also individuals acting in a criminal manor in the judiciary, government, media and academies but these are not the point of this posting though obviously they should face the consequences of their actions already.

What is the problem government is creating and then using its power to resolve, unconsciously?

The particular problem this post is alluding to, created deliberately by government of all party's, is uncontrolled mass immigration, or 'open borders' which the same government is refusing a open debate on. There might be good reason for open borders, yet this has not been fairly and squarely placed on the table to be observed with reasonable justice. There might be bad reasons it is being refused proper scrutiny. We just do not know yet because government are refusing that opportunity. And even hiding this policy with great determination and not putting it to the people openly and in a way they can make an informed choice on it when they approach the ballot. Then during election campaigns all party's telling us to be quiet as they will solve the problem once elected only to ramp it up yet more intensely when elected, further and justifiably infuriating the people.

Thought Crime. Is the government acting without justice yet within the law?

This is the root cause problem the protests are about. The government of the UK appears to have successfully acted unjustly, yet within the law, to censor any discussing of open borders. And the protests against this activity have become so strong government has had to start sending people to prison under a veil of rioting. Though of course those sent down threw bricks and could easily have avoided that and should have avoided that. But even if these ones had behaved perfectly, would the government have overstepped the mark more unjustly eventually anyway? We've already started to witness the call from authority to treat thought crimes - is the act of even thinking about resisting open borders or discussing it between friends online, starting to become a crime?

Is open public debate now considered sedition? Is government policy starting to look like its own form of terror?

Think about this possibility - the most astonishing part of the problem the original perpetrator is creating and then 'solving' with unjust power through the law, is public debate on it is being censored, most recently by imprisoning people who protested against it. Imprisoning people who throw bricks is not the unjust part of it. Using a summary imprisonment regime to scare the entire population into no longer asking the question about open borders, is. Particularly if its true that the authority created the problem in the first place and is using its power to brainwash the population into submission. Scaring away from protest anyone who insists on a debate so that they can make an informed choice and vote with integrity, very much like we saw during the pandemic with lockdowns, masks and vaccine mandates. Very much like we see with climate change and charity policy, scaring people into submission to a political doctrine and calling it following the science. What is most pernicious is a latent policy which incentivises individuals to close ranks into public groups to weed out and hound any resistance calling for open debate, much like we saw during the Red Terror in the Soviet Union prior to the war which sent millions of its own people to eternity. Even politicians are supporting this policy. Of course its nothing like as severe as the Red Terror. But we have been here many times before - and with the first link, a chain is forged.

Is the law, inherently justice and if not what can we say about it?

Is the law presupposing it is acting with satisfactory justice, therefore is justified in it's use or potentially its abuse of power? After inflaming an already angry public with propaganda directed unfairly against it. Is the law 'self aware' enough to see that is might be creating the original problem and then using unjust power to solve the problem it just created? 

It's more important than ever to remember that the law is not inherently justice. And this has become a serious question which the British people are asking about the British government recently, as a result of the governments own actions in trying to censor them, in a national positive feedback loop now almost out of control. Acutely dangerous leadership, all in the name of the 'greater good', where history testifies repeatedly that the injustice can be carried out with impunity.