Charles Synyard (@CharlesSynyard)

@[email protected] Wow, you really believe that, don’t you? As for human rights, not only do they not exist, they are a systematic justification for reworking all legal systems to protect the guilty and punish the innocent. Despite mentions of “propaganda” and “brainwashing”, you don’t really disbelieve the facts I mentioned about China sending Blacks in Guangzhou back to Africa, interning Muslims en masse, and executing thousands of criminals every year, do you? These are all actions that the state must do to fulfill its inherent reasons-for-being: preventing the nation from being replaced, body by body, by foreigners; preventing followers of Islam from perpetrating terrorism and tearing the country apart; preventing people from making destructive choices that provide no real benefit to anyone but the dealer. Maybe the majority here will agree with you, but I am here to call human rightsniks out for choosing fidelity to absurd, false-on-their-face abstractions, all in order to feel good about not being racist or intolerant—even when they are injurious to human life, and prevent the most common-sense measures to make ailing countries healthy again. How rottenly false it all is! No one is born free. Even a king is the son of his father and his mother, and if he does not honor them, it is wrong. He cannot change his race, his sex, or his aptitudes for what he may possibly learn. The amount of reason and conscience most people have, is just sufficient for following the instruction of their betters and living decent lives. Some have less, and need to be institutionalized or imprisoned, and given no more freedom that naughty children all their lives. And even of those who have more, many misuse their gifts, and for the good of themselves and others need be restrained. It would be nice if there was a sure way for the good to rule, and right to be chosen over wrong, but there is no a priori way to do it. Often I observe good rulers at the helm of authoritarian states, but the conditions of liberal democracy usually preclude good people from any chance to govern; while there are exceptions, almost to a man, good rulers of “free” countries are hounded by human rightsnik critics as “strongmen” whom, they accurately perceive, are only governing so effectively by beginning courses of action that, if followed to their logical conclusions, would mean the end of human rights and liberal democracy. Why am I not on Weibo? Never thought of checking it out, but if there is an English version, and not so many baizuo, may be worth a look. #rants