After 45 years of daily drinking (alcohol that is), I’ve suddenly stopped cold. Why? I don’t know, but first some history. When I started university in the early 70s, I was a residential student at Monash University and the orientation day involve the consumption of copious quantities of alcohol, all for free. Naturally I made full use of this and paid the penalty many hours later. It wasn’t the first time that I’d had alcohol, but it certainly was the first time that I’d had it in such a large quantity, at a continuous pace and in such a short period of time. I suspect that those days may well be over at universities, given the nature of today’s environment where all such things tend to be frowned upon and litigation just waiting around the corner. Were such orientation days appropriate? At the time I thought nothing of it and even today don’t have any issues with such activities, though I suspect many would frown upon such thoughts.
As I wrote in ‘The Nanny State‘ there seems to be a never ending push by government/s to control our lives, egged on by government funded entities (food Nazis) trying to make themselves relevant and justify their continued taxpayer funding. It hasn’t been completely government driven, as there are other groups pushing their own wheelbarrows filled with personal agendas, such as PETA, that wants everyone to become neurotic vegans and live in mutual misery. And given how they behave, it certainly appears to be a miserable life. However, a new entrant has entered the scene by way of The Lancet, who has now declared their own set of rules as to how the world (notably the western world) should, or must, live in order to save the planet from every perceived misery, including the mandatory climate-change baggage-carousel. These professional misery merchants seem to be appearing everywhere with the intent to force people into lifestyles these same misery merchants invariably never have to live themselves, given their positions of wealth.
In my story about The Good Old Days, I alluded to minority groups having a significant influence over societal changes and questioned whether that’s a good thing, but some of my comments appear to have been misconstrued as to who they were directed towards. So when another initiative by a group of Nanny State adherents, acting under the guise of ‘experts’ or do-gooders (well-meaning but unrealistic or interfering philanthropists or reformers) was announced, I thought I’d consolidate some of my views into a single story. I guess I’ve made it somewhat clear in a number of stories that government interference in our daily lives, to an extent that I’ve never experienced before, is one of my pet hates. Sanctimonious do-gooders, funded by taxpayers, need to have a reason for existence and thus keep coming up with more and more self-serving ideas to inflict upon everyone and it needs to stop.