PHOTOS: Pagans join the Women’s March on Washington

14 thoughts on “PHOTOS: Pagans join the Women’s March on Washington”

1. I’m going to take that one poster’s saying “Do no harm, but take no shit” and put it on a T-shirt!

2. It’s great to see that large scale activism is not dead in this country. It’s going to take a lot of this sort of thing to come through these next few years and beyond.

   I wonder what “alternative facts” Trump will spin about the march. He’ll either dismiss the evidence of vast participation as photographs doctored by “the liberal media” or perhaps he’ll tell his lemmings that the numbers don’t matter because they were all illegal immigrants!

3. There is a move in several Republican State legislatures to make any form of protest a federal crime. There is a push in a few to allow police to shoot any protestor, even if peaceful. Last but not least, remember President Trump can declare Marshal Law for any reason that he chooses. At that point the Constitution becomes mute point. You literally have no rights under marshal law, and he can even use the military to reinforce it. Just use the magic word and call protestors terrorists. Homeland Security Law already has that written in, any demonstration that interferes with the local economy can be considered domestic terrorism. As a terrorist you have no right to a trial,to a lawyer,n or habeous corpus. No one has to be told that the government holds you. You just disappear.

   Under the last Bush administration, Haliburton won a no bid Federal contract to build 17 secret prisons. I read a little blurb about it in the business section of one of my New Mexico state s larger newspapers. My first question was I wonder who those secret prisons are being built far and why are they secret?. So our government, through both Democratic and Republican control has been preparing for this for decades.

   Considering it is the corporation that pay billions in bribes to our congressmen, I suspect the alleged New World Order will be a Corporate Run Government, not a political one. Much cheaper as they no longer would have to bribe politicians. Can’t have democracy gett in the way of corporate profits can we?

   Meanwhile nothing to see here folks, go back toy our computer games, your tweets, game shows, sports shows and soap operas. The Romans controlled the masses by free bead and circuses. This time no bread and not even the games and amusements will be free.

   Remember the CEO of Nestlies said that water was not a human right. If you can afford it then you can have it.

   • I thought I was paranoid.

     First let’s be clear. This is not a Republican or Democrat thing. It is a function of government to expand and seize power. This is what bureaucrats do.

     What you are barely touching on is something called the Deep State. And yes, part of it is corporate cronyism.

     Government is dangerous and corrosive. There is no good way to control it. The more power you give government today, the more will be used against you tomorrow. It doesn’t matter if the “right” (left?) people are in charge, it doesn’t matter what they promised, it doesn’t matter if the corporations call the shots, or if the “people” take back power for the “common good.”

     Politics corrupt. Government seeks more power.

     Use government to control someone and it will be used to control you.

     You can only reduce government by increasing liberty. And it’s only liberty if everyone shares the choices and the responsibility.

     Your choice. Your responsiblity.

     • Is that why Canada, Denmark, Norway, and Sweden are such totalitarian hell holes with people desperately seeking to escape? Their governments are bigger than ours after all, and have been for a long time.

       Oh? They’re not so bad? The maybe your theory needs some improvement.

       • Not including the state and local governments, in the U.S. government spending, number of regulations on the books, number of regulations generated per year, and number of employees far exceed your examples.

         Most importantly, most Democrats and progressives were perfectly fine with this until a Republican was elected.

         Even now, you don’t object to government power, you just don’t like the guy in the drivers seat.

         The best way to protect yourself from government abuse of power is to make sure that government has very little power.

         Even if your man or woman is running things.

         Consider the EPA. Created by Nixon, expanded by Carter, everything going hunky-dory. Then Reagan was elected and he appointed James Watt as Secretary of the Interior. Do you remember what happened next?

         • I’m afraid you are wrong. Denmark, for example, takes a total of over 50%. On balance Danes think get a great deal for itax rates far above ours, but fewer aircraft carriers. I suspect there is nowhere in the US that approaches this figure. I challenge you to find one.

           The libertarian equation of taxes with oppression is simply wrong. It is wrong in logic and wrong in people’s perceived experience. (Even Ayn Rand and Murray Rothbard preferred high tax NYC to low tax Bird City, Kansas. And so did enough other people to make it a world attraction, unlike Bird City.)

           Government certainly can be oppressive, but tax rates are not a measure or a logical link in the problem.

         • Did I mention taxes on this thread?

         • I assumed that taxes and impact had some correlation in your mind. If not, sorry.

           But as to regulations, a great many are necessary for civilized life (like what counts as pollution, what counts as noise that is too loud, what the speed limit should be, safety rules for working conditions, etc. All of them are subject to manipulation of course, but most people feel they are worth the price. For example, here in Taos regulations restrict building height and styles. Most people approve, including those who come here as tourists and send money assisting the local economy.

           More philosophically, the more closely people are linked the more negative as well as positive side effects emerge. NYC has far more regulations than a small town on the Kansas prairie. My point about Rand and Rothbard still stands.

           Regulations seek to preserve the positive dimensions of closely interacting people while reducing the negative effects. Missoula, MT once had no regulations about wood stoves and fireplaces- then it grew big enough that Winter inversions threatened people’s health. Now it regulates wood fires.

           On the whole the greater regulations in cities work- far from perfectly, but well enough that people generally prefer city amenities to those of the country side. Some work much better than others- Vancouver probably has more regulations than most American cities, but with a different set of values involved. And Vancouver is regarded as one of the most livable cities in the world.

           Again, governments can be and often are oppressive, but not all are and it is important to get the causes right. Regulations as such are no better a measure than taxes.

         • I didn’t mention regulations either, but we’ll go with it.

           When you throw around words like most, you are defining a situation where some have privileges and others are denied. You mentioned zoning laws. One common use of zoning laws around the U.S. is to limit big box stores. Fine and dandy, except the big box stores tend to have lower prices and a larger selection. The main customers of big box stores are lower income people. So zoning laws make groceries more expensive for the poor.

           Regulations have tradeoffs. On the Federal level regulations are nearly impossible to remove, especially for the average person. What does that matter, you ask? Well, it makes it harder to start and run a smaller business. It doesn’t help that government bureaucracies usually protect larger, well established companies while acting against smaller companies and startups. The larger existing companies can afford “the cost of doing business,” especially if it reduces their competition. Big business loves big government, that alone should make you question what is happening. And of course the politicos love big business.

           Why is it necessary for a government official to decide what works for civilized life? Can’t we decide those things for ourselves? If my neighbor’s car stereo is too loud, do I really need to call the cops? Can’t I just go over there myself? Do I really need to invoke the State and all the force that involves?

           Once the power is there, where does it stop?

         • Well, if taxes and regulations don’t matter I wonder what does. Your response to my first objection mentioned both so i assumed that was what was bothering you. Maybe it is simply the existence of government, no matter what it does? At that point I have little to say other than suggesting moving to Somalia.

           I rather explicitly said regulations were not perfect and some were stupid or worse than others (my Vancouver example compared to many American cities). Democratic government is intended to make the rules we need to follow in common as fair as is practical. Other methods are worse. If you don’t want many rules, get a cabin in the woods. Building one near Chicken, Alaska, will free you from almost all of them.

           Perhaps you will say democracy is flawed. Most definitely. And getting worse. But if it performs an essential function then the flaws indicate the need to improve it, not abolish it – unless you want to argue that we do not need any common rules that can be made one way or another, and that sometimes need to be adjusted to changes. I think I covered that with examples like Missoula, MT.

           But again, if neither taxes nor regulations bother you then I don’t know what you are writing about when you warn of the dangers of government.That’s what you mentioned. So I’ll close the conversation for now.

         • I was responding to ChristopherBlackwell. He thought that Republicans are about to abuse government in the worst way. I pointed out that it isn’t a Republican problem, it is a government problem.

           As I said, you’re concerned now (“…and getting worse…”) but you weren’t so concerned when someone you mostly liked was “in charge.” I’d wager that’s true of most of the people who read and respond on this site. You see the abuses now, but you weren’t ready to see them five years ago.

           You see government as essential. I see it as necessary but incredibly dangerous with insidious long-term effects.

           It does no good to blame Republicans if Democrats do the same things. It’s a dualism trap. Do you want Tweedledum or Tweedledee?

           Maybe it’s time to find a new game?

   • “There is a move in several Republican State legislatures to make any form of protest a federal crime.”

     Where did you get this information from? Could you please list which states these are? Thank you.

4. I am delighted at the outpouring of bodies in protest. I hope it settles into serious political organization.