Smoking Bans Are Killing Public Life

All of humanity exists as a conspiracy against the obvious but not fully pleasant truth. In reality, few things are absolutely good or bad; most are a mixed bag, which means that there are trade-offs between things that we like and things that we dislike. This bothers individuals, who want guarantees of 100% safety, and fails to excite groups, who love illusions because those make everyone in the group feel warm and happy, which strengthens the group as a parasitic artificial entity.

You can tell people the obvious truth, but they will refuse to see it, relying on ideas like “freedom” and “equality” to justify their rejection of the evident reality in favor of a personal illusion, and then will ignore the consequences for long enough to claim to have forgotten the original act. This way, bad ideas become law and then idiot conservatives go out there and defend the law and order (bang on table) because it’s the foundation of our dead society or something like that.

In England, a bunch of do-gooders — mostly women and soya-infused manchildren — decided that smoking was bad because instead of dying of carcinogenic diesel fumes, youngsters might inhale “secondhand smoke” and therefore, statistically, billions of people might die. This is a tragedy despite us having too many billions of people on Earth, most of whom are manifestly useless and selfish. But I digress.

As a result, the clowns ran to the elected clowns and wept their crocodile tears and shook their hands with the drama of a high school theater production of Christ on the cross in the rain, and all the elected clowns thought, “Wow, a new rule — I can hire more bureaucrats, make government more powerful, get famous in the media and advance my career!” They took it to the voters who felt bad if they did not approve of this because, after all, think of the children. It passed.

Now eleven years later, people are slowly stumbling half-conscious to the realization that perhaps banning smoking was a mistake because it killed what people like to do at pubs, which is drink and smoke and socialize with friends, so now they do that in their garages instead:

The Hyndburn Inn is one of 50 pubs in the east Lancashire district of Hyndburn to have closed since 2001, when the borough boasted 95 – a drop of 53%. Only Newham in east London has lost a higher percentage in that period, according to official figures released last week that show more than a quarter of the UK’s pubs have closed since 2001.

Khan thinks he knows why: “The smoking ban. I’ve been driving a taxi for 29 years and since the ban people don’t go out nearly as much. They think ‘sod it, I’ll stay at home.’”

…But the tax burden still weighs heavy – not least beer duty, which was frozen in the latest budget but rose by 42% between 2008 and 2013, a period in which beer sales fell by 24% and 5,000 pubs closed.

Those beer taxes come from the very same weepy nagging nanny types who brought the smoking ban, and are approved greedily by the same bureaucrats, who constantly need money to spend on further studies of feasibility of budgetary reduction of life to microscopic granules of tedium, funding immigration so they can tax Mohammed Ackbar to pay for the pensions going to tight-fisted Baby Boomers, and of course, to bloat and grow government so that it can never, ever be removed and they will all have middle-class jobs in perpetuity that require them to do almost nothing and take no risks.

Whenever humans decide to “improve” upon life, reach for your gun. Humans are self-destructive and all of their “good” ideas end up leading to bad ends. The smart ones go with evolution, or gradually improving things by rewarding examples of the good, sort of how death metal fans traded around demos and the better ones bubbled to the top. Rewarding quality works, but trying to enforce quantity — or having everyone be the same, equal, and safe — produces a reversion to the mean, forcing everything into an average which because of the greater weight of lower values, moves downward over time. Standardization, equality, and conformity are death for this reason.

The human “improvements” to the UK were designed to allay fears of early death but instead killed public life. You need places where people can come together and meet, and those need alcohol, food, and smokes to be affordable if not outright cheap. The point is to create a commons, not suck profit out of the people so that you can fund your unsteady and overweight government. Yet in the name of “improvement” you always get the bloat, and the life is destroyed.

Death metal fans understand, in an improvement on Bill and Ted, that life should be excellent. We are not here as profit centers for conservative politicians, nor as ideological foosball player tokens for Leftist ideologues to achieve their dreamed-of but never seen in history Utopia. We are here to experience life in its greatness, to figure out who we are, and to do things that are meaningful. That includes quite a few nights in a smoky, greasy, boozy pub with friends old and new.

Tags: , , , , , , ,

35 thoughts on “Smoking Bans Are Killing Public Life”

  1. Antisocialite says:

    The professional, rootless urban youth care more about places like Starbucks and fancy ethnic restaurants where they can get their soy lattes and tofus, not some dingy watering hole with sportsball constantly blaring in the background.

  2. canadaspaceman says:

    I forgot about that. Bars and restaurants banned smoking in Toronto,Ontario in the late 1990s.
    It took years to enforce it everywhere. Sometime in the early-mid 2000’s was when I would rather buy from a liquor store, or The Beer Store,and spend my time at home or at friends’ homes as I could smoke cigarettes (or weed,or hash). Saved a lot of money that way.
    AFTER I stopped smoking myself, in 2006, I still did not agree with the Ontario ban.
    There should be a choice by establishments whether or not they want to have a ban. They can determine who their clientele is.
    Not everybody wants to travel to a Royal Canadian Legion hall to smoke, and drink a beer, with acquaintances.

    1. Thewaters says:

      I agree. Private business should be allowed to determine whether they or not they want to allow smoking. They should also be allowed to deny anyone access to their establishment and withhold their services for any reason.

  3. Satan Akbar says:

    but cigarettes smell like shit and smokers usually covered in black tar looking and smelling like shit. you say people are self destructive and then approve of smoking?

  4. Hessian Murderer of Black Death says:

    Though smoking is decadent garbage that weakens the body, worrying about second hand smoking is only for huge pussies. It’s not a big deal. When I walk past a smoker I just hold my breath.

    1. satan akbar says:

      you should’t have to hold your breath and be the one to compensate because they want to indulge in a decadent activity

      1. Does the same apply to cars, trucks, factories, and flatulence?

        1. bombastus says:

          No. Flatulence is the exception since in the middle ages it was well known that inhaling your own farts would protect you from the plague.

          1. But if you fart when you masturbate, it will turn you gay.

            1. bombastus says:

              Then you’ll get AIDS but at least not die from second hand smoke

        2. Flying Kites says:

          All forms of can spray, disinfectant, and ordor maskers. That sting at the back of the throat, through the nose, and the flat bitter taste on the tongue. I really fuckin’ hate people’s choices in covering their soy body odor or masking the shit in their bathrooms.

        3. bozaloshtsh says:

          Cars are a decadent activity? I’m willing to agree with you on that actually, but the amount of people that NEED to drive a car to make their living is far, far higher than the amount of people that NEED to smoke. I think you need to kick your nicotine addiction Brett, this article was shit.

          1. We can restructure life to avoid so much driving, at least. But why reduce pleasures?

            1. Miljenko says:

              To many people around the world, driving is a great form of pleasure. Not merely viewed as a commute.

              1. They should try smoking.

  5. Chris says:

    If you don’t like tobacco smoke and an establishment allows such, please excuse yourself. Simple. Foad

    1. Trey AzagTHOT says:

      Why should non-smokers breath in smoke of someone’s degenerate activities?

      1. canadaspaceman says:

        They don’t have to. It is not hard to understand.
        They can go to the bars/pubs/restaurants that do not allow it.
        Example –
        I do not want to get eaten by cannibals,so I do not visit places that are inhabited by them.

        1. I’m imagining a bar which endorses cannibalism. Drinks are cheap but…

      2. Jesus Enjoyed the Occasional Cigarette says:

        What are you, antifa? Because they willingly accept it if they go into a smoking establishment. Otherwise they could go to a non-smoking establishment for all the little bitches who don’t like smoke.

  6. LostInTheANUS says:

    I’d only allow pipe smokers. Cigarette (aka FAG) smoke smells like shit and their putrid smell stinks up everything around them.

      1. LostInTheANUS says:

        I’m willing to make an exception for cigars as long as they’re not trash quality.

    1. Chris says:

      I can sympathize with this but there are ventilation options for us in the 21st century! Enjoy the smoke

  7. Saul says:

    Virtually every thinker and/or warrior worth his salt throughout the ages has had some “vice” or other. Civilization as we know it has been built on the charred lungs and rotting livers of great men. Truth.

    1. Diseased and Deceased says:

      Don`t forget crotch rot.

  8. Bunch of whiny cunts, complaining about smoking bans. “No more cigarettes indoors, this is truly a harbinger of The End of the West waaaahhhh”

    If you want to smoke, you step outside for five minutes. It’s like going on break. Might even strike up a conversation with a fellow smoker. (With women, that’s called “smirting”.)

    Tobacco is from the New World… Was social life in Jolly Old England nonexistent before Columbus??

    1. Do you feel the same way about coffee?

      1. I’m surprised YOU are not calling for a ban on coffee, considering the coffeehouse’s traditional association with big city libtard culture and the “ideological ferment” of The Enlightenment (TM!) — in addition to it being alien to Europe (i.e. European genes). Your hero Cunt Grishfuck doesn’t drink coffee…

        Me? I could give a shit.

        Another benefit of the smoking ban is not having your clothes impregnated by the exhalations of others. A lot of smokers — those who aren’t greasy white trash pigs — will tell you this is a disgusting experience.

        1. canadaspaceman says:

          How many times does it have to be repeated here the FORCED smoking ban denies freedom of choice?
          Why can’t establishments decide who THEY want for patrons? If they want smokers who spend more money, then you are denying them to make a living.
          Every time someone says “go outside if you want to smoke”, then the next denial of freedom will be where they are ALLOWED to stand outside?”and stand this many feet away!”

          Most smokers will agree to certain sites deserving clean air areas, like hospitals demanding a 9 metre (25 feet) smoke-free area around exits/entrances, but what happens when these forced non-smoking bars later witness their customers get tickets for smoking within 26 or 100 feet outside?
          That’s right, MORE places will go out of business, because people will be pissed off they can’t even smoke OUTSIDE, which is what was supposed to make you happy.

          1. Why can’t establishments decide who THEY want for patrons?

            There are two basic approaches to social order: competition and control.

            Competition says that you have your best people set the standards, and you reward those who achieve those after the fact. This means that you allow a pub to allow smoking if it wants, and see if it can thrive. This is not a popularity contest per se because if your club attracts the smartest people, even if fewest in number, it becomes important in a competitive, hierarchical society.

            Control says that you design a utilitarian standard and enforce it on everyone before the fact so that they are all equal. This means that you set up 400 pages of rules concerning pubs, send out legions of bureaucrats to fine anyone who deviates, and then claim victory because everyone is “safe” but bored and yet terrified of the rules.

        2. The freedom of choice is to step outside and puff; or not. Fuck off, no cop is going to ticket someone smoking outside a bar. And anyways, two words: Patio Area…

          Adapt or perish, whiny cunts. That’s capitalism.

          And hey, I happen to agree with you, my Canadian friend… I’m a crackhead who would love to go to Freebase-Friendly Pubs; sadly, those are illegal. So instead of getting high at a table, I have to step outside and find an alley where can spark my rock. I ain’t complaining like a little bitch about it…

          If you actually read the Guardian article, you’ll see that Brett’s whole jeremiad is based on the musings of an ignorant Paki who’s never set foot in a pub. The remainder of the article is actual hard DATA on taxes, prices and market currents. It turns out it’s NOT the smoking ban — It’s the Economy, Stupid…

          Next up on **Death Metal** Underground: “Closure of North American Shopping Malls: More Evidence of the Decline of the West (Now That I’m Middle-Aged, the 80’s Were So Great Weren’t They)”

    2. sarcastro says:

      As a smoker I don’t mind the bans. Probably because I’m accustomed to stepping outside when at work or home anyway.

      The law doesn’t seem to have affected bar business much in my corner of the world. Rather just shifted congregating to the outdoor patios. Fine by me, I can’t stand the loud, shitty music inside anyway.

  9. Coolest Monkey in the Jungle says:

    The real reason why Britain is losing its pubs is that muslims don’t drink alcohol. I have even seen pubs that have been turned into mosques.

    And honestly, I’m totally fine with that.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *