Consider an event like
deedbot: http://qntra.net/2018/08/gamer-made-to-post-cryptocurrency-for-milder-pre-trial-detention-in-us-doj-blackmail-scheme/ << Qntra - Gamer Made To Post "Cryptocurrency" For Milder Pre-Trial Detention In US DOJ Blackmail Scheme
Obviously enough the SOPS (as well as the pantsuit they stand for) would like this to be -- to be -- a case of "enforcing" some "law". Translating this in-unverse construction into actual language, they would very much like to foist upon the entire world an obligation to interpret phenomena in specified terminology and towards a specified narrative (the salient point of the whole process being in this case that "if you do so then so and so will happen, therefore you must do this and that instead"). Transparently enough the purpose of the entire exercise is that the pantsuit (through their SOPS) would very much like to control your future activity, your own resources and your own thoughts too, if at all possible.
Nevertheless, things can never be words. Things are forever things, phenomena remain unwarmed by our verbiage, forever nothing but phenomena. Words are about things, and since the modern man perceives the need to affix words to things in some manner, sovereignity is what the glue relied upon for that affixion is called -- a conventional notion, an agreement as to who's to put what words on what things. That this convention is always poorly specified (and can not be specified any tighter for both fundamental as well as practical reasons) leaves some space for a certain kind of cocksucker to try and insinuate his own nonsensei in between ; verily this "going to New York to be a writer" is the fuel of the greatest idiocy engines the world has ever known.
Yet in the end, all pretense to sovereignity is exactly this : a pretense to the interpretation of phenomena ; but one that is not merely optional. Sovereignity is constructed, first and foremost, out of mandatory translation of events into meaning ; and the destruction of sovereignity begins with the rejection of that mandate.
Therefore, when people said "because one is born, therefore he's not got anything to atone for, what the fuck is wrong with you" and "because one holds a woman down and sticks it in her he's got nothing to make amends for" the Catholic church thereby ended as a sovereign (which it was, at least for the years in between the misery of Worms and say Giordano Bruno's thermal misadventure).
Similarily, when La Serenissima declares the above event is to be interpreted as yet another case of child abuse, what is at stake is nothing else, and nothing less, than the very question of sovereignity -- or more specifically what's happening is that The Most Serene Republic is defeating the baseless claim to sovereignity of a fiat pretend-sovereign.
In this context it is then meaningless to protest that "the kiddo's in jail anyway", much exactly for the same reasons it's meaningless to attempt to defend any other child rapist with a round and blind "but the victims are getting fucked even as we speak, chained to a damp wall in a musky cellar". The concreteness of the offense is no sort of defense whatsoever, who's going to base ethics judgements on occurence frequency counts ?! That aside, in the general speaking most kids aren't so raped ; but for the minority that actually are their misfortune carries no further meaning than the actuality of evil equally alongside the strength of its rejection. It certainly isn't some kind of "well, it's alright for them, since to them it somehow keeps happening". There's no "somehow" there, we know exactly how it happens -- for as long as the USG stands, kids will get raped.
Many, countless, numerous hordes of children, raped every day for and by the misery of the bureaucratic state, including the whole town of Rotherham, and including 15 yo (in 2014) Paul Horner, and as Martin Marsich, and that nameless one that killed himself, Aaron-whatever, and so on. Yes one could propose that "did they not dress as provocatively as they did, had they the sense to not live in San Francisco or get in the van with the candy guy" then they'd still be "safe". What safety is this ?
The sovereign power of The Republic is such that it ends the nonsense of the various bureaucracies ; and with it frees a whole bunch of children and adults from their current bed sitting room fate.———
- Nonsense that he, personally, and for unexamined (unexamined because, to him, unvoiceable, because in turn such voicing'd be too painful for him) reasons he thinks he needs. The ur-mechanism of all the niggers out there goes as follows : "1. I'm missing a leg ; 2. These other kids have both legs ; 5. Therefore the world must be fixed to resolve this problem of mine". The 3 and 4 that are missing from the count (and, tellingly, raise no alarm bells in the nigger head) say something or the other about just how painful it is to not have both legs, unfair, whatever.
This subjectively perceived need, to fix the world at the world's own expense so that the limp and lame no longer have to confront, in their inner sanctum, their limp lameness -- this is what impels the pizdet towards the bureaucratic chumpatron intake. This is what impels the nigger of all skin tones towards prostitextuation, and so on and so forth. No "civil servant" since the war was animated by some kind of hallucinatory, utterly nonsensical "desire to serve the public" -- that's a label without a content, generally used to conceal the content of the unlabelled "I want you all to pay for my congenital defects" vat. Everyone who ever worked for a bureaucracy wasn't there for any other reason than because the bureaucracy seemed to them convincing enough in its implicit promise of eventually fixing the world in such a way as to make prosthetics unnecessary. So what if that involves cutting some perfectly fine legs here and there ? Fuck those able bodied assholes, they don't know how good they have it -- and bureaucrat shithead is here to make them realise it! In case you were wondering why the world's been going one way since the rise of the bureaucratic state... well now you know, don't you. [↩]