The Dangers of Licensing

46
2688
Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Many people think that licensing professions – medicine, for instance – is a sound idea because it reduces quackery. 

Well, so much for that, eh? 

Consider the contrary alternative – as applied to the practice of another profession. That of journalism. Anyone is free to write, without having to beg the state or a state-enforced guild of some kind (that’s you American Medical Association) for permission to do so. Permission that is conditional. Permission that can be rescinded – and for more than what is styled “malpractice,” as regards the practice of medicine.

The latter having become synonymous with obedience.

The state of California, as a for-instance, along with the medical guild that holds a sword of Damcoles over the heads of physicians in California via the threat of taking away their permission to practice, has been trying to do just that to any doctor who tells the truth about the inefficacy of “masks,” alternatives to the “vaccines” or questions anything the state/guild state as absolute truths that may not be questioned.

And the truth is no defense.

This sort of thing was also being done on an ad hoc basis nationally during the “pandemic,” via threatened firings – loss of privileges – if a doctor refused to “mask” or (more serious) did not try to force the “mask” upon patients.

The California business has been temporarily held in abeyance by courts but there is as yet no challenge to the principle underlying it – that to be allowed to practice medicine, one must obtain the state’s permission and be anointed by a state-backed guild to do so.

But it is precisely that principle which must be rejected if doctors are ever again to be free to practice medicine.

As journalists in this country still are.

For now.

Naturally, there is a movement afoot to end that – by licensing journalists (just as Dr. Goebbels did in Germany; just as Stalin did in Soviet Russia)  and thereby controlling journalism, just as medicine is now controlled.

Imagine the consequences of that – including for medicine.

If journalists were required to be licensed by the state and/or the practice of their profession made conditional upon the permission to do so of a state-enforced guild of some kind, it is doubtful anyone – excepting those who’d been harmed by them – would know the truth about  . . .  anything. Including the truth about the drugs that were pushed on the populace by a medical system completely controlled by the same mechanisms.

Instead of people becoming aware of the facts – and becoming “hesitant” to take these drugs – most would have continued to take them, because that’s what their licensed-and-approved doctors – the “experts” – told them to and no one else was telling them about the sound reasons why they might not want to.

“Masking” would have never ended. Dr. Fauci would not be in hiding. Albert Bourla – head of the chief drug cartel – would not have to worry about free-range journalists accosting him with “impertinent” questions.

The asking of such questions is a danger, all right – to lies and those who spread them.

It is precisely because the practice of journalism does not require permission – and for that reason the right to practice it cannot be taken away for displeasing authority – that journalism is capable of exposing the truth.

Especially about authority.

This has long been understood to be an essential bulwark against abusive authority. Once upon a time, “mainstream” journalists practiced such journalism, as for example the TV program, 60 Minutes.

But that was long time ago.

“Mainstream” journalism has become a kind of guild the members of which no longer question authority but rather cheerlead for it – often deliberately avoid covering anything that calls it into question, as for example the recent revelations – on video – of a senior Pfizer drug-pusher openly admitting alarming things about the company he works for. These revelations – this video – ought to have been all over the “mainstream” news, rather than ignored by most of it.

And this is precisely why “mainstream” journalists are no longer trusted.

Journalists outside of the “mainstream” have a growing rather dwindling readership/viewership because they have been free to tell the truth – and the truth always finds an audience, because the truth is essential to physical as well as psychological survival. If young children are not told the truth about dangerous things that can cause them harm then they are much more likely to be harmed by dangerous things. Every parent knows this. Or rather, used to know it.

This is no less true for adults – viz, the drugs that don’t immunize that licensed quacks continue to insist are “vaccines.” Which they are pressured to do by threat of loss of their license to practice.

And so they squelch the truth in favor of lies that cause harm to those whom they lie to. And thereby become the very thing that “licensing” was – ostensibly – erected to prevent.

Quacks.

That word has an ancient lineage, going back to Medieval times, when quacksalvers would push mercury – a toxic liquid metal – on the sick as a “salve” for what ailed them. Modern quacks push drugs that provide no immunity from sickness as “vaccines.” It is fundamentally the same kind of malpractice. Lucky for us there were unlicensed journalists who were free to practice their profession – who exposed this malpractice.

This does not mean that some journalists – absent licensing – won’t also be guilty of “malpractice.” Just as there will always be some people who decide to use a gun for criminal purposes, irrespective of laws forbidding this. The point is that the truth stands a chance when it is free to combat untruth. Quack journalists, at any rate, would not have a lock on their profession; instead it is policed by the truth. Journalists who got it right would rise in esteem and trustworthiness. Those who were more often wrong than right – or who were caught lying – would soon be out of the profession by dint of no longer having an audience.

Precisely as is happening to the “mainstream” journalists, which probably accounts for their eagerness to turn the practice of journalism into a duly licensed profession – just like medicine.

. . .

If you like what you’ve found here please consider supporting EPautos. 

We depend on you to keep the wheels turning! 

Our donate button is here.

 If you prefer not to use PayPal, our mailing address is:

EPautos
721 Hummingbird Lane SE
Copper Hill, VA 24079

PS: Get an EPautos magnet or sticker or coaster in return for a $20 or more one-time donation or a $10 or more monthly recurring donation. (Please be sure to tell us you want a magnet or sticker or coaster – and also, provide an address, so we know where to mail the thing!)

My eBook about car buying (new and used) is also available for your favorite price – free! Click here.  If that fails, email me at EPeters952@yahoo.com and I will send you a copy directly!

 

 

 

 

 

46 COMMENTS

  1. ‘there is a movement to control journalism, just as medicine is now controlled.’ — eric

    Content control is proving more effective than licensure, especially at the intersection with medicine. Today New York Slimes stenographer David Wallace-Wells — a history major — graces us with his scribbling titled “Why Are So Many Americans Dying Right Now?”

    https://archive.ph/OLWR3

    Those of us who read the alt-press know that multiple databases — VAERS, V-Safe, VA, the military health system — show a heavy toll of adverse events and deaths from mRNA injections.

    But incredibly, the word ‘vaccine’ does not appear in Wallace-Wells’ screed. It is a limited hangout to divert attention from widespread health damage in the wake of 70% of Americans getting jabbed.

    Wallace-Wells leads with ‘delayed care,’ ‘indirect effects of pandemic restrictions,’ and ‘long covid’ as three reasons for excess deaths: all plausible, but only if the Big Kahuna, mass mRNA injections, is treated as the obvious prime suspect for excess deaths.

    “If we attribute most of those hundreds of thousands of additional deaths to Covid infection — probably the least complicated, Occam’s razor explanation — it raises the direct toll of Covid-19 in the United States to close to 1.5 million,” Wallace-Wells concludes.

    His pseudo-sophisticated piece of journalistic harlotry should be labeled ‘sponsored by Pfizer.‘ Smug middlebrow NYT readers incapable of thinking outside the MSM box will read it, believe themselves to be well-informed, and never notice what’s missing.

  2. Journalists who work in electronic media are effectively licensed by the FCC.

    TV and radio stations obviously are directly liscensed. Satellite transmitters as well. Any can be revoked pretty much any time. Oh the FCC would have to come up with a reason, but Al Capone was convicted for tax evasion, not racketeering. A win is a win.

    Cable TV is regulated by the Cable act of 1992 and several other laws. There are lots of restrictions on content that can be viewed by children, so not a big stretch to cite precedent for regulation of content for pseudoscientific or public health reasons.

    Internet gets a little foggy. The FCC is the ultmate regulator of telecommunications infrastructure in the US. No ISP is going to risk taking on the FCC for a website, even their own. The DMCA has made web services subject to the whims of ISPs and hosting facilities, but as we’ve seen from the Twitter files, the FBI has a lot of sway when it comes to disappearing unapproved content. Some of the FBI power comes from the PATRIOT act, but I’m not all that familiar with all that.

    Better hang on to that mimeograph machine and get some forever stamps Eric. The USPS is still a very secure way to send information.

  3. Licensing doesn’t weed out incompetence, fraud, safety or quackery. If it did, lawyers would be out of business. Government regulators would be unemployed.

    Licensing is just a continuation of the new deal cartelization of industry.

    It is in the interest of the licensor to maintain the public idea that licensing ensures safety etc.
    If licensees keep ending up in trouble, questions arise and trust erodes. They can’t allow that.

  4. Speaking of licenses and specifically driver’s licenses, I’d be interested in reading what it costs all of you to renew your “permission to drive” cards. Just yesterday I did an online renewal for my Connecticut driver’s “privilege” and I got ass-raped for $96! Had I went in- person to a DMV affiliate, it would have tacked on an additional 8 dollars. Granted the license is valid for 8 years, but really…$96??

    • Plymouthbill,
      My late father never took a driving test. When he got his license it was the same as getting a hunting/fishing license. You paid a not too extravagant fee, and were given one. He never let it expire.

  5. LIcit: (adj.) lawful, sanctioned, or allowed

    Etymological root word of license.

    Didn’t the U.S. sanction Russia for invading Ukraine? I had been thinking news corps had been misusing the word “sanction” and it seems so. Sanction and sanctuary.

  6. Of all the professions now requiring Licensing, most were better before the current thing. One unregulated profession that couldn’t get much worse is politicians. They should be required to pass a test similar to building contractors.

    Test would be all inclusive 80% or above to pass. Include US history, understanding of originalist constitution, division of branches of Government, rights and responsibilities. If they pass that and show no history of mental illness they can throw their hat in the ring.

    • Hi Norman,

      I have always thought if a person is competent at his trade then that will show – just as incompetence will also show. A “license” shows us nothing – other than that the person is “licensed.”

      • @Eric, The only thing a license shows is the ability to jump through hoops and memorize useless rote. In my twenty years of plumbing, 90% of what I learned for the tests, I never used again. I know a lot of unlicensed guys who are better at their trade than the licensed guys.

        Its all a racket too enrich the members of the club.

        @Jim H, Most all the congress critters have IQs that seem to rival room temperature. I cant for the life of me figure how someone gets in those positions other than an extreme sociopathic bent and a a lot ‘head nodding’

        • Indeed, Norman!

          I figured this out when I got my first paid newspaper job (as a stringer) while still in high school. It occurred to me that I knew everything I needed to know – grammar/spelling, basic competence with the language – in sixth grade and the rest of it was just experience and improvement on the job. Two hundred years ago, it was common for boys to apprentice to a “master” and learn a trade – including law – such that by the time they were around 17 or 18 (often younger) they were capable of operating as adults and did so. Today, adulthood is often delayed until the mid-late twenties and (it seems) pushing 30 in many cases.

        • Norman,
          In my 25 years of plumbing, I saw an abundance of “country plumbing” that didn’t approach being within code. And worked just fine.

      • Eric,
        “Licensing” could be easily done in the private sector. A business starts issuing “certifications” in lieu of “licenses”. You can continue to do business without the certification, but if the certifier gets a good enough reputation, it might behoove one to get it. Any thing the state can do, the private sector can do better.

        • Water lines and sink/tub drains are acceptable for the do-it-yourself-er after forty trips to the big hardware/lumber store.

          Below ground, sewer lines and venting requires trained and certified master plumbers with plenty of knowledge to know what to do. It is the go to decision, the choice you make.

          Then the inspector, mafia approved, validates the work.

          Make the pour.

        • I agree, John –

          The key is that it’s all voluntary and people are free to do business with a non-“licensed” whomever, who is also free, in his turn, to ply his trade without a “license” or repercussions for doing so. The bottom line, it seems to me, is that everyone has a right to contract services – period. And anyone has the right to provide them. Also period. If the services are poor, that is another matter. One that can be dealt with in any of several ways (such as civil court, for instance) and inevitable professional pariah-hood for being incompetent or worse.

    • ‘politicians … should be required to pass a test similar to building contractors.’ — Norman Franklin

      Totally concur. But it would require a constitutional amendment, since Article I only imposes requirements of minimum age, citizenship, and state residency.

      In a video I saw a couple of days ago, several of “Biden’s” judicial nominees, under questioning by Senator John Kennedy of Louisiana, were unable to cite basic facts about the constitution.

      It was the equivalent of an applicant for an electrical contractor’s license sticking her bare fingers into the socket, and getting an instant frizzy hairdo. ‘Senator’ Liz Warren, please copy. 🙂

      • >an instant frizzy hairdo

        Well, Jim, in today’s “woke” universe, that might be a prereq to become a “licensed politician.” Solidarity, and all that.

        Check out some of Jay Leno’s “Jaywalking” episodes, if you have not done so. There seems to be no upper bound on the stupidity and ignorance of the American public. Sad, but scary as well, because *all* these people get to vote, and all votes count the same.

    • Oh, Jesus, here we go again.
      A “licensed politician?” YGBSM.

      I remember a character from one of Robert Heinlein’s books who was described as a “licensed mendicant,” which I regard as just another of RAH’s little jokes. A license to beg? C’mon, now, how could a beggar possibly afford to pay a “license fee,” and to what purpose?

    • Norman,
      I’ve been out of the construction business for going on twenty years, but when I left it, a “building contractor” in Missouri didn’t have to pass any kind of test. All they had to do was pony up for a business license, just like a shoe store. In Kansas City and St Louis there may have been such requirement, but not where I worked.

  7. fake science sure is popular today….

    There is a trillion dollar business built on a huge lie….

    so you can’t have someone reveal the fact that the business is based on pure bs…..

    therefore anything revealing the truth about it must be classified as misinformation/disinformation…aggressively attacked, silenced, banned, deplatformed, demonized,

    The field of vi ro..lo..gy is about the same scientific level as the tooth fairy, the easter bunny, global warming, running your ice car on tap water, making gold from lead, pigs flying…100% fake science

    the monsters that work in this field, they make lots of money…. so who cares…..if they open their mouth they are de licensed, so they shutup and take the money…zero ethics….

  8. So many jobs now a days that require a license, that for the most part, worked far better before that nonsense… Teaching for example. Before the 1960’s almost no teachers had a “license”. When licensing for teaching picked up steam in the 60’s, it wasn’t required, and many schools didn’t care, or actively avoided it as they often had to pay more to those with “licenses”. So that’s why its required today, not just for public schools, but also private ones. So the state gets a say on who gets to be one, even for non government school.

    Some other ones you wonder why they have them too, hairdressers? Really? How about real estate agents. Here in Indiana we almost abolished needing a real estate license, but guess what, it was resisted by established interests…..

    So not only do you have to fight the government on it, you have to fight those already in the business who don’t want the competition.

  9. As Walter E. Williams pointed out years ago, licensing is nothing but protection from competition for those already in the business of whatever it is being “licensed”.

    Also, prescriptioning is just a price support program for the pharmaceutical/industrial complex, nothing more.

  10. As if hospital administrations, insurance groups, and large group caregiver entities weren’t bad enough with restricting a health professional’s freedom to care for their patients, this letter went out to every licensed healthcare and dispensing professional in the State of Michigan early on in the pandemic:
    March 24, 2020
    TO: Licensed Prescribers & Dispensers
    RE: Reminder of Appropriate Prescribing and Dispensing
    Dear Licensed Prescribers and Dispensers:
    The Department of Licensing and Regulatory Affairs has received multiple allegations of Michigan physicians inappropriately prescribing hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine to themselves, family, friends, and/or coworkers without a legitimate medical purpose. Prescribing hydroxychloroquine or chloroquine without further proof of efficacy for treating COVID-19 or with the intent to stockpile the drug may create a shortage for patients with lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, or other ailments for which chloroquine and hydroxychloroquine are proven treatments. Reports of this conduct will be evaluated and may be further investigated for administrative action.
    Prescribing any kind of prescription must also be associated with medical documentation showing proof of the medical necessity and medical condition for which the patient is being treated. Again, these are drugs that have not been proven scientifically or medically to treat COVID-19.
    Michigan pharmacists may see an increased volume of prescriptions for hydroxychloroquine and chloroquine and should take special care to evaluate the prescriptions’ legitimacy. Pursuant to Michigan Administrative Code, R 338.490(2), a pharmacist shall not fill a prescription if the pharmacist believes the prescription will be used for other than legitimate medical purposes or if the prescription could cause harm to a patient.
    It is also important to be mindful that licensed health professionals are required to report inappropriate prescribing practices. LARA appreciates all licensed health professionals for their service and cooperation in assuring compliance in acting responsibly while continuing to provide the best possible care for Michigan’s citizens during this unprecedented and very challenging time. To stay up to date on the latest information regarding the COVID-19 pandemic please go to http://www.michigan.gov/Coronavirus and the CDC site at http://www.CDC.gov.
    Sincerely,
    Deb Gagliardi,
    Director Bureau of Professional Licensing

  11. Milton Friedman talked about licensing. It is simply a tax if done by the state, nothing more. Does not impart any acknowledgement of competency. If a private organization such as the American Medical Association has a private standard and competency, then that would mean something. Milton must be rolling in his grave in that the AMA has jumped on board in lock step with state licensing and now are one in the same and both are corrupt.

  12. I’m not saying this is a bad idea by any means.

    But I would point out this change would have a lot of other potentially far-reaching ramifications.

    Most obviously WRT prescription drugs, which you can’t get without a doctor and a pharmacist, both of whom are officially licensed.

    This seemingly small change would really, really change the existing system (which is, by the way, broken).

    • Getting rid of all licenses would be a step back to actual liberty, to the state of things (which worked and worked well) that existed prior to about 1900. Everything the tyrants license, gets controlled, corrupted, and destroyed.

      Starting with the most basic, the “driver’s” license. Travel upon the public streets and roads is a right, not a mere privilege. As is practicing any profession or craft. The founding fathers were NOT licensed lawyers. Doctors weren’t licensed during the American revolution. If you want to be a doctor, you learn by reading, study, and emulating peers. The modern system is insane and evil, as well as completely illegitimate.

      • Regarding driver”s licenses, I have read comments in other forums that essentially say “If you want to drive/travel without a license do it on private property.” If caught without it a charge of “driving on a public way without a license” follows. As driving is a privilege requiring a licence this makes all roads private. Do you see the problem? Under licensing schemes there are no “public roads”, I’m certain the charges would stand even in the face of this Catch-22.

      • This is the age of Yelp and Google reviews.

        An argument could be made that licensing is outdated.

        Are we looking for someone who has credentials, or are we looking for someone who will generate results?

  13. I highly recommend following Glen Greenwald and Matt Taibi on Substack (along with Eric of course) to find out what’s really going on behind the curtain. Note also that Julian Assange is still rotting in prison on phony charges; I think the PTB will do their best to keep him there until he’s dead.

    • Mike,
      Julian is a blatant open display of the state’s contempt for ANY freedom. He is a foreign citizen, who committed none of the “alleged crimes” on US soil, and is now rotting in a foreign prison for the “crime” of journalism. What gives the US judicial system any jurisdiction over him? Or are we to accept that the entire world is under its jurisdiction?

  14. My chosen profession (software development) has had talk of licensing throughout the years. Never amounted to much; I think most recognized it for bs (at least those of us with no or gray hair). The argument was because we (sometimes) develop safety critical / life critical code then a bare minimum skillset is required.

    I always said that identifying talent & proving talent was the job of the HR morons and first line managers. And, most organizations have a robust software review process to catch things that may impact safety or life critical. I’m talking about professional code houses, not the dork who writes game apps for iPhones.

    • Hi Mike,

      One the absurdities that existed when I first embarked upon journalism as a career was the necessity of having a BA to “practice” it. As if that had anything to do with whether a candidate could compose a coherent paragraph, get the facts straight – and so on.

      • I was a graphic designer from the late 1990’s until about 2010. I have a BA in art, in order to even get someone to look at my work. Never mind that many of those folks interviewing me who had started in the business before the 1980’s had no college degrees at all. Most of those older folks learned on the job back then, which to be honest is a much better way to do that.

  15. ‘Journalism is capable of exposing the truth.’ — eric

    Can do, won’t do. In their own words:

    ‘Stanford journalism professor, Ted Glasser, insisted that journalism needed to “free itself from this notion of objectivity to develop a sense of social justice.”

    ‘Lauren Wolfe, the fired freelance editor for the New York Times, has not only gone public to defend her pro-Biden tweet but published a piece titled “I’m a Biased Journalist and I’m Okay With That.”

    ‘Former New York Times writer (and now Howard University journalism professor) Nikole Hannah-Jones is a leading voice for advocacy journalism. Indeed, Hannah-Jones has declared “all journalism is activism.” Her 1619 Project has been challenged as deeply flawed …’

    https://jonathanturley.org/2023/02/01/objectivity-has-got-to-go-news-leaders-call-for-end-of-objective-journalism/

    Hannah-Jones moving from the NYT to Howard U exemplifies the ‘long march through the institutions’ which is now complete.

    From here on out, the MSM will handle advocacy journalism, festooned with a thin seasoning of selective factoids. All serious journalism will be found in Substacks and alt news outlets.

    Mind the gap!

  16. What the lord giveth, the lord can take away.
    A thing anyone getting a license to do anything must be aware of. It’s temporary, depending on your “behavior”. Not to mention the exorbitant cost of many such licenses. For the simple reason of excluding anyone just starting a business from getting one. Taxi medallions for instance, in some major cities.
    Medical licensing was created by the snake oil salesmen who were predominant at the time. Keeping real medical people out of favor. If you didn’t go along with “all illness is a drug or surgery deficiency”, you were not allowed to work. More money for the snake oil salesman, less money for real medicine.

  17. Licensing always involves graft, bribery, and fraud. Once upon a time, 30+ years ago, I went to work on a construction job in Kansas City MO. Being a plumber, I needed a KC license to do so. My crew and I went to city hall to take the test. The Code enforcement guy was as nervous as a cat in a room full of rocking chairs. I asked the job superintendent about that, and he informed me that a scandal in code enforcement had recently been revealed. Low and behold, licenses had been for sale. Worked passed inspection, for a price. So my nervous enforcer was concerned I might be an agent testing him.

    • This was the case in Detroit when it came to licensing operators for HVAC large building chiller operations.
      If you went to the “school” that the city official had his hand in, you were guaranteed to pass. If not, you were given a grueling exam that might take more than one “try” to pass.
      In Michigan, there are only three cities that license chiller operators–Dearborn, Detroit and Grand Rapids.

    • When I was a real estate agent, I had a builder admit to me that the town government building inspector hadn’t ever been upstairs in his new build house that he was selling. Why? The inspector had bad knees and climbing stairs was too much of a chore…… Yes, really! (most of the homes in that development were two story, most with a basement too)

      So that is what a government inspection is worth. Nothing.. So don’t let a builder talk you out of hiring your own inspector for a new house, it’s best you have them look a number of times during the build. A good builder will have no problem with that, one that doesn’t is a big red flag. Because it’s very possible no third party has even looked at his work. Some areas are better than others when it comes to builder quality, my area isn’t bad, but some areas (especially fast growing ones) have dreadful builders.

      • richb,
        I once heard a government inspector and a contractor arguing a code issue. The inspector got tired of it, and told the contractor “I inspect it and pass it. After I leave you can do what you want”.

        • Surprised they realize that what happens after they pass something and leave. Still annoying though because it’s an extra cost to put it the way you really want.

    • Hi Roscoe,

      That claim from the Pfizer employee about lying to impress someone on a date doesn’t make any sense. Who in the world would come up with such a lie just to impress someone on a date? Considering the actions of Pfizer over the years and the actions of its current CEO, Albert Bourla, I have little reason to believe his claim.

      The establishment media made little to no mention of that Project Veritas video, likely because they get a LOT of advertising money and sponsorship from Pfizer and other drug companies. There’s video out there of various “news” programs that are “Sponsored by Pfizer”.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here