Against the Great Reset: 'China, Covid-19, Realpolitik, and the Great Reset'

Continuing today, and for the next 15 weeks, The Pipeline will present excerpts from each of the essays contained in Against the Great Reset: 18 Theses Contra the New World Order, to be published on October 18 by Bombardier Books and distributed by Simon and Schuster, and available now for pre-order at the links. 

 

PART I: THE PROBLEM

Excerpt from "China, COVID-19, Realpolitik, and the Great Reset," By Douglas Murray

It is a good rule of thumb that one should become skeptical—and perhaps also concerned—whenever everyone in a position of authority starts to say the same thing. Particularly when they also all do so at the same time.

Such a moment arrived in 2020 when nearly every Western statesman, and a few others who might aspire to that role, began to use the phrase “Build Back Better.” Boris Johnson claimed that he might have used it first. Joe Biden seemed to believe that he had. But they were hardly the only people to use it from the early days of the Covid-19 crisis onwards. Almost overnight, it seemed as though absolutely everyone was using the same words. Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern said it down in New Zealand. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau used it in Canada. Bill Clinton used it as he was campaigning for Joe Biden. And the mayor of London, Sadiq Khan, used it as he was campaigning for himself. Even minor royals could be heard parroting the same alliterative pleasantry. According to Prince Harry, speaking from his self-imposed exile in California, the Covid pandemic “undoubtedly” presents “an opportunity for us to work together and build back better.”

The prince is no stranger to political cliché, as he showed there, managing to pack in two of them into just half a sentence. Yet nor did people far more self-aware than him at any stage seem to realize that the phrase sounded strange in the first place, never mind that they should all also be using it at the same time. A year and a half after the phrase was first being used, President Joe Biden was still struggling to get his Build Back Better bill through the U.S. Senate. The phrase became so ubiquitous that almost no one in a position of power stopped to ask the question that ought surely to have loomed.

Why should a global pandemic be seen as simply an opportunity? In the immediate aftermath of the coronavirus leaking out from Wuhan, China, millions of people around the world died from the effects of contracting that virus. The global economy contracted at an unprecedented rate. Government borrowing soared to rates unknown outside of wartime in order to furlough millions of people who would otherwise have been destitute. Entire economies—including a U.S. economy that was roaring in an election year—were suddenly forced to a halt. None of this looked like a source of optimism. Ordinarily, the mass laying off of the workforce, the racking up of unprecedented peacetime debt, and the ordered shuttering away of the citizenry in their houses would be a source of concern and fury before it was a cause for optimism and opportunity.

But with only a couple of notable exceptions, during the Covid era, Western politicians skipped the rage stage. Indeed, they even skipped over the blame stage. Just as the WHO and other compromised international bodies failed to get to the roots of the source of the virus, so most Western politicians spent zero time or political capital on the question of why the virus had been unleashed on the world in the first place. Instead, they jumped straight to the question of just how much could be achieved by the unprecedented opportunity that the virus had allegedly gifted us.

Within a little over a year, politicians themselves seemed to be laughing at the phrase, even as they could not stop using it. In October 2021, Boris Johnson’s office seemed to imagine that the British public had become so thrilled by the “build back better” tagline that it was time for some riffs on the theme. At this stage, somewhere between lockdowns umpteen and nineteen, Johnson released a number of videos on his social media pages in which the slogan build back better was posted on the screen. Johnson seemed to imagine that the British public was in a playful mood around the theme. The videos included one of him spreading butter on some pieces of toast and looking at the camera and saying “build back butter.” In a second video, with the build back better motif over it, the Prime Minister could be seen unrolling a packet of fish and chips. “Mmm” he says appreciatively, before looking at the camera and saying “Build back batter.” Terms like “pathetic” and “inadequate” would fail to do justice to such political moments.

The obvious comparison to make at this stage is with great plagues in history. And though most were of a degree of seriousness that far outweighs the effects of Covid, it is a sobering consideration. Who, for instance, viewed the so-called “Spanish flu” of a century ago as an opportunity? Who would have dared in the early months or years after that pandemic ravaged the planet to see it as an opportunity to rebuild the global economy in a different way?

There are two things that are most visibly disturbing about the political reaction to all of this. The first is the desire to leapfrog over the most obvious stage in the post-pandemic era. Which should have been a clinical, careful and failsafe analysis of how this novel coronavirus managed to come out of Wuhan. The second disturbing thing is that the leap should have immediately moved on to a restructuring of the global economy and of free societies that seemed already to be sitting there, ready-made.

The extent to which that first stage was leaped over has many reasons. But one of these undoubtedly had much to do with the incumbent in the White House when the “China virus” first came into the world. President Trump was in an election year and was understandably intent on not shuttering the U.S. economy ahead of an election. He was also keen to attribute blame toward the place where he saw the virus originating. Whether the cause of the leak was a Wuhan wet market (as was early on deemed the only permissible explanation) or the Wuhan Institute of Virology (as soon seemed likelier), Trump was keen that China got the blame for releasing the virus into the world. And there was much to be said for this. Even if the leak had been an accident, it was one that the Chinese authorities did nothing to contain, allowing flights out of the region even as the first knowledge of the virus made the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) shutter flights and regions within Chinese borders.

But keen observers will have noticed that Trump was a divisive president and that what he said was the case was strenuously pushed back against by his critics when it was true as well as when it was not. Early in 2020, as Trump continued to talk about the source of the virus, his political opponents decided to claim that identifying China as the source of the virus would lead to an upsurge in anti-Chinese racism. And so Democrat Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi, for instance, not only deplored the president’s language but also implored Americans to demonstrate their contempt for the president’s “racism” in a practical way. Speaker Pelosi implored people to visit their local Chinatown and show solidarity with Chinese people. In Florence, Italy, the mayor went one better in the global game of grandstanding against Trump. On February 1, 2020, Dario Nardella urged Florentines to “hug a Chinese” person to combat racism. It is not known how many Italians contracted the virus through this demonstration of Sino-fraternalism.

The point is that from the earliest stage of the virus, the opportunity to point fingers appeared to have been queered by the fact that one of the only people in the world pointing fingers was a person who most of the political class around the world were ostentatiously opposed to. Even to speak of lab leaks or Chinese culpability in those days was to sound Trump-like, a fact that played very well indeed into the public relations campaign orchestrated by the CCP.

The effectiveness of that PR campaign was visible from the very start of the virus, and showed the extent to which a swathe of the scientific, media, and political establishments in the West were already literally or figuratively in the pocket of the CCP...

Next week: an excerpt from "Sovereignty and the Nation-State" by Roger Kimball. 

Canada Was Just the Beginning

Prior to the Ukraine war much of the “free” world has been focused on the Covid totalitarianism of the Boy Dictator and “representative government” to America's north. but the Covid-19 scare is now winding down both in America and across much of the world. Much of Europe has called it quits, and most American states and cities are done with it, though Covidiots remain with us, as evidenced by the continuing sight of masked drivers, alone in their cars, even in the maskless, free state of Arizona.

We need to be looking ahead and preparing for the next lockdown. And the one after that. If they can control and contain us over a fantasy weather prediction 100 years in the future, we need a similar time horizon. By putting up with this, what are we bequeathing our children and theirs – down to five generations hence: Liberty or totalitarianism?

Our time horizon must be about America and Western civilization, not about ourselves. The West has been increasing human liberty and accomplishment for thousands of years. Are we going to squander it all in just two?

The good old days: will they ever come again?

Ice ages come and go. Sea levels rise and fall. People are displaced from their lands for reasons of weather, war, crop failure, or just a desire to move on. The idea that these common historical occurrences that, in fact, drove the migration of man out of Africa,  are anyone’s "fault" is childish. But we are talking about those sixty-five percenters who demand to be controlled, told what to do, what to wear, what to think and say, where to live, by others.

Is the earth warming? Maybe. After all, we still may be coming out of the last “mini” Ice Age. (And into the next?) Is our planet warming due to man’s activity? No. Can this be proven in a world of government grants to research colleges and think tanks, and careers based on this pernicious hoax? No more than the WuFlu origin will be found by questioning those who created it or those who funded that creation because “the benefits of such experiments and the resulting knowledge outweigh the risks.” The risks with our lives, of which they have taken millions and destroyed millions more.

The constant “adjustment” of global temperature data sets to “prove” their hoax, the many climate scientists still rejecting it, all indicate that "Anthropogenic Global Warming" (AGW) cannot be proven, as does the greenhouse model failure similar to the Covid model failure used to put the West under house arrest.

The greenhouse model on which all of this is based has, itself, been shown to be false (and here, and here). CO2 has been rising for years without the predicted accompanying rise in temperature. If the models used to constrain our liberty, prosperity and behavior, if the most basic prediction driving all else – that increased atmospheric carbon will heat us into oblivion – is false, how can “the science” standing on that foundation not also be false? Global warming has been a hoax since the very start.

Not going to happen for the next few zillion years.

Is this warming, natural or otherwise, “bad” for humankind? Is it something we should wish to control, even if we can? No.

In fact, a warmer planet is what those searching-out an extraterrestrial home for mankind are looking for. Why? Because, contra the Klimate Kult, a warmer planet is safer, greener, more fruitful, and less prone to extreme weather.

The Davoisie already are talking about a “Climate Lockdown.” Are you ready? Shutting down inexpensive energy, the foundation of all progress is occurring across the West. Putting kill switches on our cars will lock us down to where they want us to be, not where we want to be. These will be “for the greater good,” to “reduce our carbon footprint.”

Increasing farmland ownership by the elite and not by farmers, decreasing items on supermarket shelves, and forcing us to eat fake meat and blaming it all on a “need” to farm less land, raise less beef, create less packaging waste, stop fossil-fueled trucks from delivering goods, will destroy nutrition, health, jobs, lives, families and liberty. Liberty is what life – not existence – is all about. Will our rulers reduce their carbon footprint of their private jets? Will they cease to eat real food so they can eat bugs?

The totalitarian rulers in Canada have shown how easy it is to destroy a man or his family with digital financial penalties in our cashless society. Are you ready for a Food Lockdown? How easy would this be? If your credit card won’t work at the supermarket, very easy, indeed. Through what possible rationale could the ruling class execute this? Again, easy: Covid attacked the obese more than anyone else. America is vastly overweight.  Davos Man could put us all on a diet of their choosing. For “the greater good,” doubtless to be echoed by their media stenographers. To ensure a society “more protected from the next pandemic.”

If the shoes fits...

The Canadian truckers started a good thing: The People pushing back on the rulers hired and paid to represent them. Unquestionably, our rulers have forgotten their place as our servants.  Will we be able to continue what the Canadian truckers started? Having tasted tyranny, the fascist Left of course loved it and will now find more ways in which to exercise it.

The media-driven hoax of the CCP virus is just as false as the media-driven hoax of AGW, that “we’re all gonna die” in twelve years. Both have one goal: To destroy the liberty of the middle class and indeed the middle class itself right along with it. Their policies are not "mistakes," or the result of "incompetence." They know exactly what they are doing; their destruction is intentional.

They must be resisted, starting with the complete rejection of any politician and all media supporting either of these unscientific hoaxes destructive of our liberty, and that of all future generations. What are we waiting for?

Now They Tell Us

You've got to hand it to the institutional Left: they managed to string out "two weeks to flatten the curve" into two years of "safety" fascism, and to fan the flames of Covid hysteria long enough to win a national election and install a feeble, senile old party apparatchik in the White House. What did they think this was? The Soviet Union in 1984?

Now comes this admission of something we pretty much knew all along:

lab leak in Wuhan, China, is now considered the most likely origin of the Covid pandemic “behind closed doors” in the Government, it has been claimed, after Boris Johnson signalled that security measures would be enhanced to prevent accidental escape.

On Monday, the Prime Minister told the House of Commons that the UK biosecurity strategy would be refreshed to protect against “natural zoonosis and laboratory leaks”, in a public acknowledgement of the threat from insecure research facilities. There is mounting suspicion that Covid-19 leaked from the Wuhan Institute of Virology which had been collecting and experimenting on dangerous bat coronaviruses in the years before the virus first emerged in the city.

From the jump, it was clear that the proximity of the Wuhan Institute of Virology to the yummy bat comestibles sold at a nearby "wet" (i.e. disgusting) market was a handy way to deflect Chinese governmental complicity in Covid-19 scare. Hey, don't blame it on our scientists, blame it on our charming and vibrant third world penchant for dining on pangolin gizzards and bat rectums! The fact that the entire Western world "elite" now leaps to China's defense in any and all circumstances—how about those amazing Peking Olympics, sports fans!—is simply an indication of how deep the dragon's financial claws are into our society now.

Hamish de Bretton-Gordon, an expert on chemical and biological counter-terrorism and former British Army officer, has submitted evidence for the strategy. He said: “I think the official view [within Government] is that it is as likely as anything else to have caused the pandemic. A lot of people like myself think it is more likely. I think attitudes have changed a little bit. The zoonotic transfer theory just didn’t make sense.

“There is a huge amount of concern about coming out publicly, but behind closed doors most people think it’s a lab leak. And they are coming round to the fact that even if they don’t agree with that, they must accept it’s likely, and they must make sure the policies are in place to stop it.”

Those policies ought to begin in China, but of course they won't. Anthony "gain of function" Fauci will see to that. Because while bat soup may not be his thing, he surely know which side his bread's buttered on.

 

 

'Follow the Science'—but Whither?

Before he passed on, the late George Carlin developed a stand-up bit during which he decried the increasing wussification of America. He found our growing obsession with absolute cleanliness and “germ avoidance” pathetic and ultimately counter-productive. There’s a reason we have immune systems he declared, and if our immune systems aren’t allowed to deal with everyday germs, then they likely wouldn’t be all that good at dealing with the exotic variety.

Covid viruses are not germs of course, but the principle still holds. We can place our trust in preventative measures that may decrease our risk of premature death some nth of a percent in some cases, or we can deal with such outbreaks as best we can, while we try to maintain normalcy as much as possible.

Carlin was by no definition conservative or libertarian. He was a classical, as opposed to modern, liberal. He mocked those he perceived to be in charge, whom he thought were mainly conservative and likely Republican. But Carlin’s observations were sometimes spot on and this was one of those instances. His bit mocking America and Americans for being ridiculously over-the-top about risk avoidance rings as prophetic as anything Daniel or Isaiah ever came up with. (Language warning, of course).

I was never a Carlin fan, finding his mouth a bit too foul too often, and his schtick too formulaic, but he was capable of insight. Identifying the trend of American timidity may not have required exceptional perception but making fun of it took some guts. Cowards do not care to be so called.

There is a classic science fiction short story, the name of which unfortunately eludes me at the moment, that speaks to the gap separating risk-avoidance and living. The author envisions a time where life spans are measured in hundreds of years, rather than around a single century at best. Given the possibility to live that long, society has changed. Most of the populace chooses existence over living.

People vegetate safely in their homes, almost never leaving them. Why go to the store? If you go to the store, you might get killed in an accident and “miss out” on hundreds of years of hanging around planet Earth. If you go to the store, you might catch some bug from somebody else. You might slip and fall, break your leg and die because bone marrow seeps into your bloodstream. It’s better – safer – just to sit in your recliner and have people deliver whatever you need to exist to your doorstep.

We’re not quite there yet, but we’re aways down a road that ends with everyone hiding under their beds. We’ve got to wear masks, isolate, evacuate and vaccinate because, we are told, we have to “follow the science." If Congress passed a law that required everyone who uses the phrase “follow the science” to donate five bucks in the National Swear Jar, we’d eliminate federal debt in no time, Bidenflation or no.

As an actual scientist, I’ll let you in a secret: when it comes to Covid, just as is the case with climate change, nobody is following the science. There’s a very good reason for this: nobody knows the science yet, not in a form that would allow blue-state-nNazi lockdown leaders to make thoughtful decisions about public welfare, were they capable of doing so.

We don’t know, for example, which treatments are most effective. Ivermectin is now an approved treatment method in the US. Six months ago, “experts” were pooh-poohing, with extra pooh, reports of Ivermectin’s success overseas.

Some leaders support some preventative measures, some of the time, but are prone to make exceptions when the rules affect them. Some leaders ignore common-sense on a regular basis. Take for example Illinois’ massive Governor, J.B. ”Jabba the Guv” Pritzker. He is happy to preach the value of mask mandates to the citizens of the Land of Lincoln, but for some reason has never pointed out that one’s chances of becoming seriously ill with COVID are much reduced if one controls one’s weight. Wonder why he skipped that?

J.B. looks like he hasn't missed a meal.

If you think that masks are great, you can find “science” that supports that. If you think masks are pointless, there is “science” that supports that. If you think lockdowns are great, there are studies for that. If you think lockdowns do more harm than good, somebody has collected data that proves you right too. Vaccines? Either incredibly necessary or needlessly dangerous. Take your pick. There’s always an expert in your camp sure to agree with you and slap an “expert” stamp on the opinion you like.

Science happens when people are disinterested in the results. It doesn’t happen when people have an agenda to justify their actions, as is the case with many of leaders, or to prop up their expert status, or like Dr. Tony Fauci, both. Searching for data that proves you correct has nothing to do with analyzing data. It’s quite the opposite.

Someday, several years from now, when the panic, hysteria and virtue-signaling are long gone, some scientists who have no skin in the game – since the game will be long over – will dissect the data relevant to the Covid experience and we’ll know what worked, what didn’t and what fell in between. For now, the best we can do is to understand that one can’t follow the science when there is a dearth of unbiased scientists to create it and almost no leaders qualified to identify “the science” we are supposed to follow, even when it actually exists.

THE COLUMN: Sic Semper Tyrannis

On this, the second anniversary of The-Pipeline.org, we present the first of a series of weekly columns that will appear each Monday morning. Everything on the table, nothing off the table. mw

And so we near the end of the Great Pandemic Hoax of 2019-22, an unprecedented and breathtaking power grab by governments around the world to seize powers far beyond their constitutional allotments and to transform a relatively minor flu virus — however originated and for what ill purposes — into a weapon of mass economic and emotional destruction whose effects will be felt for years and decades to come. It has been a textbook example of tyranny.

Consider it a warning shot, though, because while Covid may finally have been exposed for the non-apocalyptic event it always was, such tyranny is only the beginning until we put a stop to it. Put a stop to extra-legal "emergency" measures that are transparently and insultingly fraudulent, and which are invoked in the name of the "greater good." Put a stop to the notion of judicially sanctioned "protected classes" in a formerly classless society. Put to stop the notion of a "New Normal" of privation, deviancy, and spiritual and material penury imposed by Leftists as they continue their centuries-old task of undermining every tenet of Western Civilization in the name of "equity" — in a world in which equality is aspirational at best and equity is impossible.

And, once and for all, put paid to the notion that "when you've got your health you've got everything,"  the motto of a nation of neurotic hypochondriacs that is fundamentally at odds with every principle of the moral and socially productive life. For under this seemingly anodyne contention lies a wealth of mischief, chief among them the idea that your fellow citizens pose an existential threat to you by their refusal to conform, and thus can and should be restricted, incarcerated, or even killed as the need arises. And all in the name of Socialism, whether National or international.

Nicolae and Elena in happier times.

As we've seen via a recent study by the Johns Hopkin University (a study of studies, really), the lockdowns imposed by states, countries, and municipalities everywhere in the name of "mitigating" the spread of an illness with a 99 percent survival rate in the name of public health were completely ineffective.

Far better to have done nothing at all; instead, families were separated, the elderly (those most at risk from the respirational difficulties caused by the likely Chinese-manufactured bioweapon) died alone and often in squalor; weddings and funerals were canceled or held "virtually"; businesses were shuttered and driven into bankruptcy; more than two years of schooling were ripped away from forcibly masked children; and colleges and universities continued their descent into mere parental-money shakedown rackets by offering education-by-Zoom as they continued with their main mission of gobbling up real estate to take it off the tax rolls and fatten their endowments.

And the only people held responsible for this sanctioned crime wave were... you. You, the uncooperative, the recalcitrant, the deplorable. You, the anti-social, the rebellious, the individualists, the fighters, the darers, the doers. You, the people who founded this country in defiance of central authority and rule-by-pronunciamento, you who pledge allegiance not to a political party or a strong leader, but to a flag and to the country for which it stands. One nation, under a God whom the other side has no use for, but only contempt. Just as they do for you.

It's become axiomatic that inside every leftist is a totalitarian screaming to get out. So if there's one positive thing Covid has done is identify those people for all to see: the slave-muzzle wearers, proudly exhibiting their servile natures. They're the Karens, the mask nazis, the buttinskis who can't leave you or your family alone, the ones who screech at the sight of the unmasked like Donald Sutherland ratting out a real human being at the end of the 1978 remake of Invasion of the Body Snatchers:

These are the same people who want to force you into electric cars but not provide a reliable source of electricity for them. Who wish to destroy the energy industries that built our nation, and leave you freezing or sweltering in the dark. Who condone and even encourage mass looting of shops, the murder of small Asian women waiting for a subway train, the shooting of policemen by the underclass, and the flouting of nearly every law of civilized behavior on the streets in the name of "social justice." And these are the people who, under the rubric of "climate change" and "the Great Reset," want to strip you of your home, your cars, your livelihood and, eventually, your life. No matter which office they hold, high or low or none at all, these people are your enemies and should be treated accordingly.

Make no mistake: Covid was only a beta-test, one that a submissive population passed with flying colors. Instantly repealed, without all that pesky business about amending the Constitution, were the first, fourth, fifth, and the eighth articles of the Bill of Rights. (The ninth and tenth, of course, have long since been rendered null, void, and nugatory. You remember them, the ones that reserve all unenumerated rights not mentioned in the Constitution to the people and the states.) This is why former president Barack Obama infamously referred to our founding document as a "charter of negative liberties." Which is precisely what the Founders desired.

Read 'em and weep.

Ah, but "affirmative" rights sound so much better. Like FDR's Four Freedoms:  what could possibly go wrong with having government affirmatively promise you freedom of speech (already guaranteed by the first amendment), freedom of worship (ditto), freedom from want and freedom from fear. While they were never legislated formally, the first two were superfluous — and have in any case been repealed by Covid — and the latter two have been implemented by stealth under the false flags of "compassion" and "safety."

Affirmative rights, however, are essentially fascistic; your "safety" and material security, in the zero-sum mindsets of governments everywhere, come at the expense of someone else. Feminized guarantees of "safety" and "security" were standard fare in every European communist country until its collapse between 1989 and 1991, It's instructive to note that those are the same terms in which censorious social-media sites such as Twitter (from which I was "permanently banned" in August 2020 for unspecified "targeted harassment") and Facebook (in whose Sugarmountain Gulag I am currently spending another two weeks for "hate speech," which is Zuckerspeak for disparagement) couch their own "rules" and "community standards." The sooner both are destroyed, the better and freer everybody will be.

For when the preference cascade begins, punks, tyrants and dictators need to watch their backs as the real workers of the world unite. I spent the years between 1985 and 1991 shuttling in and out of East Germany and the Soviet Union, was in Berlin as the Wall was being torn down, and departed from Moscow just before the coup against Mikhail Gorbachev in the summer of '91. (The Soviet Union folded four months later.) I stood on Fisherman's Bastion in Budapest with Hungarian friends in late 1989, looking east over the Danube, as they expressed their fears of an imminent invasion from Romanian troops. Hope was in the air — the Wall had just fallen — but uncertainty still ruled. Would the useless George H.W. Bush administration come to their aid? Or, once again, would the fascist-communist tanks roll?

Instead, a miracle happened: the people, united, were not to be defeated.

On Dec. 21, 1989, the old dictator went to the well once too often, and called a rally he couldn't control. As the people's voices rose against him (if the Romanians had had trucks, they would have used them), his voice broke, his expression changed from confidence to befuddlement, the television transmission stopped, and he was whisked away. A rebellion that had started with a lone priest in the ethnically Hungarian town of Timișoara spread eastward across the country to Bucharest. The next day, the evil pair tried to escape by helicopter, but by then the army had switched sides. Ceaușescu and his wife were arrested, tried, and summarily executed.

What's the old saying?

Oh yes: "Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it."

Oxymorons and Morbid Attachments

It’s approaching breakfast time in Australia on 25 January. Avid wind-watcher Rafe Champion reporting:

Wind addicted South Australia is importing half of its power from Victoria and 94 percent of the local generation is gas. Wind turbines are running at 2 percent of capacity and providing 5 percent of demand. Victoria is generating a small excess of power [mainly from coal] but not enough to prop up South Australia without help from Tasmania and New South Wales. Across the national electricity network wind is delivering 3.7 percent of consumption, fossil fuels are delivering 83 percent (coal 75 percent).

Close your eyes and imagine the entire world without coal, gas and oil. If you imagine in their stead thousands of modular nuclear power stations dotted around the globe, relax. While you probably need counselling on the practicalities of supplying affordable and reliable energy in the immediate decades ahead, you don’t have acute symptoms of a novel psychological affliction. To wit, a morbid fear of cheap dispatchable power and, its mirror image, a morbid attachment to rude living.

We had it coming.

To the afflicted, cheap dispatchable power means travel and gadgets galore for humans to enjoy. This isn’t the world they envision. To them it’s a dystopian nightmare. Hence their understandable terror at the prospect of its metastasising. Correspondingly, it’s no wonder that they’re smitten by unaffordable and unreliable energy. Out of the resulting deprivation, they see the noble savage emerging ready to live parsimoniously in harmony with nature.

Ask almost anyone in the street. Ordinary people. Normal people. None will like the idea of living parsimoniously. Certainly, when it’s explained to them.

When I was a boy, me mum used to wash our clothes, bedsheets and towels by hand in the bath; mangle them, then hang them on the clothesline outside even in the deepest English winter. Electricity usage zero. Mind you, mum used hot water heated in a boiler next to our coal fire or by gas on the stove top. Carbon footprint there, I suppose. Vandalism. She should have used cold water to be absolutely green-minded and parsimonious.

Today all kinds of labour-saving, communication and entertainment gadgets abound. They will be prised only out of cold dead hands. And not just gnarled hands. Make no mistake, those jet-setting climate-warrior hypocrites and their handmaidens are not about to forsake a smidgeon of indulgence.

How in the world do they get away with it? That is the question. Why isn’t net-zero laughed off the stage? Smoke and mirrors. That’s why. The truth is hidden. It’s hidden by baseless claims of green nirvanas. Job creation is the poster child.

Angus Taylor is Australia’s federal government “minister for industry, energy and emissions reduction.” His job description is a double-barrelled contradiction in terms. But all of those propagating the received wisdom are intent on the populace seeing them as oxymorons. Even among those who’ve never heard of Shakespeare’s sweet sorrow; who wouldn’t know an oxymoron from a contradiction in terms; and, incidentally, who might benefit from Danny DeVito’s masterly teaching.

Oxy this, you moron.

To expand. Juxtaposing both industry (the thriving thereof) and energy (the affordability and reliability thereof) with emissions reduction is meant to instill confidence that all is well with the world. Thus, effectively, we are meant to view "carbonless energy" and "carbonless industry" as oxymorons. That is to say, thunderous silence is more silent than plain silent. So, carbonless energy is cheaper and more abundant than just plain old energy. Carbonless industry is more competitive and job creating than just plain old industry. Grammar and propaganda working in sync to underpin the big sell.

Other countries have different set ups. But, within western governments these days; as, for example, in the U.K. and in the U.S., energy, industry and climate-change policy are caught under one broad umbrella, as though they are mutually supportive with no hint of conflict. And who’s to gainsay? No one of note at a political level. They’re predominantly likeminded.

It’s the real plague of our age. Political opposition has withered. Combatting climate change is a shared hysteria across the political aisles. It’s exactly the same thing with combatting the Wuhan virus. There’s no mainstream opposition. For the most part in Australia at a state and federal level, the usual charge against governments is that they’re not being hysterical enough. If you get the occasional reservation, it’s at the margin or from powerless mavericks.

Our system of government depends upon there being robustly opposing political forces. In Australia, Canada and the U.K., Her Majesty’s Loyal Opposition, puts the imperative into words. They’re not idle words.

Two things thrive in the absence of opposition. Foolishness and despotism. We are seeing both in full bloom in the response to Covid. So far climate policy is simply replete with foolishness. Watch out for despotism when people refuse to follow the parsimonious script, grids collapse and blackouts ensue.

Not hysterical enough.

Back to Angus Taylor. He recently took delight in a ship leaving port for Japan carrying hydrogen made using brown coal. Reportedly, the CO2 was captured and stored in a reservoir. No comment on the extent of capture, how leaky, how expensive, how scalable. What he said is that “clean hydrogen is a fuel of the future [and] the government is investing more than $1.3 billion to accelerate the development of our local hydrogen industry.” And did he promise jobs? Needless to ask, “over 16,000 jobs by 2050 plus a further 13,000 jobs from the construction of related renewable energy infrastructure.”

Notice something across jurisdictions. Renewable energy creates job galore. No mention of jobs lost. It’s all gain and no pain in the imaginary renewable energy world. This is the way hearts and minds are lulled. But real life is confronting and salutary. As my opening shows, unlike Esteban in Kill Bill II, wind is not susceptible to flattery. Neither will clean hydrogen become cheap and abundant on the wish and prayer of governments.

We are told by Taylor that “the government is determined to supercharge the [hydrogen] industry even further to support our plan to reach net zero emissions by 2050.” There you have it. Nothing is impossible for a determined government armed with taxpayer dollars. Didn’t Barack Obama promise to quell the rise of the oceans among other wonderous feats and derring-dos? Job all done then, surely?

Covid Elephants in the Room

How things have changed! The Covid “room” was once filled with white coats and blue suits, all advocating for stringent measures to fight a novel coronavirus: compulsory masks, social distancing, house arrest, punitive fines, devastating lockdowns and mandatory vaccines to eliminate the perceived threat of mass infection. And there was always space for more politicians, medical officers, presumed “experts” and media personnel to convene, often unmasked and in close proximity to one another. No longer.

The Covid “room” now seems to have shrunk, having become almost too small to accommodate a growing herd of elephants. An elephant in the room is often sufficient to damage a consensus. But by my count, there are at least eight elephants in the room trumpeting their inconvenient truths, all jostling for space, gradually crowding the previous occupants into the corners.

Elephant 1: According to the World Health Organization, no friend of skeptics, the mean Covid infection fatality rate (IFR) seems close to statistically insignificant, rounding to a figure of 0.20 percent. As the paper concludes, “Most locations probably have an infection fatality rate less than 0.20 percent.” The figure is confirmed by the Yale BMJ survey, which concludes: The IFR of Covid-19 in community-dwelling elderly people is lower than previously reported. Very low IFRs were confirmed in the youngest populations.” Indeed, “younger age strata had low IFR values (median 0.0027 percent). Similar values have been reported on many other sites and exposés, demolishing the Big Lie marshalled to terrify a population into submission to the administrative state.

Covid-free, we think.

Elephant 2: It turns out that domestic pets, mainly cats and dogs—though I have met domesticated ferrets on leashes or poking their noses out of jacket pockets—are virus shedders. Over the last few years my wife and I have lived in different parts of Vancouver, which by my lights may be the most animal friendly city in the world. On our many walks and outings, we have met innumerable masked people strolling with their unmasked dogs—some wheeling their cats in baby carriages—exploding the fable they have been living by.

Admittedly, the consensus is that animals were first infected by humans and then transmitted the virus back, though the trajectory seems on the face of it rather hard to prove. Denmark slaughtered 17 million infected minks; should cat and dog lovers do the same to their cherished pets? Or should animals be masked and social-distanced? I suspect that would be a bridge too far for pet owners who have no compunction applying the same regime to themselves and their fellow humans. As my U.K. research colleague Martin Parker (to whom I owe the impetus for this article) points out, the animal reservoir alone puts paid to the fantasy of Covid-zero.

Elephant 3: Israel, which many regard as the vanguard and petri dish of escalating Covid policy. Over 80 percent and rising of the population have received the staple two shots and over half the population have received the third booster; yet Israel is experiencing a dramatic surge in cases and deaths. Many excuses have been offered for this failure: easing restrictions too early, insufficient interest among the Haredim and Muslim communities, not enough booster shots—the list goes on. But there is no doubt that vaccine effectiveness wanes within months (always assuming that the vaccines were truly effective to begin with). Indeed, the majority of internet sites and official venues do not even trouble themselves with alibis but herald a magnificent success. The vaccines work, even if they don’t.

Elephant 4: Sweden. The country did not lock down, did not require masking, did not close the schools, and allowed most businesses to remain open. Vaccines are available on a voluntary basis. Despite the lies and dire predictions of Sweden’s virtual destruction, the country has prospered relative to others; even the BBC has had to admit, grudgingly, that Sweden has fared better than other countries. As Jeffrey Tucker shows in Liberty or Lockdown, Sweden’s  comparatively favorable results came about “because it refused to violate human rights.” 

Looking for a way out.

Elephant 5: It is now known that natural immunity is a better option than vaccine immunity. Vaccinated people may pose as great or greater a risk to society via transmission as do the unvaccinated. A Johns Hopkins University study of July 31, 2021 states: Vaccinated and unvaccinated individuals have similar viral loads in communities with a high prevalence of the SARS-CoV-2 delta variant. Owing to robust natural immunity, people who recover from Covid are significantly less likely to transmit the virus than those who have submitted to the jab. The Lancet finds no correlation between vaccine-induced neutralizing antibody levels and viral loads or the development of symptoms.” As Grant Brown explains in an important C2C essay, we cannot inject our way out of this pandemic.

Elephant 6: Vaccine Adverse Events. There is growing anxiety among accredited health professionals and ordinary people that the vaccines generate serious side-effects that equal or outweigh their putative benefits. Passive reporting sites like VAERS in the U.S. and Yellow Card in the U.K. do not tell the whole story, recording only a small fraction, perhaps as little as 1 percent, of vaccine-caused infirmities and deaths. The real count is much disputed but appears to be unacceptably high. An encyclopedic volume by Peter and Ginger Breggin, Covid-19 and the Global Predators, presents a list of official government and medical sources attesting to the hazard, which can be dismissed only at our peril.

Elephant 7: Social collapse. The virtual destruction of the global economy; the disruption of supply chains; the casting of untold millions into poverty and solitude; the irruption of stagflation; the dismantling of the middle class and the annihilation of small business, throwing hundreds of thousands into bankruptcy, accompanied by “the greatest upward wealth transfer in modern history”; the demolition of Charter and Constitution, including the suspension of due process, the right of assembly and freedom of worship; the censorship of information; the establishment of a health cartel determining what is permitted and what is forbidden; the shuttering of schools and sequestering of children, depriving them of their pivotal formative years and blighting their future development; the mounting number of “excess deaths” owing to stress, depression, suicide and prolonged deferment of critical medical procedures, arguably eclipsing the Covid morbidity rate—all such factors lead to the stark conclusion that the orchestrated response to the virus was likely degrees of magnitude worse than the disease itself.

Ready or not, here they come!

Elephant 8: Vaxxports, the political mammoth of the herd. The Canadian edition of The Epoch Times observes that “Vaccine passports mandated by governments will create a highly intrusive surveillance system” that can force citizens “to reveal their health information but can also track their whereabouts.” Dr. Ann Cavoukian, former Ontario Information and Privacy Commissioner and currently executive director of the Global Privacy and Security by Design Centre, worries that an individual’s driver’s licence, phone number and other personal information will be on record, establishing a “global infrastructure of surveillance,” in effect, the Covid State.

Of course, this is not just a Canadian instance of surveillance monitoring, but applies across the board to all Vaxxport nations. Similarly, The Sociable warns that “Covid passport mandates are fueling authoritarian social credit systems, digital identity schemes,” on the Chinese model—what is known as “corporate communism.” When one’s privacy is invaded, one’s most valuable “property” is compromised: one’s selfhood. Creating a system of medical apartheid and political oppression, the vaccine passport is the ticket to a totalitarian state.

It is true that elephants are an endangered species, no less so in the savannas of progressivist ideology and medical demagoguery. But when elephants congregate in the room, they claim a lot of space, carry considerable weight and do not consort agreeably with their adversaries. Admittedly, one must avoid the ingestion of hopium, an opioid that can enfeeble the will to act and ride the elephant. But things do change, and when the elephants finally emerge from the room, it may be triumphally and with much trumpeting.

Enemies of the People: Anthony Fauci

Of Covid Mandates and Legal Liabilities

Last month President Biden announced an initiative that he asserts will ‘stop’ the SARS Cov-2 virus. A scientifically implausible objective, his outline included a plan to require all private businesses with 100 or more employees to ensure their employees are fully vaccinated or require weekly testing. The mandates are curious because they burden businesses in unprecedented and legally nebulous ways.

Using a mechanism referred to as an Emergency Temporary Standard through the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the administration asserts mandating vaccines will stop the transmission of the virus. However, the vaccine was neither developed for, nor indicated to arrest transmission of the virus. According to the FDA website, the vaccine is intended to “…reduce severe illness, hospitalization and death.”

So why might the Administration be issuing mandates for a vaccine that cannot achieve their stated purpose of ‘stopping the virus”? Consider possible reasons by looking through the lens of liability.

Cross my heart and hope to die.

As business-minded leaders do in the face of government overreach, a response must be developed that helps create certainty for the business. To get there in this case, one must review the most fundamental aspect of a mandate… if the business requires the action as a condition of employment, the business owns the consequence of what happens as a result. Understanding the business of vaccine liability may help a business determine whether it is in its best interest to accept the premise of the Biden Administration mandate, or perhaps consider other strategies, including legal challenges.

An important element of the liability relating to vaccines is whether the individual receives the Emergency Use Authorized (EUA)-version of the vaccine, or the newly FDA-approved, branded-version known as Comirnaty. While there is no difference in the actual drug in the syringe, there are differences in the liability protection offered under EUA for those who manufacture, distribute or in some way deliver the vaccine, compared to the FDA-approved Comirnaty.

According to the Congressional Research Service, “…in order to encourage the expeditious development and deployment of medical countermeasures during a public health emergency, the Public Readiness and Emergency Preparedness Act (PREP Act) authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to limit legal liability for losses relating to the administration of medical countermeasures such as diagnostics, treatments, and vaccines.”

In a declaration effective February 4, 2020, nearly six weeks before the U.S. lock-downs, the HHS Secretary invoked the PREP Act and declared Coronavirus Disease 2019 (Covid-19) to be a public health emergency warranting liability protections for covered countermeasures inclusive of the available vaccines. According to the current PREP ACT, the protection against liability reaches into 2025.

Ummm...

All state and local governments, medical providers and related manufacturers and distributors of modalities for treatment of Covid-19 were exempted from liability. So for anyone who receives the EUA- version of the vaccine, which as of this writing is still the only version available in the U.S., one has no recourse from a liability perspective, except in very specific and limited circumstances should one experience an adverse event or die. However, once FDA-approved and sold under the brand name Comirnaty, liability is handled differently. Comirnaty is currently only available in Israel.

Under normal circumstances, the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program (VICP) provides compensation for injuries caused by most vaccines routinely administered in the U.S., such as childhood vaccines and non-pandemic seasonal influenza vaccines.

Enter mandated businesses. Once a vaccine is mandated by a private business, an entity not outlined and protected under the PREP Act, nor protected once a branded drug is available on the market, liability protection seemingly does not  exist for businesses.

Looking beyond the PREP ACT, consider the long-term efficacy data currently available. Since vaccines have only been available for a relatively short time, long-term data is simply unknown. However, that doesn’t mean the potential adverse events are not a liability for which a mandated company must model and prepare.

Consider the language from the FDA’s website, pertaining to long-term efficacy of the FDA-approved Comirnaty regarding Myocarditis and Pericarditis.

Additionally, the FDA conducted a rigorous evaluation of the post-authorization safety surveillance data pertaining to myocarditis and pericarditis following administration of the Pfizer-BioNTech Covid-19 Vaccine and has determined that the data demonstrate increased risks, particularly within the seven days following the second dose. The observed risk is higher among males under 40 years of age compared to females and older males. The observed risk is highest in males 12 through 17 years of age. Available data from short-term follow-up suggest that most individuals have had resolution of symptoms. However, some individuals required intensive care support. Information is not yet available about potential long-term health outcomes. The Comirnaty Prescribing Information includes a warning about these risks.

Add to this, we now believe the SARS CoV-2 virus was modified in a Chinese lab and the liability issues are more nebulous. A recently exposed a 2018 grant proposal submitted by Peter Daszak of the Eco Health Alliance, to DARPA, the Pentagon’s research and development arm. The proposal sought funding to engineer a Furin Cleavage site (FCS) into a beta coronavirus. The FCS was intended to increase the virulence of the virus in humans. DARPA deemed it too dangerous and denied the grant.

A year later, in 2019, a beta coronavirus virus with a FCS shows up having potentially ‘leaked’ from a Wuhan lab at which Daszak was coincidently using National Institute of Health (NIH) funding to make gain-of-function modifications to beta family coronaviruses. A significant percentage of the spike protein from the original strain of SARS Cov-2 are in the vaccine now being mandated. What other enhancements were made to that virus and inadvertently stitched into the vaccine? The answers are presently unknown.

Companies must decide whether mandating the vaccine for their most valuable asset, their employees, is a sound business decision. Can businesses confidently assert that without a legal fight, they will not have some liability in the face of potential short and long-term health issues associated with the currently available vaccine?

The Coming Viral Dictatorship

A pivotal feature of dictatorial regimes is the institutional lie, expressed as an unfounded message of millennial hope, an ever-changing set of legislated policies, and the tendency of authoritarian leaders to violate their own axioms and edicts. We see this happening before our eyes as a Covid-19 tyranny takes root on our own soil.

The manifold inconsistencies and deceptions that circulate regarding the draconian mandates and coercive measures imposed by Big Government to combat the Covid pandemic should by now have alerted the public to their suspicious nature. We have observed the extent to which these ordinances are regularly flouted by the authorities, who have been seen without their masks, disregarding social distancing rules, and travelling during lockdowns. Such exemptions are obviously a privilege reserved only to the elites, who do not scruple to lecture us on the current proprieties.

One popular slogan that we meet everywhere, on radio and TV, on the Internet, and emblazoned on ubiquitous signage, is particularly irritating: “We’re All In This Together.” Clearly, we are not. While small business owners and entrepreneurs struggle with bankruptcy as their establishments are closed down, Big Box stores operate at full capacity, teachers retain handsome salaries while refusing to enter their classrooms, government personnel continue to be paid in absentia, and politicians suffer no loss of ample remuneration.

This means you.

Weddings, church services, funerals, social gatherings, holiday celebrations and anti-lockdown protests are either curtailed or banned to prevent proximity transmission of the virus; BLM demonstrations involving thousands of people cheek-by-jowl agitating for “social justice” are permitted and encouraged. Doctors are here to serve their patients; now many have embraced telemedicine, which does not impact their fees as it does their effectiveness. Diagnosis at a distance is not reliable medicine, though it is lucrative medicine. The overall hypocrisy that confronts us at every level of political, corporate and professional society is so blatant as to be unbelievable—except it is entirely believable. We are manifestly not in this all together, not by a long shot.

Another sedative to which we are constantly exposed is the official platitude that the mandates under which we malinger are intended “to protect public health and safety.” The collateral effects of this faux campaign have, in fact, endangered public health and safety. The category of “excess deaths” owing to delayed medical procedures for cancer, Alzheimer's, heart ailments and diabetes, among other conditions, including critical stress, depressive suicides, and adverse reactions and deaths linked to the Covid vaccines now arguably surpass Covid morbidity numbers—which themselves appear to have been grossly inflated. Indeed, in a crowning irony, the virus may itself be “boosted” by iatrogenic interventions. One need only consult virologist and immunologist Robert Malone, the actual inventor of the mRNA vaccines, who warns against them as Covid-19 suppressants. 

We were assured that vaccine passports were the route to “public health and safety” and that life would soon be back to normal. Now triple vaxxing, masks and renewed lockdowns have become mandatory in many jurisdictions and nations. The temptation to blame and penalize the unvaccinated for any upsurge of “cases” is spreading and may easily translate into second-class status for the unvaccinated and a policy of forced internment. 

But who are the “unvaccinated”?  Israel’s Director of the Ziv Medical Center Dr. Salman Zarka admits that the definition is changing: “We are updating what it means to be vaccinated.” In the absence of a third jab (and counting), even the double-vaxxed fall into the category of “unvaccinated.” As Kit Knightly writes in off-guardian, “Israel is the petri dish”; if it works there, the rest of the world will follow suit. Of course, in another sense of the phrase, it doesn’t really “work there.” A multi-sourced chart published in the Financial Times, comparing over-vaxxed Israel to under-vaxxed Egypt, provides a sobering metric. Egypt is doing at least an order of magnitude better than Israel. Equally distressing, on August 22 West Virginia governor Jim Justice reported a 26 percent surge among the fully vaccinated and a 25 percent increase in vaccinated deaths. This surely is not a one-off.

Where do you think you're going?

It should be obvious by this time that we are dealing with a vast shell game. In an open letter to the Canadian Minister of Health, McGill University theology professor Douglas Farrow argues, correctly, that vaccine mandates are incoherent. That is surely the right word. Masks were supposed to keep us safe. They didn’t do very well, so the first jab was introduced, which should have offered immunity. Then came a second jab, followed by a third and counting. Then came the vaccine passports. Meanwhile, as noted, double-and-triple-jabbed Israelis are still fighting infection and transmission and have now even been refused entry to Portugal and to open, prosperous Sweden.

It is no surprise, at least among the concerned, that distrust is growing of our health authorities, the political class and the collusive “misleadia,” assiduously promoting a medical dogma that is plainly muddled, deceptive and hypocritical. It is also, to put it bluntly, totalitarian.

The next step is the construction of quarantine or internment camps, as currently planned in Australia. Similarly, in the U.S. the CDC has proposed a “shielding approach” that would establish “a group of shelters such as schools, community buildings within a camp/sector…where high-risk individuals (the unvaccinated) are physically isolated together.” As if this weren’t plain enough, the proposal states that “High-risk individuals would be temporarily relocated to safe or ‘green zones’ established at the household, neighborhood, camp/sector or community level… They would have minimal contact with family members and other low-risk residents.” 

Meanwhile, the National Guard is in process of hiring “internment resettlement specialists” to supervise detention operations and “provide guidance to individual prisoners.” It is not clear from the explanatory description what this program precisely entails, but it doesn’t augur well. On August 6, 2021, governor Bill Lee of Tennessee signed an executive order authorizing involuntary internment of targeted citizens, under the convenient designation of “regulatory flexibilities.”

Not to be outdone, the Department of Homeland Security claims that those resisting the vaccines pose a “potential terror threat.” If you oppose the vaccines, you are an “extremist.” The document is very clear: “These extremists may seek to exploit the emergence of COVID-19 variants by viewing the potential re-establishment of public health restrictions across the United States as a rationale to conduct attacks.” Bill HR 4980 currently before Congress would place unvaccinated persons on a No-Fly list and lead inexorably to a No-Buy gun control law. A No-Buy gun list would prevent people from arming themselves. As they say, you have been warned.

Welcome to Australia.

My own country of Canada marches in lockstep with the heavily mandated nations of Israel, the U.K. and, of course, Australia and parts of the U.S. According to NaturalNews, the Canadian government has ordered enough vaccines to inoculate every man, woman and child many times over for the next three years, having stockpiled 293 million doses for a population of 38 million. The report continues: Just months ago, the Covid-19 vaccines were hailed as a ‘miracle of science’ that were putting an ‘end to the pandemic’… But now the narrative has changed” and we can expect more censorship, travel restriction, contact tracing, deprivation of human rights, dodgy testing, and mask and vaccine mandates. The fear is that even supermarkets may eventually be placed off limits for the unvaccinated, forcing one to rely on doorstep deliveries. 

As we’ve seen, this despotic program is being implemented in the name of “protecting public health and safety.” It appears, rather, as if it is being put in practice to create a system of “vaccine enslavement” and authoritarian control. Our Prime Minister, after all, is on record as admiring the “basic dictatorship” of Communist China.

What next? One shudders to think. Where next? Who's next?