Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘Boris Johnson’

PETER HITCHENS: Britons are being sentenced to a slow, agonising death… by No 10’s panic squad | Daily Mail Online

Posted by M. C. on October 19, 2020

Britons like the late Peter King are being sentenced to slow, agonising deaths … by No 10’s panic squad, writes PETER HITCHENS

By Peter Hitchens for The Mail on Sunday

One of the filthiest tactics of the Panic Merchants is to claim that anyone who opposes their strangling of the country is callous and cares only about money, not life. 

Dissenters have been pelted with slime of this kind by Johnson, the man who ruined Britain, and by his dense sidekick, Hancock – perhaps the first Health Secretary in history who does not know that malaria is spread by mosquitoes. They tell us we wish to ‘let the virus rip’.

Well, Johnson and Hancock, if you care so much about lives, get in touch with Lisa King, as I did. Ask her to tell you about how her husband Peter, a retired taxi driver aged 62, died. +4

One of the filthiest tactics of the Panic Merchants is to claim that anyone who opposes their strangling of the country is callous and cares only about money, not life

It is a horrible, upsetting story, involving a grown man screaming in agony. And in my view it is an absolutely direct consequence of Hancock’s conversion of the NHS into a National Covid Service which treats everything else as a nuisance.

Peter King was grudgingly granted (as so many now are) a remote session with a GP who, unable to meet him, and apparently ignorant of his records, diagnosed his severe chest discomfort as reflux. I am not especially interested in blaming this doctor. Under the conditions created by Hancock, he was presumably doing his best.Dissenters have been pelted with slime of this kind by Johnson, the man who ruined Britain, and by his dense sidekick, Hancock – perhaps the first Health Secretary in history who does not know that malaria is spread by mosquitoes. They tell us we wish to ‘let the virus rip’+4

Dissenters have been pelted with slime of this kind by Johnson, the man who ruined Britain, and by his dense sidekick, Hancock – perhaps the first Health Secretary in history who does not know that malaria is spread by mosquitoes. They tell us we wish to ‘let the virus rip’

But it was not good enough. Actually the trouble was far more serious – a stone trapped in his gall bladder – and the resulting delay meant he was overcome with indescribable pain a few days later.

Peter was given emergency surgery to reduce the agony, but needed a more radical operation. He was put on the urgent list for it. But this was still too late. 

He fell terribly ill again and despite the heroic efforts of paramedics, he died. The many years of happy life which Peter and Lisa King might otherwise have had were wiped out for ever.

This is not just some isolated case. Something like 25 million appointments with GPs have been lost as a result of the Johnson Government’s panic (not as a result of Covid, as the hopelessly pro-Government BBC always says. The Government had a choice over how to respond, and took the wrong path).

Millions have not had referrals for diagnoses including cancer and heart disease. Some of them will have been scythed down as Peter King was. Others will have been needlessly damaged in smaller, slower ways.

See the rest here

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

“Build Back Better”: Why Are Both Biden and Boris Now Using This Phrase? | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on October 14, 2020

During lockdown, countless commentators waxed lyrical about how “nature was coming back to life” during our miserable house imprisonment. Now, economist Mariana Mazzucato, of University College London, is floating the idea of “climate lockdowns”—that is, forcing people to stay in their homes to limit carbon dioxide emissions. And the UN is pushing a global propaganda campaign to get a good percentage of national bailout budgets siphoned off into “green” gravy train projects with highly questionable environmental and economic returns.

Mark Tovey

Listen to the Audio Mises Wire version of this article.

The Trump campaign shared a video on social media this week, claiming Joe Biden had ripped off a slogan from British prime minister Boris Johnson.

“We have a great opportunity to build back and to build back better” (emphasis added), Biden said in the video, dated July 9, 2020. Then rolled a video of the British PM, using the same phrase on May 28: “We owe it to future generations to build back better.” Damning evidence—it seemed—that the Democratic nominee had, once again, copied his homework. (Biden was famously caught passing off a Robert F. Kennedy quote as his own during his ill-fated 1988 run for president.)

In fact, the story here is not one of lazy speech writing or plagiarism. The use of the phrase “build back better” by both Biden and the British PM spells something far more sinister. “Build back better” is the rallying cry of a globalist plot to exploit the coronavirus pandemic for the sake of narrow-minded, well-connected lobby groups—particularly of the “environmentalist” stripe.

Boris Johnson did not coin the phrase “build back better”. It first surfaced on April 22 in a UN press release, marking “International Mother Earth Day”—a faux holiday created by the UN in 2009.

As the world begins planning for a post-pandemic recovery, the United Nations is calling on Governments to seize the opportunity to “build back better” by creating more sustainable, resilient and inclusive societies.

“The current crisis is an unprecedented wake-up call,” said Secretary-General António Guterres in his International Mother Earth Day message. “We need to turn the recovery into a real opportunity to do things right for the future.”

But would “Brexit Boris” really swallow a globalist scheme hook, line and sinker? On October 6, the British PM unveiled a plan at the Conservative Party conference to dump £160m into powering every home with wind energy by 2030—all part of a harebrained scheme to “build back greener.”

The Conservative lawmaker Lord Matt Ridley excoriated Boris’s “build back greener” policy in a radio interview the next day: “It takes 150 tonnes of coal to build one wind turbine…if we want a zero-carbon future by 2050, the only way we’re going to get it is nuclear. Wind is messing around and rewarding rich people at the expense of poor people.”

But it is not just Boris Johnson and Joe Biden who are being played like cheap violins by the UN. All around the world, politicians are echoing the same sentiment.

The European Commission used the slogan when announcing their €750 billion stimulus fund on May 27: “Through this fund, officially titled Next Generation EU, the Commission hopes to “build back better,” through channels that contribute to a greener, more sustainable and resilient society.”

In Canada, PM Justin Trudeau signaled his allegiance to the globalist “green” lobby in August, saying: “We need to reset the approach of this government for a recovery to build back better.”

The UN have even taken the liberty of translating the slogan into Spanish (reconstruir mejor), Portuguese (reconstruir melhor), French (reconstruire en mieux), and many other tongues—so that politicians all over the world can sing from the same hymn sheet. The No Agenda podcast, hosted by Adam Curry and John C. Dvorak, is a fantastic resource for keeping track of the growing number of co-occurrences of the “build back better” meme.

Some environmentalists are twisting the covid-19 pandemic into a pretext for extreme “green” policies, of the type that would have been unthinkable less than a year ago. During lockdown, countless commentators waxed lyrical about how “nature was coming back to life” during our miserable house imprisonment. Now, economist Mariana Mazzucato, of University College London, is floating the idea of “climate lockdowns”—that is, forcing people to stay in their homes to limit carbon dioxide emissions. And the UN is pushing a global propaganda campaign to get a good percentage of national bailout budgets siphoned off into “green” gravy train projects with highly questionable environmental and economic returns.

Talk of “building back better” and “green growth” obfuscates the tradeoff between growing GDP and limiting carbon dioxide emissions. Globally, GDP is forecast to plummet a whopping 4.9 percent in 2020, according to the International Monetary Fund.

Lifting lockdowns, cutting taxes and deregulating would quickly get the world turning again. On the other hand, financing a global racket with billions of dollars of funny money—or “building back better”—will only cause us to sink deeper into this malaise. Author:

Mark ToveyMark Tovey works for a data news agency and has authored numerous reports for London-based think-tanks, including the Institute of Economic Affairs and the Taxpayers’ Alliance. His research has largely focused on health economics issues and the UK foreign aid budget. He graduated in 2016 with a degree in economics from the University of Sussex.

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

I’ve gone from pro-lockdown to NO lockdown. Here’s why people must take over from inept governments and learn to live with Covid — RT Op-ed

Posted by M. C. on October 8, 2020

No matter what middle-class journalists like me tell you from their home offices, this will be a disaster on so many fronts. It will stamp on the teeth of an economy that’s already lying in the gutter crying for its mummy. It will send half the population either mad or into the streets with flaming torches. It will crank up the dial on already bitter societal divisions to 11. It will utterly wreck Christmas.

Andrew Dickens

Andrew Dickens is an award-winning writer on culture, society, politics, health and travel for major titles such as the Guardian, the Telegraph, the Independent, the Daily Mail and Empire.

I supported the first national lockdown but a second one would be a mistake of titanic proportions. Here’s how we can wrestle control from governments and learn to live with Covid.

Sometimes, if you want a job done well, you have to do it yourself. Sadly, many jobs that need doing well are occupied by people whose gift for doing them isn’t just non-existent, it’s a black hole that sucks in and destroys any crumbs of talent that happen to be floating in the vicinity.

Here in the UK, the job of prime minister is taken by a man who, when the going gets tough, gets going on holiday. Other jobs, such as those of health secretary, home secretary, chancellor and education secretary are taken up by fawning lackeys with all the independent thought and qualifications of a reluctant 15-year-old intern who’s only there because their dad’s mates with the CEO.

And yet, despite this, when Covid-19 made its intentions and capabilities known, I backed this U-turning confederacy of dunces. I thought that a ‘lockdown’ was the right thing to do. I know there were arguments about the efficacy of various measures, about mortality rates and transmission. I also know that those arguments have become mind-numbingly tedious and repetitive, so let’s not go there. At the time, nearly all evidence and expert advice suggested that we should err on the side of caution. End of.

Lockdown here was a walk in the park, literally, compared with what some populations endured but it still hurt people – financially, emotionally, even physically. I lost thousands in income and sought help for my skyrocketing anxiety levels, and yet still I gave that flock of dangerous idiots leewayin what can comfortably be described as a very, very weird situation.  Read more As Boris Johnson announces Britain’s ‘great reset’, were the Covid ‘conspiracy theorists’ right all along?

However, there’s a ‘but’ – one big enough to get Sir Mix-a-lot interested. There must not be a second lockdown. 

After a summer of relative liberty, sharp rises in infection rates have triggered Boris Johnson and the man who operates him, Dominic ‘no-one talks to me at the office Christmas party’ Cummings, into burdening us with new draconian measures, somehow more confused and complicated than the original rules. It’s now clear that we’re weeks, maybe days, away from a return to the ‘all but essential’ mantra. No more nights out at the pub, no more nights in with friends. Back to the heavily-scraped bottom of the Netflix barrel.

No matter what middle-class journalists like me tell you from their home offices, this will be a disaster on so many fronts. It will stamp on the teeth of an economy that’s already lying in the gutter crying for its mummy. It will send half the population either mad or into the streets with flaming torches. It will crank up the dial on already bitter societal divisions to 11. It will utterly wreck Christmas.

Shutting the country down again, with no end in sight, will be like sticking a cork in one end of a balloon while filling it with a waste pipe at the other. Whether the balloon bursts or is uncorked at a later date, it’ll create a terrible mess.

You have, of course, the fact that it’ll be adding salt to particularly nasty economic wounds that are about to have the clumsy fist of Brexit shoved into them. The ruination of businesses, charities, families, support services, and the travel, hospitality, arts and entertainment industries, is a surefire bet. This is a government that simply doesn’t care if you don’t have music, film or theatre in your lives next year. 

Jobs and homes will be lost, people will end up on the streets. The uncertainty and short-termism of the government’s measures (sometimes announced overnight in its signature cowardly style) make it impossible for anyone to plan or invest. Government aid is ending, so who’d keep staff, let alone hire them? Who’d book a holiday? Who’d order a turkey? Also on UK health secretary claims rise in Covid-19 cases is ‘very serious problem’

Then there’s people’s wellbeing. People are already dying of other diseases as a result of Covid-related measures. Some of this is due to a shift in resources towards dealing with the pandemic, but much is down to hospital services being limited or frozen and people being frightened to visit doctors. Workers will refuse to get tested because they fear quarantining without pay, making them more likely to spread the virus. 

It’ll cause a mental health nightmare, plunging people into depression and causing unmanageable stress levels at a time when they can’t get proper help – not least students who already feel imprisoned in halls. Some will be forced to work in risky conditionsbecause a lack of financial support means they have no choice. Others will simply be fed up with arbitrary, ill-explained and increasingly short-notice limitations and therefore tempted to flick a collective V-sign at the authorities.

There are already indications that people have had their fill of lockdown measures and tightening the grip further is asking for trouble. As Mayor of Manchester Andy Burnham said, these measures could make matters worse and lead us to a “winter of discontent.” Our lives have to varying degrees been hammered like a tough steak for months and most of us have accepted it with some grace. But we all have our limits. Read more ‘Priority is jobs,’ UK’s finance minister says, but warns Covid-19 will remain a ‘factor in the economy’

To misquote Newton’s third law of motion, every action has an equal and opposite reaction. The harder you try to contain people, the more dramatically they’ll rebel.

Among these people will be the usual arseholes whose raison d’etre is to make life uncomfortable for other people, no matter what the situation; the cough-in-face types, the spoilers for fights over masks. There will always be the incurably stupid, too. And then there’ll be responsible citizens, of which I’m generally one, who have had enough. If this group sees no reason or effectiveness in the rules, perhaps sees their elected and unelected leaders continue to break the rules, then they’ll be less inclined to follow those rules. 

A heavy, nationwide lockdown also won’t work because this virus isn’t going away any time soon. There will almost certainly be no widespread vaccine or divine intervention that sees it disappear by Christmas 2021, let alone this winter. And you can’t shut the country down forever.

So what do you do when something can’t be got rid of? You don’t hide from it, you learn to live with it. The problem is, as mentioned, this government, like many, doesn’t have the smarts to do that. 

It specialises in things that don’t work. Effective track-and-trace app? Nope, sorry, can’t do that. Functioning testing system? You’re having a laugh, mate. A vague semblance of competency? It can’t even master an Excel spreadsheet. This is the government that didn’t think a return to schools and universities would cause a September surge in infections, that flips daily between telling us to get out and stay home, like a political hokey cokey, and whose hardline measures so far have still allowed more than 42,000 deaths (and that’s just from the virus).

This is why its role needs to be limited, like you would that of the aforementioned 15-year-old intern. It should provide, not instruct. It can supply data and advice, and can give people freedom and responsibility, and it can write cheques for things like testing and healthcare and for ideas with brains. But that’s it. 

Decisions need to be taken on a micro level; national government is too macro for this situation. Blanket rules won’t work now. We need to adapt and adjust by location, age, job and risk. We need to give people clarity and reliability. 

We need to think local and use more intelligent data analysis. Look at hospital admissions, not just infections and deaths. Look at demographics, postcodes, favourite ice-cream flavours. We’re a data-filled, algorithm-obsessed planet, so let’s use this to be nimble and clever.  Also on Cineworld to close all US & UK movie theaters this week, putting 45,000 jobs at risk

The R-rate in Birmingham should not be affecting my ability to have a pint and a pasty in Falmouth. If I’m 25 (I’m not) I should have more freedom than is currently being offered, because I’m statistically at less risk than someone who’s 85. However, I should also have more responsibility for the 85-year-olds, the asthmatics, the diabetics. Don’t punish me for being young and healthy, but encourage me to protect the vulnerable – and maybe have a punishment up your sleeve if I don’t. 

Mini local lockdowns and short-term local furlough schemes with defined time limits could be used as ‘circuit-breakers’ for the spread of infection. If pubs shut for one weekend, for example, with help and clarity they can adjust and cope. As can pub-goers. These are bumps in the road, not walls to smash into.

People and businesses should be trusted to be ‘Covid-smart,’ too. Rule one of this pandemic (and of life) should read ‘Don’t be a d**k,’ and we work from that. Everyone should have the right to work from home if they can, but also the right to go to a safe place of work. Have restrictions in a cinema, sure, but not at a funeral. Give guidelines on hygiene and safety but allow us to be sensible with things like mask use, social-distancing and numbers at gatherings, particularly when it comes to friends and family. No one (well, very few people) want to give their nearest and dearest a dose of a potentially deadly bug. Not even at Christmas. 

I’m just spitballing here but all of this makes more sense than harsher, ineffective rules that breed resentment, discord and disorder. It’s all about less pain, more gain – the opposite of that Newton principle. The less you press people, the less likely they are to overreact. Give them room to breathe and adjust and they’ll feel like they’re being treated as adults. But there will be idiots, so don’t spare the rod on those who flagrantly abuse that freedom to the detriment of others. Carrot dangled, stick held behind the back.

This is not about belittling the obvious dangers of the virus; too many people have died and suffered for anyone vaguely intelligent to do that (comparing it to other causes of illness isn’t logical or helpful, thanks). It’s about facing up to reality and necessity, and dealing with these two very annoying things in a way that allows people to live as normally and happily as possible, protects their jobs and businesses, and looks after their mental and physical health. 

The UK government has consistently blamed its failings on the public, despite using Covid to give itself dictatorship-like powers. So we might as well be given the chance to fail – or succeed – on our own terms.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

As Boris Johnson announces Britain’s ‘great reset’, were the Covid ‘conspiracy theorists’ right all along? — RT Op-ed

Posted by M. C. on October 8, 2020

Neil Clark

Neil Clark

is a journalist, writer, broadcaster and blogger. His award winning blog can be found at He tweets on politics and world affairs @NeilClark66

The UK Prime Minister’s remote speech to his party conference saw him dismiss the idea of returning to normality. Is he using Covid-19 to follow the World Economic Forum’s ‘Great Reset’ agenda, as many have warned?

It’s not really about public health or a virus. They have another agenda.’ That’s what the so-called ‘conspiracy theorists’ have been saying since March, when the first British lockdowns were imposed and our lives were turned upside down. 

Those ‘conspiracy theorists’ were denounced, as always, as ‘cranks’ and ‘flat-Earthers’ but here we are in October, and, let’s face it, there is absolutely no sign, despite very low numbers of deaths ‘with’ Coronavirus, that we are returning to anything like normal. In fact, in his keynote speech yesterday, Prime Minister Boris Johnson specifically ruled out a return to normal, not even with a vaccine.

After all we have been through, it isn’t enough just to go back to normal. We have lost too much. History teaches us that things of this magnitude – wars, famines, plagues, events that affect the vast bulk of humanity, as this virus has – they do not just come and go. They can be the trigger for economic and social change.” 

When I heard Johnson utter those words I thought, ‘where have I heard this stuff before?’ Well, the answer is in the book ‘Covid-19: The Great Reset’ by Klaus Schwab, the executive chairman of the World Economic Forum, and Thierry Malleret. They too, like Johnson, invoked the Second World War as the trigger for fundamental changes, not only to the global order and global economy, but to society and the way human beings interact with one another. Like Johnson, they don’t want to return to normal. “Many of us are pondering when things will return to normal. The short response is never.” Also on ‘No peasants, please’: BoJo’s love-in with Bill Gates on Twitter shows just how broken UK democracy really is

Instead, Schwab and Malleret want a world changed forever by a virus which they admit is only ‘mild’ compared to others in history. Covid-19 is seen as the catalyst for the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’. 

As to where all this is heading, I recommend you read Schwab’s ‘Great Reset’, and his earlier ‘The Fourth Industrial Revolution’, but please don’t do so late at night, because they will probably give you nightmares. Schwab’s elitist Davos-man utopia is a trans-human, socially distanced, utterly soulless dystopia for the rest of us. Think of the most terrifying sci-film you’ve ever watched and that still doesn’t go anywhere near it. And the worst thing is that it is sold to us as some kind of ‘progressive’ vision.

Johnson, in his speech yesterday, showed he’s a fully-signed up ‘Great Resetter’. It was, for me, the most chilling oration ever made by any British prime minister at a party conference. 

The man who justified a national lockdown in March on a purely temporary three-week basis to ‘flatten the curve’, and ‘protect the NHS’, and who said in the summer, after the lockdown had lasted three months, that he hoped Britain would return to ‘significant normality’ by November, now tells us: “We have been through too much frustration and hardship just to settle for the status quo ante – to think that life can go on as it was before the plague; and it will not… We are resolving not to go back to 2019.”

For Johnson, using the globalists’ phrase ‘Build Back Better’, this is the time to launch Britain on the ‘Fourth Industrial Revolution’. “From internet shopping to working from home, it looks as though Covid has massively accelerated changes in the world of work… as old jobs are lost and as new ones are created… The Covid crisis is a catalyst for change…” he said. 

Did Schwab actually write his speech? It looks like it. Although Johnson didn’t use the phrase ‘The Fourth Industrial Revolution’, he did mention a ‘Green Industrial Revolution’ twice.

Johnson foresees a future in which every home in Britain relies on wind power (he certainly produces a lot of that), and “instead of being dragged on big commutes to the city” people can “start a business in their home town… and bring up their children in the neighbourhoods where they grew up themselves.” 

Working from home is here to stay, with “gigabit broadband,” shopping from home, conferencing from home… in fact, let’s do everything from home. Who needs to meet other human beings? Not that there’d be anywhere to meet, with pubs, cinemas and theatres all closed down due to the never-ending coronavirus restrictions. 

Johnson pledged to make Britain “the greatest place on Earth” but to me it sounds more like hell. The question, as ever, is who benefits? Also on Boris Johnson’s £100bn Operation Moonshot needs to be shot down – fast

The World Economic Forum, founded by Schwab, has been incredibly influential when it comes to the changes we’ve already seen in 2020, and what is being openly planned for the future. It was the WEF which co-hosted the Event 201 conference in New York in October 2019, which modelled a fictional global pandemic. 

It was at the WEF’s annual meeting in Davos on January 24, 2020 that Bill Gates’ Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness and Innovations (CEPI) held a press conference to announce a ‘new partnership’to develop vaccines for the virus, when the number of confirmed worldwide cases was still in the hundreds.

It was the WEF’s Schwab who declared in June: “The pandemic represents a rare but narrow window of opportunity to reflect, reimagine and reset our world.

It was the WEF that in July was promoting a Covid-19 Health Passport app, the ‘brainchild’ of one of its ‘Young Global Leaders’, as the future for travel and attending events.  

Travelling with confidence.📕 Read more:— World Economic Forum (@wef) July 30, 2020

And for those who don’t have the app or a ‘negative‘ test result? Well, you can just stay at home.

Conspiracy theorists eh?”The World Economic Forum-backed project aims to create the first globally recognised proof that a passenger has tested negative for the virus before a flight, using a digital certificate downloaded to a mobile phone”— Simon Dolan #KBF (@simondolan) October 7, 2020

If you take a look at the founding partners of the WEF’s Centre for the Fourth Industrial Revolution you’ll see names such as Microsoft, Palantir, Facebook, Netflix and Gavi, The Vaccine Alliance, founded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

Yes, that’s right, hi-tech online giants and hi-tech multi-billionaires supporting a big shift towards a stay-at-home, ‘do everything on the Internet’ society.  

Is it a ‘conspiracy theory’ to say that Covid-19 is being used as a convenient opportunity to introduce long-planned changes to the economy and society, when those pushing for such changes like Schwab openly talk of there being a “rare but narrow window” for a major ‘reset’? 

Actually, after Johnson’s speech yesterday, the biggest ‘conspiracy theorists’ now are those who DON’T think the British government is working to another agenda.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Boris’s new Covid restrictions are unscientific mumbo jumbo and an exercise in futility that will wreak havoc on millions — RT Op-ed

Posted by M. C. on September 25, 2020

But this is no oversight. It is a low trick the mandarins have conjured to avoid the consequences of their actions – they can always change the story post hoc. Like so much else of modern Britain, it could have come straight out of Orwell. Unsurprisingly, those 32 brave dissenters suffered personal abuse and their calls were ignored, as the government announced their half-baked scheme that very evening.

By Peter Andrews, Irish science journalist and writer based in London. He has a background in the life sciences, and graduated from the University of Glasgow with a degree in genetics

I accept my dissenting voice may not be heeded by the UK government, but when a former Supreme Court judge delivers a damning verdict that the rules are ‘pointless, arbitrary and unnecessary’, shouldn’t they be listening?

The UK has announced a fresh suite of draconian Covid restrictions, with Prime Minister Boris Johnson warning they could be in place for six months. But, like all previous attempts, the new rules are worse than useless.

You’ve all heard the new rules by now, so I won’t analyse the details of what the individual implications will be. Just as poring over a government white paper based on astrology would be pointless, tepid nit-picking within the nascent pseudoscience of ‘Covidology’ is an exercise in futility. It’s also an immediate acceptance of the quacks’ terms of the argument.

‘The rule of six’ could be ‘the rule of seven’, the pubs could close at midnight or 10pm, level 4, 5 or 75 could be enforced – none of this would make any difference. Nor is it acceptable. The fiddled numbers, the fake compromises, the newspeak – all of it is misdirection. In a nutshell, this doubling down means nothing less than the acceleration of an end to the free, decent life to which all human beings are born entitled. Only a total return to normality should be demanded, and it’s non-negotiable.

Heavyweight opposition

Just ask former Supreme Court justice Lord Jonathan Sumption, who has been making waves this week with his scathing analysis of the government’s madcap plot. He’s dubbed Johnson’s ‘rule of six’ “pointless, arbitrary and unnecessary”. 

It’s pointless, he says, because, without a Stasi-like secret army of citizen spies, it cannot be enforced. He is correct, of course (although I don’t consider the likelihood of an army of snitchers quite as unlikely as he seems to). It’s arbitrary because it’s far from universal – people mix in much larger numbers in schools and workplaces, on public transport and in the streets, all of which is essential. And it’s unnecessary because the increase in positive tests is being driven – as Health Secretary Matt Hancock is so fond of reminding us – by the young, to whom the disease poses relatively little threat.

Lord Sumption’s verdict is a pretty comprehensive takedown of the prime minister by one of the finest legal minds in the country, and every word of it is right.

I would add one more adjective to the list, to apply to all Covid restrictions from national lockdowns to hand-washing: unscientific. That’s not to claim that alcoholic soap, say, does not kill viral particles. I have no doubt that it does. But my question to any scientist would be “why are we trying to kill viral particles?” A reason for pitting state power against an endemic respiratory virus is never asked for or given. If you think the answer is self-evident, then please briefly and clearly outline it. Otherwise, I suggest you recall the words of the Hippocratic Oath, and first do no harm.

What’s the plan?

A large part of the problem is that the government has stopped declaring what it is that it’s  trying to do. Is it flattening the curve, getting to zero cases of Covid, or what? As 32 top scientists wrote in their open letter to the government leadership this week, without a clearly stated objective, “neither the overarching strategy, nor individual policy choices within it, can be evaluated”.

But this is no oversight. It is a low trick the mandarins have conjured to avoid the consequences of their actions – they can always change the story post hoc. Like so much else of modern Britain, it could have come straight out of Orwell. Unsurprisingly, those 32 brave dissenters suffered personal abuse and their calls were ignored, as the government announced their half-baked scheme that very evening.

I try never to wave my scientific education in people’s faces in arguments, and, not being a devoted scholar, would never claim to be truly expert in any realm of science. But one thing a scientific education does teach you is that scientists can be just as irrational, cultish and politically compromised as everybody else. Do not ‘trust the experts’. Never ‘follow the science’. These are often PR canards designed to boondoggle people into horrible conditions that their instincts scream against. Trust your instincts, and believe in evidence, not politics dressed up as science.

Think your friends would be interested? Share this story!

Be seeing you




Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Crossing the Rubicon: The UK Slips into a Repressive State – OffGuardian

Posted by M. C. on August 3, 2020

I’m forced now to doubt that we, the British people value our freedom as much as we profess to. We take to the streets in droves to embrace new forms of repression, such as an anarchistic movement that seeks to rewrite history and dismantle our police forces, or an anti-human death cult that seeks to suppress all human activity by frightening us all into believing we are destroying the Earth by existing.

Mark Chapman

Julius Caesar’s crossing the Rubicon River in 49 BC in defiance of Roman law placed him and his army on a direct collision course with Rome, leading to the Civil War which established him as Roman dictator. It is a well-established metaphor for a point at which there is no going back and at which things will never be the same.

I predicted a few weeks ago that the UK Government would in the near future try to force everyone to wear facemasks in public. Leave aside the plethora of information that makes it clear face masks are of practically zero benefit in everyday circumstances, and may in fact be dangerous, the forced wearing of facemasks is a transgression so fundamental and of such significance that it is difficult to adequately express.

It implicitly hands your body over to state control, and renders one of your most basic existential freedoms subject to state interference. For the first time, the right to exercise a choice of whether you should inhibit your respiratory faculties and hide your face in public is taken out of your hands. If you doubt the significance of this, try to remember the public outcry that followed a debate regarding banning the wearing of burkhas and hijabs in the face of Islamic terrorism, and the connotations this had for civil liberties at the time.

Facemask wearing is the visible hallmark of Asian states perceived in the West as repressive and authoritarian. It is a badge of serfdom, akin to the yellow star that Jews were forced to wear in Nazi Germany. There is no greater invasion of your person possible short of tattooing you with a number.

This astonishing about-turn in policy has not happened overnight or without preparation. It has been preceded by a cleverly-orchestrated media campaign which seeks to bizarrely turn established professional and scientific research on its head, making virologists, infection-control bodies and academics who have published papers for the medical profession into liars and charlatans.

This campaign has included editorials and blogs which talk in disapproving and accusatory tones of “mask-shirkers” and “mask-deniers” allegedly “refusing” to wear face masks. Leave aside the obvious fact that refusal cannot take place without a demand: in other words someone has to give you an instruction to which you reply, “No, thanks.”

Absent such a demand, you are not refusing anything, merely making a choice. And until now there has been no such demand. But those making this choice are now psychopaths and enemies of humanity without a shred of integrity, respect or regard for their fellow human beings. When I returned from Asia early this year the advice was clear: face masks do not protect you from infection and it is not advised that you wear them.

What is more, face mask wearing was actively discouraged because of limited supplies required for hospital environments, where infection control is king and every precaution makes sense. Above all the only situation in which it is appropriate to wear a facemask in public is if you are unwell and have a cough, in which case why not stay at home?

But this piece of simple logic has been covered by the mask-advocates whose logic runs like this: “You may have coronavirus without knowing it, and may infect others with your breath even at unlimited distances so you need to wear a mask.” This covers all bases despite the evidence for this being at best negligible and at worst manipulated and dishonest.

It is part of the greater logic that renders every societal value worthless unless it contributes to the impossible task of making sure that not one single individual anywhere, ever, is infected with Covid-19. None of this means I think we should do nothing about this pandemic. But there is now a growing awareness that the cure proposed is not indefinitely sustainable and may in fact be worse than the disease.

The virtue-signalling of face-mask advocates is easily refuted. Facemasks have been available for decades for use in industry and ideas generally considered good are taken up by the public. Nobody needed the government to tell them to go out and buy a car or a television set.

So if you’re so convinced face masks are a good idea why has it taken the State to tell you before you came to this Eureka moment?

And for how many years or decades have you been going around disrespectfully infecting your fellow human beings by going out without a mask when you had a cold or the flu?

However, apparently all the established research is now wrong and face mask wearing is essential. It is a vast game of “Simon Says,” in which we only do anything when Simon says. And it won’t stop there. Expect newspapers like the Guardian to run sanctimonious editorials demanding that face-mask wearing be extended to pubs and restaurants, and eventually to every departure from your home.

Following this such a move will become policy: indeed, the British public will do what they are already doing, gleefully embracing this perverse doctrine, boasting of buying colourful face masks for their children, and showering anyone who has a different point of view with disapproval.

I’m forced now to doubt that we, the British people value our freedom as much as we profess to. We take to the streets in droves to embrace new forms of repression, such as an anarchistic movement that seeks to rewrite history and dismantle our police forces, or an anti-human death cult that seeks to suppress all human activity by frightening us all into believing we are destroying the Earth by existing.

But in the face of mounting attacks on our liberty and our freedom, we are silent. We have had our liberty taken away from us. Our movements are monitored. Our discussions are censored via social media. We are no longer free even to make fundamental choices about our bodies. A public that will silently accept these things has learned nothing from history, will accept anything and deserves its fate if that is a dystopian world-state.

We are no longer entitled to lecture other nations about being repressive states. Their representatives, quite rightly in my view would laugh in our faces. There is a growing fear in the minds of many of us that Western lockdowns may be permanent. The spectres of identity cards, martial law and forced vaccination now hover over us.

Dismissing this as “conspiracy theory” and accusing those who feel this way of an inhuman disregard for life is the rhetoric of fascism, a force that always thrives in the face of a perceived threat. I believe forced face-mask wearing in British streets is a brutal act that crosses the Rubicon, and finally signifies our descent into a de facto repressive state.

Mark Chapman is an artist and educator based in the UK. His work is often concerned with questioning established narratives where evidence is contrary to these. You can read more of his work at his blog Humanism

Be seeing you




Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The Seven-Step Path from Pandemic to Totalitarianism – OffGuardian

Posted by M. C. on July 30, 2020

There are just seven steps from pandemic declaration to permanent totalitarianism – and many jurisdictions are about to start Step 5

Rosemary Frei

As if it was planned in advance, billions of people around the globe are being forced step by rapid step into a radically different way of life, one that involves far less personal, physical and financial freedom and agency.

Here is the template for rolling this out.

Step 1

A new virus starts to spread around the world. The World Health Organization (WHO) declares a pandemic.

International agencies, public-health officials, politicians, media and other influential voices fan fear by focusing almost exclusively on the contagiousness of the virus and the rising numbers of cases, and by characterizing the virus as extremely dangerous.

Within a few days governments at national and local levels also declare states of emergency. At lightning speed they impose lock-down measures that confine most people to their homes – starting with closing schools – and shut down much of the global economy. World markets implode.

The stunned, fearful and credulous public – convinced over the previous few years that their bodies do not have the natural ability to react to pathogens by producing antibodies that confer long-lasting immunity – largely complies willingly.

The first weekly virtual class on local emergency and crisis responses to COVID19 is held for mayors and other city officials around the world. Coordinated by a handful of American organizations in the academic, medical, financial, political and transportation spheres, the classes feature guests ranging from Barack Obama to Bill Gates.

Step 2

National, state/provincial and municipal leaders, as well as public-health officials, start daily press briefings. They use them to pump out frightening statistics and modelling asserting the virus has the potential to kill many millions.

Most of this information is hard to decipher and sheds little real light on the natural course of the virus’s spread through each geographic area.

Officials and media downplay or distort inconveniently low death tolls from the virus and instead focus on alarming statistics produced by compliant academics, social-media influencers and high-profile organizations.

The main message is that this is a war and many lives are at stake unless virtually everybody stays at home. Mainstream media amplify the trope that the world is at the mercy of the virus.

Simultaneously, central banks and governments hand out massive amounts of cash largely to benefit the big banks. And they bring in giant private-sector financial firms to manage the process despite these global companies’ very poor track record in the 2008-2009 crash. Governments also rapidly start to create trillions of pounds’ worth of programs that include compensating businesses and workers for their shutdown-related losses.

Step 3

There is a concerted effort by all levels of government and public health to very rapidly ramp up testing for viral RNA, along with production of personal protective equipment.

They push aside the need for regulation, including quality standards and independent verification of tests’ rates of accuracy, by insisting that fast approval and roll-out are imperative for saving lives.

Models are released that predict snowballing of numbers of cases, hospitalizations and deaths even under best-case scenarios.

At about the same time, public-health officials significantly loosen the criteria for viral infections, outbreaks and deaths, particularly in the oldest members of society. That increases the numbers of cases and deaths ascribed to the new pathogen.

The media continue to clamour for more testing and for severe punishment of people who aren’t completely compliant with the lock-down measures.

As a result, there’s little backlash as police and military with sweeping new powers enforce these measures and give stiff penalties or even jail terms to those who disobey orders. States also monitor with impunity massive numbers of people’s movements via their cellphones.

Vast human resources are focused on tracking down people who have had contact with a virus-positive individual and confining them to their homes. Thus the portion of the public exposed to the virus remains relatively small.

It also contributes to social isolation. Among many effects, this enables those in control to even further erase individual and collective choices, voices and power.

Step 4

When the numbers of cases and deaths start to plateau, local officials claim it’s too early to tell whether the virus has finished passing through their population and therefore, restrictive measures must continue.

An alternative narrative is that if such measures aren’t kept in place there will be a resurgence of cases and deaths. Yet another is that the continuing climb in elderly persons’ deaths means all bets are off for the time being.

They admit that initial models incorrectly predicted there would be a tsunami of cases, ICU admissions and deaths. However, they assert more time is needed before it can be determined whether it’s safe to loosen some of the restrictions and let children return to school or adults go back to work.

Officials do not try to calculate the overall skyrocketing cost to their populations and economies of the shut-downs and other measures against, nor do they discuss what cost level may be too high.

They and powerful media organizations also push for the massive virus-testing over-capacity to be used to surveil the general population for viral RNA in their bodies. At the same time, the roll-out begins of widespread blood testing for antibodies to the virus.

Meanwhile, new data are published showing the virus has a high capacity to mutate. Scientists and officials interpret this as meaning a larger medical arsenal will be needed to combat it.

Step 5

About two or three weeks later, the dramatic increase in testing for viral RNA produces the desired goal of a significant upsurge in the number of people found positive for the virus.

Public-health officials add jet fuel to the surge by adding to their case and death tallies the large number of people who are only suspected – and not lab-test-confirmed – to have had an infection. Politicians and public-health officials tell the populace this means they cannot return to their jobs or other activities outside the home for the time being.

Governments work with public-health agencies, academics, industry, the WHO and other organizations to start to design and implement immunity-passport systems for using the results of the widespread antibody testing to determine who can be released from the lock-downs. This is one of many goals of the seven steps.

Meanwhile, government leaders continue to highlight the importance of vaccines for besting the virus.

Step 6

Large-scale human testing of many different types of antivirals and vaccines begins, thanks to a concerted push from the WHO, Bill Gates and his collaborators, pharmaceutical and biotech companies, governments and universities.

Large swaths of the population don’t have the antibodies to the virus because they’ve been kept from being exposed to it; they eagerly accept these medications even though they’ve been rushed to market with inadequate safety testing. They believe these medical products offer the only hope for escaping the virus’s clutches.

Step 7

Soon the new virus starts another cycle around the globe – just as influenza and other viruses have every year for millennia. Officials again fan the flames of fear by positing the potential for millions of deaths among people not yet protected from the virus.

They rapidly roll out virus and antibody testing again, while companies sell billions more doses of antivirals and booster vaccines.

Governments simultaneously cede control of all remaining public assets to global companies. This is because local and national governments’ tax bases were decimated during Step 1 and they’re virtually bankrupt from their unprecedented spending in the war against the virus in the other steps.

The overall result is complete medicalization of the response to the virus, which on a population level is no more harmful than influenza.

This is coupled with the creation of permanent totalitarianism controlled by global companies and a 24/7 invasive-surveillance police state supported by widespread blossoming of ‘smart’ technology.

The key players repeat the cycle of hysteria and massive administration of antivirals and booster shots every few months.

And they implement a variation of steps 1 to 7 when another new pathogen appears on the planet.

Sounds far-fetched? Unfortunately, it’s not.

With the arrival of COVID19 many countries quickly completed Steps 1, 2 and 3.

Step 4 is well under way in a large number of jurisdictions.

Step 5 is on track to start in early May.

Rosemary Frei has an MSc in molecular biology from a faculty of medicine and was a freelance medical writer and journalist for 22 years. She is now an independent investigative journalist in Toronto, Ontario. You can find her earlier article on the novel coronavirus for Off-Guardian here, watch and listen to an interview she gave on COVID19 and follow her on Twitter.

Be seeing you




Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Boris Johnson Fights for Life… Russian Media Got it Right — Strategic Culture

Posted by M. C. on April 11, 2020

Many consider RT more truthful than most media.

Finian Cunningham

British newspapers delivered the grim news on their front pages Tuesday: Prime Minister Boris had been taken into hospital intensive care because his health deteriorated rapidly overnight from Covid-19 disease.

The Mirror splashed: ‘Sick Boris Faces Fight For Life’. Other newspapers conveyed similar shocked tones and the disquieting sense of a government in disarray. Who will lead the government if Johnson is incapacitated, they asked?

Compounding the sombre mood is a mounting death toll among Britons, with over 5,300 succumbing so far to the global pandemic. Britain has not reached its peak in the epidemic.

Only the day before, however, the Mirror and other British news outlets were telling the public that 55-year-old Johnson had been admitted to hospital as a routine precaution. It was roundly reported that he was “in good spirits” and that, so to speak, there was nothing to see here or worry about. Move along everyone.

In particular, the British media quoted the prime minister’s Downing Street office as dismissing as “disinformation” earlier Russian reports claiming Johnson’s health condition was more serious. There was a palpable sense of British disdain that the Russians were distastefully indulging in infowar at a most inappropriate time.

A report on Monday in RIA Novosti, and picked up by other Russian outlets, claimed that Johnson was hospitalized and he could soon be put on a ventilator. The claim was attributed to a senior source in the British national health service. That claim indicated the prime minister’s health condition was not “in good spirits” but actually in grave decline, requiring medical intervention to assist with breathing.

The pathology of Covid-19 as shown in other cases is such that it can rapidly go from mild symptoms to aggressively attacking a patient’s internal organs, especially the lungs in which case victims can drown from their own pleural fluids.

Johnson was first diagnosed as having contracted Covid-19 nearly two weeks ago. He had been self-isolating in Downing Street and taking conference calls as the head of government, while reportedly suffering “mild symptoms” of coughing and fever.

On Sunday, he was admitted to St Thomas’ hospital in London, near Westminster, because of “persistent symptoms”. But, as noted above, the British media were dutifully repeating the official version that the hospital admission was precautionary and nothing more serious.

Things took a dramatic shift on Monday evening about 7.30pm local time when the BBC delivered “breaking news” that Johnson had been taken to the intensive care unit (ICU) within St Thomas’ hospital. Still, the British media were maintaining that the latest move was more precautionary than an emergency intervention. Even though being in ICU is a big deal.

The Independent reported Tuesday: “Boris Johnson has been moved to intensive care after his coronavirus symptoms worsened, just hours after Downing Street insisted he was in good spirits and in control of the government’s response to the escalating crisis… The prime minister is understood to still be conscious and to have been moved as a precaution, in case he requires ventilation to aid his recovery.”

The outlet added: “He was given oxygen to help his breathing before he went into the intensive care unit, sources said last night.”

British media Tuesday were quoting Cabinet ministers as saying that Johnson had not been subjected to invasive ventilation, requiring the insertion of an oxygen tube into his lungs. Though it was admitted that oxygen was administered to him, presumably via a face mask.

Cabinet minister Michael Gove told the BBC on Tuesday: “The prime minister’s not on a ventilator. He has received oxygen support.”

If there is any change in his condition, “Number 10 [Downing Street] will ensure the country is updated,” Mr Gove added, according to the BBC.

At this point, Downing Street and the British media have lost credibility in their reporting on what is the exact condition of Johnson. Up to now, they have both been downplaying the matter and playing catch-up.

Was Johnson put on a ventilator on Monday, as Russian media were saying? Or was it a less invasive procedure of oxygen administered with face mask? It scarcely matters. The point is that the British prime minister’s life is in a lot more vulnerable condition than the British media were telling.

It was the Russian media who had the story largely correct and yet they were peremptorily dismissed as Russian “state-owned disinformation”. The dismissal by Downing Street was given added emphasis by British media outlets who seemed to be more keen to rubbish Russian rivals than actually check out the facts about Johnson. The rubbishing of Russian media also plays into the long-running dubious narrative about Russian interference and Kremlin-sponsored media influence.

Well, it looks like the Russian media had the scoop on Johnson’s deterioration. And it turns out the British media are the ones that were peddling fake news and keeping the public in the dark.

This is not meant to engage in petty oneupmanship and schadenfreude.

It’s a basic question of the British public’s right to know about a crucial matter on the state of their government in competently handling a public health crisis. The last thing needed is public uncertainty and distrust about what they are being told about a life-threatening pandemic, either by the government or by the media.


Be seeing you



Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

The End Has a Date – EPautos – Libertarian Car Talk

Posted by M. C. on February 6, 2020

Which accounts for the urgency; the need to “act” – now!

If people are given too much time to think about it, they might have second thoughts.

Before it’s too late.

I used to like cars. That died long ago.

The question I always ask: What will happen to our power grid when all cars are electric? That is a lot of windmills. Is it windy where you are today?

By eric

The story goes that when Julius Caesar crossed the Rubicon river with his legions and headed into Rome – something forbidden by the Republic – it signaled the end of the Roman Republic. A similar event has just occurred that heralds the end of the internal combustion-engined car.

Not because a lower-cost, more efficient and more practical alternative has been found – as happened when the Model T replaced the horse and buggy, without any bayonets shoved into the backsides of horse-and-buggy owners.

But because a higher-cost, less efficient and much-less-practical alternative has been found that requires bayonets shoved into backsides, for precisely those reasons.

Boris Johnson – the Caesar of Great Britain – has decreed that as of 2035 no one will be allowed to buy a new car that is not an electric car. Not even partially electric hybrid cars will be allowed.

Only electric cars.

Less than 15 years from now.

Car manufacturers – especially European-based brands such as Mercedes, BMW, VW/Audi/Porsche, Peugot (which just merged with Fiat – which owns the American brands Chrysler, Dodge, Jeep and Ram) and, of course, Jaguar/Land Rover – have been put on notice that there’s no future – not long from now – for other than electric cars.

And will therefore cease devoting resources toward the development of new cars that are not electric.

They’d be stupid to do otherwise.

The effect of this proscription – a Roman word whose original meaning is most apt in this context – will be felt much sooner than most people outside the car business may realize.

Far sooner than 15 years from now.

It takes years to conceive, develop, test and generally get a new car ready for the market. It takes years – often decades – to recover the costs of development including the tooling and so on necessary to manufacture it, build up spare parts inventory, train dealer service people – etc.

This is called the product cycle.

And less-than-15-years is too brief a cycle to spend much time – or money – developing new products that won’t be legal for sale by the time they are ready to be sold.

And so they won’t be developed.

Stagnation will ensue. Existing models that aren’t electric will receive a few updates here and there but it is unlikely many new models that aren’t electric will be released. Existing stock will be depleted – and not replaced.

Well, it’ll be replaced. With electric cars.

Whether there’s a market for them being irrelevant. Caesar will simply decree one.

All the brands mentioned above have already begun the switchover to electrics; not because there’s a market for them but because Caesar has said they will shortly be forbidden from bringing other-than-electric cars to market.

The reason it’s hard to buy a rifle – or even a pellet gun – in the UK isn’t for lack of a market.

It’s because the market has been illegalized.

Now, other-than-electric cars are to be illegalized. Not just there, either – and not just that. The UK ban will be followed by European bans – France has already banned. It will likely metastasize into a world ban.

American brands are international brands; they will make the “transition,” too. Caesar – our Caesar – may also do decree it.

The ban on selling new cars that aren’t electric cars will also be attended by a driving ban on cars that aren’t electric. Or heavy taxes on them, to punish their owners for not driving electric cars.

This is already happening – no need to wait until 2035. And not just in the UK. France and Germany currently proscribe the driving of other-than-electric cars in certain areas – and those areas will increase until it becomes proscribed to drive other-than-an-electric car anywhere.

You won’t be able to buy – drive – or sell.

Well, for much.

At the retail level – new and used – the prices of other-than-electric cars will shortly collapse, accelerating the end. Of what value is a car you can’t drive where you need to go – or which will cost you a fortune (in punitive taxes) to drive?

Or which you will have great difficulty selling given these two facts?

Caesar says “We know as a country, as a society, as a planet, as a species, we must now act.”

He means we must be forced.

Caesars always speak in euphemisms – to make their proscriptions go down easier.

We must be forced – because it’s the only way to get most people into electric cars, for the same reason it would have been necessary to force most people back into their horse-drawn buggies.

Only the Amish go willingly.

Caesar says we must be forced because of the imminence of a bug-eyed “climate crisis” – predicted to arrive by 2030 – hence the hysteria of language and of legislation. But what happens when we get to 2025 – just five years from now – and the “climate” isn’t in “crisis”?

The jig will be up. Hysteria will abate – or at least, become recognized as hysteria. Those still afflicted can be treated – by psychiatrists. It will be realized that the End Times scenarios peddled on the basis of computer models and false – simplistic – assumptions about hugely complex and naturally variable phenomena – the “climate” – were of a piece with the Heaven’s Gate cult and the shedding of containers.

But it will be too late for the rest of us.

We’ll have been forced out of our cars and into electric cars – for those who can afford them. The rest of us will be forced to ride-share in electric cars or move close enough to where we need to be in order to walk there.

Which accounts for the urgency; the need to “act” – now!

If people are given too much time to think about it, they might have second thoughts.

Before it’s too late.

Be seeing you

Insane Lemon Battery Used to Power Volkswagen Electric ...

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Will the Secessionist Epidemic Ever End? – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on December 17, 2019


Fresh from his triumphal “Get Brexit Done!” campaign, Prime Minister Boris Johnson anticipates a swift secession from the European Union.

But if Britain secedes from the EU, warns Scotland’s first minister Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland will secede from the United Kingdom.

Northern Ireland, which voted in 2016 to remain in the EU, could follow Scotland out of Britain, leaving her with “Little England” and Wales.

Not going to happen, says Boris. His government will not allow a second referendum on Scottish independence.

Yet the Scottish National Party won 48 of Scotland’s 59 seats in Parliament, and Sturgeon calls this a mandate for a new vote to secede:

“If (Boris) thinks … saying no is the end of the matter then he is going to find himself completely and utterly wrong. … You cannot hold Scotland in the union against its will.”

She has a point. If a majority of Scots wish to secede, how does a democratic Great Britain indefinitely deny them the right of self-determination?

Is Scotland fated to become for Britain what Catalonia is to Spain?

Where does this phenomenon, this continuing unraveling of old and proliferation of new nations, this epidemic of secessionism, end?

The most recent population explosion of new nations began three decades ago, when 15 republics of the USSR became independent nations. Soon, several of the 15 began to unravel further.

Transnistria seceded from Moldova. South Ossetia and Abkhazia seceded from Georgia. Chechnya sought to break free of Russia, only to be crushed. Since 2015, the Donbass has sought to secede from Ukraine.

When Josip Tito’s Yugoslavia collapsed, six “nations” seceded from Belgrade.

When did secessionism begin? The Americans started it all.

The first great secessionist cause was the Revolution, when the 13 American colonies declared and won independence from the British crown.

It is solemnly declared today that our Revolution was about ideas, such as the equality of all men. But the author of the Declaration did not believe in equality.

Jefferson was a Virginia plantation owner, some of whose slaves were with him in Philadelphia. He described Native Americans in the Declaration as “merciless Indian Savages.” The British are fraternally called “brethren” with whom we share “ties of a common kindred,” but who have been “deaf to the voice of consanguinity.”

I.e, our cousins have been deaf to the call of our common blood.

John Jay, in Federalist 2, before the Constitution was even ratified, spoke of the elements that formed the nation — “one connected country to one united people … descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion … similar in their manners and customs.”

A second secessionist movement, six decades later, created a second American nation. Texans under Sam Houston rose up and ripped that vast province away from its young mother country, Mexico.

The third secessionist movement united 11 states that sought to create a new confederated nation outside the Union, as the revolutionary generation had created a new nation outside of Britain. Read the rest of this entry »

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »