MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘lockdowns’

Government Property Is Sacred. Your Property? Not So Much. | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on April 10, 2021

Only a detached member of the ruling class whose livelihood is sustained by some of America’s most powerful corporations can have the gall to downplay the trials and tribulations untold numbers of small business owners had to endure during last summer’s mayhem. Scarborough and his coterie would have us believe that paying respect to the hallowed institutions of mass democracy is the highest virtue while trying to defend the fundamental property rights of the common man is the province of buffoons and country bumpkins.

https://mises.org/wire/government-property-sacred-your-property-not-so-much

José Niño

In light of the government’s response to the January 6 storming of the Capitol, anyone with a sense of political sanity can no longer argue that the war on terror is separate from American domestic affairs.

US imperialism came full circle on January 20, 2021, when Washington, DC, was subject to military occupation during Joe Biden’s inaugural address in order to secure the Capitol from alleged domestic extremist threats. When the right-wing violence that DC talking heads were squawking about never came to pass, their focus shifted toward trying to deradicalize right-leaning individuals who hold heretical views that collide with the managerial regime’s gospel.

Former CIA director John Brennan was among the most vocal of the national security analysts who started listing off all sorts of problematic groups that potentially pose a threat to the dystopian political order crystallizing before our very eyes. The very act of a mob entering the holiest of the holy sites was enough to make the entire American political establishment have a mental breakdown.

The message the ruling class sent to those who protested against it on its own turf was quite clear: tread your muddy boots on our cathedral and you will be met with a firm response from the state.

So far, there have been over 380 people charged for participating in the January 6 incident. Rest assured, the politicians who are still shaken from January 6 are thirsting for more people to persecute. Words like coup, insurrection, riot, sedition, and treason were tossed around liberally to describe the January 6ers’ actions. Only a regime insecure of its legitimacy would throw a hysterical fit over the Capitol storming that looked more like a live-action role-play than a rebellion that threatened the sovereignty of the DC occupational regime.

Pace the gatekeepers of political opinion, launching a coup requires strong organizational capacity. Rag-tag groups of disgruntled, working-class Americans, disenchanted soccer moms, and extremely online Trump supporters aren’t going to be pulling off a coup against the most powerful government in human history. The only venues the January 6 demonstrators were capable of taking over were online chat rooms.

Government Property Is Sacred. Your Property? Not So Much. 

The double standards the legacy media is using to rationalize its ongoing crusade against the specter of extremism are farcical, to say the least. Over the course of a year when small business owners had their livelihoods destroyed by arbitrary lockdowns and widespread rioting, the ruling class tipped their glasses to the rioters and scoffed at those who had to put up with last summer’s mayhem. These same media mouthpieces would likely be cheering on color revolutions and lively protests in the Middle East and post-Soviet countries as the maximal expression of democracy. But when a rowdy group of Trump supporters took it upon themselves to stand up to their overlords, that was simply a bridge too far.

Any attempt to try to point out the inconsistency of the media’s hyperventilation with regard to the January 6 incident was met with instant pushback. On Morning Joe, TV host Joe Scarborough did not pull any punches:

I know there are idiots on other cable news channels that will say, “Well, this mom-and-pop store that was vandalized during the summer riots and that’s just as bad as the United States Capitol being vandalized.” 

He then had some colorful language for those who hazarded to question the prevailing narrative:

No jackass it’s not. It’s the center of American democracy. No, jackass…. I’m not going to confuse a taco stand with the United States Capitol.

Only a detached member of the ruling class whose livelihood is sustained by some of America’s most powerful corporations can have the gall to downplay the trials and tribulations untold numbers of small business owners had to endure during last summer’s mayhem. Scarborough and his coterie would have us believe that paying respect to the hallowed institutions of mass democracy is the highest virtue while trying to defend the fundamental property rights of the common man is the province of buffoons and country bumpkins.

Private Property Is Critical for Civilization

For the adherents of the present political order, symbols of the state have a religious aura. Private property, on the other hand, is a sacrificial animal to be slaughtered as an offering to the state, though the whole conversation would likely change if the property of Nancy Pelosi, Chuck Schumer, Mitch McConnell, Big Tech, or politically connected corporations were defiled. The media would instantly become situational capitalists and vigorously defend the sanctity of their fellow peers’ property. 

Heck, they might just throw some radical free market defenses here and there. But this is out of pure self-interest, not because political leaders and their corporate patrons hold private property in high esteem at a holistic level. As for the rest of the rubes in Middle America, they must put up with whatever political violence befalls them and their property. Simply raising their voices in opposition will have the legacy media branding them as “reactionary,” “racist,” or “bigoted.”

On the other hand, Ludwig von Mises championed private property not just for the sake of sloganeering but to impart to others the necessity property rights as a means of fostering social harmony. As he observed in Omnipotent Government, “If history could teach us anything, it would be that private property is inextricably linked with civilization.”

Mises’s vision for a social order predicated on respect for property rights has not disappeared from the intellectual consciousness. Successors of the Misesian tradition such as Hans-Hermann Hoppe have continued making the case for the respect of private property as a civilizing force. Unlike the public sector worshippers, Hoppe understood the bigger picture of why private property, not public property, should be treated as sacred. In fact, he views the modern-day state as one of the principal drivers of the erosion of property rights throughout the West.

As Hoppe argued in Democracy, The God That Failed,

the more the state has increased its expenditures on social security and public safety, the more our private property rights have been eroded, the more our property has been expropriated, confiscated, destroyed, or depreciated, and the more we have been deprived of the very foundation of all protection: economic independence, financial strength, and personal wealth.

As a consequence of being accustomed to having mandarins in distant government agencies lord over them, Americans have gradually come to disrespect or at least take for granted the concept of property rights. Hence their relative indifference toward the wanton destruction of the property of many small business owners’ establishments during last summer’s riots and toward the devastation government-promoted lockdowns inflicted on these small business operations.

The sign of a healthy society is one where private property is respected, and not just the private property of social media whales or parasitic defense contractors, but that of everyday business owners. By the same token, a society with a modicum of sanity would laud acts of self-defense against criminals who wish to harm the property and persons of lawful individuals.

Many of the shibboleths that Americans have been so inured to accept are now imploding. Millions of Americans took it upon themselves to buy firearms at record levels during a time when police services could not be relied on to uphold their end of the proverbial social contract. Moreover, a number of Americans responded by forming community defense groups to protect their neighborhoods when police were standing down left and right as cities nationwide burned.

Even the idea of privatized policing is starting to gain traction in certain parts of America. Occasionally, moments of crisis force people to rethink many political premises they’ve stubbornly held. There’s something to be said about how operating outside of one’s comfort zone can compel one to look at things differently.

All things considered, the past year should all but dispel the notion that America is “exceptional.” It’s a country with a myriad of problems that have dotted empires in decay throughout world history—a corrupt ruling class, an overstretched military presence, an unstable monetary system, and declining public order.

Reassuring ourselves of empty bromides that it “can’t happen here” because America is exceptional is a pathetic cope that ignores the iron laws of politics and economics, which the US is not exempt from. The only thing exceptional is the level of befuddlement that many experts will find themselves in once the US inevitably careens into the abyss of social and economic decadence if the country’s leaders don’t get their act together. Author:

Contact José Niño

José Niño is a freelance writer based in Austin, Texas. Sign up for his mailing list here. Contact him via Facebook or Twitter. Get his premium newsletter here.

Be seeing you

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

Why Is Everyone In Texas Not Dying? | ZeroHedge

Posted by M. C. on March 28, 2021

The CDC has a very helpful tool that allows anyone to compare open vs closed states. The results are devastating for those who believe that lockdowns are the way to control a virus. In this chart we compare closed states Massachusetts and California with open states Georgia, Florida, Texas, and South Carolina. 

https://www.zerohedge.com/covid-19/why-everyone-texas-not-dying?utm_campaign=&utm_content=Zerohedge%3A+The+Durden+Dispatch&utm_medium=email&utm_source=zh_newsletter

Tyler Durden's Photoby Tyler Durden

Authored by Jeffrey Tucker via The American Institute for Economic Research,

I’m sitting at a bar in Texas, surrounded by maskless people, looking at folks on the streets walking around like life is normal, talking with nice and friendly faces, feeling like things in the world are more-or-less normal. Cases and deaths attributed to Covid are, like everywhere else, falling dramatically. 

If you pay attention only to the media fear campaigns, you would find this confusing. More than two weeks ago, the governor of Texas completely reversed his devastating lockdown policies and repealed all his emergency powers, along with the egregious attacks on rights and liberties.

There was something very un-Texan about those lockdowns. My hotel room is festooned with pictures of cowboys on horses waving guns in the air, along with other depictions of rugged individualism facing down the elements. It’s a caricature but Texans embrace it. Then a new virus came along – as if that had never happened before in Texas – and the new Zoom class took the opposite path, not freedom but imposition and control. 

After nearly a year of nonsense, on March 2, 2021, the governor finally said enough is enough and repealed it all. Towns and cities can still engage in Covid-related mischief but at least they are no longer getting cover from the governor’s office. 

At that moment, a friend remarked to me that this would be the test we have been waiting for.

A complete repeal of restrictions would lead to mass death, they said. Would it? Did the lockdowns really control the virus? We would soon find out, he theorized. 

I knew better. The “test” of whether and to what extent lockdowns control the virus or “suppress outbreaks” (in Anthony Fauci’s words) has been tried all over the world. Every serious empirical examination has shown that the answer is no. 

The US has many examples of open states that have generally had better performance in managing the disease than those states that are closed. Georgia already opened on April 24, 2020. South Dakota never shut down. South Carolina opened in May. Florida ended all restrictions in September. In every case, the press howled about the coming slaughter that did not happen. Yes, each open state experienced a seasonality wave in winter but so did the lockdown states. 

So it was in Texas. Thanks to this Twitter thread, and some of my own googling, we have a nice archive of predictions about what would happen if Texas opened. 

  • California Governor Gavin Newsom said that opening Texas was “absolutely reckless.”
  • Gregg Popovich, head coach of the NBA San Antonio Spurs, said opening was “ridiculous” and “ignorant.”
  • CNN quoted an ICU nurse saying “I’m scared of what this is going to look like.”
  • Vanity Fair went over the top with this headline: “Republican Governors Celebrate COVID Anniversary With Bold Plan to Kill Another 500,000 Americans.”
  • There was the inevitable Dr. Fauci: “It just is inexplicable why you would want to pull back now.”
  • Robert Francis “Beto” O’Rourke of Texas revealed himself to be a full-blown lockdowner: It’s a “big mistake,” he said. “It’s hard to escape the conclusion that it’s also a cult of death.” He accused the governor of “sacrificing the lives of our fellow Texans … for political gain.”
  • James Hamblin, a doctor and writer for the Atlanticsaid in a Tweet liked by 20K people: “Ending precautions now is like entering the last miles of a marathon and taking off your shoes and eating several hot dogs.”
  • Bestselling author Kurt Eichenwald flipped out: “Goddamn. Texas already has FIVE variants that have turned up: Britain, South Africa, Brazil, New York & CA. The NY and CA variants could weaken vaccine effectiveness. And now idiot @GregAbbott_TX throws open the state.” He further called the government “murderous.” 
  • Epidemiologist Whitney Robinson wrote: “I feel genuinely sad. There are people who are going to get sick and die bc of avoidable infections they get in the next few weeks. It’s demoralizing.”
  • Pundit Bill Kristol (I had no idea that he was a lockdowner) wrote: “Gov. Abbott is going to be responsible for more avoidable COVID hospitalizations and deaths than all the undocumented immigrants coming across the Texas border put together.”
  • Health pundit Bob Wachter said the decision to open was “unforgivable.”
  • Virus guru Michael Osterholm told CNN: “We’re walking into the mouth of the monster. We simply are.”
  • Joe Biden famously said that the Texas decision to open reflected “Neanderthal thinking.”
  • Nutritionist Eric Feigl-Ding said that the decision makes him want to “vomit so bad.”
  • The chairman of the state’s Democratic Party said: “What Abbott is doing is extraordinarily dangerous. This will kill Texans. Our country’s infectious-disease specialists have warned that we should not put our guard down, even as we make progress towards vaccinations. Abbott doesn’t care.”
  • Other state Democrats said in a letter that the decision was “premature and harmful.”
  • The CDC’s Rochelle Walensky didn’t mince words: “Please hear me clearly: At this level of cases with variants spreading, we stand to completely lose the hard-earned ground we have gained. I am really worried about reports that more states are rolling back the exact public health measures we have recommended to protect people from COVID-19.”

There are probably hundreds more such warnings, predictions, and demands, all stated with absolute certainty that basic social and market functioning is a terrible idea. The lockdown lobby was out in full force. And yet what do we see now more than two weeks out (and arguably the lockdowns died on March 2, when the government announced the decision)? 

Here are the data. 

The CDC has a very helpful tool that allows anyone to compare open vs closed states. The results are devastating for those who believe that lockdowns are the way to control a virus. In this chart we compare closed states Massachusetts and California with open states Georgia, Florida, Texas, and South Carolina. 

What can we conclude from such a visualization? It suggests that the lockdowns have had no statistically observable effect on the virus trajectory and resulting severe outcomes. The open states have generally performed better, perhaps not because they are open but simply for reasons of demographics and seasonality. The closed states seem not to have achieved anything in terms of mitigation. 

On the other hand, the lockdowns destroyed industries, schools, churches, liberties and lives, demoralizing the population and robbing people of essential rights. All in the name of safety from a virus that did its work in any case. 

As for Texas, the results so far are in…

I’m making no predictions about the future path of the virus in Texas. Indeed for a full year, AIER has been careful about not trying to outguess this virus, which has its own ways, some predictable and some mysterious. The experience has, or should have, humbled everyone. Political arrangements seem to have no power to control it, much less finally suppress it. The belief that it was possible to control people in order to control a virus produced a calamity unprecedented in modern times. 

What’s striking about all the above predictions of infections and deaths is not just that they were all wrong. It’s the arrogance and confidence behind each of them. After a full year and directly observing the inability of “nonpharmaceutical interventions” to manage the pathogen, the experts are still wedded to their beloved lockdowns, unable or unwilling to look at the data and learn anything from them. 

The concept of lockdowns stemmed from a faulty premise: that you can separate humans, like rats in cages, and therefore control and even eradicate the virus. After a year, we unequivocally know this not to be true, something that the best and wisest epidemiologists knew all along. Essential workers still must work; they must go home to their families, many in crowded living conditions. Lockdowns do not eliminate the virus, they merely shift the burden onto the working class.  

Now we can see the failure in black, white, and full color, daily appearing on our screens courtesy of the CDC. Has that shaken the pro-lockdown pundit class? Not that much. What an amazing testament to the stubbornness of elite opinion and its bias against basic freedoms. They might all echo the words of Groucho Marx: “Who are you going to believe, me or your own eyes?”

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , | 1 Comment »

They Said Things Would Be Much Worse in States without Lockdowns. They Were Wrong. | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on March 20, 2021

In other words, the dire predictions surrounding states that first canceled stay-at-home orders have been spectacularly wrong. Many lockdown enthusiasts will now do what the LA Times did: quibble over small differences between Florida and California to show that California did a little bit better. New York, of course, will just be completely ignored.

https://mises.org/wire/they-said-things-would-be-much-worse-states-without-lockdowns-they-were-wrong

Ryan McMaken

Like nearly all US states, Georgia imposed a stay-at-home order in March 2020 in response to demands from public health officials claiming a stay-at-home order would lessen total deaths from covid-19.

But unlike most states, Georgia ended its stay-at-home order after only five weeks, and proceeded to lower other restrictions quickly.

The legacy media responded with furious opposition. For example, an article in The Atlantic declared the end of Georgia’s lockdown to be an “experiment in human sacrifice.” The Guardian approvingly quoted one Georgian who insisted the end of the stay-at-home order was “reckless, premature and dangerous.”

A few weeks later, other states began to end their stay-at-home orders and to end other restrictions as well. Florida was the largest among these states.

Shortly thereafter the Daily Beast declared that the scaling back of restrictions in Georgia and Florida was “terrifyingly premature,” and quoted one expert who insisted, “If you lift the restriction too soon, a second wave will come, and the damage will be substantial both medically and economically. We don’t want to throw away the sacrifices we have made for weeks now.”

All this hyperbole about human sacrifice and recklessness leads us to conclude that states which ended lockdowns quickly must have experienced far worse numbers of deaths from covid than states which maintained lockdowns longer. Indeed, when it came to lockdowns, we were told, the longer the better. Ideally, lockdowns shouldn’t be loosened up at all until everyone can be vaccinated.

But things didn’t turn out that way. Experts have scrambled to come up with explanations for why this is the case, but the fact remains some of the most strict states (i.e., New York and Massachusetts) have covid deaths at far worse rates than the “reckless” states like Georgia and Florida.

Moreover, with little to show for their lockdowns in terms of “public health,” these states with extreme lockdowns also have some of the worst unemployment rates. This occurred in spite of the fact that experts insisted that a failure to impose lockdowns would doom a state’s economy to later economic disaster.

State-to-State Comparisons Aren’t Helping the Prolockdown Narrative

A year after stay-at-home orders began, even the usual media outlets are being forced to recognize the outcomes aren’t what was predicted. The Associated Press reported earlier this week:

California and Florida both have a COVID-19 case rate of around 8,900 per 100,000 residents since the pandemic began, according to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. And both rank in the middle among states for COVID-19 death rates—Florida was 27th as of Friday; California was 28th.

Connecticut and South Dakota are another example. Both rank among the 10 worst states for COVID-19 death rates. Yet Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont, a Democrat, imposed numerous statewide restrictions over the past year after an early surge in deaths, while South Dakota Gov. Kristi Noem, a Republican, issued no mandates as virus deaths soared in the fall….

Like Florida, Missouri had no statewide mask mandate, ended business restrictions last June and has a cumulative COVID-19 death rate similar to California’s.

Even the LA Times was forced to admit this reality, although they insisted that when you consider the higher levels of poverty and “overcrowding” in California—translation: California is a filthy breeding ground for disease—California should have had far worse rates than Florida for covid deaths. Thus, the LA Times concludes, “California better controlled the virus.”

The LA Times goes on to point to the fact Florida’s covid death rate, while similar, is nonetheless 6 percent higher than California’s, and this translates to three thousand deaths that presumably wouldn’t have happened if Florida had adopted lockdown rules similar to California.

But the numbers don’t stack up so well in favor of lockdowns if we use the LA Times‘s method to make other comparisons. For example, New York’s total deaths-per-million rate is 67 percent higher than Florida’s. Translated into raw numbers, that means if Florida were like New York, Florida would have experienced 54,000 deaths instead of the 33,000 that the CDC now attributes to covid in Florida. (New Jersey’s outcomes are even worse than New York’s.)

Similarly, if Florida were like Massachusetts in its outcomes, Florida would have experienced 54 percent more deaths.

If the LA Times is going to claim overcrowding should translate into more death in California, it should also note that Florida fares worse than California in terms of median age and incidence of obesity. Since advanced age and obesity are major factors in covid hospitalizations and deaths, we might conclude it is Florida, and not California, that is primed for especially bad covid numbers.

(According to the CDC, Florida and New York are evenly matched in terms of obesity, Florida has more obesity than Massachusetts, and Florida has the highest median age of them all.)

And what about Georgia, that experiment in human sacrifice? Well, the CDC reports Georgia’s total deaths-per-million rate at 1,720. That’s worse than California’s rate of 1,400, but Georgia is still far and away better than New York, New Jersey, and Massachusetts, which have rates of 2,530, 2,690, and 2,400, respectively.

What about Economic Performance?

Meanwhile, it is likely that the economies of Florida and Georgia have suffered less. Although the Daily Beast assured us that the “damage will be substantial both medically and economically” if a state ends lockdowns “too soon,” we now find that the unemployment rates in Florida and Georgia are 4.8 and 5.1, respectively.

In California, the picture is quite different, where the unemployment rate now sits at 9 percent. New York doesn’t fare much better, with an unemployment rate of 8.8 percent. New Jersey clocks in at 7.9 percent.

In other words, the dire predictions surrounding states that first canceled stay-at-home orders have been spectacularly wrong. Many lockdown enthusiasts will now do what the LA Times did: quibble over small differences between Florida and California to show that California did a little bit better. New York, of course, will just be completely ignored.

As one doctor at UC San Francisco admitted: “One might’ve expected that the Floridas of the world would’ve done tremendously worse than the Californias of the world … ” Places like Florida and Georgia were supposed to be overwhelmed by an absolute tsunami of death if they were “reckless” in ending covid restrictions. That didn’t happen.

Author:

Contact Ryan McMaken

Ryan McMaken (@ryanmcmaken) is a senior editor at the Mises Institute. Send him your article submissions for the Mises Wire and The Austrian, but read article guidelines first. Ryan has degrees in economics and political science from the University of Colorado and was a housing economist for the State of Colorado. He is the author of Commie Cowboys: The Bourgeoisie and the Nation-State in the Western Genre.

Be seeing you

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

The Real Reasons Why Millions Of Americans Will Defy Covid Mandates And Vaccines – Alt-Market.us

Posted by M. C. on March 13, 2021

5) In March of 2020, head of the NIAID Dr. Anthony Fauci had this to say about mask wearing when being interviewed on 60 Minutes:

Right now, in the United States, people should not be walking around with masks….there’s no reason to be walking around with a mask. When you’re in the middle of an outbreak wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better, and it might even block a droplet but it’s not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is, and often there are unintended consequences – people keep fiddling with the masks and they’re touching their face.”

6) On Twitter in February of 2020, the US Surgeon General had this to say about mask wearing:

Seriously people – STOP BUYING MASKS! They are NOT effective in preventing general public from catching #Coronavirus, but if healthcare providers can’t get them to care for sick patients, it puts them and our communities at risk!”

Both the Surgeon General and Fauci later reversed their stance on mask wearing when it no longer suited the control narrative, and are now fervent supporters of enforcing mask mandates. Scientific data continues to show that mask wearing does nothing to stop the spread of Covid.

https://alt-market.us/the-real-reasons-why-millions-of-americans-will-defy-covid-mandates-and-vaccines/

By Brandon Smith

I suspect a large portion of the public is at least partially aware when they are being pushed or lured into a specific way of thinking. We have certainly had enough experience with institutions trying to manage our thoughts over the years.  Governments and mainstream media outlets in particular have made the manufacture of public consent their top priority. This is what they spend most of their time, money and energy on. All other issues are secondary.

The media does not objectively report facts and evidence, it spins information to plant an engineered narrative in the minds of its viewers. But the public is not as stupid as they seem to think. This is probably why trust in the media has plunged by 46% in the past ten years, hitting an all time low this year of 27%.

Except for pre-election season spikes, mainstream outlets from CNN to Fox to CBS to MSNBC are facing dismal audience numbers, with only around 2 million to 3 million prime time viewers. There are numerous YouTube commentators with bigger audiences than this. And, if you sift through the debris of MSM videos on YouTube, you’ll find low hits and a majority of people that are visiting their channels just to make fun of them.

The MSM is now scrambling to explain their crumbling empire, as well as debating on ways to save it from oblivion. The power of the “Fourth Estate” is a facade, an illusion given form by smoke and mirrors. Bottom line: Nobody (except perhaps extreme leftists) likes the corporate media or activist journalists and propagandists.

One would think that media moguls and journos would have realized this by now. I mean, if they accepted this reality, they would not be struggling so much with the notion that no one is listening to them when it comes to pandemic mandates and the covid vaccines. Yet, journalists complain about it incessantly lately.

In fact, half the media reports I see these days are not fact based analysis of events, but corporate journalists interviewing OTHER corporate journalists and bitching to each other about how Americans are “too ignorant” or “too conspiratorial” to grasp that journos are the anointed high priests of information.

I actually find this situation fascinating as an observer of oligarchy and being well versed in the mechanics of propaganda. The fundamental narrative of control-culture is that there are “experts” that the establishment chooses, and then there is everyone else. The “experts” are supposed to pontificate and dictate while everyone else is supposed to shut up, listen and obey.

Media elitists see themselves in the role of “the experts” and the public as devout acolytes; a faithful flock of sheep. But what happens when everyone starts ignoring the sheep herders?

The other day I came across this revealing interview on CBS news about a poll of Americans showing at least 30% will refuse to take the covid vaccine outright. The interview is, for some reason, with another journalist from The Atlantic with no apparent medical credentials and no insight into the data surrounding covid.

One thing to note right away is that the discussion itself never addresses any actual facts about the virus, the pandemic, the lockdowns, the mandates, or the vaccines. The establishment keeps telling us to “listen to the science”, but then they dismiss the science when it doesn’t agree with their agenda. When is the the mainstream going to finally acknowledge facts like these:

1) According to multiple official studies, including a study from American College of Physicians, the Infection Fatality Ratio (or death rate) of Covid-19 is only 0.26% for anyone outside of a nursing home. This means that 99.7% of people not in nursing homes will survive the virus if they contract it.

2) Nursing home patients account for over 40% of all Covid deaths across the US. These are mostly people who were already sick with multiple preexisting conditions when they contracted covid.

3) The Federal Government’s own hospital data from the Department of Health and Human Services indicates that capacity for hospital beds is ample in the US and that this has been the case for the past year. Covid patients at their peak only took up around 13% of inpatient beds nationally. The stories in the media of hospitals at overcapacity due to covid are therefore inaccurate or they are outright lies.

See the rest here

You can contact Brandon Smith at:

brandon@alt-market.com

Be seeing you

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged: , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Almost a Year Later, There’s Still No Evidence Showing Governments Can Control the Spread of Covid-19 | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on February 24, 2021

https://mises.org/wire/almost-year-later-theres-still-no-evidence-showing-governments-can-control-spread-covid-19

Anthony Rozmajzl

As we approach the one-year anniversary of fifteen days to flatten the curve, we have yet to acquire any data suggesting that the past year of life-destroying lockdowns and politicized behavioral mandates has done anything to keep us safe from covid-19. While discussions surrounding the reintroduction of nationwide lockdowns seem to have ceased—it’s impossible to ignore the lockdowns’ disproportionately deadly effects and the numerous studies demonstrating their futility—the media still retain their grip on the narrative that nonpharmaceutical interventions (NPIs) such as mask mandates, curfews, capacity restrictions, gathering restrictions, and others remain necessary to prevail in our fight against covid-19.

Government officials, in lockstep with big tech and nearly all major news outlets, have controlled the NPI narrative to such an extent that its proponents have simply sidestepped the burden of proof naturally arising from the introduction and continued support of novel virus mitigation strategies, happily pointing to the fact that their ideas enjoy unanimous support from the corporate media and government officials all over the world. This seemingly impenetrable narrative rests, of course, on the critical assumption that NPIs, or behavioral mandates, have protected us from covid-19.

The One Chart That Covid Doomsdayers Can’t Explain

If there is one visualization the reader should become familiar with to highlight the ineffectiveness of a nearly a year’s worth of NPIs, it would be the following chart comparing hospitalizations and deaths per million in Florida with those in New York and California, however we will be focusing solely on the comparison between Florida and California.

In light of everything our officials have taught us about how this virus spreads, it defies reality that Florida, a fully open and popular travel destination with one of the oldest populations in the country, currently has lower hospitalizations and deaths per million than California, a state with much heavier restrictions and one of the youngest populations in the country. While it is true that, overall, California does slightly better than Florida in deaths per million, simply accounting for California’s much younger population tips the scales in Florida’s favor.

Florida has zero restrictions on bars, breweries, indoor dining, gyms, places of worship, gathering sizes, and almost all schools are offering in-person instruction. California, on the other hand, retains heavy restrictions in each of these areas. At the very least, Florida’s hospitalizations and deaths per million should be substantially worse than California’s. Those who predicted death and destruction as a consequence of Florida’s September reopening simply cannot see these results as anything other than utterly remarkable. Even White House covid advisor Andy Slavitt, much to the establishment’s embarrassment, had no explanation for Florida’s success relative to California. Slavitt was reduced to parroting establishment talking points after admitting that Florida’s surprisingly great numbers were “just a little beyond our explanation.”

Does Compliance Explain the Discrepancy?

Invariably, the above graph will invoke responses pointing to Californians’ supposed lack of compliance relative to Floridians as justification for their poor numbers. On its face, this claim is patently absurd given that Florida has been fully open since September. But if we dig into the data a bit more, we find some relevant metrics that shed light on how frequently Floridians and Californians are engaging in behaviors that allegedly fuel covid-19 transmission. The following survey data—California is shown in blue, Florida in gray—is taken from Carnegie Mellon University’s Delphi Research Group. Beyond the red vertical line, Florida has had consistently lower hospitalizations and deaths per million than California.

Mask Compliance

Bar Visits

Traveling

Restaurant Visits

We can see that, relative to Floridians, Californians have consistently been doing a better job of avoiding social behaviors that allegedly fuel the spread of covid-19. Moreover, at no point was there a drastic change in behavioral patterns after December 17 indicating that Floridians had suddenly begun avoiding activities purportedly linked to covid transmission.

A quick glance at each state’s “social distancing score” also indicates, yet again, that Californians have been doing a better job avoiding activities meant to facilitate the spread of covid-19. Additionally, Google’s covid mobility reports, as of February 16, 2021, show that Californians partake in fewer retail and recreational visits—restaurants, cafes, shopping centers, theme parks, museums, libraries, and movie theaters—as well as fewer grocery store and pharmacy visits, which include farmers markets, food warehouses, and speciality food shops. Evidently, the whole “noncompliance” schtick is nothing more than a fraudulent excuse for explaining away undesirable trends.

More Metrics Rebutting the Mainstream Covid-19 Narrative

Moving on from the Florida-California comparison, national metrics also highlight the lack of correlation between the intensity of states’ NPIs—methodology for determining this can be found here—and deaths per million.

In fact, if we visualize case trends across all fifty diverse states, each state having varying levels of restrictions, you’ll quickly notice a pattern that presents itself quite similarly across all fifty states: a bump in cases early to midway through the year followed by a much bigger surge in cases during winter months. The following data was retrieved from Johns Hopkins Coronavirus Resource Center.

See the rest here

Anthony Rozmajzl

Anthony graduated from Grove City College in 2018 with a B.A. in Economics. He has been a student of the Austrian School of Economics for over 8 years and a champion of Rothbardian libertarianism. During the day, Anthony works as a Software Quality Analyst for an ERP software company.

Be seeing you

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

Will Biden Blockade Florida?

Posted by M. C. on February 11, 2021

According to the Miami Herald, the Biden Administration is considering imposing travel restrictions on some states, including Florida, to combat what it claims is the spread of “mutated” coronavirus. Is this science…or politics? Also today: Newsom recall effort passes milestone; Doctors concerned about blood disorder cropping up; Who wanted the lockdowns?

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

What They Said About Lockdowns Before Covid

Posted by M. C. on January 16, 2021

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2021-01-15/goldfix-what-they-said-about-lockdowns-covid

Vince Lanci's Photoby Vince Lanci

Authored by Micha Gartz of AIER.org

In 2020, beliefs about how to handle a new virus shifted massively. Prior to the Covid-19 pandemic, mainstream epidemiology and public health entities doubted – or even rejected – the efficacy of lockdowns and mass quarantines because they were considered ineffective. This all changed in March 2020, when sentiment flipped in support of lockdown measures. Still, there is a vast body of evidence explaining their original stance and why these mandates do not work. 

[Edit-links to original stories embedded  in sub headlines- VBL]

  1. Fauci said that shutting down the country does not work. (January 24, 2020)

Early into 2020, Fauci spoke to reporters saying, “That’s something that I don’t think we could possibly do in the United States, I can’t imagine shutting down New York or Los Angeles, but the judgement on the part of the Chinese health authorities is that given the fact that it’s spreading throughout the provinces… it’s their judgement that this is something that in fact is going to help in containing it. Whether or not it does or does not is really open to question because historically when you shut things down it doesn’t have a major effect.”

  1. World Health Organization Report discusses NPIs and why quarantine is ineffective. (2019)

In a table, WHO lists their recommendations of NPIs depending on severity level. Quarantine of exposed individuals is categorized as “not recommended in any circumstances.” The report explains that “home quarantine of exposed individuals to reduce transmission is not recommended because there is no obvious rationale for this measure, and there would be considerable difficulties in implementing it.”

  1. WHO acknowledges social-distancing did not stop or dramatically reduce transmission during the 1918 influenza pandemic. (2006)

The WHO authors ultimately conclude that NPIs, including quarantining, require better and more focused methods to make them more effective and less “burdensome.” “Ill persons,” the authors assert, “should remain home when they first become symptomatic, but forced isolation and quarantine are ineffective and impractical.” Summarizing reports from the 1918 influenza pandemic the WHO cites Lomé (British-occupied Togo) and Edmonton (Canada) as places where “isolation and quarantine were instituted; public meetings were banned; schools, churches, colleges, theaters, and other public gathering places were closed.” Yet, despite additional measures (Lomé halted traffic, and Edmonton restricted business hours) in both cases “social-distancing measures did not stop or appear to dramatically reduce transmission.” A United States, comprehensive report on the 1918 pandemic also concluded that closures “[were] not demonstrably effective in urban areas but might be effective in smaller towns and rural districts, where group contacts are less numerous.” 

  1. A study in the Bulletin of Mathematical Biology regarding the 1918 influenza pandemic in Canada also concluded quarantines do not work. (2003)

The study simulated different levels of travel and found that travel limits could be effective but “that a policy of introducing quarantine at the earliest possible time may not always lead to the greatest reduction in cases of a disease.” The authors conclude that, “quarantine measures limiting intercommunity travel are probably never 100% effective, and simulation results suggest that such a situation may actually make things worse, especially in the absence of strong efforts to keep infectious individuals isolated from the rest of the population.”

  1. Popular author and Tulane adjunct professor John M. Barry, a strong opponent of the Great Barrington Declaration, argued that quarantines do not work in the case of the Spanish Flu. (2009)

Over a decade ago, Barry found that historically quarantines have been unsuccessful: “This author supports most proposed NPIs except for quarantine, which historical evidence strongly suggests is ineffective, and possibly school closing, pending analysis of recent events.” And instead promotes commonly touted measures, such as remaining home when unwell (and isolating from family members while doing so), frequently washing hands, and wearing a mask if you are sick. On the latter point he warns against healthy people wearing masks, noting: “Evidence from the SARS outbreak suggests that most health care workers infected themselves while removing protective equipment.”

  1. Seton Hall’s Center for Global Health Studies Director says travel restrictions did not delay the transmission of SARS. (2009)

Yanzhong Huang acknowledges that “travel restrictions and quarantine measures have limited benefit in stopping the spread of disease […] affecting travel and trade, dissuading the very kind of transparency and openness essential for a global response to disease outbreaks.” These measures ultimately undermine a country’s surveillance capacity because “people who show symptoms might choose to shun public health authorities for fear of quarantine or stigmatization [and squander] limited health resources […] Laurie Garrett of the Council on Foreign Relations [noted] by July signs of fatigue and resource depletion had already set in most of the world.

  1. A study from Wake Forest University encounters ‘self-protection fatigue’ in simulated epidemic. (2013)

Study uses a multiplayer online game to simulate the spread of an infectious disease through a population composed of the players. The authors find that “people’s willingness to engage in safe behavior waxes or wanes over time, depending on the severity of an epidemic […] as time goes by; when prevalence is low, a ‘self-protection fatigue’ effect sets in whereby individuals are less willing to engage in safe behavior over time.” They say this is “reminiscent of condom fatigue—the declining use of condom as a preventive measure—in the context of HIV/AIDS prevention.”

  1. In Biosecurity and Bioterrorism journal, Johns Hopkins epidemiologists reject quarantines outright. (2006)

In an article titled, “Disease Mitigation Measures in the Control of Pandemic Influenza,” JHU epidemiologists note problems with lockdowns: “As experience shows, there is no basis for recommending quarantine either of groups or individuals. The problems in implementing such measures are formidable, and secondary effects of absenteeism and community disruption as well as possible adverse consequences, such as loss of public trust in government and stigmatization of quarantined people and groups, are likely to be considerable.” Their concluding remark emphasized, “experience has shown that communities faced with epidemics or other adverse events respond best and with the least anxiety when the normal social functioning of the community is least disrupted.”

  1. In a top journal, American Journal of Epidemiology, authors explain the conditions when quarantine would be effective, which do not align with the characteristics of Covid-19. (2006)

Specifically, they note that quarantines will only be effective when: (1) isolation is not possible; and (2) asymptomatic spread is significant and timed in a narrow way (none of which is the case for Covid). They conclude that “the number of infections averted through the use of quarantine is expected to be very low provided that isolation is effective.” And if isolation is ineffective? Then it will only be beneficial “when there is significant asymptomatic transmission and if the asymptomatic period is neither very long nor very short.” But, should mass quarantine be used it would “inflict significant social, psychological, and economic costs without resulting in the detection of many infected individuals.”

  1. In the Epidemiology Journal, Harvard and Yale professors Marc Lipsitch and Ted Cohen say delaying infection can leave the elderly worse off. (2008)

They explain how delaying the risk of infection can work counterintuitively when the pathogen is more lethal for older populations. They say, “Reducing the risk that each member of a community will be exposed to a pathogen has the attendant effect of increasing the average age at which infections occur. For pathogens that inflict greater morbidity at older ages, interventions that reduce but do not eliminate exposure can paradoxically increase the number of cases of severe disease by shifting the burden of infection toward older individuals.” Based on this analysis, Covid-19, which disproportionately harms the older more than the young, is better handled by allowing the community to be exposed, whether through natural infection or vaccination.

  1. A team of Johns Hopkins scholars say quarantines don’t work but are pursued for political reasons. (September 2019)

In the report, they explain how quarantine is more political than related to public health: “During an emergency, it should be expected that implementation of some NPIs, such as travel restrictions and quarantine, might be pursued for social or political purposes by political leaders, rather than pursued because of public health evidence.” Later on, they explain the ineffectiveness of quarantine: “In the context of a high-impact respiratory pathogen, quarantine may be the least likely NPI to be effective in controlling the spread due to high transmissibility.”

In March 2020, Michael Osterholm – now Biden’s Covid-19 advisor – also argued that lockdowns are not a “cure” for the pandemic, listing multiple costs from a lockdown. Yet, Osterholm’s New York Times article in August reveals a contrasting viewpoint, stating that “we gave up on our lockdown efforts to control virus transmission well before the virus was under control” by opening “too quickly.” Osterholm and (Neel) Kashkari promote a mandatory shelter-in-place “for everyone but the truly essential workers.”

Also in March 2020, these findings from the listed works and many others culminated in an open letter to vice-president Mike Pence signed by 800 medical specialists from numerous universities throughout the country which pointed out: “Mandatory quarantine, regional lockdowns, and travel bans[…] are difficult to implement, can undermine public trust, have large societal costs and, importantly, disproportionately affect the most vulnerable segments in our communities.”

While expert consensus regarding the ineffectiveness of mass quarantine of previous years has recently been challenged, significant present-day evidence continuously demonstrates that mass quarantine is both ineffectual at preventing disease spread as well as harmful to individuals. Learning the wrong lesson – assuming that mass quarantines are both good and effective – sets a dangerous precedent for future pandemics.

Be seeing you

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

How The Grinch Flunked Ecology and Stole the Whole Damn Year – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on January 2, 2021

Today Americans would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow, they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there is an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being by their world government.” –Henry Kissinger, June 8, 1992, Evian, France, Media Protects Bilderberg, Spotlight.org

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2021/01/l-reichard-white/how-the-grinch-flunked-ecology-and-stole-the-whole-damn-year/

By L. Reichard White

OK, I’m going to give away this whole piece with the first quotes. Can you figure out where I’m going with ’em – – –

Athens distributed its most responsible public positions by lottery: army generalships, water supply, everything. …Professionals existed but did not make key decisions; they were only technicians, never well regarded because prevailing opinion held that technicians had enslaved their own minds. –The Way It Used To Be by John Taylor Gatto

Some First Nation folks have a related outlook which clarifies things – – –

My own tradition disbelieves in “experts.” “That which enables, disables also” means that a physicist will fail in understanding in many other areas, precisely because of the amount of time she/he spends on physics and therefore not on other things. Such people are not considered “experts,” but “those extensively informed on part of the whole“. –A NATIVE AMERICAN WORLDVIEW, by Paula Underwood Spencer

“…everything is too important ever to be entrusted to professional experts, because every organization of such professionals and every established social organization becomes a vested-interest institution more concerned with its efforts to maintain itself or advance its own interests than to achieve the purpose that society expects it to achieve.” –Carroll Quigley, ex-president William Jefferson Clinton’s mentor

Here’s the typical reaction when an “organization of such professionals” is challenged – – –

“I’d lie. We have to survive after-all.” –my childhood friend just before an internal evaluation to determine if the organization he headed actually was reducing the prison recidivism rate. He didn’t have to lie.

Particularly note Paula Underwood Spencer’s sentence, “Such people are not considered ‘experts,’ but ‘those extensively informed on part of the whole‘.”

Maybe that use of the word “whole” reminds you of ecology? Not yet? Well I’m pretty sure it will – – –

When Dr. Fauci and I were growing up — he’s five years older — our pale-face cultures — and even science — were a lot more narrow-minded, restricted and boxed-in, mostly because of a few language quirks and associated habits of thought.

Then along came General Semantics, operations research which morphed into systems analysis, and finally, in the 1960s, the environmental movement which popularized ecology.

They all helped us see through the barriers, walls and borders we inadvertantly impose on reality because of those quirks of language and habits of thought. They helped us see the Bigger Picture, and of course, that there always is one.

Another view sees system analysis as a problem-solving technique that breaks down a system into its component pieces for the purpose of studying how well those component parts work and interact to accomplish their purpose.[1… Systems analysis – Wikipedia

Systems analysis showed us we were always drawing lines — mental and otherwise — around parts of things, and thus, as per Paula Underwood Spencer, dividing the whole up into parts. That schooled us, implicitly at least, that there was always something on the other side of every line.

This is my favorite icon for that enlightenment, especially for folks of Dr. Fauci’s and my generations – – –

We know that the earth is round. We know there are people on it. We know that they are all like us. But when you fly around it time and time again —90 minutes to get around the whole earth—again and again and again, it comes in a different way. It doesn’t come in through the head. It comes in through the heart, in through the gut. When you come down from that experience, you’ve crossed thousands and thousands of borders and boundaries that are artificially created. They work nice on maps. You paint them orange and blue and green. But that’s not what it is when viewed from space. You don’t even see those boundaries and borders. We created them, guys, and it’s up to us to do something about it. …That’s what comes through to you when you’re up there in space, when you’re flying around this beautiful planet. –from “On Space,” by Rusty Schweickart, excerpted from The Magic of Conflict by Thomas F. Crum, pg. 85

In the 1960s – – – I turned 20 and Dr. Fauci was probably in medical school “enslaving his own mind” – – – the Environmental Movement, built on ecology, brought things down to earth. It nudged us into recognizing that biological organisms are interrelated and that although each organism has its own ecological niche, everything, affects everything else, often very indirectly.

And Chaos Theory with its butterfly flapping that Kansas tornado into existence expanded our core insights into interrelatedness.

And so we became aware that things we didn’t normally think of as related affecting each other wasn’t just limited to biology. It was the rule not the exception, and the word “ecology” became the go-to word to describe large-scale interrelatedness in general.

So, for example, business enterprises exist in an ecology. In fact, the entire economy is one huge interrelated ecosystem. And that ecosystem includes how you get your money and nearly everything you spend it on. Food for example. In other words, the economy is the central hub of our entire socio-economic ecosystem.

Without the interrelatedness of a well-functioning economy, a huge percentage of us would die, most from starvation.

The medical community is an integral part of that ecosystem. But only a part.

It seems that the medical experts our bureaucrats and elected prevaricators have put in charge — a mistake the ancient Greeks and P. Underwood Spencer wouldn’t have made — all flunked ecology, have forgotten or remain unaware of their ecological niche limitations, and have missed the Big Picture.

Just as Mr. Quigley suggested, enabled by the political establishment and fertilized by Main Stream Media, the medical-government-media complex is behaving as “a vested-interest institution more concerned with its efforts to maintain itself or advance its own interests than to achieve the purpose that society expects it to achieve,” that is, it’s behaving as an out-of-control memetic machine.

So now, let’s put this devastating mistake in proper ecological perspective.

If, as implemented, lockdowns, masks and social distancing would stop COVID-19 the pandemic would be over. Clearly they don’t and it isn’t.

Epidemiologists told us early-on, once things got out of control of contact-tracing, as with other flues, there would be no stopping COVID-19 till it had run its course and one way or another, we reached so-called “herd immunity.

They told us until herd immunity, the best we could do was to slow it down enough that it wouldn’t overwhelm the hospitals because that might lead to inadequate care in some cases and thus more deaths than otherwise expected.

This wouldn’t prevent infections, cases or deaths, it would just spread them out over time. Chaos Theory: Two Essa… Robert P. Murphy Best Price: $15.61 Buy New $7.00 (as of 04:50 EDT – Details)

You remember, “flatten the curve.”

So, as more realistically understood, the best the most extreme medically-proposed measures — particularly lockdowns — could hope for was preventing a relatively few extra deaths by protecting hospitals from serious overcrowding.

Still, isolated from the rest of the socio-economic ecosystem — and suitably hyped by the medical and pharma PR folks — and politicians — that sounds sortta reasonable. Doesn’t it?

However, once you take the medical-expert blinders off — and realize the MSM hasn’t — you can begin to drop this aberration into its niche in our full ecosystem. And you can begin to see the utter devastation this economically blind, idiocracy-worthy lockdown fiasco is still (January 2021 A.D.) wreaking on the world’s health and socio-economic ecology.

For starters, not to disvalue us older folks, but a significant majority of asserted COVID-19 victims are much older and we have fewer years to live. That means that the majority of any lives saved by lockdowns etc. would be, actuarially speaking, our less valuable lives. Taking that into account, this study concludes that COVID-19 Lockdowns [Are] Over 10 Times More Deadly Than the Pandemic Itself .

So the very most we get in return for what multi-credentialed Dr. Roger Hodkinson aptly called the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public is extending a relatively few lives of older folks and taking the pressure off hospital staff for awhile. And that’s the most you can hope for.

What’s the full Big Picture socio-economic cost for this?

For a quick, dirty, and mostly random sampling, in addition to the “10 Times More Deadly” figure above, we can start off with the CDC’s own records which document a 24% to 31% increase in pediatric mental health visits for children between the ages of 5 and 18.

And then, according to a September 2020 economic impact report by Yelp, 163,735 U.S. businesses had closed their doors as of August 31, 2020, and of those, 60% – a total of 97,966 businesses – were permanent closures. Hardest hit were minority enterprises. That’s from “Why Lockdowns Don’t Work and Hurt the Most Vulnerable” by Dr. Joseph Mercola. There’s a lot more in that article.

And then, if you’re concerned about saving lives, there’s this biggie:

“2021 Will Be Catastrophic” – UN Warns Of Humanitarian Crisis As 270 Million People May Starve

Once you have the blinders off — and realize the MSM still has them firmly in place — you can begin to see the costs vs. the benefits. I suggest whisky and tranquilizers — not at the same time of course. And you might want to keep your firearms out of reach.

We regularly hear, “Listen to the scientists!” But which scientists?

Despite the quite amazing attempt to censor folks who disagree with the ecologically challenged folks in charge, not all of our medical folks flunked ecology. Apparently only the ones the politicians and bureaucrats decided to put in charge.

Because so far, as of December 23, 2020, these 39,384 Medical practitioners and 13,035 Medical & Public Health Scientists signed The Great Barrington Declaration, dissing The Establishment’s alarmist, misleading destructive, and socio-economically ignorant handling of COVID-19.

The Declaration nails a few of the harmful effects like this – – –

“Current lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short and long-term public health … with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden.” and “with the underprivileged disproportionately harmed.” …”Indeed, for children, COVID-19 is less dangerous than many other harms, including influenza. ” …

And Great Barrington Declaration goes on to suggest this immediate correction:

“Those who are not vulnerable should immediately be allowed to resume life as normal. “

Then there’s Dr. David Nabbaro, the UK’s envoy to the World Health Organisation (W.H.O.) bureaucracy. He’s condemned the mass coronavirus lockdowns as a ghastly global catastrophe for crashing the world economy and doubling global poverty.

Unfortunately, in speaking out clearly, Dr. Nabbaro is somewhat of a W.H.O. rogue.

Even when you’re just consulting the experts and not worshiping them, there’s this final warning about them from inside science – – –

“Learn from science that you must doubt the experts. As a matter of fact, I can also define science another way: Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts.” –Legendary physicist Richard Feynman

And OK, so it’s not fair to cast Dr. Fauci as the Grinch Who Flunked Ecology and Stole the Whole Damn Year, he’s just doing what any self-respecting expert would do in his position. It’s our fault for taking the elected liars who listened almost exclusively to him and his ecologically challenged brethern seriously. And especially it’s on us for taking their literally illegal dictats seriously.

We can stop now.

But, dang it, if there ever was an excuse for type casting – – –

Fauci tells Americans not to see their kids for Christmas | Fox News

So, is all this just socio-economic ignorance? I like to think so, but this haunts me – – –

Today Americans would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow, they will be grateful. This is especially true if they were told there is an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being by their world government.” –Henry Kissinger, June 8, 1992, Evian, France, Media Protects Bilderberg, Spotlight.org

HERE for updates, additions, comments, and corrections.

AND, “Like,” “Tweet,” and otherwise, pass this along!

L. Reichard White [send him mail] taught physics, designed and built a house, ran for Nevada State Senate, served two terms on the Libertarian National Committee, managed a theater company, etc. For the next few decades, he supported his writing habit by beating casinos at their own games. His hobby, though, is explaining things he wishes someone had explained to him. You can find a few of his other explanations listed here.

Be seeing you

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

Why do hypocritical officials violate their own COVID rules? « Jon Rappoport’s Blog

Posted by M. C. on January 2, 2021

You don’t have to be smart, you don’t have to understand all the intricate details of the fake test, the fake case and death numbers based on the test. You just need to understand enough.

You just need to be clued in.

https://blog.nomorefakenews.com/2021/01/01/why-do-hypocritical-officials-violate-their-own-covid-rules/

by Jon Rappoport

The latest example of hypocrisy is Dr. Deborah Birx, White House coronavirus advisor. It turns out she traveled to meet her family for Thanksgiving after telling Americans not to travel, not to gather with family outside their immediate households.

Gavin Newsom, the governor of California, told the public they should celebrate Thanksgiving outdoors. Then he was caught having dinner, indoors, at a restaurant, unmasked, with 12 people.

There are other examples.

The usual explanation: these officials are arrogant and believe they’re above the law. They want to thumb their noses at the little people.

Yes, no doubt. But a more direct reason is staring us in the face.

The hypocritical officials know the whole COVID pandemic is a fraud.

They know there is no danger.

They know the lockdowns are unnecessary.

That’s why these officials break their own rules.

Why would they expose themselves to “the virus,” unless they knew they were safe?

Some of them believe they’re trapped in a political apparatus that offers no exit. They must go along with the show. They must participate in the fraud because, for example, federal dollars flow into their states, and those dollars are contingent on “playing the COVID game.”

Other officials have been bribed, blackmailed, threatened.

Regardless, they know they can flout their own rules because there is no health risk, no danger.

The risk is on the level of betting on a boxing match, when the bout is fixed, and you know who will win.

People will say, “These officials aren’t smart enough to figure out COVID is a fraud.”

You don’t have to be smart, you don’t have to understand all the intricate details of the fake test, the fake case and death numbers based on the test. You just need to understand enough.

You just need to be clued in.

This would suggest the COVID fraud is an open secret, shared by many in power. I believe that is exactly the case.

For purposes of comparison, consider a level of “secret understanding” slightly above that of politicians. Government scientists.

These scientists are fully aware that the PCR test for COVID is a complete hoax—for reasons I’ve detailed over the past nine months. Therefore, the scientists also know the case numbers based on those tests are fraudulent. And they know the case numbers are used as the rationale for the lockdowns.

That’s a lot of knowing. That’s a lot of “open secret.”

Here’s another comparison. PCR techs in labs all over the world, who are running the test, are fully cognizant of the crimes they’re committing every day—by utilizing “too many cycles” and therefore destroying any shred of validity when diagnosing ANYTHING.

Sharing this open secret among themselves, they otherwise remain silent.

Getting the picture?

The open secret of the COVID fraud isn’t confined to a dozen people in a sealed room. It’s high and wide. It’s understood by many in positions of power and responsibility, all over the world.

You can add your own lists of “secret sharers.” Mainstream physicians, for example. Physicians who are in charge of administering the COVID vaccines they know are unnecessary and dangerous. They also remain silent. So do certain news media people.

And since there are so many people who know the real score, we can begin to see the degree and extent of complicity that is driving the whole pandemic hoax.

This isn’t only a small conspiracy of movers and shakers who planned it and launched it.

This is a very wide-ranging conspiracy of silence.

“Don’t blame me. I’m just following orders.”

“But you know COVID is a total fraud.”

“Of course I know.”

“And you know others who know.”

“Many others.”

“Case closed.”

Which is to say, case WIDE OPEN.

The COVID situation is directly analogous to the Nazi, USSR, and Chinese bureaucracies; faceless workers passing on and obeying orders.

Many of the workers know those orders, no matter how they are dressed up, are arbitrary and evil.

The orders are initiated to destroy lives and freedom, and are transferred through the human machinery of The Complicit Silent Ones.

Jon Rappoport

The author of three explosive collections, THE MATRIX REVEALED, EXIT FROM THE MATRIX, and POWER OUTSIDE THE MATRIX, Jon was a candidate for a US Congressional seat in the 29th District of California. He maintains a consulting practice for private clients, the purpose of which is the expansion of personal creative power. Nominated for a Pulitzer Prize, he has worked as an investigative reporter for 30 years, writing articles on politics, medicine, and health for CBS Healthwatch, LA Weekly, Spin Magazine, Stern, and other newspapers and magazines in the US and Europe. Jon has delivered lectures and seminars on global politics, health, logic, and creative power to audiences around the world. You can sign up for his free NoMoreFakeNews emails here or his free OutsideTheRealityMachine emails here.

Be seeing you

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

It’s Interesting How the Violent Riots of 2020 Ended Right After the Election – The Organic Prepper

Posted by M. C. on December 30, 2020

https://www.theorganicprepper.com/2020-riots/

by Daisy Luther

Lest people think that 2020 was only about Covid-19, lockdowns, and economic disaster, don’t forget about the protests, riots, and escalating exhibits of rage.

The triggering event was the death of George Floyd. He was killed during an arrest on May 25th in Minneapolis, Minnesota. The entire thing was caught on video. It had all the potential to be a turning point with regard to police brutality and race – the nation was riveted and outraged.

But then, as often occurs, the protests were co-opted. Extremists took over, extremists on the other side took umbrage, and  Mr. Floyd became a footnote.

2020 devolved into ongoing violence in American streets that most of us haven’t seen in our lifetimes. Distinct sides were chosen, lines were drawn, and those who saw the middle ground were quickly shouted down while America burned.

May

Minneapolis immediately erupted into violent riots that turned deadly.

Rioters set the police station on fire.

Within a week of Mr. Floyd’s death, demonstrations had spread to 30 cities across the United States, many turning from peaceful protests to riots.

Riots in Denver:

Seattle was the site of particularly destructive and violent riots.

In fact, protestors took over a six-block area in the Capitol Hill area of Seattle, driving out police and maintaining their presence there for months. They even strategically changed the name of the area to make it part of a bigger movement.

June

The National Guard was deployed to cities across the country in an attempt to quell the violence.

Seattle:

Atlanta:

Los Angeles and Hollywood:

In this article, a National Guardsman shared a personal account of what was really going on during the Seattle riots.

July

In July, police and rioters in cities across the country were engaged in violent clashes.

Federal police squared off with rioters in Portland.

August

On August 23, fuel was added to the raging inferno when Jacob Blake was shot by police in Kenosha, Wisconsin. At this point, the facts of the shootings were no longer relevant – any police violence against a black suspect was going to result in riots.

By that evening, Kenosha was on fire.

The destruction of Kenosha, a moderate-sized town, was shocking.

We ran the first-person account of a Kenosha resident who said, “Everyone in the city was getting ready for a war.”

Looting and rioting broke out in Chicago after another police shooting and the “Magnificent Mile” was trashed by angry mobs.

It got so bad that Chicago Mayor Lori Lightfoot ordered the drawbridges raised.

Interestingly, activists attempted to justify the looting as “reparations.”

September

By September 1st, riots occurred for the 95th consecutive day in Portland.

Violence also erupted in Louisville, Kentucky when the Grand Jury declined to charge the officers accused of killing Breonna Taylor, a local paramedic, with homicide.

These protests also spread across the nation.

Some of those arrested in the New York City riots were entitled kids from wealthy families who were “enacting their revolutionary strategy.”.

October

In October, Walter Wallace was shot sixteen times by Philadelphia police during a mental health call after he refused to drop a knife.

Looting soon followed the rioting.

November

While America braced itself for riots based on the outcome of the hotly contested US presidential election, these fears did not come to fruition. In fact, the violence has slowed down since the outcome (which is still being argued by attorneys for President Trump.)

Did police shootings suddenly cease? Did racially-motivated violence end? Did the justice system radically evolve? Did everyone finally agree and settle their differences amicably?

It’s almost enough to make a person ask questions about the widespread violence from May through October.

What are your thoughts on this timing? Let me know in the comments.

About the Author

Daisy Luther

Daisy Luther is a coffee-swigging, gun-toting blogger who writes about current events, preparedness, frugality, voluntaryism, and the pursuit of liberty on her website, The Organic Prepper. She is widely republished across alternative media and she curates all the most important news links on her aggregate site, PreppersDailyNews.com. Daisy is the best-selling author of 4 books and lives in the mountains of Virginia with her two daughters and an ever-growing menagerie. You can find her on FacebookPinterest, and Twitter.

Be seeing you

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