MCViewPoint

Opinion from a Libertarian ViewPoint

Posts Tagged ‘mask’

The Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity : When Fascism Comes, It Will Be Wearing a Mask

Posted by M. C. on January 26, 2021

Mask and social distancing mandates, government control of private industry, and some of Biden’s other executive actions, such as one creating a new “Public Health Jobs Corps” with responsibilities including performing “contact tracing” on American citizens, are the type of actions one would expect from a fascist government, not a constitutional republic.

Joe Biden, who is heralded by many of his supporters as saving democracy from fascist Trump, could not even wait one day before beginning to implement fascistic measures that are completely unnecessary to protect public health. Biden will no doubt use other manufactured crises, including “climate change” and “domestic terrorism,” to expand government power and further restrict our liberty. Under Biden, fascism will not just carry an American flag. It will also wear a mask.

http://ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/featured-articles/2021/january/25/when-fascism-comes-it-will-be-wearing-a-mask/?mc_cid=4115c2c90e

Almost immediately after his inauguration, President Joe Biden began creating new government dictates via executive orders. Many of these executive orders concern coronavirus, fulfilling Biden’s promise to make ramping up a coronavirus-inspired attack on liberty a focus of his first 100 days.

One of Biden’s executive orders imposes mask and social distancing mandates on anyone in a federal building or on federal land. The mandates also apply to federal employees when they are “on-duty” anywhere. Members of the military are included in the definition of federal employees. Will citizens of Afghanistan, Iraq, and other countries where US troops are or will be “spreading democracy” be happy to learn the troops shooting up their towns are wearing masks and practicing social distancing?

Another one of Biden’s executive orders forces passengers on airplanes, trains, and other public transportation to wear masks.

Biden’s mask mandates contradict his pledge to follow the science. Studies have not established that masks are effective at preventing the spread of coronavirus. Regularly wearing a mask, though, can cause health problems.

Biden’s mask mandates are also an unconstitutional power grab. Some say these mandates are an exercise of the federal government’s constitutional authority to regulate interstate commerce. However, the Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the power to regulate interstate commerce. The president does not have the authority to issue executive orders regulating interstate commerce absent authorization by a valid law passed by Congress. The Founders gave Congress sole law-making authority, and they would be horrified by the modern practice of presidents creating law with a “stroke of a pen.”

Just as important, the Commerce Clause was not intended to give the federal government vast regulatory power. Far from giving the US government powers such as the power to require people to wear masks, the Commerce Clause was simply intended to ensure Congress could protect free trade among the states.

Biden also signed an executive order supporting using the Defense Production Act to increase the supply of vaccines, testing supplies, and other items deemed essential to respond to coronavirus. The Defense Production Act is a Cold War relic that gives the president what can fairly be called dictatorial authority to order private businesses to alter their production plans, and violate existing contracts with private customers, in order to produce goods for the government.

Mask and social distancing mandates, government control of private industry, and some of Biden’s other executive actions, such as one creating a new “Public Health Jobs Corps” with responsibilities including performing “contact tracing” on American citizens, are the type of actions one would expect from a fascist government, not a constitutional republic.

Joe Biden, who is heralded by many of his supporters as saving democracy from fascist Trump, could not even wait one day before beginning to implement fascistic measures that are completely unnecessary to protect public health. Biden will no doubt use other manufactured crises, including “climate change” and “domestic terrorism,” to expand government power and further restrict our liberty. Under Biden, fascism will not just carry an American flag. It will also wear a mask.


Copyright © 2021 by RonPaul Institute. Permission to reprint in whole or in part is gladly granted, provided full credit and a live link are given.
Please donate to the Ron Paul Institute

Be seeing you

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

What People Say When They Wear a Mask in Their Car – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on December 29, 2020

I believe masks work but still want you to wear one so you don’t infect me.

I can’t get the coronavirus if I take off my mask while eating and drinking at a restaurant.

I believe we are all in this together, but I don’t really know what this means.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/12/laurence-m-vance/what-people-say-when-they-wear-a-mask-in-their-car/

By Laurence M. Vance

We’ve all seen it. A man or a woman driving their car with a mask on their face.

As we all know, you can say a great deal about yourself without actually saying anything.

They may not realize it, but here is what people are saying when they wear a face mask while driving their car.

I voted for Joe Biden.

I believe the coronavirus is a deadly disease like smallpox or ebola.

I believe everything the government says about the coronavirus.

I believe that the coronavirus is a public health emergency that only government can deal with.

I believe the coronavirus is like a toxic cloud lingering in the air that could poison me.

I hang on every word of Dr. Fauci.

I believe everything the mainstream news media says about the coronavirus.

I check the latest figures on the worldwide coronavirus infection rates every night.

I am scared to death that I am going to breathe in the coronavirus while I am driving my car.

I no longer use restrooms at stores and restaurants.

I believe that Covid-19 tests are entirely accurate.

I believe in social distancing.

I am very concerned about the rise in coronavirus cases, but ignore the death rate.

I believe that everyone whom the government says died of coronavirus actually died of coronavirus.

I can’t wait to take the Covid-19 vaccine.

I no longer go the church services.

I believe that wearing masks saves lives.

It bothers me when I see employees at stores not wearing their masks properly.

I use hand sanitizer all throughout the day.

I don’t believe anything that conservatives and libertarians say about the coronavirus.

I think that those who dismiss the severity of the coronavirus are conspiracy theorists.

I am going above and beyond any recommendations to keep from catching the coronavirus.

I believe that breathing in fresh air might make me sick.

I support government mask mandates.

I support government lockdowns.

I support the government closing “unessential” businesses.

If I catch the coronavirus, then I might die.

I wear a mask when walking in the park.

I wear a mask when I gas up my car.

I wear a mask when I walk my dog.

I believe that everyone should wear a face mask.

I wear a mask whenever I step out of my front door.

I believe everything the CDC says about the dangers of the coronavirus.

I believe that people who don’t wear masks are endangering themselves and others.

I wear a mask in restaurants while I am ordering my food.

I believe masks work but still want you to wear one so you don’t infect me.

I can’t get the coronavirus if I take off my mask while eating and drinking at a restaurant.

I put on my mask to walk to the restroom at a restaurant.

I put on my mask back on at a restaurant as soon as I finish my meal.

I didn’t spend any time with people outside of my immediate family over the holidays.

I believe we are all in this together, but I don’t really know what this means.

Be seeing you

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

The Absurdity of Lockdown 2.0 | Mises Wire

Posted by M. C. on November 22, 2020

But there’s still time for people to see the major failures of bloated, bureaucratic government made up of people who pay little to no price for being wrong and wreaking economic havoc—covid or not—on its citizens (far from being punished, those in charge regularly reward themselves with hefty taxpayer-funded pensions). Gross mismanagement by distended governments that leads to further social unrest and far worse doesn’t have to be the future. As Ludwig von Mises said, “whoever wants peace among nations must seek to limit the state and its influence most strictly.” Those wise words are applicable to peace within nations, too.

https://mises.org/wire/absurdity-lockdown-20?utm_source=Mises+Institute+Subscriptions&utm_campaign=c716c5a92a-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_9_21_2018_9_59_COPY_01&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_8b52b2e1c0-c716c5a92a-228343965

Shane J. Coules

“A man walks through an eerily quiet, once-busy street lined with closed-down stores and burnt-out vehicles. Some of the storefronts display boarded-up windows, others with spattered red paint on the glass like blood on a wrecked car’s windshield. Some of the stores have been victims of looting, the shards of glass on the ground a diamond-like reminder of the recent mayhem. Our protagonist takes a deep breath; the sound audible in the vast silence. He releases the breath slowly and continues to walk. His nostrils flare. He detects a familiar smell in the air: something’s burning. His ears twitch as he hears the distant roar of a mob, the volume rising with each step he takes. He sees in the distance a fiery orange glow growing larger; the fire that has been raging for months, continuing to spread.”

The above scene may sound like the prologue of an apocalyptic novel by, say, Stephen King. But it could easily be a blend of scenes from 2020: moments pulled from a nightmarish year—the end of which most of us will be happy to see.

And as countries throughout Europe and some states in the US move into a second wave of covid-inspired lockdowns, it’s worth reflecting on what we’ve encountered thus far in this surreal year, and ruminating on the absurdity of a second lockdown.

“Stay at Home. Wear a Mask. Science Is Real.”

If I had a dollar for every time I heard or saw those three short statements bandied about on- and offline, I’d have quite a few, although admittedly I wouldn’t be rich. But I’d likely be in a better position than many small businesses that’ve been thrown into the unforgiving sea by their government only to be tossed a meager life vest by the same people who wrestled them overboard in the first place. It’s worth noting that the life vest hasn’t been enough to save some from sinking to the murky depths—with many more to follow suit.

Let us take a moment to consider those three regularly regurgitated phrases:

Stay at home. This was and still is the order given by many governments around the world, telling their citizens that they should venture outside only if it is “essential” or for a spell of light exercise. Limits on how far you can travel (in Ireland, for example, it’s within a five-kilometre radius of your home), and how many people from other households you can invite into your privately owned property (again, in Ireland this number is zero as of this writing, and that includes your front and backyard), have been declared by the powers that be. Fines, public shaming (do not dare question these measures or partake in antilockdown protests!) and a bad reputation await those who break these rules. 

Wear a mask. While this writer personally has no problem wearing a face mask if a business owner requests it, it is interesting to note that years of scientific analyses on the effectiveness of face masks when it comes to hampering the spread of infectious respiratory illnesses like the flu, have shown it to be negligible. Go to the CDC’s (Centers for Disease Control and Prevention) website right now and you’ll read that “no recommendation can be made at this time for mask use in the community by asymptomatic persons, including those at high risk for complications, to prevent exposure to influenza viruses.” While Covid-19 and flu are similar illnesses, they come from different viruses, and the former is more infectious than the latter. It is also worth noting that the science around face masks is indeed still disputed by experts, and it’s even been argued that wearing masks can enhance the spread of the virus because people can be less mindful of social distancing, while touching their nose and mouth more than they would when not wearing one.

But even if we accept that masks are definitely effective in slowing the spread of the disease—as recent studies have indeed claimed—overconfidence and inconsistency from experts and public figures throughout the pandemic has left public trust in them wanting to say the least. For instance, the US surgeon general in February urged citizens (in all caps no less) to “STOP BUYING MASKS!,” adding that they weren’t effective in preventing the general public from catching coronavirus. Even as late as March, New York mayor Bill de Blasio told residents to “get on with your lives” and “go out on the town despite coronavirus,” while the UK chief medical officer told UK denizens to not wear face masks. Meanwhile the WHO and the CDC had both argued against the use of masks in the early months of the outbreak. While things may have changed in recent months due to the aforementioned new studies, we still have countries like Sweden not mandating mask wearing as we approach the end of this bizarre year (note: Sweden’s daily number of covid deaths hasn’t risen above ten since mid-July and has since generally been below five). Can you really blame people for being just a little skeptical of those in positions of power?

Science is real. To end so emphatically (and condescendingly), you would hope that the person speaking those patronising words has science on their side. But as one of the world’s most senior epidemiologists, Johan Giesecke, advisor to the Swedish government, said back in April: UK and European policies on lockdown are not evidence based. And then we can remind ourselves of the now infamous Neil Ferguson–led Imperial College London study which determined that up to five hundred thousand lives could be lost in the UK alone. It was later revealed that the modelling used for the study was outdated, and thus the calculations dramatically inflated. For what it’s worth, Ferguson also said back in 2005 that 150 to 200 million people could die from the bird flu. The number of worldwide fatalities from bird flu between 2003 and 2009 was…282. So, science is real. Stop being a bad person. Listen to the experts and do not question them. Ever.

Prolockdowners Are de Facto “Prorecession”

Another common line that has been doing the rounds over the last nine months is “placing the economy above society is wrong.” This statement brings to mind F.A. Hayek’s famous words regarding socialists: people who don’t understand economics fail to understand how societies—and markets—function. Economies are essentially societies, and societies are essentially economies; a healthier economy is conducive to a healthier society. Of course, there will still be problems brought on by bad government policy (e.g., the war on drugs), individual behavior (e.g., poor choices), and misfortune (which can be alleviated by support networks and charities). Societies will always have issues: utopias are impossible.

By calling for lockdowns, people are essentially welcoming a recession. And with recession come countless societal ills—in case that hasn’t already been made evident by the depressions of the past. If government measures are about ensuring the well-being of the people, plunging a country into a recession and piling up debt sure is a strange way to go about it. At the national level, lockdowns and recessions cause sometimes irreparable damage to people’s livelihoods, their mental health, and their physical well-being. At the global level, widespread lockdowns are predicted to greatly exacerbate third-world famines, with “virus-linked hunger tied to 10,000 child deaths each month.” With tragedies like these, lockdowns are indeed a strange way to go about protecting the most vulnerable people.

The Immorality of Lockdowns

Pandemics like covid-19 are unusual for Europe and the United States. Being 100 percent prepared for them is impossible, because while tax-funded research is regularly conducted in the hope that countries can be as pandemic ready as possible, each new virus brings with it an air of mystery, and fears of the unknown aren’t completely irrational, after all.

But, putting such life-altering power—over matters such as forced lockdowns—in the hands of people who pay a negligible price for being wrong (some political damage, maybe) is not only asinine, it is plain wrong. Coercion is wrong. Taking the freedom of choice away from people by force is wrong. Tell the old woman living with a terminal illness that she must spend the final months of her life in isolation; that she can’t take a trip to the lake she’s visited since she was a child; that she can’t be surrounded by her loved ones during the remaining time she has left. Tell a business owner that their business isn’t essential. Tell the man who’s prone to depression and lives alone in a tiny studio apartment that this lockdown is for his own good. Tell the woman whose cancer diagnosis will be delayed—and thus her chances of survival reduced—that this lockdown is for her own good.

This is no different from telling an individual driver that “speed kills,” so tough—you can’t drive a car anymore. Or that alcohol is one of the biggest yearly killers, so tough—you can’t enjoy a beer anymore. Or that more than two hundred thousand children alone are treated in hospital every year from accidents related to bike riding, so tough—you can’t enjoy cycling anymore. The role of government isn’t to keep people safe from themselves or the dangers that come with living freely; there’s no reason why this shouldn’t apply to covid-19.

The Absurdity of Lockdown 2.0

For months now, data and experts have raised major questions around the efficacy of lockdowns in stopping the spread of the coronavirus and highlighted the damage caused by them. In the words of the Great Barrington Declaration (led by infectious disease epidemiologists and public health scientists), “lockdown policies are producing devastating effects on short- and long-term public health. The results (to name a few) include lower childhood vaccination rates, worsening cardiovascular disease outcomes, fewer cancer screenings, and deteriorating mental health—leading to greater excess mortality in years to come, with the working class and younger members of society carrying the heaviest burden.” Even the WHO has said that lockdowns should be a very, very last resort. Argentina recently entered its two hundredth day of nationwide lockdown, yet daily new cases have been hovering between ten thousand and twenty thousand since August. These and countless other examples and warnings have gone unheeded in many countries as they enter another lockdown—all the while not giving people a say in the matter.

The Future Is a Choice

For many of us, the latest covid calamity is just another disappointing chapter in the dreadful tome that is big government. When we consider that “one cannot violate moral and economic laws without having to pay a price, and that one violation will, according to the ‘logic’ of state action, lead to more violations until the price that must be paid becomes intolerable,” more scenes of social unrest are likely. The scene we opened with today may be a collage of moments from 2020; if things keep going in the same direction, it may be a glimpse into the not-too-distant future.

But there’s still time for people to see the major failures of bloated, bureaucratic government made up of people who pay little to no price for being wrong and wreaking economic havoc—covid or not—on its citizens (far from being punished, those in charge regularly reward themselves with hefty taxpayer-funded pensions). Gross mismanagement by distended governments that leads to further social unrest and far worse doesn’t have to be the future. As Ludwig von Mises said, “whoever wants peace among nations must seek to limit the state and its influence most strictly.” Those wise words are applicable to peace within nations, too.

Author:

Shane J. Coules

Shane Coules is a scriptwriter, author, and copywriter from Dublin, Ireland who possesses a deep interest in economics, history, and political theory. 

be seeing you

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

The Modern Mayflower? – EPautos – Libertarian Car Talk

Posted by M. C. on November 2, 2020

And yet, the cloth is worn – suggesting the horrible possibility that the wearers want to wear their holy Face Diapers. Which suggests they will not object when the wearing of them is required by law – and actively enforced. More, that they will become the willing helpers of enforcement. And not just of the wearing of the Holy Diaper. They will be the “hands and fingers” that push the meds.

If that happens, which is almost certain to if the Orange Man loses – because the Hair Plugged Man has promised it will happen – then dissenters will be targets. Fixed targets, as they will be at home and their homes don’t move.

https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2020/10/28/the-modern-mayflower/

By eric

Living in a van down by the river has become a cultural catchphrase – it was part of a hilarious Chris Farley Saturday Night Live skit back in the ’90s about a depressed and broke motivational speaker.

But maybe it’s not such a bad idea.

In about a week, Americans could face the prospect of a federal mandate requiring them not only to join the Sickness Cult by adopting its uniform – the loathsome “mask” – but also extend their arms for the injection the government will likely attempt to mandate as well.

For some of us, these things are non-negotiable No’s.

The problem then becomes one of mobility – and visibility.  How to get away from the Diaper Police? Who may go door-to-door to make sure you take your medicine – and who will starve you out if you don’t, by keeping you “locked down” for the greater good if you don’t.

If you’re tied to your home, you are tied down. They know where you live. You literally have all your eggs – including your kids – in that one basket.

It may be time to consider getting mobile. Especially if you live among the Diapered – the actually ill ones ones who not only wear their religious garment willingly but are champing at the bit – if you could see them champing at the bit – to make you wear it, too. If the election goes the wrong way, they may soon have the power to do that.

Do you want to be home for that?

I’ve been thinking about it a lot lately. I love my place in The Woods of rural SW Virginia. It’s a beautiful area, with a reasonable climate and a relatively low cost of living. I moved here about 17 years ago to get away from Northern Virginia, the canker sore part of the state that’s adjacent to the federal capital, with all of its pathologies.

The problem is that Northern Virginia is increasingly all of Virginia, attitudinally and so politically. The sickness has leached across the state. If the election goes the wrong way, it may no longer be safe to stay. The governor/gesundheitsfuhrer has already let slip – via trail balloon – that he intends to force every person in the state to take his medicine.

Or rather, Bill Gates’ medicine.

He has already made it plain that he wants no one to show their faces anywhere outside their homes and it is not beyond the realm of the possible within their homes.

Anything to “stop the spread” – of dissent.

The showing of your face being a show of disrespect for the holy doctrines of the Sickness Cult. It cannot be tolerated for the same reason that Winston Smith, the hero of Orwell’s 1984, could not be allowed to cling to the axiom that 2+2=4 because if that – i.e., objective reality – is granted then the regime has conceded there is something outside their power and superior it, which is immensely threatening to its power.

Winston – and all of us – must come to love Big Brother. It is not enough merely to obey him, out of fear of being punished if we do not. We must embrace the Diaper. We must accept the Needle.

Those of us whose brains aren’t mottled by the weaponized hypochondria of the Sickness Cult may face having to pick one of two options. The third option – wearing the holy cloth and partaking of the communion via the medicine – being off the table.https://www.youtube.com/embed/rJz77y4d_JA

The first is to stay and hope  – and be prepared to fight, if it comes to that.

I have been leaning this way for most of the duration of this plague – of psychosis. I have been hoping it would pass, like an epilectic fit. That enough people would, after a brief spell of being shellshocked by the manufactured fear campaign,  come to their senses as it became evident that the only people who need to wear a respirator (as opposed to a “mask”) are people who have age-or-sickness weakened bodies, as has always been the case with regard to the catching of colds.

That the science – i.e., objective reality – would de-alarm people in no real danger of dying from this cold, for the same reason that most people continue to get in their cars every day even though there is a very small chance that they might die in an accident. The chance of them dying from the WuFlu being even smaller, I figured they’d come to their senses sooner rather than later.

And perhaps they still will.

But it does not look good. Literally. Even here, which is almost as far from Northern Virginia as it is possible to get without actually leaving Virginia, the wearing of the Holy Cloth has become almost universal, even though the requirements – decrees, actually – aren’t being actively enforced almost anywhere

And yet, the cloth is worn – suggesting the horrible possibility that the wearers want to wear their holy Face Diapers. Which suggests they will not object when the wearing of them is required by law – and actively enforced. More, that they will become the willing helpers of enforcement. And not just of the wearing of the Holy Diaper. They will be the “hands and fingers” that push the meds.

If that happens, which is almost certain to if the Orange Man loses – because the Hair Plugged Man has promised it will happen – then dissenters will be targets. Fixed targets, as they will be at home and their homes don’t move.

They could, of course, fight – if the cultists refuse to leave them alone. This is morally justifiable and even noble, but it may also be as pointless as fighting the tide.

But you can avoid getting soaked by the tide by moving out of its reach. This brings up the final solution, so to speak. It is in a way the same solution chosen by the people who fled Europe to come to this continent hundreds of years ago when Europe became intolerable. They moved to get out of the reach of the governments of Europe. Of the various politically empowered psychopaths who would not leave them be.

Rather than stand their ground, they found new ground.

An RV – or even just a van – could be a kind of modern Mayflower that way. If things get hairy, you can split. They can’t Diaper – or Needle – what they can’t get their hands on. And you can get a pretty nice RV – one with  a full-size bed, a full kitchen and a full bathroom with a shower – for fraction of the cost of a home. If you own your home or have decent equity in it you could sell it to buy the RV – and use the remainder of the cash to finance your move as well as your stay – wherever you end up going.

It’s still a big country and there are places free of this psychosis or at least, where you can hide from it, once you find one.

It beats hell out of a three-month sea passage in a leaky wooden ship without hot or cold running water.

And it beats hell out of being force to don the Holy Cloth – and accept the Holy Needle.

Be seeing you

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

Why COVID Kids May Grow Up To Be Libertarians | Intellectual Takeout

Posted by M. C. on October 5, 2020

https://www.intellectualtakeout.org/why-covid-kids-may-grow-up-to-be-libertarians/

By Emma Freire

The Coronavirus crisis hit children as hard as any other segment of the population. All familiar routines were suddenly ripped away from them. Thousands are still doing school online. Many state mask mandates include young children.

For children old enough to remember it in the future, the year of Coronavirus, will be a significant event in their childhoods. They will probably tell their own children and grandchildren stories about what it was like to live through this time.

But how will they look back on this crisis when they reach adulthood? And how will it shape their worldview?

For adults, the debate about handling the pandemic has been highly politicized for some time. However, we are now moving into a phase of the reopening where different standards about what is allowed and what isn’t will be obvious even to children.

For example, last week a kind friend wanted to organize a picnic for my three small children. She prepared little sandwiches and lots of fun snacks, yet, when we arrived at our local park a guard approached us to tell us we couldn’t bring food in. This is normally allowed, but it is forbidden during COVID-19 because eating requires removing one’s mask. My children burst into tears. My friend and I tried – in vain – to convince them that having a picnic in the living room is also fun.

The worst part of this situation, however, is that we constantly walk by restaurants in our neighborhood that are open for business – both with indoor and outdoor seating. What’s the difference between us having a picnic in the park and buying an ice cream cone and eating it on the restaurant terrace? Why is one a health hazard and not the other? I was at a loss to explain this discrepancy to my children. It is simply unfair. As young as they are, my kids intuit that.

Children have a deep-rooted sense of fairness. Peter Gray, a professor of psychology, writes in Psychology Today that children grasp early on that fairness is necessary in order to play with each other.

Anyone who has spent much time observing children play independently of adult control knows that they are very concerned with fairness. ‘That’s not fair’ is among the most common phrases you will hear.…

There is a simple reason why play must be fair. The fairness doesn’t come from some highfalutin moral philosophy nor from deep-seated altruism. Children are neither philosophers nor angels. … Fairness comes from the simple reality that play with others is only possible if it is fair.

American children are seeing that their schools are still closed, but that other types of gatherings are allowed. Some activities are permitted while others – despite being essentially the same thing – are forbidden. Depending on their age, these observations will impact them deeply. Kids realize this is unfair. Not everyone is playing by the same rules.

Future research will likely tell us a great deal about which government imposed restrictions actually combatted the virus and which were pointless. We will also have a much better understanding of the side effects of these measures. Adults who were children during this pandemic will likely follow these developments with great interest.

Articles about the impact of the pandemic on children tend to focus on the education they have lost due to school closures. But it is also worth noting that children are witnessing repeated violations of their innate sense of fairness. This may well leave them with a sense of mistrust towards institutions and authorities. Is COVID-19 going to raise up a generation of libertarians?

Emma Freire

Emma Freire is a writer living in Sao Paulo, Brazil. She has also been published in The Federalist and The American Conservative.

Be seeing you

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

Fauci cautions that a Covid-19 vaccine won’t eliminate the need for masks and public health measures

Posted by M. C. on September 28, 2020

Masks (and presumably goggles) forever!

What goes on in his head?

If he is the top guy at NIH it is a miracle anyone is still alive.

This definitely and a power and control issue. His power and his control over you.

https://www.cnn.com/2020/09/24/health/us-coronavirus-thursday/index.html

Elite Privilege: Hypocrites Extraordinaire! – Government ...

 

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

Unmasked | Porcupine Musings

Posted by M. C. on September 22, 2020

One of the problems with models is their perception by the public as infallible fonts of knowledge. The media reinforces this narrative by credulously reporting model-based claims without any scrutiny. They never consider questioning the underlying assumptions built into the models. Models are easily manipulated. They are malleable and versatile instruments. In the hands of a virtuoso they can play any tune. They are tools of science, but they are not science themselves.

https://porcupine-musings.org/2020/09/17/unmasked/

“We know that wearing a mask outside health care facilities offers little, if any, protection from infection. Public health authorities define a significant exposure to Covid-19 as face-to-face contact within 6 feet with a patient with symptomatic Covid-19 that is sustained for at least a few minutes (and some say more than 10 minutes or even 30 minutes). The chance of catching Covid-19 from a passing interaction in a public space is therefore minimal. In many cases, the desire for widespread masking is a reflexive reaction to anxiety over the pandemic.”

New England Journal of Medicine, 2020; 382:363

These days everyone imagines himself or herself to be a scientist. Scolds, who labor under the delusion that reading the New York Times is equivalent to holding a doctorate, unceasingly inflict on us finger-wagging lectures about how we need to “listen to the science” when it comes to masks. Apparently “masks work” because “The Science™” says so. Newsflash: these media figures and self-styled authorities aren’t (largely) scientists and know not of what they speak. As a scientist myself I feel compelled to set the record straight on what is, and is not, science. For those degreed scientists out there parroting the mask propaganda: for shame, you should know better. Cherry picking, selection bias, anecdotal data, and dubious models have no place in the arsenal of scientific inquiry. 

What is the claim built on?

Here’s the problem with “the science” about masks: the media cited studies are built on a foundation of sand. They are based on computer models1, anecdotal stories2, theoretical mechanistic (non-biological) analysis, or hypothetical contra factual scenarios.1 In short, if the conclusion of a study rests on “this would have happened” then that is not science. Science does not compare contra factual or hypothetical scenarios. It analyzes concrete, reproducible, controlled conditions (that are broad enough to be statistically valid).  In every single story where there has been a reference made to evidence that “masks work” and I have drilled down through the 42 layers of links to get at the actual research document, it turns out the study is, surprise, based on a contra factual model, anecdote, or purely mechanistic study. Every. Single. Time. How do models support the claims? They make a “post-diction” for an alternate universe where masks were not deployed. Then they compare those values to the real world and wouldn’t you know, the numbers are lower when masks are used. The non-scientist with little time to drill down to the source will credulously accept what is read. Why shouldn’t they? An “authority” was cited and we’ve been trained from childhood to be predisposed toward trusting those perceived to be “in charge”. This is why whenever one questions the mask narrative the response is invariably “so and so said they work.” This is nothing more than the common logical fallacy known as an appeal to authority. Such a response deflects the inquiry, it does not answer it. When you encounter an appeal to authority your BS meter should max out. We should take every news story with a grain of salt and seek answers to the artfully omitted questions. Everyone has an agenda, even me. My agenda is to set the record straight and not allow the noble scientific profession to be prostituted in service of state propaganda. I encourage the reader to question and consider my assertions and to verify my claims by the references provided.

Question the models

One of the problems with models is their perception by the public as infallible fonts of knowledge. The media reinforces this narrative by credulously reporting model-based claims without any scrutiny. They never consider questioning the underlying assumptions built into the models. Models are easily manipulated. They are malleable and versatile instruments. In the hands of a virtuoso they can play any tune. They are tools of science, but they are not science themselves. Science is not SimCity. Science is doing real work in the real world to gather real data. Once one has collected data, then one may develop a model – based on that data – to make predictions about the future. Those predictions are then tested (i.e. the prediction is falsifiable). It is impossible to check a post-diction for a contra factual universe. The impossibility of such verification precludes falsifiability of the claim and in doing so removes it from the realm of science toward “what-if” fantasy. 

Evidence against the claim?

The reader might now be wondering, “well where is the evidence against masks?” Sorry, that’s not how science works. Those making the novel claim carry the onus to support it. You have to prove your claim; I do not have to disprove it. A claim cannot be said to be true because there does not yet exist evidence disproving it. This is the same as the foundation of our legal system; innocent until proven guilty. Guilt is a novel positive claim and must be proven. Were this also not the standard in science, then one could claim ghosts exist because no one has definitively proven they do not exist. With that said, because the “masks work” claim is a scientific one it is therefore subject to falsifiability. If it is true, then we should see fewer real world infections when use vs. non-use scenarios are compared.. Is that what we see? Unfortunately, no. There are a number of studies in the literature from the pre-Covid era regarding real world mask effectiveness at limiting contagions. In short none of them demonstrated any statistically significant diminishment in real world viral spread. 3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10,11

Correlation not Causation

The lack of substantive empirical data in real world environments has shifted the focus toward teasing out a positive correlation between mask use and case loads by reviewing case counts across cities, states, and countries over time. One may certainly cherry pick a country, state or time frame where mask use is high and case rates are low. But for every one of those you can find several more that counter it.12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19 The scientific method demands one looks at all the data, not just the data that confirms the preconceived conclusion (selection bias). When all localities are analyzed, the aggregate results demonstrate zero correlation between masks and case counts. Zero. However, even this is a bad metric for both sides. There are simply way too many variables at play to claim this one thing (masks) had an effect or did not relative to other competing influences. However it certainly doesn’t help the “masks work” camp that the vast majority of such comparisons show no correlation or a negative correlation (i.e. better outcomes in low mask use localities). Correlation does not prove causation; but, it is impossible to have causation without correlation.

At what cost?

Compelled mask wearing (along with all the other various restrictions on normal life) is morally equivalent to the banning of alcohol, drugs, and firearms: a handful might be irresponsible so all must suffer the remedy in order to protect a vanishingly small minority. This mode of thinking, sacrificing the many in favor of a few, does not come without costs. The reflexive objection here is that the benefits could be substantial while the costs should be minimal. Perhaps in March that approach might have been sound given the ignorance surrounding what we were dealing with. But here we are months later and it has become clear who is at risk and who is not. It has become clear that widespread mask use does not correlate well with reduced cases. 12,13,14,15,16,17,18,19   It has become clear that asymptomatic spread is a negligible risk vector.20 Countries such as Canada, Australia, and even Sweden have much lower mask compliance but with equal or lower case loads and deaths per capita than the US.21 If the effect was substantially beneficial we would not expect this outcome. A benefit too small to be measured must be weighed against a cost that is measurable. The longer people suffer under these mandates the costs come into greater focus. Interacting with a sea of faceless zombies is disrupting normal social cues, interactions, and at some level social cohesion itself. A smile can brighten ones day. Sadly, those are cancelled for now. This is stressful to the human psyche in a way that is not easily accountable. Theoretically solitary confinement shouldn’t be mentally taxing – and yet perplexingly it is among the harshest of punishments. Social interaction matters. Likewise on the individual level there are increasing reports of inflamed skin conditions and fungal infections from prolonged mask use.22 Further, fatigue and “brain fog” are elevated by long-term excess CO2 inhalation.23 No, masks do not decrease oxygen intake, but they do increase COintake  – even the pro-mask camp admits that – although they try to hand wave it away by disclaiming that such high levels of COare “tolerable” or pose no “serious” health risk. But, just because something is tolerable or not serious does not mean it is ideal either. No air conditioning on a 95 °F day is “tolerable” too but I doubt many would enjoy it long term. Would you forgo air conditioning forever if you were told it would save 10 lives? I suspect few would willingly partake in that offer. We are allowing the scolds to rhetorically guilt us into a corner where non-compliance with their arbitrary dictates is equated with sociopathic behavior merely because it is claimed a life could be saved. That is a dangerous precedent. It opens the door to justifying any demand upon one’s behavior if one meekly submits. 

What should be done

A more effective strategy would be to shift from indiscriminate universal mandates and toward targeted and individualized interventions. Resources are limited and should be focused and not scattered about. For example, N95 masks do largely protect the wearer. Unless regulations are impeding production, there is no reason supplies should be constrained anymore. If there are regulations, then remove them.  If you are concerned about exposure to yourself, wear a properly fitted N95 mask. This would be self-regulating in direct proportion to its effectiveness. If cases went up, then more people would opt to don masks, which would then drive the cases back down. Because the proportion of society at elevated risk (mostly those above age 70 with health conditions) is a minority there should be no issue in supply of such masks. Additionally, there is some limited mechanistic evidence that surgical (not cloth) masks may be useful in limiting droplets and aerosols in ill patients (although the viral load found was barely measurable even without the mask).24,25 This may be useful in a health care or home setting. Restricting such mask use to those at risk (N95) or actively sick (surgical) has the added benefit of signaling to everyone around them that they are to be avoided. Targeted social distancing would be vastly superior to a universal mandate. Fatigue over this standard among the clearly healthy leads to lapses in maintaining it. Let those at low to no risk foster herd immunity while staying distanced from those who are sick or at risk. We all have a role to play. It is counterproductive to force all to play the exact same role. Allow the healthy to be exposed (natural vaccination) to build herd immunity while focusing protective resources on those actually at serious risk.

Individualized measures based on a person’s risk profile are how this country and the rest of the world handled such decennial pandemics up until now. The strategy this year: lockdowns, social distancing, universal mask mandates – these are the unprecedented policies that should be scrutinized with a skeptical, critical, science based, analysis. 

 

Gregory Morin  @gregtmorin

B.S., Chemistry, Emory University

M.S., Chemistry, Emory University

Ph.D., Organic Chemistry, University of Notre Dame

List of Citations

Be seeing you

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

‘When tyranny becomes the law…’ – RPI Sept. 20th Update

Posted by M. C. on September 19, 2020

Speaking of Nazi Germany, in Thursday’s press conference, where Texas Governor Greg Abbott magnanimously announced that he was “allowing” a few more customers to enter a few more select businesses, Lt. Governor Dan Patrick actually suggested that certain people who are “safe to be around” should wear arm bands to signify their “safe” status.

How did that work out last time, eh Dan?

https://mailchi.mp/ronpaulinstitute/maskprotest?e=4e0de347c8

 

Your author’s daughter (right) and son (background) protesting.

‘…rebellion becomes duty’

Dear Friends of the Ron Paul Institute:

Today my son and one of my daughters joined me to participate in the “Open Brazoria County” weekly protest along the main drag of our current hometown, Lake Jackson, TX. The protests have been continuing for several weeks with the goal being to end the unconstitutional, illegal, and criminally unethical restrictions on the citizens of Brazoria County and Texas in the name of fighting a virus. 

Despite what many may think about the heart of “Ron Paul Country” here on the Texas Gulf Coast, there has been a depressing acceptance of the idea that some minor elected officials can somehow order certain businesses and institutions (like churches and bars) to remain closed while “allowing” others to continue in operation, and that the same officials somehow have the authority to tell us what we must wear on our bodies in the name of fighting a virus.

Suddenly our health – indeed our very physical being – no longer belongs to us, but has been expropriated by the state in the name of some larger gargantuan struggle. If it sounds familiar, it’s because you’ve probably read some of the great dystopian literature of the past 100 or so years. Or perhaps studied Soviet communism or Nazi Germany.

Speaking of Nazi Germany, in Thursday’s press conference, where Texas Governor Greg Abbott magnanimously announced that he was “allowing” a few more customers to enter a few more select businesses, Lt. Governor Dan Patrick actually suggested that certain people who are “safe to be around” should wear arm bands to signify their “safe” status.

How did that work out last time, eh Dan?

So on a rare beautifully mild day in Lake Jackson there were about 30 or so of us standing in the green patch alongside Lake Jackson’s busy main street holding up signs enforcing the idea that we must actively oppose tyranny if we are to remain free.

One man had a parrot on his shoulder.

We of a certain age were leavened by the energy and enthusiasm of so many youngsters happily holding their signs in-between chasing each other, running around madly, and tumbling somersaults.

Those homeschoolers!

Where I had been steadily disheartened by the seemingly universal acceptance here that one must comply with clearly illegal demands that we mask ourselves, I found myself absolutely thrilled by the response to our protest.

It is important to quantify as accurately as possible support versus opposition to one’s cause, and as I stood next to my son watching the cars go by (it was a very busy day!) we were heartened to conclude that support versus opposition to our cause was running literally more than 100 to one.

I had no idea what the actual sentiment regarding masks and other restrictions was because my only experience was in viewing the near-total mask compliance in the local grocery stores.

That is why today was so exhilarating. Car after car, truck after truck, SUV after SUV was honking horns and giving thumbs up, two thumbs up, and cheering us. Even Dr. Paul’s daughter-in-law passed by our protest and leaned all the way out the car with two thumbs in the air! We love you Peggy!

Of the hundreds of thumbs up and enthusiastic honks, there were literally two (maybe three, it’s hard to tell) negative reactions. One of the negative reactions was depressingly hilarious: two older people drove by with their masks tight across their faces in a car alone honking and pointing to their own masks. If anything, their sad protest of our protest demonstrated the absurdity of their cause.

“Why are you masking alone in your car?”
“Because they said to.”

We noticed a few squad cars from Lake Jackson’s finest circling around several times in the course of our protest. While it may seem fashionable in today’s climate to expect the worst from police officers, my son and I actually witnessed one officer passing by smiling and waving to us. My son said, “I am not at all surprised; they have to go around their whole day with those horrible masks on their faces.”

The pro-maskers like to claim the high ground by saying they are “doing it for you,” but the reality is that those of us who refuse to wear a mask under any condition are actually “doing it for you” in the hopes that those who are required to wear these unhealthy and unscientific rags will soon be free from their burden. I hope the police and the grocery store checkers and everyone else will soon be free to choose whether they put a mask on their face or not.

No one should be forced to wear a mask; no one should be prevented from wearing a mask.

They want to divide we who refuse to relinquish our civil liberties to state bureaucrats by constructing a strawman that we are “deniers” who “hate science” and believe the virus was somehow all a grand conspiracy, etc. That is what people do who have no argument. They toss straw. It is entirely logical to understand that disease poses a great risk to certain sectors of our population while strongly opposing state-tyranny over the entire population in the name of fighting said disease.

Last week in Pennsylvania a Federal judge ruled that lockdown orders were unconstitutional. As Dr. Paul always says, we do not need 50 percent plus one out there on the main drag of Lake Jackson or your own home town. If you want to be able to make your own choices about your health. If you are worried about a DARPA-funded chip inserted inside your body to alter your DNA in the name of “fighting a virus,” the time for making your opinion known is now. 

They are not backing off and they are emboldened by our silence. We all have a duty to fight to preserve our liberty. There are many ways to do so. Find you way and go for it!

 
Many of you will recognize my son from our RPI conferences…

Sincerely yours,

Daniel McAdams
Executive Director
Ron Paul Institute for Peace and Prosperity

Be seeing you

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

Discrimination Is Freedom – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on August 19, 2020

This doesn’t mean that refusing to admit or serve someone would be practical or prudent, and having prejudice can exact a heavy price. But in a free society, no one has the right to be admitted to or served in any restaurant or business establishment.

If a business owner discriminated against anyone for any other reason than for the lack of a face mask, he would face a federal civil rights lawsuit and picketing, boycotts, and violence by leftists. It is only government-approved discrimination that is lawful—like discriminating against Asians in college admissions.

The hypocrisy of the left on discrimination is appalling.

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/08/laurence-m-vance/so-do-we-now-have-the-right-to-refuse-service/

By

To comply with the letter of the non-law issued by the fascist mayor of Orange County, Florida, Jerry Demings, most restaurants in the county want their patrons to (1) Wear a mask upon entering the restaurant, (2) Wear a mask while waiting for a table, (3) Wear a mask while walking to your table, (4) Wear a mask when going to the restroom, and (5) Wear a mask upon leaving the restaurant. At least we don’t have to wear a mask while eating (although I have seen at least one person at a restaurant pull their mask down to insert a bite of food in their mouth and then put their mask right back over their mouth to chew their food).

Most of the restaurants I have been to in Orange County aren’t enforcing the mayor’s dictate. They don’t have to. Because compliance is nearly 100 percent, the restaurants either don’t notice or don’t care to make an issue of the 1 percent or so who enter their establishments without a mask. Never thought I would be a member of the 1 percent.

Yet, I was refused service twice last week at fast-food restaurants: Five Guys and Smashburger. Why? Although I wore a shirt and shoes, I had no face mask. Instead of complying with the mask requirement, I went and got a hamburger elsewhere (not McDonalds: it is total mask nazi).

I was discriminated against and refused service. And I fully support the right of businesses to do both.

I have made it clear in my many articles on discrimination that all businesses should have the right to discriminate against anyone on basis and for any reason: race, religion, color, creed, gender, national origin, sexual orientation, gender identity, facial hair, hair style, political preference, clothing style, age, height, weight, head covering, disability, familial status, martial status, odor, socioeconomic status, religious piety.

Any business should have the right to refuse service to anyone with or without a red shirt, black pants, a bald head, a mustache, a Rolex on the wrist, a gold chain around the neck, leather shoes, or a face mask.

Discrimination means freedom. It is a crime in search of victim. Anti-discrimination laws are an attack on property rights, freedom of association, and freedom of thought.

This doesn’t mean that refusing to admit or serve someone would be practical or prudent, and having prejudice can exact a heavy price. But in a free society, no one has the right to be admitted to or served in any restaurant or business establishment.

So, in regard to my being discriminated against and refused service, here is the $64,000 question: Do we now have the right to refuse service?

Of course we don’t.

If a business owner discriminated against anyone for any other reason than for the lack of a face mask, he would face a federal civil rights lawsuit and picketing, boycotts, and violence by leftists. It is only government-approved discrimination that is lawful—like discriminating against Asians in college admissions.

The hypocrisy of the left on discrimination is appalling.

Since discrimination is not aggression, force, coercion, threat, or violence, the government should never prohibit it, seek to prevent it, or prosecute anyone for doing it.

So, to those restaurants in Orange County that want me to wear a mask when inside your establishment when I am entering, waiting, and walking (even though many who are finished eating and drinking are still sitting at tables and booths talking without wearing masks), I will take my appetite and my money elsewhere.

Be seeing you

 

 

 

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

Yes, Mother – LewRockwell

Posted by M. C. on July 21, 2020

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2020/07/laurence-m-vance/yes-mother/

By

Those of us who had a good mother growing up were generally given some good and practical advice:

Don’t swim right after you eat.
Don’t bite your fingernails.
Don’t suck your thumb.
Eat your vegetables.
Don’t be late for school.
Don’t stay out too late.
Don’t stay up too late.
Do your homework.
Wash your hands before you eat.
Don’t sleep in too long.
Don’t skip breakfast.
Put on your coat before you go outside in the cold.
Brush your teeth.
Look both ways before you cross the street.
Don’t take candy from a stranger
Take your vitamins.
Don’t get into a strange car.

Then the government started to give us what it thought was motherly advice:

Don’t eat eggs.
Don’t eat butter.
Don’t smoke.
Don’t consume trans fat.
Don’t breathe in second-hand smoke.
Don’t eat too much red meat.
Don’t drink sugar-laden soft drinks.
Don’t use chewing tobacco.
Don’t use drugs.
Don’t abuse alcohol.
Exercise.
Don’t inhale fumes.
Wear your seat belt.
Wear a bicycle helmet.
Wear a motorcycle helmet.
Don’t drink and drive.
Don’t text and drive.
Sneeze or cough into your elbow instead of your hand.
If you see something, say something.

But now the government actually thinks that it is our mother:

Don’t forget to wash your hands for at least twenty seconds all throughout the day.
Don’t shake hands with anyone for any reason.
Don’t hug anyone for any reason.
Don’t visit anyone in the hospital.
Wear a face mask whenever you leave the house.
Don’t visit anyone in a nursing home.
Don’t go to a bar.
Don’t go to the beach.
Don’t go to an amusement park.
Don’t go to a sporting event.
Don’t take your kids to a playground.
Use hand sanitizer all throughout the day.
Don’t take your kids to a park.
Don’t go to a museum.
Maintain social distancing of at least six feet.
Don’t get a haircut.
Don’t go to the movie theatre.
Keep your interactions brief.
Don’t go to the nail salon.
Don’t go to unessential businesses.
Avoid touching your eyes, nose, and mouth.
Don’t sing in church.
Don’t take communion in church.
Don’t go to church at all.
Don’t take a cruise.
Refrain from gathering with family and friends.
Don’t go bowling.
Don’t sit on a park bench.
Don’t play basketball at a park.
Don’t fly on a plane.
Stay home if you feel even the slightest bit ill.
Get tested for Covid-19 even if you have no symptoms and don’t feel sick.
Minimize the travel of your employees.
Don’t go on a date with a stranger.
Install Plexiglas shields at your place of business.
Avoid close contact with anyone who is even the slightest bit sick with any illness.
Stay home as much as possible.
Regularly disinfect everything in your home or business and then do it again.
Listen to the government experts about the dangers of the coronavirus.

Oh, and I almost forgot: Don’t exhale without wearing a mask—you might kill someone.

Hey government, you are a mother all right, but you are not our mother. If we want to voluntarily do any of the above things, that is our business. But we don’t need you to tell us what to do.

Laurence M. Vance [send him mail] writes from central Florida. He is the author of The War on Drugs Is a War on Freedom; War, Christianity, and the State: Essays on the Follies of Christian Militarism; War, Empire, and the Military: Essays on the Follies of War and U.S. Foreign Policy; King James, His Bible, and Its Translators, and many other books. His newest books are Free Trade or Protectionism? and The Free Society.

Be seeing you

 

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