‘Pandemic’ Reflections

RESPONSES TO PANDEMIC QUESTIONS

As you may know, I wrote a guide to the lockdown world, pandemic questions, and invited responses, arguments and objections of which there were none, apart from insults and hand-waving dismissals, too feeble to mention, and of course laser-like focus on a few secondary, debatable points (which are bound to appear in such a long article), such as the efficacy of Ivermectin (now approved in Japan) and death-rates in Africa (see note below).

I sent the article to John Zerzan and Noam Chomsky. Here is what Zerzan (with whom I had already engaged on the subject of the ‘pandemic’) said;

Yeah, no pandemic… I’ll get back to you after I debate a Qanon character. I think what you need to answer is how did conspiracy theory thinking take you over.

I replied by explaining why the designation ‘pandemic’ is misleading, and why I put it in scare quotes, and finished by noting his…

…knee-jerk refusal to engage, despite a massive number of references, academic studies, official figures and reasonable arguments for the above, a refusal followed by, as expected, one of the cheapest slurs in the book.

To which he concluded the exchange;

Globally, who is deprived of vaccines? Another ‘cheap slur’ is that your position is racist.

I think here he’s referring to the terrible fact that Africans are being denied the forced injection. Africa, which, over two years, has lost an apocalyptic 0.017% of its population to Covid; that’s 215,000 people in a continent of 1.2 billion (source). Although, to be fair, some countries have done worse than others, for some strange reason;

Poor old Africa. Racist it is to deny them the vaccine.1

Moving on to another celebrated anarchist and intellectual, Noam Chomsky, who has recently gone on record as a supporter of biomedical apartheid, separating the vaccinated from the unvaccinated. I sent him my essay, which he responded to by ignoring it (fair enough, he’s a busy bunny) and telling me that the evidence was ‘overwhelming’ that vaccination radically reduces infection, contagion, deaths, and that therefore the vaccinated should be provided ‘safe spaces’.

I don’t like to be drawn into the efficacy of vaccinations, masks and so on, when the fact that the disease is not serious enough to warrant any such measures is the foundational weak point of those who support them, and the one that should be attacked. Nevertheless I asked Chomsky why deaths and cases were so low in Romania, with around 25% of the population injected…

and so high in Israel, with around 75%.

His response;

Easy. Just ask the Israeli health authorities, who have acted effectively to deal with it. And who, like the health authorities in a mere 100% of other countries reject all of your wild claims and look at the actual facts.

Alright, I said, but;

I asked you why cases are rocketing in supervaxxed Israel and are flatlinining in unvaxxed Romania. Can you give an answer or can’t you?

He replied;

I gave the answer, namely, the one given by the Israeli authorities, and 100% of others responsible for national health policy.

To which, of course, I said;

So you cannot say why cases are going up in Israel and down in Romania.

He concluded with;

You cannot say why every health authority in the world, including of course Israel, firmly rejects your position. Is it that they are all too stupid to recognize your brilliance…

I haven’t looked at Romania. In Israel, as health authorities recognize, restrictions were removed too quickly given that only 2/3 of the population had received even one dose, so like everywhere, they immediately violated your proposals and turned to increased vaccinations and further restrictions.

Look, if you enjoy advocating killing people en masse, go ahead.  But I’m finished with you.

My conclusion was;

Your response to ‘How is Romania doing so much better than Israel?’ is that Israel wasn’t strict (i.e. punitive and authoritarian) enough. Great stuff, worthy of a celebrated thinker and moralist…

I certainly can say why every health authority rejects my position on health, just as I can say why every education authority rejects my position on education (obvious to students of Ivan Illich, not to those of Noam Chomsky).

Postscript 1: Romania up, Israel down The above stats were up to the end of August, when I had the above exchange with Chomsky. Since then, Romania’s cases and deaths have risen somewhat. Perhaps because they’ve removed all medications which combat flu from pharmacies, perhaps because they’re desperate to get more people injected and so are fudging the figures, as the UK does, perhaps because there has been a rise in Covid infections, or perhaps flu season is with us now and we’re all going to see a few more deaths of people at the end of their life. Conversely, Israel’s cases and deaths have fallen. Again, it would be foolish not to suspect shenanigans, but, as I say, the point is moot, given the non-seriousness of the disease.

Postscript 2: a note on my credentials. It is often said, on social media and elsewhere, that critics of lockdown, vaccinations, etc should ‘listen to the experts’ and stay silent if they are not a professional in the medical industry. In my original article I listed a large number of prestigious medical scientists who are not being listened to, and I gave a long list of reputable studies which support what I have to say. Obviously I do not have the requisite specialist knowledge to check the credentials of all these papers and authors, and, equally obviously, I am not in a position to make definitive claims about specialist medical questions, but this ‘pandemic’ and the best approach to dealing with it, is not — bare facts aside (statistics which anyone can get their hands on) — a technical matter, it is a moral one. The question of ‘context’ for example, completely lacking in the presentation of deaths, does not come down to technical expertise, but the quality of the context; ‘how bad’ is such and such a mortality rate, for example, is totally beyond the reach of science. The idea that technocratic experts — particularly those who advise governments and are allowed access to powerful, elite-managed, channels of communication — are capable of qualitatively assessing the context — which is to say that they are morally trustworthy — is not borne out by history or by common-sense, although those same experts would like you to believe otherwise.

Postscript 3: The Rolling Over of the Left I was, as I noted last year, shocked at Zerzan’s (and at Pilger’s) cowardly acquiescence to our Brave New World. Chomsky’s (like Hedges’, Johnstone’s, Graeber’s, Media Lens’ and Cook’s) didn’t surprise me. If it surprised you, I invite you to take a look at this critique.

SOFT STRATEGY VS HARD CONSPIRACY

As the lockdown left slowly come round to realising that they’ve helped create an imprisoned techno-fascist world of unprecedented scope, a few of them will start to approach a critical attitude, coming in with the idea that bungling governments, motivated by their usual venality, put together biofascism more or less by accident. This I call the ‘soft strategy’ thesis. At the other end of the spectrum is the ‘hard conspiracy’ thesis, that the entire thing was meticulously planned from the start by the WEF and a cabal of technofascist billionaires. The latter thesis is mocked by proponents of the former for its generally wacky tone, the fact that its proponents are often attracted to fringe silliness like chemtrails, and for its improbability; the powers of organisation required to pull something like this off, on such a scale, without a single leaky leak, is probably not something that the authorities possess (by which I mean those with actual power, rather than government morons). On the other side, hard conspiracists accuse soft strategists of soft-peddling tyranny. Immoral acts, from theft to mass murder, are nearly always justified as ‘mistakes’ made because not enough information was available (‘if only we’d known…’), shifting emphasis away from questions of right and wrong, onto questions of mere fact. This is slowly becoming more common on the left, with righteous indignation aimed at incompetence, short-sightedness, expediency and some version of the Naomi Klein ‘shock doctrine’ whereby catastrophes are exploited for capital gain.

It should be obvious, to anyone with an understanding of how the world actually works, that neither of these things are wholly true, and, crucially, even if they are, it doesn’t matter. Everything that has happened is entirely and completely consonant a) with ordinary self-interest and b) with the goals and motives of a civilised, technocratic system, ten millennia in the making, which was built from a). There is no need to posit an Illuminati behind the growth of the system at any point in its history, just as there isn’t now. I can’t stress this enough, how true it is and how important it is. The system has its own logic, its own ‘nature’, its own momentum, just as the minds of the fearful domesticants which comprise it do. Understanding these things completely clarifies the murky world of power, opens the door to actual, meaningful, lasting change (on a personal level and on a societal level), while overly focusing on Blofelds in Bunkers, muddies it, and lets the system as a whole off the hook.

That doesn’t mean that there aren’t Blofelds in Bunkers, it doesn’t mean that there aren’t people, with immense power, who make plans — conspire, you could say — and it doesn’t mean that these plans aren’t carried out by those beneath them. Of course there are. There are secret meetings in which elites discuss what they want to do and then go off and do these things — we know there are, we’ve seen the places they meet and we even sometimes have records of what goes on inside them. We also know that the influence of such groups is immense; their ‘core values’ and ‘strategies going forward’ do — with various degrees of conscious awareness — filter down into government and corporate policy and then, via the government-corporate media, into the moronic mass mind. It therefore behoves anyone, with any real critical interest in the way the world works, to understand what is likely going on in the minds of the people who control Blackrock and Vanguard, of Davos attendees, BAP participants and WEF members, and so on and so forth, and it goes without saying that a basic understanding of what I call the medial causes of world affairs (banking, corporate and political shenanigans) has value. It is now all but certain that lockdowns, masks, vaccines and vaccine passports were all part of a concerted push to avoid an apocalyptic financial crash (possibly also to mitigate an ecological crash) by digitising currencies and throttling production, and to enhance social control techniques in uncertain times, by implementing digital IDs and making unprecedented restrictions on civil liberties the ‘new normal’.

Of course it is important to understand all this; but unless the distal causes — the nature of the overarching domesticating system — and the proximal causes — the nature of our death-fearing egos — are grasped, such analysis is useless, even counterproductive. So you’ve overcome capitalism, you’ve halted the new normal, you’ve brought down the New World Order, you’ve voted in some splendid, kindly socialist grandpas. Great. A world-wide, inherently alienating, management-deifying machine would still be in charge of the world though; a machine which will never stop pushing for more mechanised control. And an anxious, angry, unconscious, needy, numb, power-mad ego would still be charge of the selves of the world; an ego which will always be a shaky, thinky, moody, life-ruining imposter.

The usual model for our lockdowned world is, quite understandably, and quite rightly, totalitarian Nazi Germany. We are entering a new, terrifying dystopia which we can and should understand by looking at local variants which preceded it. What soft strategists tend to do is, effectively, to assume that the Nazis were either bumbling fools who accidentally murdered millions of people, or ‘cogs in the machine’ who were ‘just following orders’, or cynical opportunists who didn’t really care about Nazism or any its plans, but whose personal goals of self-advancement just happened to harmonise with the genocidal Nazi world. Hard conspiracists, on the other hand, see, in effect, all of Nazi Germany as a complicated torture machine devised and operated by Hitler, Himmler, Hess, Göring, Goebbels, Speer and Eichmann, effectively cutting these figureheads off from the mass of ordinary German unconsciousness ‘beneath’ them and the impersonal technocratic world system ‘above’ them. (This is analogous to how, incidentally, when Nazi Germany was dismantled, and the pieces reassembled in the USA, totalitarianism was able to grow again; because its roots were left untouched).

In the end though, the most important thing for the Jews in Auschwitz, was not who or what was behind the death camp, but how to escape from it, survive it or burn it down. What’s different about their death camp and ours, is that ours covers the entire world. It is the world.

REASONS TO BE CHEERFUL, PART 3

Sure, we’re all imprisoned in a biofascist, technocratic, dystopian death-machine; but it’s not all doom and gloom you know! There are plenty of reasons to be cheerful.

The left were exposed. Socialists revealed themselves as the authoritarian mediocrities they are. Many will never take them seriously again, and although few can or ever will be able to grasp the central, unifiying truth of the system, many have now seen that the difference between the left and the right is and always was an illusion. This means that anarchism — genuine anarchism, that actually identifies and resists domination — is rising in popularity. Not necessarily by name (ordinary, free, human interaction is anarchist, but nobody ever says ‘I had a great anarchist chat with the kids over dinner’) and certainly not by very much, but enough to seed good ideas into the human soil.

Cowards were exposed. It turned out that there were a few more cowards in the world than we previously supposed, eh? The worst ones were not those who zealously believed in all the bullshit; they’re not conscious enough to be cowards. It was those who knew it is bullshit, who knew that it wasn’t really a pandemic, who knew that masks and vaccines do nothing, and, for an easy life, still wore them, got injected and went along with it all. They were the ones most responsible for what happened. But still, we know who they are now — and we’ll never trust them with anything important again. Right?

Less work. Hundreds of millions of people are being pushed into dire poverty, with billions facing grave financial uncertainty. Needless to say, this is not a cause for celebration, and it would be monstrous to suggest so; but still, in the midst of all this, free time and independence have opened up. True, opportunities for using it well have also been minimal, mostly because very few people know what to do with free time — the working classes fill it up with ‘fun’ and the middle classes use it produce sterile ‘culture’ — but a breath of ease, long lost to good people, did blow across the mindlessly working West.

Independence is becoming a necessity. Those few shade-like touches of conviviality which lockdown returned to people are, as more and more people are cut off from the system, going to have to expand. Again only few — very few — people will get it together, and the obstacles are mighty — for many insurmountable — but networks of home-schooling, mutual cooperation, local syndicalism and useful criminal activity (i.e. stealing from the system, rather than from each other) are sure to be on the rise, or at least an urgent desire for them, and that’s all to the good. There’s also going to be an increase in class-consciousness, which is no bad thing either.

The old normal is now impossible. It was, I’m sure you’ll agree, lovely to see all the stupid pubs2 and clubs close, and all the moronic sports events stop, and all the ugly, boring, poisonous restaurants shut up, and all the youth-prisons we call ‘schools’ go on extended break, and all the sickness-spreading hospitals and clinics close, and all the furious, robotic consumption cease. No? You enjoyed those things did you? Or did you merely need them — were you, in a word, needy? Because the way it was set up we did need them. ‘Society’ for many people really did mean going to a restaurant or a pub, ‘culture’, really did mean going to a concert or a cinema! ‘Fun’ meant a New Year’s Eve party, The World Cup or a holiday! Can you believe it? Fortunately though, all that feeble stimulation is coming to an end, and although something worse is here, and although it will get worse still — much, much worse — the solution is not to go back to a slightly more comfortable insane asylum. That, now, thank God, is impossible.

Life is getting more interesting. Again, comparing this world to the ‘old normal’, the boring nightmare we were living in before (for only a nutter would say this new hell is interesting), anyone with any blood still pumping in their veins finds that, for once in their lives, they have something to fight for (even if it’s getting into the fucking supermarket). Drawing the line, refusing to compromise, opens up possibilities which, actually, were always there, but were deferred because, ‘I might lose my job’ or ‘I might get a criminal record’. Now a critically large number of people are losing what they had to lose, or soon will. The consequences of this will be horrendous, sickening, completely heartbreaking and glorious.

The system is crap. It’s easy to think, raised on a diet of science fiction and Apple products, that the techno-dystopian near future we’ll soon be in, will be a clean, white, slick death-machine, from which the human soul has no chance of escaping. In reality, what is being built will inevitably be a shoddy, shonky, leaky, botch job, and although many millions will be annihilated by its agonisingly inefficient and inhuman functioning, many more will be able to slip through the gaps automatically produced by trying to control everything. Quien mucho abarca poco aprieta as the Spaniards untranslatably say, referring to the fact that the larger the bundle you attempt to wrap in cloth, the less able you are to keep it all pressed together.

Death. Totalitarians cling to ‘life’ like grim death. Suggest to anyone, anywhere, that this ‘life’ might not be the supreme good that it is set up to be, actually embrace mortality, actually face death, and, chances are, you’ll find yourself under attack. You’ll be told that accepting a reality in which everything is constantly killing everything else and in which everyone dies, means that you want them to die, that you want to kill people or that you’re happy people are dying. You might even be physically attacked. People become murderous when you suggest that acceptance of death is a good thing. They can’t see the irony though, or the funny side, because this ‘life’ of theirs is a Very Serious Business, demanding constant safety and constant control. Fortunately that life is ending. It’s all ending. We’ve taken a massive step towards the final, agonising, conclusion to this stupid story, and not only have we all got a front row seat. We are, each one of us, the play, the players and the theatre itself.

Life. By which, obviously, I don’t mean the abstract ‘life’ of the system, the scientific life diagrams and official life statistics and Sunday supplement life photographs and everyday bromides such as ‘every life is sacred’ and religious exhortations to ‘live life to the full’, and all the rest of it. I mean the conscious experience of being here, now, in this living situation. This, the strangest and rarest state on earth, is paradise, and it is not just still here, but it will always be here, right down to the moment when the roller coaster we’re all strapped to smashes slow-motion into the wall we’ve made of the world.

Even in the prison, there are sycamores and sparrows, and even when there are no trees and birds, there is sky and sun and clouds, and even when there is no sky and sun and clouds, there is the sensate body, and even when the body is nothing but pain, there is the selfless experience of life, the pristine I which mutely is. To those who would like to argue that this experience is not absolutely good, at all times, forever, there is no response, there is only life, which does nothing but take the world away from you until you realise it.

Dread and despair and ‘oh woe look at what the world is becoming’ are understandable. We all succumb. But they are, at the end of the dreary day, selfish emotional illusions, with no more reality to them than 5pm October sadness at the prospect of winter is. Winter is coming, and it is going to be a gruesome one, but winter is necessary, and not only will there be spring, there is, in the belly, underneath the thinking-wanting-worrying self, always and forever, perpetual summer.

Note

  1. Note that Africa as a whole and central African states specifically do have younger populations — fewer, in other words, in their eighties, when people a) normally die of Covid and, coincidentally enough, b) normally die.
  2. I mean standard pubs, not the original ‘public house’, those that still serve its original function — although even these are largely places where people go to consume a drug that suppresses their conscious attention and turns their hearts to sentimental syrup.