If the pandemic policy response had taken the form of mere advice, we would not be in the midst of this social, economic, cultural, political disaster. What caused the wreckage was the application of political force that was baked into the pandemic response this time in a way that has no precedent in human history.
The response relied on compulsion imposed by all levels of government. The policies in turn energized a populist movement, Covid Red Guard that became a civilian enforcement arm. They policed the grocery aisles to upbraid the maskless. Drones swarmed the skies looking for parties to rat out and shut down. A blood lust against non compliers came to be unleashed at all levels of society.
Lockdowns granted some people meaning and purpose, the way war does for some people. The compulsion to bludgeon others trickled down from government to the people. Madness overtook rationality. Once this took place, there was no longer a question of “Two weeks to flatten the curve.” The mania to suppress the virus by ending person-to-person contact extended to two years.
This happened in the US and all over the world. The madness achieved nothing positive because the virus paid no attention to the edicts and enforcers. Ending social and economic functioning, however, shattered lives in countless ways, and continues to do so.
It is precisely because so much about life (and science) is uncertain that civilized societies operate on the presumption of the freedom to choose. That’s a policy of humility: no one possesses enough expertise to presume the right to restrict other people’s peaceful actions.
But with lockdowns and the successor policy of vaccine mandates, we’ve seen not humility but astounding arrogance. The people who did this to us and to billions of people around the world were so darn sure of themselves that they would take recourse to police-state tactics to realize their goals, none of which came to be realized at all, despite every promise that this would be good for us.
It’s the compulsion that’s the source of all the issues. Someone wrote the edicts at someone’s behest. Someone imposed the orders. Those somebodies should be the people who should own the results, compensate the victims, and otherwise accept the consequences for what they have done.
Who are they? Where are they? Why haven’t they stepped up?
If you are going to force people to behave a certain way – to close their businesses, kick people out of their homes, stay away from meetings, cancel vacations, physically separate everywhere – you have to be damn certain that it is the right thing to do. If the people who did this were so sure of themselves, why are they so shy to take responsibility?
The question is pressing: who precisely bears the blame? Not just in general, but more precisely: who was willing to step up from the beginning to say “If this does not work, I accept full responsibility?” Or: “I did this and stand by it.” Or: “I did this and I’m very sorry.”
So far as I know, no one has said anything like this.
Instead, what we have is a big jumble of messy bureaucracies, committees, reports, and unsigned orders. There are certain systems in place that seem structured in a way that makes it impossible to find out who precisely is responsible for their design and implementation.
For example, a friend of mine was being harassed by his school for not being vaccinated. He wanted to speak to the person who imposed the rule. In his investigation, everyone passed the buck. This person put together a committee which then agreed on best practices left over from some other printed guidance approved by another committee, which had been implemented by a similar institution on another matter. This was then adopted by a different division and passed on to another committee for implementation as a recommendation and then it was issued by another division entirely.
Incredibly, throughout the whole investigation, he failed to find a single person who was willing to step up and say: I did this and it was my decision. Everyone had an alibi. It became one big mush of bureaucracy with no accountability. It’s a tub of dough in which every bad actor pre-built a hiding place.
It’s the same with many people who have been disemployed for refusing to divulge their vaccine status. Their bosses typically say that they are very sorry for what happened; if it had been up to them, the person would continue to work. Their bosses in turn demur and blame some other policy or committee. No one is willing to speak to victims and say: “I did this and stand by it.”
Like millions of others, I’ve been harmed materially by pandemic response. My story lacks drama and is nothing remotely close to what others have experienced but it is salient because it is personal. I was invited to join in a live studio appearance on TV but then was refused because I refused to divulge my vaccine status. I was sent to a separate studio reserved for the unclean where I sat by myself.
The person who informed me said the policy was stupid and he objected. But it is the company policy. Maybe I can speak to his boss? Oh, he is against this stuff too. Everyone thinks it is dumb. Who then is responsible? The buck is always passed on and up in the chain of command but no one will accept the blame and bear the consequences.
Even though the courts have repeatedly shot down the vaccine mandates, there is universal consensus that the vaccines, while perhaps offering some private benefits, are not contributing to stopping infections or spread. Which is to say: the only person who might suffer from being unvaccinated is the unvaccinated himself. And yet still, people are losing their jobs, missing out on public life, being segregated and blocked, and otherwise paying a heavy price for not complying.
And yet there are still people who are intensifying the blame game that blames not government nor public health authorities nor anyone in particular but rather a whole class of people: the evil unvaccinated.
“I am furious at the unvaccinated,” writes Charles Blow of the New York Times, a paper that kicked off the pro-lockdown propaganda as early as February 27, 2020. “I am not ashamed of disclosing that. I am no longer trying to understand them or educate them. The unvaccinated are choosing to be part of the problem.”
How precisely are the unvaccinated the problem? Because, he writes,“it is possible to control the virus and mitigate its spread, if more people are vaccinated.”
This is plainly untrue, as we’ve seen from many countries’ experiences around the world. Look up Singapore or Gibraltar or Israel or any high vaxx country and see their case trends. They look the same or worse than low vaxx countries. We know from at least 33 studies that the vaccines cannot and do not stop infection or transmission, which is precisely why Pfizer and people like Anthony Fauci are demanding 3rd and now 4th shots. Shots without end, always with the promise that the next one will...
Read More HERE
> Who Will Be Held Responsible for this Devastation?
ReplyDeleteHah, hah. Who do you expect? The answer is, "No one." They'll all skate and, as usual, We The People will be left holding the bag.
An outcome that needs to end.
Rule 308
DeleteEverybody can earn $500 dollars Daily… Yes! you can earn more than you think by working online from home. I have been doing this job for like a few weeks and my last week payment was exactly 25370$ dollars.
ReplyDeleteThis Website OPEN HERE………… Www.PayCash1.Com
So the theory that " how could so many people be involved?" Is true on some levels. It only took 4 insurance CEOs to tell all the big name businesses that they must follow the dictates or no coverage. Who directed them is not that difficult to see either. Once that started, that was all that was needed
ReplyDeleteI’m earning 85 dollars/h to complete some work on a home computer. I not at all believed that it can be possible but my close friend earning $25k only within four weeks simply doing this top task as well as she has satisfied me to join. Check further details by reaching this site… http://Www.PAYCASH1.com
ReplyDeletecatch-22
ReplyDeletenoun, often capitalized
\ ˈkach-ˌtwen-tē-ˈtü , ˈkech- \
plural catch-22's or catch-22s
1: a problematic situation for which the only solution is denied by a circumstance inherent in the problem or by a rule
the show-business catch-22—no work unless you have an agent, no agent unless you've worked
— Mary Murphy
also : the circumstance or rule that denies a solution
2a: an illogical, unreasonable, or senseless situation
b: a measure or policy whose effect is the opposite of what was intended
c: a situation presenting two equally undesirable alternatives
3: a hidden difficulty or means of entrapment : CATCH22