In the first two paragraphs of this dispatch, Steve summarizes the main results of the last two years. As he points out, most of the “changes” in our world have been “horrible.” Writes Steve:
“The pandemic has brought on many changes, most of them horrible. Progressives stopped being progressive and became authoritarian.
In the first two paragraphs of this dispatch, Steve summarizes the main results of the last two years. As he points out, most of the “changes” in our world have been “horrible.” Writes Steve:
“The pandemic has brought on many changes, most of them horrible. Progressives stopped being progressive and became authoritarian.
“Then came the insane policies that necessitated the mass censorship of science precisely because these policies can’t bear the scrutiny of scientific discourse.”
To expound on these crucial take-aways:
Yes, “MANY changes” have occurred and, yes, "most" of these changes have been “horrible” for world inhabitants (I would argue "all" of these changes have been horrible). They were indeed “insane.”
Among these horrible developments is the fact that “progressives” … “became authoritarian.” I would edit this statement to say that many non-progressives also embraced “authoritarian policies.”
The “insane policies” also “necessitated “mass censorship of science.” I’d add these “policies” were really “mandates,” imposed not by changing laws, but imposed as “emergency orders” issued by mayors, governors, presidents and bureaucrats acting on the bogus or dubious advice of alleged “experts” and “authorities.”
As the world’s remaining critical thinkers have tried to point out, few if any of these “policies” (mandates) could “bear the scrutiny of scientific discourse.” Because this is the case, “mass censorship of (real) science” HAD to occur.
I would add that members of the Fourth Estate have also eschewed any real “search for the truth” …. so both real science and real journalism have been discarded.
In a world where alleged “scientists” and alleged “watchdog journalists” refuse to search for the truth, untruths are bound to proliferate. When these falsehoods remain (largely) unchallenged, they become “the (authorized) narrative.”
As ensuing policies that affect every life on the planet are not based on underlying truths, they invariably produce “horrible” results, results that are often the exact opposite of what their proponents assured the public would happen. Thus we get “safe and effective” vaccines that are ineffective and unsafe. Even the “vaccines” are not really real “vaccines.”
Lockdowns designed to “slow or stop” the “spread” of a respiratory virus - thus allegedly preventing large numbers of deaths - did NOT stop the spread of this virus at all. Indeed, these policies produced untold number of deaths and adverse events (health-wise and economic) that otherwise would not have occurred.
The people who tried to make these points have been vilified and/or censored while the “leaders” who pushed the bogus or dubious narratives have been celebrated and given even more power.
The bottom line from these “changes” is that millions of people who should never have experienced economic or health harms have experienced harms to some degree (“harms” ranging from mild and hard-to-quantify up to an including death).
The official narrative says that millions of lives have been “saved” and things would have been far worse if all the draconian “policies” (mandates) had not been implemented.
The real question is WHO should the masses believe is/was right? Today, most world citizens still side with the public health officials, scientists from prestigious institutions, politicians, executives with Big Pharma and the editors and journalists at the mainstream press organizations.
Which begs this question: Why would so many people accept as infallible the pronouncements of these particular people and organizations?
WHY this is so should be clear by now: Because world citizens have been subjected to 26 month of non-stop, largely unchallenged “reporting” that says the “narrative” is/was right.
Things might “change” only when more people realize the “authorized” narratives were bogus all along …. which would mean all our “leaders” who acted on these false narratives were also WRONG. Basically, the world has been listening to the wrong leaders.
If enough people ever reach this conclusion, real change probably WILL occur. But this might also represent the proverbial truth many people simply cannot handle.
Really what would have to happen is for many of my friends who have thought differently than myself for the past two years to ask this question: “Are you guys really saying that ALL of our “trusted” public officials and institutions were wrong about such important topics?”
To which I would have to reply with one word: Yes.
Someone supposedly asked Ben Franklin after a meeting of the Founders, "So what type of government have you given us?" Franklin reportedly answered, "A republic ... if you can keep it." The Founders must have known that most governments end up being authoritarian .... so they tried to create as many "checks and balances" as possible to prevent this from happening. This framework largely worked for two or so centuries, but I think the authoritarians are prevailing in the end. I still think the Fourth Estate deserves more blame than even elected officials or even voters. The Founders did make "freedom of speech or the press" the FIRST Amendment to the Constitution, probably realizing that all freedoms and liberties ultimately depend on a genuinely free press/speech. So when the mainstream press was completely captured (by would-be authoritarians), the last great restraint againt authoritarians disappeared.
In the first two paragraphs of this dispatch, Steve summarizes the main results of the last two years. As he points out, most of the “changes” in our world have been “horrible.” Writes Steve:
“The pandemic has brought on many changes, most of them horrible. Progressives stopped being progressive and became authoritarian.
“Then came the insane policies that necessitated the mass censorship of science precisely because these policies can’t bear the scrutiny of scientific discourse.”
To expound on these crucial take-aways:
Yes, “MANY changes” have occurred and, yes, "most" of these changes have been “horrible” for world inhabitants (I would argue "all" of these changes have been horrible). They were indeed “insane.”
Among these horrible developments is the fact that “progressives” … “became authoritarian.” I would edit this statement to say that many non-progressives also embraced “authoritarian policies.”
The “insane policies” also “necessitated “mass censorship of science.” I’d add these “policies” were really “mandates,” imposed not by changing laws, but imposed as “emergency orders” issued by mayors, governors, presidents and bureaucrats acting on the bogus or dubious advice of alleged “experts” and “authorities.”
As the world’s remaining critical thinkers have tried to point out, few if any of these “policies” (mandates) could “bear the scrutiny of scientific discourse.” Because this is the case, “mass censorship of (real) science” HAD to occur.
I would add that members of the Fourth Estate have also eschewed any real “search for the truth” …. so both real science and real journalism have been discarded.
In a world where alleged “scientists” and alleged “watchdog journalists” refuse to search for the truth, untruths are bound to proliferate. When these falsehoods remain (largely) unchallenged, they become “the (authorized) narrative.”
As ensuing policies that affect every life on the planet are not based on underlying truths, they invariably produce “horrible” results, results that are often the exact opposite of what their proponents assured the public would happen. Thus we get “safe and effective” vaccines that are ineffective and unsafe. Even the “vaccines” are not really real “vaccines.”
Lockdowns designed to “slow or stop” the “spread” of a respiratory virus - thus allegedly preventing large numbers of deaths - did NOT stop the spread of this virus at all. Indeed, these policies produced untold number of deaths and adverse events (health-wise and economic) that otherwise would not have occurred.
The people who tried to make these points have been vilified and/or censored while the “leaders” who pushed the bogus or dubious narratives have been celebrated and given even more power.
The bottom line from these “changes” is that millions of people who should never have experienced economic or health harms have experienced harms to some degree (“harms” ranging from mild and hard-to-quantify up to an including death).
The official narrative says that millions of lives have been “saved” and things would have been far worse if all the draconian “policies” (mandates) had not been implemented.
The real question is WHO should the masses believe is/was right? Today, most world citizens still side with the public health officials, scientists from prestigious institutions, politicians, executives with Big Pharma and the editors and journalists at the mainstream press organizations.
Which begs this question: Why would so many people accept as infallible the pronouncements of these particular people and organizations?
WHY this is so should be clear by now: Because world citizens have been subjected to 26 month of non-stop, largely unchallenged “reporting” that says the “narrative” is/was right.
Things might “change” only when more people realize the “authorized” narratives were bogus all along …. which would mean all our “leaders” who acted on these false narratives were also WRONG. Basically, the world has been listening to the wrong leaders.
If enough people ever reach this conclusion, real change probably WILL occur. But this might also represent the proverbial truth many people simply cannot handle.
Really what would have to happen is for many of my friends who have thought differently than myself for the past two years to ask this question: “Are you guys really saying that ALL of our “trusted” public officials and institutions were wrong about such important topics?”
To which I would have to reply with one word: Yes.
Someone supposedly asked Ben Franklin after a meeting of the Founders, "So what type of government have you given us?" Franklin reportedly answered, "A republic ... if you can keep it." The Founders must have known that most governments end up being authoritarian .... so they tried to create as many "checks and balances" as possible to prevent this from happening. This framework largely worked for two or so centuries, but I think the authoritarians are prevailing in the end. I still think the Fourth Estate deserves more blame than even elected officials or even voters. The Founders did make "freedom of speech or the press" the FIRST Amendment to the Constitution, probably realizing that all freedoms and liberties ultimately depend on a genuinely free press/speech. So when the mainstream press was completely captured (by would-be authoritarians), the last great restraint againt authoritarians disappeared.