“Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them; for it is to those who are childlike that the Kingdom of the Heavens belongs.” —Matthew 19:14.
Martin Kulldorff, Ph.D., is an epidemiologist, biostatistician, and Professor of Medicine at Harvard Medical School. Jay Bhattacharya, MD, Ph.D., is a Professor of Health Policy at Stanford University School of Medicine. Newsweek published a review of the scientific literature in a labeled op-ed, “How Fauci Fooled America.” It is an itemized list of all things I have been right about for months here on Freedom and Reason. The evidence indicates that corporate and government representatives lied about natural immunity (infection provides robust and durable immunity), misled the public about the relative dangers of SARS-CoV-2 infection (healthy people are unlikely to die from COVID-19 or even develop serious symptoms or any symptoms as all), needlessly and counterproductively closed public schools (action that carried devastating effects for childhood development), misled on the efficacy of masks (they don’t work), wasted valuable resources on contract tracing (could not stop the disease), are responsible for collateral public health damage (the list here is extensive, so definitely read the article).
There’s a reason the facts vindicate me. It’s not luck or magic. I’m no shaman. It’s my method. My default position is to not accept what pharmaceutical companies tell me (for the same reason I don’t trust the gas and oil industry) or to believe the spokespersons of the administrative state. Our regulatory agencies are captured by corporate power. The CDC is a corporate front. It’s actually funded by Big Pharma. The CDC Foundation is “an independent nonprofit and the sole entity created by Congress to mobilize philanthropic and private-sector resources to support the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s critical health protection work.” It is hardly news that the FDA is corporate captured. There is a constant circulation of elites between the FDA and Big Pharma. The function of these bodies (along with the USDA, EPA, and other such bodies) is to lend legitimacy to corporate products and practices. These are all part of the progressive apparatus designed by industry to prevent populist attempts to limit corporate power. Nor do I believe the corporate media or the culture industry. These constitute a propaganda apparatus serving the interests of financial and corporate power.
I understand that in the capitalist mode of production the the means of production are owned and controlled by the capitalist and professional-managerial classes, these arrangements determine authority (power) relations, and that those who control the means of production at the same time control the means of intellectual production. I know that the right questions to ask are these: Who is in a position to determine what happens in society? Who benefits from these arrangements? If you do not operate with this understanding and not asking these questions you are not properly in the game. Under less-than-totalitarian conditions, the intellectual system is somewhat open since the appearance of freedom is needed to manufacture the appearance of liberty. Here control is managed through a complex process we know as the engineering of consent. When you understand that process, you can bypass it.
My method allows me to determine which studies are industry propaganda and which are the result of independent research. It is well known among those who are familiar with the scientific literature that industry-generated science is shaped by bias serving the interests of corporate power. I knew about the efficacy of HCQ and ivermectin early on because I read the independent studies. When corporate scientists denied that efficacy, I knew what was going on. I have known for more than a a year and a half that corporate state policy was killing people. Doctors wanted to treat patients, but big medical groups, corporate pharmacies, regulatory agencies, and professional associations, all operating for profit or for the profit of others, stopped them. I knew about the problems with and dangers of the vaccines, the low level of efficacy, lack of durability, and problematic safety profile, because I read the studies. I knew masks don’t work because I read the literature and listened to industrial hygienists. I reported all this on Freedom and Reason.
You don’t necessarily have to be a scientist to understand these matters. You need to know what to look for and how to read the science. You need to approach the claims of corporate and government officials from a critical standpoint. You approach these institutions the same way you approach the institutions of religion. A PhD in science helps. But these methods are available to everyone.
* * *
According to Forbes, COVID-19 associated deaths reported to the Vaccine Adverse Reporting System (VAERS) now exceed sixteen thousand. That’s just deaths. Injuries are far greater in number. These include heart inflammation, paralysis, and other serious damage, especially in our young people. These figures are undercounts.
You might be tempted to rationalize this large number in light of the highly publicized death tolls attributed to COVID-19. First, those are almost certainly exaggerated and inflated in contrast to vaccine deaths which are underreported. Second, and more importantly, deaths and injuries from vaccines are visited upon those who are very unlikely to die or suffer long-term harm from the virus itself—an infection from which they will acquire effective and durable immunity (your Google factcheck propaganda sidebar not withstanding).
I realize this can be both, in fact I am sure it is, but as a matter of gauging the primary causal force in all this, as you know, I have wondered whether the rush to vaccinate everybody is the result of science denialism and illiteracy or a kind of revivalist type affair, like a Great Awakening—only instead of Christianity, it’s Scientism.
Like Wokeism, we really should start capitalizing Scientism. These are the prevailing faith-based systems of the progressive left (I don’t think they are really left, to be honest, but you know what I mean). Or perhaps we might place Scientism as a doctrine under Wokeism.
* * *
I am fortune to not be part of the structures of corporate power and administrative control. I would probably be a whistleblower if I were. But I never got close to power. Not because I thought I would be coopted, rather because of my ethical sensibilities. I suppose by being an academic, I am a minor player in the system that manufactures consent. For what it’s worth, I have refused to participate to any significant degree in corporate projects, a choice that has come with considerable personal discomfort and professional limitation. My case excepted (and there are others, of course), these forces, along with the corporate media and the culture industry, explain why people who know what they are saying is a lie participate in the lie and continue peddling the lie in order to retain what legitimacy they have left. How do you come out know and say, “Look, I lied and I’m a whore” or “I didn’t care to understand science and I have no real commitment to ethics or principles”?
I want to be fair. It is not only because people lack a commitment to truth and morality. One can underestimate the power of bureaucratic organization and the subjectivity this system generate to colonize the lifeworlds of employees and compel them to participate in deception and falsehoods. But that is precisely why you do not depend on the system of hegemonic production in a capitalist society, why you set the default where I have set it. It’s tragic that so many good people on the left have so fallen for progressivism, as this is ideological projection of the administrative state and technocracy and corporate-manufactured mass culture, that they don’t even consider where the default lies for rational beings. Their role as subalterns in the extended state apparatus is a key element in the successful process of engineering consent. I invite them to return to the democratic and ethical life. I am pessimistic, though.
Part of why the left is so easily deceived is they lack a sophisticated understanding of the history and character of progressivism and social democracy, confusing it with democratic socialism or industrial democracy (see the work of Richard Grossman to acquire some degree of necessary sophistication). There is a world of difference between expanding industrial democracy, on the one hand, and expanding the corporate state, on the other. It’s the difference between socialism and fascism. We fail to grasp this as our peril. Making workers dependent on a government controlled by banks and corporations pulls workers under the control of private power beyond the constraints the workplace already imposes on the freedom of workers. Private control becomes totalitarian under these arrangements. Under these conditions workers are no longer free labor, however much that means they are exploited labor, but serfs on a network of corporate estates, a high-tech plantation supported by the custodial state. Renting one’s body isn’t complete freedom, but it’s a hell of a lot freer than one’s body being owned by an estate upheld by government. Too many folks on the left do not get the distinction. They see big government through rose colored glasses. They think that’s socialism. Ironically, so does the far right. They’re both wrong. But at least one of these groups opposes it.
* * *
We are seeing in Australia what we saw in Ireland and Vermont. The first graph is COVID-19 cases. The second graph is the vaccinated proportion of the population.
You will note that Australia had a long period of near zero cases. As the mass vaccination program proceeded, COVID-19 cases start rising. Australia is the most locked down country in the world. Indeed, it is safe to say that Australia has become a fascist state. The vast majority of those hospitalized in Australia are vaccinated. At some point people are going to have stop deluding themselves about vaccine efficacy. It looks like the surge has finally started to subside. Now the call has gone out to parent to sign up their children for vaccination. Hopefully parents will resist subjecting their children to the insanity.
* * *
Big Pharma’s desire for mega-profits know no boundaries. Billions await jabbing children with a novel drug for a disease that does not threaten them. According to the CDC, COVID-19 is associated with 0.0003 percent of deaths among children aged 5-11 years old in the United States. Taking all children into account, 0.0009 percent of deaths are associated with COVID-19. Those who died (a few hundred out of tens of millions nationally) with a COVID-19 diagnosis were morbidly obese or suffering other serious health conditions, such as leukemia. They didn’t so much die from COVID-19 (which is one of numerous cold viruses in their environment) but with COVID-19. No matter, jab healthy children with a novel drug that is injuring and killing young people. There’s a useful slogan capturing the status quo here: profits before people.
It used to be that people on the left had a different slogan. This one is aspirational: people before profits! But fascistic corporate hegemony is powerful stuff. The proof of this is everywhere, but probably no more disturbingly than woke progressive parents dutifully, eagerly lining up their children to be jabbed. “We’re doing our part!” More than patriotic corporatism, the jab is a fetish in a secular religion. The faithful have long been waiting for the clerics to bless their children. “When will my child recieve his blessing?” Corporations have played progressives masterfully—by appealing to the narcissistic personality that is widespread among the professional-managerial class. They believe by getting the jab they separate themselves from the lower primates, the mouth-breathers, the wretched antivaxers—i.e., presumed populists. Over against the deplorables, the children of progressives will become Übermensch. That is literally the campaign to get shots in the arms of those who can’t consent to being experimental subjects by stroking parents’ egos.
As I reported on Freedom and Reason, the last time the government rolled out the vaccine, just as the COVID-19 began steeply declining after coronavirus’s seasonal surge (remember, there is nothing novel about coronavirus, which sweep the planet every year), the nation experienced a resurgence of cases. I hope we don’t see a repeat of that with the new mass vaccination campaign. But there is cause for concern. Since children don’t experience symptoms or very mild symptoms from infection unless the variant is especially pathological, vaccination will allow more pathological mutations (mutation is an inherent part of the evolutionary process) to be transmitted because the vaccines have an effect on reducing symptoms.
Antibody-dependent enhancement is a real danger in populations with small probabilities of severe illness. Cases and hospitalizations have been heading back down of late after the last mass vaccination blunder, as a large proportion of those who have been vaccinated were subsequently infected and reinfected (since a lot of people with natural immunity still got the shot) thus reestablishing herd immunity against the Delta variant. But, as Kulldorff and Bhattacharya have told us, and as reported here on Freedom and Reason, the corporate state appears unconcerned with science.The vaccines don’t confer effective or durable immunity. The real-world evidence is entirely clear on this question. Our way out of this pandemic is for children to get the virus and develop natural immunity to it. We have to get out of the viruses way and let the normal evolutionary process work.
* * *
As reported by The Economist, forty percent of American workers still work from home. Do Biden’s executive order and OSHA regulations account for that? (OSHA is clearly captured now. Just wait until you see what’s next.) Why be tested every week for a virus that the vaccine doesn’t prevent when you aren’t even going to be on the job site? What would be the point beyond funneling money to the companies that manufacture, distribute, and administer testing kits (which are biased to produce false positives)? The point of this whole affair seems to be to drag everybody under the control of the state. I expect mandatory vaccinations are coming for everybody. A appeal to “equity” perhaps?
This from OSHA: “The Department of Labor and OSHA, as well as other federal agencies, are working diligently to encourage COVID-19 vaccinations. OSHA does not wish to have any appearance of discouraging workers from receiving COVID-19 vaccination, or disincentivizing employers’ vaccination efforts. As a result, OSHA will not enforce 29 CFR 1904’s recording requirements to require any employers to record worker side effects from COVID-19 vaccination through May 2022. We will reevaluate the agency’s position at that time to determine the best course of action moving forward.”
So, in order to keep workers in the dark about vaccine injuries so workers will be more likely to expose themselves to vaccine injuries, OSHA is suspending the reporting of vaccine injuries as a workplace requirement. This is OSHA. I will repeat that: This is OSHA. This is literally the opposite of what OSHA was created to do. OSHA is supposed to protect workers, not keep them ignorant of potential dangers from the vaccines their employers are mandating. The agency is concealing injuries workers sustain as a work requirement. We are truly through the looking glass, comrades.
I once read about a case, it occurred back in 1983, where a manager removed the skull and cross bones from drums of toxic chemicals his workers didn’t want to work around because of health and safety concerns. One night he removed all of the warning labels and told them the next morning that he had replaced those barrels with new barrels filled with harmless chemicals. The next day a worker opened one of the drum. So toxic were the contents that the medical examiner and his assistant were poisoned when they opened him up at autopsy.
It is unethical to withhold from another human being, especially the well-being of a person for whom one has responsibility, information about potential dangers of activities required of him. A worker has the right to know anything pertaining to his health and safety so he can make an informed choice about whether he wants to proceed or whether he wants to refuse.
* * *
How they lie to you