IT IS a dangerous mistake for leaders to make laws on the basis of received wisdom. To quote Dr Martin Luther King Jr: ‘Morality cannot be legislated, but behaviour can be regulated. Judicial decrees may not change the heart, but they can restrain the heartless.’
Amidst the raft of commentators deconstructing Covid policies and their devastating impact (collective and individually) including the predictably catastrophic effects of the lockdowns, one can logically conclude that those responsible were completely devoid of compassion or empathy.
I would call these sanctimonious authoritarians ‘Tin Men’ lacking hearts in every edict they release, bent on shaping as inhumane a society as possible by chilling the hopes and wellbeing of their constituents. The forced isolation of old and infirm people along with abandonment of the poor, and other institutional non-Covid crimes such as police cover-ups of sex abuse to dodge accusations of racism reveals a malevolent intent to curate a more nasty and factious world for everyone except those in power. Throw in the further weakening of familial bonds, community networks and friendships from harsh restrictions, and it all appears to be driven by a desire to crush the human spirit.
It leaves society broken into a state that was well summed up by the 17th century philosopher Thomas Hobbes in his book Leviathan or The Matter, Forme and Power of a Commonwealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil, written during the English Civil War: ‘In such condition there is no place for industry, because the fruit thereof is uncertain, and consequently no culture of the earth, no navigation nor the use of commodities that may be imported by sea, no commodious building, no instruments of moving and removing such things as require much force, no knowledge of the face of the earth, no account of time, no arts, no letters, no society, and which is worst of all, continual fear and danger of violent death, and the life of man, solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short.’
Everything about the policies imposed points to a desire to create such a world. In a recent interview with Brett Weinstein, Neil Oliver compared the gradual truth revelations in the current post-traumatic Covid analysis to a ‘leaky colander’. With more people seeking and facing the truth will the dam finally burst?
Professor Norman Fenton, another of Weinstein’s interviewees, whose findings challenging mRNA vaccine efficacy were featured on TCW last year, says that everything we were told to do – locking the vulnerable indoors, shutting gyms, staying away from hospital until critically ill and avoiding the beach – was the exact opposite of what should have been advised. He concludes that a sinister agenda must have driven institutional decisions. Like many in the growing community of Covid vaccine and lockdown sceptics he has been ostracised by mainstream academia. Fenton was also libelled by editors of Wikipedia who accused him on the platform of spreading misinformation before he successfully fought to have the content removed. That he is a specialist in ‘Bayesian’ statistical formulas which have been used in court cases to assess a defendant’s guilt based on probabilities and context determining the accuracy of evidence presented, counted for naught. Yet this type of analysis is most useful in scenarios where only limited empirical data is available and serves to narrow down causation by eliminating factors which are merely circumstantial.
Fenton points out that much of the information circulated by mainstream media about Covid which influenced public perceptions has been based on false data, one instance being the mislabelling of deaths after the first vaccine shot as being ‘unvaccinated’. Another is the BBC last month incorrectly stating that 8 per cent of the UK population remained unvaccinated, when the correct figure from UKHSA reporting was closer to 30 per cent. The reason under-reporting of unvaccinated numbers matters is that it skews the proportion of non-Covid related deaths in the unvaccinated population to appear higher than it actually is.
Fenton blames the institutional capture of medical practitioners and academics in part on the peer review system. Any dissent from accepted narratives results in being shunned (as he was) with journals refusing to publish his work.
If we want to create a kinder and more compassionate world and avoid further human suffering there will need to be an about-face and acceptance that wrong decisions were made and some soul-searching by those – not least the mainstream media – who not only refused to interrogate these decisions but actively co-operated in promoting them and imposing them on the population. As Bob Moran pointed out in TCW on Wednesday, this needs to start with journalists and doctors: ‘Journalists are not supposed to be gatekeepers of the truth. They shouldn’t get to decide what truths the public are allowed to hear any more than doctors should get to decide who gets treated and who doesn’t’.
Let us hope the Tin Men and Women who govern us will listen and those who unquestioningly supported their narrative can manage to locate their missing hearts and do that before it is too late.