Archives for category: A Journal of a Plague Year

or, Why the Best Bioweapon Is a Weak Bioweapon

Early in the “pandemic,” Scott Adams heard a rumor that the new virus affected non-Chinese more fatally than the Chinese, so he speculated. If I remember correctly, his speculation was that a biological weapon directed against a race of people was an inevitability, and that perhaps it was happening now. Specifically, the Chinese “communists” harbored an itch to eradicate Uyghurs. Perhaps SARS-CoV-2 was a new instrument of that ongoing genocide, and it had gotten out of hand.

I do not follow Adams, and do not know how he ultimately settled, in his mind, this Ultimate Uyghur Sanction, but I was impressed by one thing: Adams was willing to consider wild possibilities, including one that most people resisted on what seemed like grounds of squeamishness, the squeamishness of people afraid to be called “racist,” or “conspiracy theorists”: that the virus was built in a lab, and may have even been deliberately deployed as a bioweapon.

More than a year and a half later, and now the likelihood of the so-called Lab Leak Theory is commonly recognized as quite high. The worm turned.

Early on, I advised that, according to the Precautionary Principle, it was pure foolishness not to consider the possibility of a conscious bioweapon release. The reason to parlay the principle was simple: one considers a danger to prevent the worst outcomes. Early on, the Precautionary Principle was used to justify extreme mitigation efforts. But that was considering only the virus as a menace. By considering its threat potential, on the other hand, we might fend off other possibilities — those worse than a mere mass death.

Worse?

Yes.

The trouble with bioweaponry is that its deployment is negative sum: it is almost impossible to contain a virus, and the virus you deploy against your enemy will likely bite back at you.

With China, though, there is plenty of “surplus population.” So if the virus’s creators had prepared an inoculation in advance, and were willing to get rid of some population surplus, while also destroying much more of their enemy populations, that remains a possible strategy.

But there is a simpler method. If you want to destroy your enemies, what you want is not a real killer virus, but a virus that is actually not that dangerous … but which, with the right propaganda also deployed, can be made to seem more dangerous than it is. Indeed, a weak bioweapon is the perfect kernel for a psychological operation to get one’s enemies to over-react and weaken themselves.

Which is what happened.

Not only have western nations — weakened by standard churning state politics and China-funded race-baiting psy-ops — over-reacted to the contagion with psychologically destabilizing mask mandates and economically and culturally destructive lockdowns against commerce, they now deploy a very risky set of pseudo-vaccines, which may end up killing more people than the disease they are supposed to defend against.

I don’t know much about what is actually happening, but I do know that it is easy to manipulate mass men. 

And that is what we have here, the culture of Late Stage Churning State Capitalism is filled with Last Men, the gender-rending fools of our decadent culture. Our politics is now crazy, our government policies crazier, and our culture, laziest, ready for Lying Flat, the ultimate nincompoopery of a witless, ill-informed, culture of marks.

Grifted by the authorities, we accept as true things that are obviously false.

What things? You know, things like notion that the pandemic was an existential threat. No. Our reaction to it was. Are we fulfilling a civilizational death wish, or have we been pushed by Chinese (or globalist?) machinations?

I suspect the latter, but don’t rule out the former. Conspiracies are possible, but invisible hand processes still dominate most major trends.

In any case, we must contemplate the possibility that the pandemic could be the result of a conspiratorial threat — of warfare — so we can steal ourselves against our own destruction. It is easier to unite in the face of a concerted threat than against a mysterious menace; easier to accept losses, easier to become heroes.

twv

Books that just came into my library, or that I have just begun reading.

Two months ago or so, my little sister was diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in its later stages. Though she had had a tough case of the COVID in 2020, the hospital required her to take one of the “vaccines.” She chose the Johnson & Johnson, and then, in early July she endured her first chemotherapy treatment. In eight days she was dead.

I have been as listless as many who have taken the pushed treatments, since. No desire to make a podcast or write anything of much importance. But the times are not waiting for me. The onslaught of medical tyranny is coming.

Last night, my dog woke me up in the middle of the night and I couldn’t get back to sleep. So I went on a binge of posting to Twitter and Facebook, doing little on Gab. My previous day’s Twitter foray was described as crazy by one Twitter follower:

I take my alarmist cue in part from seeing what is happening Australia and New Zealand and taking these societies as bellwethers. The tyrannies being set up there are quite horrific. I’ve been catching occasional news about it all, but one YouTuber — a fascinating and extremely odd gentleman going under the name Theoria Apophasis — has been engaged in a string of videos on the subject of Pandemic Over-Reaction Down Under:

Though things look grim, the logic of it all is so fractured that it is hard not to laugh. Somebody satirized the logic in a fine parody:

ABBOTT AND COSTELLO’S ‘WHO’S BEEN VACCINATED?’

Bud: ‘You can’t come in here!’

Lou: ‘Why not?’

Bud: ‘Well because you’re unvaccinated.’

Lou: ‘But I’m not sick.’

Bud: ‘It doesn’t matter.’

Lou: ‘Well, why does that guy get to go in?’

Bud: ‘Because he’s vaccinated.’

Lou: ‘But he’s sick!’

Bud: ‘It’s alright. Everyone in here is vaccinated.’

Lou: ‘Wait a minute. Are you saying everyone in there is vaccinated?’

Bud: ‘Yes.’

Lou: ‘So then why can’t I go in there if everyone is vaccinated?’

Bud: ‘Because you’ll make them sick.’

Lou: ‘How will I make them sick if I’m NOT sick and they’re vaccinated.’

Bud: ‘Because you’re unvaccinated.’

Lou: ‘But they’re vaccinated.’

Bud: ‘But they can still get sick.’

Lou: ‘So what the heck does the vaccine do?’

Bud: ‘It vaccinates.’

Lou: ‘So vaccinated people can’t spread covid?’

Bud: ‘Oh no. They can spread covid just as easily as an unvaccinated person.’

Lou: ‘I don’t even know what I’m saying anymore. Look. I’m not sick.

Bud: ‘Ok.’ Lou: ‘And the guy you let in IS sick.’

Bud: ‘That’s right.’

Lou: ‘And everybody in there can still get sick even though they’re vaccinated.’

Bud: ‘Certainly.’

Lou: ‘So why can’t I go in again?’

Bud: ‘Because you’re unvaccinated.’

Lou: ‘I’m not asking who’s vaccinated or not!’

Bud: ‘I’m just telling you how it is.’

Lou: ‘Nevermind. I’ll just put on my mask.’

Bud: ‘That’s fine.’

Lou: ‘Now I can go in?’

Bud: ‘Absolutely not?’

Lou: ‘But I have a mask!’

Bud: ‘Doesn’t matter.’

Lou: ‘I was able to come in here yesterday with a mask.’

Bud: ‘I know.’

Lou: So why can’t I come in here today with a mask? ….If you say ‘because I’m unvaccinated’ again, I’ll break your arm.’

Bud: ‘Take it easy buddy.’

Lou: ‘So the mask is no good anymore.’

Bud: ‘No, it’s still good.’

Lou: ‘But I can’t come in?’

Bud: ‘Correct.’

Lou: ‘Why not?’

Bud: ‘Because you’re unvaccinated.’

Lou: ‘But the mask prevents the germs from getting out.’

Bud: ‘Yes, but people can still catch your germs.’

Lou: ‘But they’re all vaccinated.’

Bud: ‘Yes, but they can still get sick.’

Lou: ‘But I’m not sick!!’

Bud: ‘You can still get them sick.’

Lou: ‘So then masks don’t work!’

Bud: ‘Masks work quite well.’

Lou: ‘So how in the heck can I get vaccinated people sick if I’m not sick and masks work?’

Bud: ‘Third base.’

And…scene…

The illogic of it all is the astounding thing. Paul Jacob captured this yesterday by showing how challengeable the official line is:

A recent Reason article on New York’s new vaccination passport informs that “there’s a case to be made . . .” yet neglects to mention that the opposite case can also be made. 

What case is it?

Well, the Mayor Bill de Blasio-sanctified case is that “these [totalitarian] measures are important for getting as much of the population vaccinated as possible in order to reduce virus mutation and prevent more harmful variants from taking root.” 

Yet the inverse is perhaps more persuasive. Several important figures in the medical and scientific community have been crying Cassandra* for some time, arguing that an ineffective vaccine, like the mRNA treatments sponsored by Pfizer and Moderna, may, according to epidemiological principles long understood, pressure the spreading viruses into the thing we don’t want: more deadly variants.

The normal course for a new contagion is for it to mutate into easier-to-spread but less deadly variants. Killing a host isn’t good for the virus, so it changes over time. Oddly, I rarely hear this mentioned.

Herd immunity, which is the prevalence in a community of enough people who can fend off the virus preventing transmission to weaker people, can only be helped by vaccination when the vaccines increase hosts’ immunity to obtaining it and spreading it — neither of which clearly applies to the current vaccines.

“From their very first conceptualization,” claims Geert Vanden Bossche, one of the biggest names in the industry to object to the vaccination campaign, “it should have been very clear that these ‘S-based’ Covid-19 vaccines are completely inadequate for generating herd immunity in a population, regardless of . . . the rate of vaccine coverage.”

Sans herd immunity but with universal vaccination, he says, deadlier variants could arise.

Is he right? I don’t know. 

But the case against vaccine passports might reference epidemiology and virology from sources outside establishment-approved “scientific” opinion.

Totalitarians rarely have “the science” on their side.

Paul Jacob, Common Sense with Paul Jacob, “Ceding ‘Science’ to Totalitarians?” (August 19, 2021).

The Reason article Paul quoted notes that there are no exceptions given, under de Blasio’s regime, for natural immunity. You have to take “the jab” no matter what, or no society for you. You will be kept out of all public buildings. Including “private” businesses. An astounding thing. My Facebook reaction to this policy was brief:

The irrationality here should be obvious. The consequences of the irrationality are perhaps less obvious, because Americans have never really seen their own society break into pure terror and mob-fueled totalitarianism before. They are unprepared. And most will deny the warning, calling the warning itself irrational. But Folly now calls to its own, and we can expect the madness to grow exponentially. It has been fun, so to speak. Now it gets grim. The end of the republic is at hand. Woo-hoo? (Ugh.)

Theoria Apophasis calls the process underway “bringing a people to its knees.” But it is not just the madness of crowds. There are guiding hands, as I argued, and it has been going on a long time. Take the vaccines. Vaccination has been hyped and the case for their success grossly overstated:

We are propagandized about vaccines for reasons of power: medical and political. More important than vaccination in [nearly] eradicating traditional major diseases was the automobile replacing horses (which shat everywhere) and the development of good plumbing and sewage systems.

“Civilization is the distance man has placed between himself and his own excreta.” Brian Aldiss, The Dark Light Years

Folks who like public Uplift could take credit for these two major developments, since government was involved in strategic ways. But why don’t they? Because there is scant more power to be gained by their promotion. The next ramp-up of power is from the medicalization of everyday life. Therapeutic tyranny is, as Thomas Szasz predicted, the next big thing.

And fabulism about vaccination efficacy is a key propaganda point to ushering in the new form of control.

New York’s vaccination passport is merely the first step. Politicians, bureaucrats, doctors and Big Pharma will take it all — take away as much freedom and dissolve as much distributed responsibility as possible — if we let them.

The rationales for masks, lockdowns, and the vaccines are all very bad. Courtesy of historian Tom Woods, I shared an important chart:

Here are the death numbers for Germany and Sweden. Sweden is at about 9% mask compliance; Germany has a medical-grade mask mandate. Yet same trajectory, same numbers. £ It’s almost like the virus does what it will, regardless of our “I feel better if I’m doing something even if it’s pointless” interventions. [Tom Woods]

My comment on this was succinct:

I’m so tired of the way most folks argue for masks. That is, like religious zealots. I argue against masks every which way — except one: I think masking when sick would be socially useful; masking when not showing symptoms, on the other hand, is socially detrimental. I’ve made the case before. It’s fairly obvious.

My view of the near future is quite bleak. But I do agree that not all hope is lost:

An intransigent minority can win. And did. In Afghanistan.

And, just so, if Americans wish to regain freedom, the would-be free must become intransigent, or they shall be ground down quickly. The grinding machinery of mob government is at the door….

And I do have a vision of how a freer society would handle contagions like the current one — and worse:

A free people would negotiate with each other openly and rationally on matters of how to handle sociality during a contagion.

They would not mandate coercive policies with ambiguous effects and then stick to their “sides” as if the issue were Eternal Security and the proper way to settle arguments were to point at specific Bible verses.

They would not revise their history books to conform to the latest policy whim, as the author of that history of the Spanish Flu did this past year. They would not blithely suppress ideas they disagree with. They would not scream at those whom they disagree with in public, and sic the cops onto children to pepper spray them for non-compliance with an ineffective mask mandate.

But we are not a free people. We are a disgraceful one.

That reference to a cop pepper-spraying a child who wasn’t complying with an idiotic mask mandate came from Australia, actually. But I feel at one with Australia. This is not just one country utterly pissing away freedom, here. It is most of a civilization. Ours. “Western,” so to speak.

twv

Confession: An astounding amount of 2020’s and 2021’s public discussion of virology and epidemiology has struck me as novel. Maybe that’s what made the “novel coronavirus” so novel: the discussion surrounding it was itself novel. People who should know what they are talking about — and by this I mean doctors and scientists and science bureaucrats and writers on the science beat — generally yammered on in ways that defied what I had learned in previous years.

Concession: It has been somewhat disorienting. Not being a scientist, the novelties “felt” wrong, but not being a genius, I often had trouble remembering the precise concepts that were being flouted. My limitations were evident from the beginning.

But one has to follow one’s nose and not just kowtow to the CDC or the quasi-Communists who run China. One has to do a little research.

I confess: I have done as little as possible. As soon as the experts began flip-flopping and engaging in outright lies, I did not bother to dig deep. When bullshitters pile it on, one doesn’t need a shovel, one needs a hose. Spray.

I concede: It has been interesting to watch so many smart people — including doctors — just fall into line and suppressing any acknowledgement of the obvious b.s.

Now, politically this has been fascinating, since the actual rolling out of mitigation to the new disease has been excessively political, driven by politics, guided by politics, and leveraged for politics. This is so obvious I have found it hard to take anyone innocently defending mainstream media narratives about the disease seriously. I now routinely roll my eyes at many of my own odd cohort of libertarians. Conservatives have been as disappointing as usual, and “liberals” (none exist in herds any longer) have doubled down on credulity and deception.

My respect for humanity has gone down about nineteen notches.

But, as compensation — and to offset any late-onset pride — my own personal foibles also have become more evident than ever. I have not cared enough about humanity to do the deep research the situation seems to demand. I could apologize, but to whom? Who deserves it?

twv

“The blood clots are not rare”

It looks like Alex Jones is on to something big: “Deadly Blood Clots Develop In 62% of People Receiving COVID Vaccine” according to preliminary studies.

I of course know nothing.

But from the beginning, the rapid deployment of a very novel vaccine was being pushed through the regulatory system smelled suspicious. The fact that this new technology was rejected for flu vaccination purposes, and that many of the experimenters warned against this tech’s use on humans, suggested that extra caution was in order.

Extra caution against the cure.

Indeed, the novel coronavirus’s novel vaccines were developed too quickly to be believed. That is — if we can believe the official story. Which we cannot. This is old-enough tech, and there is a literature surrounding it. And if the skeptics in this video are to be trusted, the literature goes against the current vaxx-pushing policy. But that seems like common sense to me, it being imprudent to force a novel technology on the world population with so little public review.

And I mean public review, where scientists debate openly in public, without censorship. With censorship? Let others take the risk.

There has got to be a control group. Let the uncontrolled self-enroll. We all take our risks.

Dr. Charles Hoffe

In the video, Dr. Charles Hoffe, explains how the mRNA “vaccine’s” effects include microscopic clotting damage done to the brain, leading to many of the common symptoms, and similar damage to the lungs, inducing permanent “distorted architecture” (“increased reticulation”) that leads to “high blood pressure in their lungs” which, in three years, would likely lead to death by “right-sided heart failure.”

Sixty-two percent?

Talk about bad odds.

Dr. Hoffe has been removed of his ER duties because he has spoken out. That is a key fact, which helps you to know that we are dealing with a very dangerous madness of crowds and a possible manipulation of such madness by managerial elites, who know that their ability to control the masses is key to their own privileged status.

The second half of the video goes deep into conspiracy theory, where the idea is that our elites are engaging in a worldwide “eugenics” campaign to basically push Holodomor 2.0. I know nothing about that. Doesn’t seem impossible. The Depopulation Death Cult has been around for decades. I once sort of bought into it, back when I was an ignorant environmentalist. Viruses of the mind are more catching than actual viruses. Ideas have consequences.

“A worldwide contagion of a neurosis,” says one doctor. Yes. That much is obvious.

twv

From pages 137-138 of

…as posted on Gab.com….

Once again, many of my opinions barely climb to the level of “belief”: they are suspicions.

For example: I suspect that had Americans been polled prior to 2020 about a new strain of virus that would pass over kids and productive adults pretty much with mere flu-level symptoms at worst, but would indeed kill some immune-compromised older people at about the levels it is now being said to have done, and then asked them whether they would advise nearly the whole world population to take a new, understudied, unapproved-by-the-FDA genetic treatment that works in some significant ways quite different from vaccines in the past, almost no one would be in favor of the “vaccine.”

I cannot prove that. It is my hunch. Outside the context of the events as they unfolded, I suspect nearly everyone on the left would have objected to the proposed vaxx — and rightly so.

But wait. Do I believe that?

Maybe. Depending on the definition of “belief.” But I don’t know it.

And my suspicion affects other beliefs and arguments I make. I think veil-of-ignorance rationality works against the current craze of worldwide vaccination with mRNA spiked protein treatments. I hazard that people are so overwhelmed by events and panicky contexts that their rationality has been undermined, and they support policies (masking; lockdowns; vaccination) they would not have, otherwise.

I could be wrong. It is, alas, hard to prove — nay, impossible to prove — that I am wrong.

And vice versa. The mass of credulous and panicked vaxxed maskers could be wrong, too. But can I prove it? No. But how would their beliefs fare were they to take my challenge?

Probably not well, once they realize how easy it is to be duped.

But most people believe only other people can be duped. And I do very much believe that this specific belief is without any foundation in psychology or common sense.

We are, none of us, dupe-proof.

twv

One of the great things about the current pandemic is that it has revealed the astoundingly anti-religious nature of many of our states’ governors — especially Democratic governors, but some Republican politicians, and Democrats in general, as well.

It is rather bracing for a secular person like me to witness the brazenness of their anti-clerical agenda, as shown in their “lockdowns.” I mean, I have always known that the political left has always leaned towards anti-social revolutionary doctrine, and that many seculars (including many of my friends) really, really hate religion in a chthonic manner, full of bile and blood and steaming excretory fluids. But this has never been my bent.

It sure seems the bent of politicians like Cuomo, Pelosi, and Newsom, though.

These pols often pretend to be Christian, but I don’t believe them. I also do not believe the Clintons and the Obamas. By their fruits we shall know them, and if it came out in Wikileaks that Pizzagate were not only true, but also that these folks practiced full-on devil worship, the only shock would be that they believe anything transcendent to their power. For the nature of the lockdown priorities and protocols tip the hand.

Here is Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch showing the angle of the hand gesture, as evident in Governor Cuomo’s lockdown orders:

At the same time, the Governor has chosen to impose no capacity restrictions on certain businesses he considers “essential.” And it turns out the businesses the Governor considers essential include hardware stores, acupuncturists, and liquor stores. Bicycle repair shops, certain signage companies, accountants, lawyers, and insurance agents are all essential too. So, at least according to the Governor, it may be unsafe to go to church, but it is always fine to pick up another bottle of wine, shop for a new bike, or spend the afternoon exploring your distal points and meridians. Who knew public health would so perfectly align with secular convenience? As almost everyone on the Court today recognizes, squaring the Governor’s edicts with our traditional First Amendment rules is no easy task. People may gather inside for extended periods in bus stations and airports, in laundromats and banks, in hardware stores and liquor shops. No apparent reason exists why people may not gather, subject to identical restrictions, in churches or synagogues, especially when religious institutions have made plain that they stand ready, able, and willing to follow all the safety precautions required of “essential” businesses and perhaps more besides. The only explanation for treating religious places differently seems to be a judgment that what happens there just isn’t as “essential” as what happens in secular spaces. Indeed, the Governor is remarkably frank about this: In his judgment laundry and liquor, travel and tools, are all “essential” while traditional religious exercises are not. That is exactly the kind of discrimination the First Amendment forbids.

This signals an important element of today’s leftism that anti-leftists such as myself tend to forget: today’s lefty statists do not hate trade, do not hate business; they understand that they can bully business and leech off big business, at the very least. What they hate is religion, first, and strong families, second — for these inspire loyalty that might resist their statist designs.

twv

N.B. Illustration at top is by James Littleton Gill. This post was written
in late November, but for some reason not published at that time.

. . . as posted on Facebook. . . .

Retirement, especially as guaranteed by government, is the secular replacement for heaven.

It is the funniest religion-buster we have. Social Security is also a great metaphor for one view of Christian salvation: half works, half grace. But I still have trouble seeing the State as Savior, which is the favored model of many people, left and right. Of course, in this analogy, it is on the left that the messianism is strongest, for leftists want (nay, demand!) at the very minimum something like a guaranteed income, which is all grace and no works. I snicker.

Yes, I find our world hilarious.

January 11, 2021, 3:14 PM PST


Just to re-state: Bill Barr did not disclose the FBI’s ongoing investigations into Hunter Biden even while Trump was being impeached for asking for an investigation into the Bidens. How could this be justified? Barr had what seems to me a clear obligation to the citizenry to explain what was really going on. Instead, he let every gullible person in America think Trump was likely engaged in a partisan, self-interested witch hunt, when he really had reasonable suspicion of deep crookery.

That strikes me as cause for Barr to be reviled for siding with the Deep State and against a sitting president for doing nothing wrong.

And now Ukraine has come out with its investigation results. The government says billions are missing and the Bidens engineered the theft.

Yet I notice little talk in the press. We hardly need to wonder why: the press in America is largely a propaganda mill for the Deep State.

A video comment about the origins of the ongoing Ukraine fiasco.

January 11, 2021, 12:16 PM PST

The idea is to liken global warming skeptics to holocaust deniers. It’s a bit misleading because the skeptics/climate realists are the ones who always emphasize that climate never stops changing and has been changing for over four billion years, while the global warming catastrophists try to deny the reality of the Medieval Warm Period (when the Earth was hotter than today) and the Little Ice Age (from which we are still rebounding).

David Ramsay Steele, as quoted by Lee C. Waaks.

Now we skeptics can be called COVID deniers by the same crowd, on a different subject (but with eerily similar policy prescriptions), because we really do have this notion that science is about criticism, and requires considering more than one factor in a complex phenomenon.

January 11, 2016, 7:16 PM PST


The official timeline of the coronavirus outbreak is almost certainly wrong. Instances of the virus (in some form) appeared in the West in pockets starting in November 2019. I had it in February, and I was fairly late to the disease in the valley I live in. My brother had the same, odd illness in December and January, and he’s over a thousand miles to the east. Studies indicate that it was in Europe in December.

This could have huge implications for our understanding of what the virus is and why it has spread like it has. I have conjectures, but it would be mere fun to speculate much. The truth is unknown by me.

January 12, 2021, 4:47 PM PST


Operation Paperclip was a thing. It is a fact. Nazi scientists and technicians were imported into the United States to fill the ranks of NASA, military contractors, the academy, and intel agencies. We have good reason to believe that the disinformation skills of the National Socialists were absorbed into the intellectual culture of the Deep State in the 1950s and 1960s.

This is not a mere conspiracy theory, since while the secrecy was real the program has been acknowledged. And it was vast.

We might want to keep this in mind when considering current psychological operations and Internet speech suppression.

Now, some extrapolations we can make from this are indeed “conspiracy theories.” Joseph P. Farrell’s judgment — his “high octane speculation” that he floats as reasonable and likely — is that the Nazis basically took over America in a de facto if not de jure fashion with the JFK assassination. That seems a big stretch. I know. But it should be judged by the evidence, not our well-programmed “instincts.” Many of our prejudices have been programmed by psychological operations of the Deep State. For example, “conspiracy theory” was a term coined and pushed by the CIA for the media to use to marginalize anyone who questioned the “lone gunman” theory of the JFK assassination.

Don’t be good little boys and girls. You can be adults and question authority.

An afterthought on causation: A group that could incorporate Nazis into it is obviously nasty. A group incorporating Nazis into it, and in high places, offering special expense accounts and subsidies, is not going to be bettered by the inclusion. Indeed, it’s indicative of a direction. And that helps explain why America is such a messed-up place: it anathematizes Nazis but is run like a Fourth Reich, increasingly.

January 12, 2021, 5:05 PM PST


New temporary Profile Image, May 10, 2021. Note: this mask is only a nicety. It cannot possibly affect even a mere bacterial transmission, the grid of its breathing net being too wide. It is a camouflage mask, for hunters. But I use it as a camouflage mask for woke disease puritans.

The mask mandate has been something of a puzzle. From the beginning, we were lied to about mask efficacy during a respiratory virus epidemic. At first, we all remember, we were told not to wear them, they wouldn’t be effective, people couldn’t wear them well, etc. And the studies (and yes, there were studies) did not show any utility in reducing the spread of an airborne viral contagion. But Fauci, whom everyone knows, deep down, is a liar, seemed to be lying when he told us they weren’t useful. He was just saving the masks for the professionals! So it sounded to normal people like they did work, but Fauci got almost no flak for fibbing.

Then came the lockdowns, the Fifteen Days to Flatten the Curve – to save the hospitals from over-flow and professional staff from being over-burdened. We were advised to wear makeshift masks in our few public appearances, and we were told that mask production was up. And well-meaning people chipped in, making and selling and giving away home-made masks. And most of us thought that a 15-day holiday was the least we could do.

And then came the greatest con job in world history. Most people did not blink, sucked it all in like an OnlyFans whore. The governors of the states – and officials around the world – kept the lockdowns past the 15 day limit. In American, the hospitals suffered chiefly from under-use, not over-use, so the whole rationale had evaporated. Yet the lockdowns continued, and Trump’s promise of a vaccine shifted the whole pandemic panic from a coping strategy, playing it as it comes, to an over-arching Salvation Strategy, wherein anyone dying was a tragedy for the world, and how dare anyone think anything about their rights when old people are dying. So we are still in this ambiguous realm of over-reaction in most places, but open society in some places, like South Dakota, Texas and Florida — the latter two where the COVID is not as disastrous as it is in the lockdown areas. Meanwhile, many of us are wearing masks. I find it stupid, and when I look at cross-regional stats, I can see absolutely no correlation between mask and lockdowns with better epidemic outcomes. None. Zip. Nada. Zilch.

So what is with these masks? They are crowd control. Their limited utility is keeping people from touching their faces, as a sort of muzzle — though even this minor effect has not been demonstrated statistically, and I am unaware of any study that demonstrates this effect clearly.

“It cannot hurt” is the best we can say for the policy. But that is not at all true. Look at children who have gotten infections because they are wearing masks all day, because of insane state mandates in public schools. Remember, masks are probably pretty effective in sealing in/out bacterial infections. But that sealing-in effect can be quite bad.

But most people don’t care about that, because they are sheep. We bleat, we do not reason.

May 10, 2021, 2:17 PM


Whereas the traditional way of categorizing the general government of these United States is to list the three constitutionally divided federal branches, with their respective designated powers; and whereas the even more traditional is to recognize the primacy of the states in the federation, nevertheless — I recognize that things have changed, and there exists a Leviathan of competing and cooperating powers, including:

1. constitutional government, as specified in written documents at the country’s origins, and as funded by a variety of taxes and loans;

2. the welfare state, as funded by income earners and spent in transfer payments in Social Security, Medicare, Medicaid, and allied programs;

3. the Deep State, as constituting the Administrative State in its more secret realms, in the intelligence agencies and the Pentagon, and, especially, in their semi-permanent “partners” in military and intelligence contractors (the “military-industrial complex,” as Ike put it);

4. the Wide State, as instantiated in the major players in the unions and plutocracy, and in the shallow end of the Deep State, and especially in the corporations and NGOs that gain power by contract and special relationships with the constitutional government, but sans secrecy; and

5. government by folkways, which remains the part I like the most, but which has proved itself recently of being captured by the governments above to quite bracing effects.

May 12, 2021, 1:45 PM


It is worth noting that “social justice” is in complete opposition to liberty in the realm of public policy. Social justice is a changeling philosophy, swapped out to “liberals” while they were barely paying attention in the government-run classes that were designed by advocates of social justice.

There is no compatibility between “social justice” and “liberty.” And when one waxes, the other must wane.

May 7, 2021, 5:14 PM


I received on my author’s page on Facebook a direct challenge to a recent post. I will respond to it here, as soon as my taxes are done. And I unbury myself from mowing the lawn, etc. So: maybe never?

The puzzle we have all faced when thinking about a deadly contagion is: why doesn’t it just kill off every last one of us?

From this question epidemiologist launch into their very interesting study of the evolution of viruses. As if conforming to some law that Epicurus identified when he said our worst pains prove to be of brief duration while the long-lasting pains be not so intense, the worst viruses tend to kill off their hosts too quickly to spread themselves widely. So there is a natural limit to the worst viruses.

Now enter a prophylactic “vaccine” that does not prevent infection or, we are told, spreading of the infection: it just allows the infected to feel less put-upon by the disease. It will save some lives, undoubtedly, by lessening the virus’s effects.

But it will allow deadly viral variants to live longer in their hosts to spread to those with weakened immune systems. It will make a super-virus.
What’s not clear to me is whether this protects the vaccinated much, in the long term.

I gather it sets up an arms race. Pfizer and Moderna both are talking about booster shots and constant updates.

So, this is what it LOOKS like to me: Vanden Bossche is probably right. That is, immune escape is going to happen — is probably happening now in “the more dangerous variants” that Fauci yammers on about. This will first affect the NON-vaccinated. Killing millions. Then there will be the blowback onto the vaxxed. There will be hysterical demands for more and more R&D in genetic treatments. Politically, we will achieve a new level of governance: the medical-industrial complex. There will be scant freedom of association, and your travels will be restricted and tagged.

Our civilization will, if it survives, become mostly virtual — as in Asimov’s The Naked Sun — and we will cease exist as a social species. It will be all virtual-social.

If this be correct, it is already too late. The die is cast. We are in this rut. There is no “going back.” We are committed to transhumanist/posthumanist manipulation of the genome, because that is where these simple mRNA pseudo-vaccines will lead us, through their failures.

The evolution of the virus is going to lead us to a weird stefnal future that I only read about in the past.

I could of course be wrong. This is merely the scenario that fits closest to what I have understood of epidemiology for years. I’d love to be wrong. I do not particularly want to die within the next few years. But to accept a correction I would actually have to see it and understand it. In other words, I would have to see some actual science in place of all the cowardly bullying groupthink promoted by CNN and the CIA and women wearing masks as they jog.

twv

Typhoid Mary has loomed over the last year in the form of a suspicion: could SARS-CoV-2 be spread by asymptomatic carriers, like Mary Mallon was for typhoid?

A lot rests on this fear. Most of the lockdown policies, for example. 

Why should healthy people keep a six-foot distance from other healthy people, or wear masks, if there are few or no people spreading the disease while not knowing they are infected?

The whole extreme mitigation craze began a year and a month ago with the “Fifteen Days to Flatten the Curve” ploy. The curve to be flattened was of dire cases necessitating hospitalization. The policy was to prevent hospital over-crowding. That didn’t happen, but the measures were kept. 

And fears of asymptomatic spreading of the virus helped fuel the idea that we — “as a society” — could fend off the worst casualty rates until a “vaccine” could be developed. Now we have a few vaccines, and it has been like pulling teeth to get the CDC to allow the vaccinated some freedom of association.

You probably have heard about studies alleging prevalence of asymptomatic spread of COVID. Most of these studies seem pretty iffy to me, and the best study almost conclusively indicates no such epidemiology — “no positive tests amongst 1,174 close contacts with asymptomatic cases.”

Now, Mary Mallon, the original asymptomatic superspreader, spread typhoid by handling food that she prepared for others. After years of back-and-forth, she was basically imprisoned for 27 years. In America, you might think that a taking of her liberty for the public good would have instituted a system for her compensation. But that was not really done.

Just so, this last year: the liberty taken away from the productive many for the benefit, chiefly, of immune-compromised few, was not handled as a free society would.

Will there be progress?

Not so long as the big issues are ignored. Evaded.

Big issues like just compensation and the actual science of the spread of disease. Were there a case for quarantining people, preventing them from engaging in commerce, the ones who lost incomes from such quarantine should surely be compensated according to the Takings Clause of the Constitution. But almost no one mentions that.

The takings problem is especially interesting in the COVID case because the most at-risk population are retirees who barely lose monetarily, if at all, from “the lockdowns,” while those who lose most — workers and business owners — have the least to gain. This suggests to me that the only halfway reasonable takings/compensation method to manage a quarantine would be to require those who are not monetarily affected by the lockdown orders to compensate those who are monetarily affected in a direct manner. By this I mean the funds to compensate the most negatively impacted should come from those least impacted on a weekly basis, skipping states’ general funds entirely. The least impacted would write checks to a fund that would distribute to those most affected.

Note what this method would do: give immediate incentive to those who benefit most from the lockdowns to oppose the lockdowns when their benefit/cost changes. As it is, in the current lockdown regime, there is not incentive for those who benefit to let up on the request to be benefitted at others’ expense. The state lockdowns compensated for by federal subsidy amounts to an incentive to forever let some benefit at others’ expense. It is the kind of scenario that the Constitution was designed to prevent.

The lockdowns have been just one of many poorly thought-out, irresponsibility-maximizing programs introduced during the panic.

And as for Mary: what should have been done? Well, negotiate with the woman. Pay her off. If her freedom to earn a living was in conflict with others’ health, than the healthy should have paid her off not to work. They would have hired her to “socially distance” — rather than lock her up. Indeed, this kind of policy would not even require a state to manage.

This model should have become the norm. And because it did not, we have lockdowns today that abridge freedoms and benefit some at the uncompensated-for expense of others. Anathema!

And because no one has to pay the direct cost of these policies, the whole pandemic has been one ideological contest sans responsibility. The system actually discourages rational reconsideration of the data. People just choose what they want to believe to fit their situation and their free-floating “values.” A responsibilitarian society would not serve anyone’s free-floating values. Only cost-conscious values would count.

In a free society there would exist strong incentives to look at the effectiveness of masks and other mitigation measures rationally, not in a cultic manner.

twv