What this means for people in open states is the dawning of a new consciousness. If they are going to keep their freedoms and good lives, they have to prepare for a new way of thinking. It’s a sense of independence and determination to avoid the hysteria, demands, and attacks from the party in power — and the media apparatus that works all day to bolster them.
The lesson is that the questions, answers, and solutions are within the capacity of individuals in society to discern and implement. We do not need powerful institutions with legal rights over us to feed them to us, to legislate us, to coerce us.
The lockdowns are looking less like a gigantic error and more like the unfolding of a fanatical political ideology and policy experiment that attacks core postulates of civilization at their very root. It’s time we take it seriously and combat it with the same fervor with which a free people resisted all the other evil ideologies that sought to strip humanity of dignity and replace freedom with the terrifying dreams of intellectuals and their government sock puppets.
America, the greatest country in the world, should be based on individual freedom, not government interventions.
Trump’s Steel Tariffs Still Harming Producers and Consumers Read More
The conclusion is that the Coronavirus has no influence on the mortality of the 50-70 age groups. And that very conclusion is the same for all groups below 80 years of age. As 80 is the average age of death in the population, the general conclusion therefore is that the Coronavirus has no influence on population mortality.
In a world in which not every human being lives an isolated existence – that is, in our world – each of us incessantly acts in ways that affect strangers without thereby justifying government-imposed restrictions on the great majority of these actions. Therefore, justification of government obstruction of the ordinary affairs of life requires far more than an identification of the prospect of some interpersonal impact.
If they tried to generate panic based on next to nothing in 2005-06, people should have asked at the time, what will they do when something real comes along? It took 15 years but now we know.
“Half the Population Could Die!”: The Great Disease Panic of 2005-06 Read More
The rich and left wing could do their jobs from the Hamptons. And so they moved there. And so did their art, and other sources of entertainment. Those who personify “limousine liberal” got out of town because they could, supported lockdowns because they could, but does anyone think their reaction would have been at all similar had their own livelihoods and source of dignity been threatened?
The great turn from ancient political and economic structures into more modern ones was not only about property rights, commercial freedoms, and the participation of ever greater waves of people in public life. There was also an implicit epidemiological deal to which we agreed, what Sunetra Gupta describes as an endogenous social contract.
We’ve entered into an area of post-truth governance. If they can take away your right to enforce rent collection from your own tenants — and this has been provisionally codified by the Supreme Court — while attempting to replace normal commercial contracts with billions in welfare spending, nothing is off the table.
Market signals plainly never factored into Fauci’s analysis. He made plain that no virus-related risks should be taken, even if it meant economic contraction. Such are the luxuries, but more realistically the negatives of working without marketplace pressures. It’s easy to be wrong when there’s no share price exposing your error.
What If Fauci Had Faced the Discipline of the Market? Read More
Refusal to admit failure is costing us dearly right now, as they added layer upon layer of compulsion as a cover for honestly coming to terms with the appalling mess of the last 18 months.
