What is the truth about Coronavirus?
We are told that the Coronavirus COVID-19 started spontaneously in a seafood and live animal market in Wuhan, China, a country where people, or some people, treat animals appallingly, and where many eat strange things such as bats.
That may be true. I cannot say that it is untrue. There are, however, dissenting voices, that is to say voices dissenting from the official narrative. I was sent this:
I was at first inclined to accept the official narrative as most likely correct. Now? Not sure.
What interests me more are the socio-political effects of the Coronavirus on the world and particularly the UK. In particular, I noted that the near-dictatorial powers which the Government of the UK has taken on are not designed to last for a few weeks, a few months. No…they are drafted to last for TWO YEARS. I think that we are entitled to ask why that is so.
True, the powers taken by the UK Government can be removed again by Commons vote (every 6 months or, in constitutional principle, at any time), but this government, with its 80-strong majority, can push through extensions easily, if it wants.
Boris-idiot, posing as PM, has shown little or no leadership, but that has not prevented “Conservative” scribblers from behaving like the most sycophantic Stalinists in the Soviet Writers’ Union (of about 1948). Look at this creature:
Most people are natural followers. Few like to have to think for themselves. In this case, spurred by natural feelings of fear, anxiety etc, most people want to “do the right thing” and that can include thinking the “right” thing.
Despite the above, a minority is beginning to question the origin of Coronavirus, the fairly draconian measures now being taken by the UK government and, even leaving all that aside, whether the economic stimulus is being done in the right way.
Peter Hitchens has tweeted scornfully about the situation
I do not agree with everything written or said by Hitchens, who is also, in fact, not the great champion of freedom he likes to present as (he blocked me on Twitter a few years ago when he discovered a. that I could match his erudition and b. that the Jewish lobby trolls were hostile to me; I presumed that he did not want to lose his lucrative msm work), but his tweets here are important, because they go against both an almost hysterical official narrative and also an unthinking public.
I blogged about Hitchens in May 2019: https://ianrmillard.wordpress.com/2019/05/19/peter-hitchens-and-his-views/
Hitchens is on to something here, and makes a few valid points for sure. He is not alone.
Others have noted unreported factors or strange anomalies in the present government policy:
The “lockdown” relies on people self-censoring, “doing the right thing” if you like. I am not opposed to that as matters stand with “the virus”, but I am very uneasy with where this is all leading.
I am presently blogging separately about where UK society and economy will be in a while. We are approaching a massive change across the world, particularly across Europe. 2022 will bring change on a scale not seen since socialism in all forms collapsed in and after 1989. It’s a 33-year cycle which has interested me for a long time.
We must be clear. These restrictions can only work if the general population goes along with them. I don’t mean “work” in terms of suppressing Coronavirus infections. The restrictions may or may not work in that sense. I do not know. No, what I mean is “will the restrictions work in terms of enforcement?”
Most people will no doubt go along with the restrictions for a few weeks. If this situation continues for longer, probably not. It has been reported that the police have been told to expect 6 months of this! I cannot see the population sitting still indefinitely.
The head of the Police Federation has now said that officers
- are unsure how to enforce the new “lockdown” measures;
- are already ignoring crime because prioritizing the enforcement of “lockdown”.
I cannot see how the two above statements can be easily reconciled, but the law was ever “a ass…a idiot”, as one character from Dickens expostulates.
At this stage, it is clear that the portentous announcement, by a clownish Prime Minister, of “lockdown”, is a kind of sleight of hand, or if you prefer, confidence trick. The State, as matters stand, cannot actually enforce these strictures. It is reliant on the population agreeing with them and playing ball.
I suppose that the police could impose road blocks between towns or even within towns, but the police officers would have no way of checking whether any one motorist is on a legitimate mission of mercy, of shopping for supplies, of commuting to a “essential” job, or whether that motorist is going to a house party (banned under the regs) or simply driving around because bored. If that last, why shouldn’t he, really? Someone in a car is not going to infect anyone by reason of simply driving around.
It is hard to escape the view that at least part of all of this is designed to create an atmosphere in which a fearful population submits to State orders. Of course, behind that is, also, the real threat from Coronavirus.
Despite the plaudits heaped upon Rishi Sunak for opening the gates of the money dam, I wonder what the outcome will be, a year or two down the line. Not good, I think. However, I shall examine that more in my (not yet published) blog on the socio-economic aspects of the virus crisis.
Sign of the times…
As blogged about previously, the police in the UK are gradually abandoning the population, especially the white English population. The police, behaving as a Poundland KGB, prefer to concentrate on political or socio-political “crime” such as “racist” tweets etc. Or now, “prioritizing lockdown”.
Co-incidence or conspiracy?
The Jewish lobby continues to destroy intellectual and historical-enquiry freedom
Mixed messages on the Coronavirus front
My drive around today
Went out not long before darkness fell. Intended to visit a chemist’s, only to find it shut by reason of truncated opening hours. Nuisance. Drove to small village shop a few miles further on. Near to its new 1800 closing time. No bread, but bought a little milk and some local asparagus. I noticed that some dry pasta was available. I myself have no need for any more, but it was heartening to see that not all had sold, even if only basic spaghetti. At least the shelves were not bare, except for the bread shelf (and even that had a sad and solitary roll still on sale).
As for other people: a few couples walking in the country lanes, a few solitary dog walkers too in the semi-suburbanized villages, a few bicyclists. No one at the little shop noted above. Roads very quiet, even the nearest rural A-road. No sign of police activity of any kind, even in the local town. General impression of an almost-closed-down society.
Poignant, but what struck me was the “two degrees” bit. Why does someone with two degrees work in a pub (for years)? The answer —unless the degrees were only completed out of interest— must be that, from the strictly vocational/job point of view, “degrees” (an outdated mediaeval concept anyway) are now next to worthless on the open jobs market (even though quite ordinary jobs now “require” a “degree”). When everyone and his dog has a degree, what is a degree worth? Not much.
The corollary to the above is that one must ask why the State should subsidize those educational qualifications that are valueless, in direct terms, to the State and society.