“Being vaccinated does NOT make you significantly less likely to become infected with Covid, or to transmit to others if infected. It may [or may not] reduce severity of symptoms for a few months for some people. That’s it.” — Dr. André De Lorenzi, MD and Infectious Disease Specialist
  • The following screenshots show good doctors and medical professionals, without an agenda, trying to help human beings and do good work and remain true to the Hippocratic oath they took and took seriously. Their work is being deliberately obfuscated and suppressed, and in so obfuscating and suppressing, the criminal harms taking place as a direct and demonstrable result of experimental Gene Transfer injections are growing.

    As I wrote earlier:

    Truth needs no propaganda. Truth holds its own, and it is unstoppable and irrepressible. This overwhelming fact is what the propagandists have working against them, and it is a significant fact.

    Freedom is everything.

    Even now, many people who for over a year have tried to mock and ridicule out of all existence the paramount importance of human freedom — putting in quotes, for instance, terms like “your rights” and “your freedoms” (e.g. “To hell with your ‘rights’ and your ‘freedoms!’ People are dying!”) — even now, I reiterate, many of these same mockers and ridiculers, who for well over a year have wanted to hear nothing about the effectiveness and success of early-treatment protocols, despite the fact that “people are dying” (and dying more now from the Gene Transfer vaccines they’re pushing, as well as the slew of Covid variants that the vaccines have selected for), are glimpsing, in the sudden construction of quarantine camps and the endless lockdowns and mandates which also entail sudden police intrusions into private homes and private lives and private spaces, at any given time, without warning or reason or cause or explanation or recourse, glimpsing what societies are actually like without individual freedom: the freedom to associate, the freedom to exchange, to mingle, to be alone, the freedom to protest, to speak, to gather, to move about, to be left alone or to engage in voluntary transactions — in short, the freedom to exist.

    In societies that do not have such freedoms, humans exist only by permission, not by right, and these permissions may be legally revoked at any time, for any reason or for no reason. Just as in such societies, individual human beings can be imprisoned and even murdered for any reason or for no reason — as precisely has happened all throughout history when authoritarianism and totalitarianism has replaced individual autonomy and individual freedom.

    Freedom is everything.

    Freedom, I repeat, is everything.

    It is only when people are by law no longer free that the paramount importance of individual freedom comes into sharper focus — by which time it is too late.

    It’s then that individuality and individual thought is replaced by Borg-like obedience and an automaton’s way of processing thoughts and of acting.

    That is my definition of hell.

    But there are many countries right now — like Botswana, like Japan, like Romania, like Denmark — who are taking a beautiful and principled stand against the World Health Organization and the explicit eugenics programs promoted by the Gates Foundation and so many other elitists; taking a stand as well against the sheer obviousness and stupidity of this entire propaganda campaign, which has grown stale and cliche, the sheer stark-raving-madness of it all, the deadly farce that it is, which it is now becoming increasingly clear will never end unless individual people put a stop to it.

    Politico-economic policies are always and only the result — never the cause — of a long sequence of ethical and epistemological ideas, which are in turn the result of metaphysical ideas. Yet it is politico-economic policies which for each individual human being possess the most destructive — or beneficial — potential.

    Political power is the power to shape human action.

    Since all human action is preceded by thought, the one who is politically powerful is so because her political might and influence is ultimately sourced in the power of ideas.

    It is ideas only that can confer upon a person the enduring power to influence the choices and actions of others —enduring, I say, because one can become a lasting leader of other human beings only if one is supported by ideas the acceptance of which makes other people willing to be led.

    This point is of vital significance.

    Power is for this reason not ultimately a physical thing but a moral-philosophical phenomena, which rests upon the subject’s sanction: the sanction, specifically, of the ideology held by the person or people in power.

    It is the distinguishing characteristic of the state to apply coercion, even to the point of imprisonment and violence (or its threat) against those who are neither willing to accept state-mandated decrees nor to act voluntarily in obeying them. Yet observe that even this physical oppression and violence, or its mere threat, is no less founded upon the power of ideas, insofar as she or he who advocates the application of violence needs the voluntary cooperation of at least some people, since a ruler can never rule by means of physical violence alone, but needs the ideological support of some group in order to subdue other groups — or, to put that another way:

    The despot must have a group of partisans who of their own accord obey the despot’s dictates. This obedience and support is the thing that provides the despot with the necessary means by which she or he is able to rule others. Whether the despot’s sway is long-lasting or short-lived depends entirely on the numerical relation of those who voluntarily support the despotism and those who do not.

    “Though a tyrant may temporarily rule through a minority if this minority holds superior arms and methods of force over the majority, in the long run a minority cannot keep the majority in subservience. The oppressed will rise up in rebellion and cast off the yoke of tyranny. Any system of government that would endure must therefore construct itself upon a system of ideas accepted by the majority” (Human Action, Ludwig von Mises, 1949).

    Thus are moral-ideological forces the true forces that form the foundation of government and bequeath to rulers their legal power and sanction: the sanction and power to use force and violence against any renegade individuals or dissident minority-groups made up of renegade individuals.

    It is for this precise reason also that the deterioration of independent thought and its corollary — the deterioration of the critical faculty — is among the most serious threats to true civilization, making it, in addition to everything else, horrifyingly simple for people in positions of power to convince people of outright falsehoods.

    This is the reason we see people on both so-called sides of the aisle now sincerely believe it when they’re told that they can only be free if they relinquish their freedom — economic freedom first and foremost of all — in one form or another, whether it be in the name of “privilege,” God, equality, the environment, SARS-CoV2, or some other equally fallacious thing, including the known, as well as the yet-to-be invented. The specifics are ultimately immaterial.

    The logical elaboration of this ideology is that if people willingly cede their freedoms — putting more power into the hands of political elites and bureaucrats thereby, all of whom know better than we ourselves, as individuals, how best to conduct our lives and our affairs — we will, at last, only then contribute more fully and ably to that vaguely defined entity known as the “common good.”

    Whiskey Wisdom, The Art of Independent Thinking, Chapter 10: THE ONE WHO SPENDS HER LIFE EDUCATING HERSELF


    September 4th, 2021 | journalpulp | 3 Comments |

About The Author

Ray Harvey

I was born and raised in the San Juan Mountains of southwestern Colorado. I've worked as a short-order cook, construction laborer, crab fisherman, janitor, bartender, pedi-cab driver, copyeditor, and more. I've written and ghostwritten several published books and articles, but no matter where I've gone or what I've done to earn my living, there's always been literature and learning as the constant in my life.

3 Responses and Counting...

  • L 09.04.2021

    “In my opinion, if, as the result of certain combinations, Kepler’s or Newton’s discoveries could become known to people in no other way than by sacrificing the lives of one, or ten, or a hundred or more people who were hindering the discovery, or standing as an obstacle in its path, then Newton would have the right, and it would even be his duty… to remove those ten or a hundred people, in order to make his discoveries known to mankind. It by no means follows from this, incidentally, that Newton should have the right to kill anyone he pleases, whomever happens along, or to steal from the market every day. Further, I recall developing in my article the idea that all… well, let’s say, the lawgivers and founders of mankind, starting from the most ancient and going on to the Lycurguses, the Solons, the Muhammads, the Napoleons, and so forth, that all of them to a man were criminals, from the fact alone that in giving a new law, they thereby violated the old one, held sacred by society and passed down from their fathers, and they certainly did not stop at shedding blood either, if it happened that blood (sometimes quite innocent and shed valiantly for the ancient law) could help them.”
    ― Fyodor Dostoevsky, Crime and Punishment

  • Half-mad Raskolnikov. He didn’t quite have the courage of his convictions, did he?

  • L

    That’s why I appreciate you. Thank you.

    It is a strangely appropriate monologue on the peculiar problem of morality that always faces science and government. Not all who are half-mad lack convictions.

Leave a Reply

* Name, Email, and Comment are Required

%d bloggers like this: