Covid Is a Social Construct
eugyppius.substack.com
eugyppius.substack.com
There may or may not be times when additional public safety measures must be taken: whether it’s for terrorism or illness. We can debate about the merits of taking off shoes at airports or wearing masks until the cows come home.
But one thing that’s clear is that these extraordinary measures, whatever is deemed important enough to exist, ought to be temporary and have an expiration date otherwise it likely will never end.
If it is up to the continuously wrong ruling class, they will never give up their powers.
After telling people that all they had to do was get fully vaccinated, now they're hinting that people will probably just need 1 booster. Once people internally bargain with themselves and buy into that, then the goalposts will get shifted again.
"Just 15 days to slow the spread" morphed into whatever this dystopia is, so we'll see.
I hope with every fiber of my being that I am laughably wrong.
This is poetry
I have no idea how people functioned before modern science; my brain could not cope.
Terrorism is also "invisible and everywhere" and yet 20 years later, people are still freaking out about a threat that is as dangerous to them as stairs or lightning. Clearly the point is that you can make up threats and fear people into submission. You are not healthy, you are pre-sick and a mass murderer if you meet other people!
Perfectly rounded off with the most delusional, revealing admission you can make in our modern era; "no idea how people functioned before modern science"... Jesus Christ, yeah. Maybe you can "use modern science" to figure out how they functioned before it? Especially during this farce, where the "modern science" collectively decided that viruses and pandemics are an entirely new discovery that has never existed in the previous literature before so none of our previous knowledge could be applied to it - "This virus is unlike anything we have ever seen". What a joke.
Cancer, Heart Disease, Diabetes are also 'invisible and everywhere' - and we test for them in the same way as he describes: doctors, labs etc..
Thankfully COVID tests are much cheaper, and you can absolutely obtain some for yourself if you want.
I'm all for rational skepticism but this piece is bizarre.
Their ignorance goes so far as to say
> This in Spring 2020 it was ironically the most alarmist regions, those that had imposed the strictest lockdowns nominally for the safety of the elderly, which ended up killing more elderly than anybody else, due to over-hospitalisation, criminal mistreatment of many Sars2 patients and poor, paranoid management of elderly cases.
What? People are dying in hospitals because there are not enough beds!
I just find it fascinating, and wonder how much is knowingly telling a story that they know some people want to hear, and how much is constructing a complicated justificaton for their pre-existing beliefs because their political philosophy simply had no answer to "How do you deal with a viral pandemic?".
If anything the main group he points at is bureaucrats, which in the West are not so much a leftist group as a career path in very centrist politics. The fact that he talks about social construction shows he's at least somewhat versed in postmodernism, which is generally associated with left and post-left thinking.
He does mention leftist elites, but I think he's more talking about the media narrative than some kind of conspiracy plot.
"China faked a Hollywood-style viral pandemic to undermine western political philosophy, and leaders of the world allowed themselves to be fooled because it conveniently grants them more power."
Liberal globalism advocated for keeping borders open no matter the cost and against any restrictions of social life at the beginning. The progressive Left miss-identified quarantine for all entering the country as political scare-mongering against foreigners. The right is still embarrassing itself on a daily basis, regarding the pandemic. Most of the elderly politicians in all sorts of countries, seem to be entirely unable to adapt to new situations, outside of their life-experienced frame of reference. All they have is the fixated-idea to tunnel through "back to normal times".
The International Institutions were revealed to be underfunded, thus easily subverted and mostly interested in turning the first world into a fortress as protective measures instead of helping.
Government policies for all types & forms of government meandered and flailed. It seems after several generations since the last pandemic, the experience and institutional knowledge had been wiped out to deal with it. I have no solution for this, but it seems that while theoretical knowledge remains, a correct response can not be inoculated with just that.
I honestly doubt that even with the Obama Playbook around and in use, the outcome would have been much different. The measures would have been taken half-assed and the actions crippled by cost- and corner-cutting.
Those with the most pandemic experience fared pretty well at the start (South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore mostly due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002%E2%80%932004_SARS_outbrea... ) - but even within these societies the nature of the beast was largely ignored by sub-cultures (religious or otherwise).
It seems that some things, we can only learn and remember, by suffering through it. I hope, that this does not also is the case for imperialistic induced world wars.
Creeping power and influence of fairly undemocratic globalist institutions and especially major multinational corporations that have far more power than any local government is a legit concern.
All of said - I do not like this article one bit.
It's really bad.
It's so bad that it should be considered for it's bad logic, more than anything the author has to say about face value.
There are lies, misrepresentations, logical fallacies in every paragraph.
He indicates that 'it's odd' that people can have 'good health but still have COVID', which is not odd at all.
He misrepresents the nature of testing: " Consider all those people these past months who have recovered from a respiratory illness, with fever and cough, without ever being tested." - insinuating in the following sentence that somehow untested individuals with 'fever' are counted as COVID, which is definitely not the case.
The author seems incapable of grasping that having a viral load means 'you have COVID' and importantly - can spread it.
"Central to the definition of Covid, is that mass testing programs be the only means of defining the extent of the disease, assessing the success of the technocratic response, and the virtue of the compliant population. Covid is not like other communicable diseases, which are diagnosed mostly in private, according to likely symptoms. "
Is completely false.
COVID is tested much like every other such disease, using tests made available for private and public, your doctor will apply them just the same and it's ludicrous to suggest a doctorw would only diagnose 'based on symptoms' if there were simple and accessible tests at the ready.
". There is no general unified Covid with a limited set of properties. Attempts to fix its characteristics dissolve in a pool of contradictory evidence. "
Yes, this is called Science. It's a new disease and our understanding of it changes rapidly.
"Reinfection aligns neatly with established doctrine about the inadequacy of our natural defences. "
No, it's just a common thing that happens in viral diseases.
" Remember that this all started with "two weeks to crush the curve,"
Yes, we had very short period of time to change behaviours to bring the R0 down. It mostly worked.
"To begin with, vaccines, while indeed extra-natural, merely stimulate natural immunity. If we may hope for a vaccine, it is unclear why we cannot let some of our natural immune systems join the fight. "
This is a totally nonsensical and contradictory statement. We know some people are infected, and we adjust that into our policy. We also know it's of much less risk to children and that they do actually represent some threshold of natural immunity.
He uses the term 'extra-natural' in different situations without any context, it has no meaning.
It's really difficult to parse through this really terrible reasoning, I'm all for contrarian arguments but this is a terrible piece.
Taiwan, Hong Kong, Singapore, China, S. Korea? Arguably even Japan pragmatically.
Basically all non-Western states with modern economies have take roughly similar actions, some of them much more stringent.
The Brood X Cicada comes out of the ground ~1y after human "induced" disaster:
1987 After competitive rush of capitalism fills the mind of Diatlov with aggression causing Chernobyl
2003 after 3 NYC commerce office buildings fell Perfectly into their foundations, Iraq war begins, and first social media surveillance tools deployed
2021 after natural/deployed respiratory illness for stagnant daily routines for bodies that quit moving. "Zombie" media entertainment uses these citizens as reference.
"Give them bread and circuses and they will never revolt." -Juvenal
We used to be pioneers but the machines made us docile.
Matter of fact we didn't lockdown in the early 00s for SARS.
Further it seems to me that the progress in prolonging human lifespan and the collapsing levels of interpersonal violence are not worth it if the price to pay is constantly living in fear.
Whether we like it or not we must admit that the self -confidence and arrogance that causes a bar brawl comes from the same part of the brain that compels people to publish their long odds theory of everything or a moon shot company.
Which is incidentally the same part of the brain which gives people the arrogance to think that COVID is a nothingburger and they'd never catch it , and if they ever catch it they'd never die from it.
People thought that the castration of Western society would have been a free lunch. There is no free lunch out there.
People are extremely scared about everything nowadays.
There have been thousands of COVID like viruses in the history of civiliaztion and they aren't even recorded because it's a rounding error in the metric that matters the most but that nobody wants to use:
Months trimmed off the life expectancy of the deceased (ex-COVID)
Huh? Isn't the life-expectancy of the deceased zero?
This post was so well-written! Despite the fact that it’s somewhat against the mainstream narrative and thus will never gain wide recognition.
This comparison between HIV/AIDS and SarsCov2/Covid is probably the most damning indictment of society’s mismanagement of this virus.
Yes. The fact that gay sex was already illegal in many places just made it less controversial.
> Was the gay community ever blamed for the AIDS epidemic and scolded by public health bureaucrats for worsening statistics?
Yes. What was different then was that people dying due to "the gay flu" was not seen as a bad thing. And note that those who had HIV were not a threat to the public around them (barring those who came into contact with their bodily fluids), unlike for Covid.
> Were gay bars and bath houses ever targeted for closure or curfews or—imagine!—contact tracing, to flatten the curve?
Yes. https://www.nytimes.com/1985/11/08/nyregion/city-closes-bar-...
With particular regard to contact tracing, nowadays failure to tell your partner if you know you are HIV positive is a crime, and healthcare providers are required to report the sex partners of positive individuals.
Well, I mean, except that:
(1) It seems to assume a lot of false similarities between HIV and SARS-COV-2, and
(2) It explicitly takes false positions on every question it asks and then answers about the response to HIV (literally everything it says was not done was, in fact, done), and
(3) It fails to recognize that the HIV pandemic itself was badly mismanaged, so that even if it wasn't wrong on analogizing the pandemics and wasn't wrong on all the facts of the HIV response, it would still have no probative value on the point it tries to make.