China is catching up fast...

 

Difficult not to compare the new Chinese radio telescope in the Guizhou province and the old American Arecibo telescope in Puerto Rico which just crumbled two weeks ago and not draw more general conclusions. 

As the article below explains, the rise of China is unstoppable, surfing on a wave of scientists and engineers which guaranties that over the coming decades, most innovations will be Chinese. 

With this, unavoidably will come the Chinese way of doing things, softly at first then less and less so as time goes on. But looking at what is going on right now in the West, the question is: Will we give up on freedom so fast that our new Chinese social scores or their equivalent make little difference when they are implemented?

 

In a sort of distributed Ouija board enterprise, intellectuals these days predict the likely evolution of relations between China and America. These authorities do not wallow in consistency. China will take over the world. Alternatively, China will collapse because of a surfeit of men, because the different linguistic regions will become independent, because their debt bubble will explode, because the Chinese can’t “innovate,” and because the population is aging and there won’t be enough workers. And of course, the American military will remain regnant over the planet and nearby galactic space. The US will always stay ahead. Or it won’t. This seems to cover the basses.

Well, maybe. But if you watch what the Chinese are actually doing, you may get the impression that China is largely ignoring the American military and letting the US spend itself to death while Beijing focuses on commerce, business, R-and-D, commerce, the economy, education, technology, and more commerce. You might additionally get the idea that China is a confident, well-governed, energetic people on a roll and doing quite well in the inventive department. The snippets below may support this impression of technical and economic vitality.

The future? An asleep thought (I presume this is the opposite of “woke”): demographics is destiny. America draws its scientists and engineers from roughly 200,000,000 STEM-capable whites. Blacks and Latinos contribute, if not negligibly, then almost so. China depends on a billion STEM-capable Han Chinese. These are the people who dominate America’s elite technical high schools and universities. Thus, it can potentially put five times as many scientists and engineers to work on tech work. As America’s schools deteriorate under the assault of social-justice warriors, China expands its already-rigorous schooling. Add that psychometricians put the East Asian IQ about five points higher than that of Eurowhites. Thus, many more and somewhat smarter STEM people from demanding universities against fewer and less intelligent from inferior schools. Then add stable, focused government versus rule by chaos. Arguably, massive Chinese technological superiority might seem likely.

Increasingly America does not compete with China, but strongarms it because it cannot compete. For example, in Five G China is ahead in technology, manufacturing capacity, and turnkey systems. Unable to produce an equivalent product, Washington banned Huawei Five G in the US and has twisted arms to keep countries that it controls from using Huawei. Seeing that Huawei had very attractive smartphones that would have competed with Apple, it banned these also. What America can’t do, it seeks to keep anybody else from doing.

WSJ: “US vs. China in Five G: The Battle Isn’t Even Close

HONG KONG—By most measures, China is no longer just leading the U.S. when it comes to 5G. It is running away with the game. China has more 5G subscribers than the U.S., not just in total but per capita. It has more 5G smartphones for sale, and at lower prices, and it has more-widespread 5G coverage. Connections in China are, on average, faster than in the U.S., too…By year’s end, China will have an estimated 690,000 5G base stations—boxes that blast 5G signals to consumers—up and running across the country .”

Techies can argue C band versus millimeter waves but I will bet that the Chinese, nothing if not commercially agile, will have Five G up and running in factories and the IoT and everywhere else while American pols rattle on about how China is an Existential Threat and the Pentagon needs more money for Space Command and diversity is more important than schooling anyway.

The shifting balance may already be visible. For example, America used to make superb aircraft such as the SR-71 and the F-16. Now it has the F-35, an engineering horror. The Boeing 737 MAX, its flagship product, has been grounded internationally because of poor engineering, second-rate software, and corporate lying about both.

America invented the microcircuit, and once dominated its manufacture. Today, American companies cannot make the seven nanometer chips now used in high-end telephones, and certainly not the five nanometer chips now coming online. Neither can China. Both countries buy them from Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company, TSMC, Interestingly, the Taiwanese are genetically and culturally Chinese. Washington has strongarmed TSMC into ceasing to sell to Huawei—the US still can’t make high end chips. Recently it strongarmed TSMC into agreeing to build a semiconductor fab in Arizona. Because America can’t.

Then there is TikTok, a hugely popular Chinese video app that threatened to break America’s lock on social media. Unable to compete, Washington decided simply to confiscate it on grounds that it might be used to spy on Americans. (Chinese intelligence is deeply interested in your daughter’s video of her cat.)

Parenthetically, technology seems to be shifting toward East Asia, with America being less ahead in things in which it is ahead and behind in others. Did I mention demographics?

• “COMAC’s Hydrogen Fuel Test Plane Completes Ten Flights”

Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China. Airlines are looking hard at hydrogen as a replacement for petroleum with no carbon emission.

China chooses landing site for its Tianwen-1 Mars rover. Whether the lander, currently en route, will land or crash and burn remains to be seen—it is China’s first time out, so to speak. In either case, that the country, forty years ago arguably the poorest in the world and thinking that making pencils was high-tech, has built a Mars lander is, well, weird.

• “Electric planes closer to reality with China’s first flight”

“Four-seater electric aircraft makes first flight in north-eastern Chinese city of Shenyang”

Good for 180 miles, say the Chinese, expect more with improvements in batteries. Intended for short-haul flights, deliveries.

• “China rolls out Long March 5 rocket for Chang’e 5 moon sample-return mission launch”

Impressive engineering, at least if it works, but not revolutionary. What is impressive is that so many tech advances come rapidly. at night and end up betting on a bar fight. My guy loses. How do I pay you a hundred bucks? Cash? Don’t have it. Check? Don’t have one with me, and you would have to go to a bank to cash it. ATM? Late at night in a probably dangerous city. And so on. With WeChat Pay or Alipay, my phone gives the money to your phone in perhaps as much as two minutes. In China, four of five transactions are by mobile app. It works, and is fantastically convenient, because everybody has one or the other, and they are universally accepted.

Those who follow China soon notice that when Beijing needs to decide something, it does, without fifteen years of talking, congressional infighting, and interminable lawsuits. When it decides that something is important, it does it. Right now. Commercially, the Chinese are quick and cutthroat. They have been called the Jews of Asia. And only a billion of them.

“Hualong One (HPR 1000) is the 3rd-generation nuclear power brand to which China has exclusive intellectual property rights.“

Washington tries to cripple Chinese technological advance by denying access to intellectual property, driving Beijing to design its own, thus creating a competitor for American firms.

• “China Tops 110 Million Five G Users in Less Than a year”

• “China Replaces Russian Engine in J-10C Jet With Locally-made WS-10 Taihang”

“The WS-10 Taihang is China’s first high-performance, high-thrust turbofan engine with intellectual property rights, Chinese Central Television reported.” (The J-10 is a fighter plane.)

A serious weakness of Chinese technology has been the inability to make jet engines. It still can’t make engines for airliners. Yet they advance. “Intellectual property rights” matter because Washington will do anything it can to cripple the development of a country of which it is mortally terrified.

Impressive engineering, at least if it works, but not revolutionary. What is impressive is that so many tech advances come rapidly.

• Lenovo ranks No. 1 with most supercomputers on Top500 List

Chinese firm.

• How Does China’s Digital Yuan Work?

Various countries are toying with the idea of digital currency, but China seems most advanced, with several cities now in large-scale trials. Payments will be by mobile phone, with which the Chinese are familiar. It will not be a cryptocurrency, will not use blockchain, and will not require a bank account. This would make it appealing to the billions around the world who have smartphones but no bank account, and would tie them into a sort of distributed virtual China. Transfers will be instantaneous, avoiding the delays of the American-dominated SWIFT system and, at least potentially, allow bypassing of American sanctions. The downside will be vulnerability to detailed surveillance by China. For most people, to judge by online experience, convenience will outweigh concerns over privacy.

The digital yuan is typically Chinese in approach. Beijing decides to do something, figures out how, tests it and, if it works, runs with it. Boddaboom, boddabing, done. America would spend thirty years arguing, Wall Street banks would bribe congress to get control, different companies would squabble over standards, the ACLU would wade in about disparate impact, and conservatives would worry that the digital dollar might contain microchips to make them into communist slaves. (Wait. Maybe it’s vaccines that have the chips to make communist slaves.)

Much more speculative: suppose I go to Cancun, write a story on contract to Xinhua, email it to them, and payment in digital yuan appears in my phone. Being distracted, I might forget to report this to IRS. Let us say that hotels and stores serving Chinese tourists, who are getting thick on the ground, accept digital yuan. I would then be part of an ecosystem opaque to and independent of the US government.

Wilder still: Say that China sends five thousand workers to Zimbabwe to build a railroad, pays them in digital yuan that they can spend in a large company store. Local merchants, wanting some of the lucre, begin accepting the currency and Zimbabwean banks, sensing gravy, turn it into whatever Zimbabwe uses for money, for a cut. It becomes a de facto local currency as it is stable and usable outside of the country. The government might even decide to make it the, or a, national currency since it would be (a) reliable and not inflatable and (b) out from under American control.

But this may be delusional. And anyway, I am sure the Chinese haven’t thought of it.

• Xi sends congratulatory letter on success of 10,000-meter sea trial of manned submersible Fendouzhe

That’s 33,000 feet. This is not Guatemalan engineering. A country that has the technology, money, and curiosity to undertake such projects is likely to be tough competition. China can afford it because it has a for-profit economy while America runs a huge trade deficit and debases the coinage by printing money to support a military empire.

• World’s Biggest Ultra-High Voltage Line Powers Up Across China

(Bloomberg) –” State Grid Corp. of China has started up the world’s longest and most-powerful ultra-high voltage power line from its far northwest to the heavily populated east…The 1,100-kV direct-current Changji-to-Guquan project stretches 2,046 miles… The project… was approved in December 2015 and construction started the next month”

Stories of this sort are not sexy, except maybe to power engineers, but they are common in China and embody a lot of technology. Twelve gigawatts. Another one, kind of techy: “A libaba On The Bleeding Edge Of RISC-V With XT910.” Certainly interesting, possibly important, but too long to go into here.

All anecdotal, but enough anecdotes become a statistic, enough points a picture. Nuff said.

 

Data Science Visualization

 

Here's a superb Data Science Visualization I found on Twitter. It is interesting because it isn't hierarchical in importance and in doing so highlight fundamental parts of data science which are often left in the dark... 

COVID-19 Lockdowns: Liberty and Science (Part-2)

 

 

 This is a very long post which resumes almost everything about a year of Covid-19 so I have divided it into 2 parts. This is part 2.

COVID-19 Lockdowns: Liberty and Science by Ammo.com‘s lead writer, Sam Jacobs, originally appeared in Thought Grenades, the blog at LibertasBella.com.

COVID-19 Lockdowns: Liberty and Science

How Dangerous Is COVID? Not Very.

On the flip side of this are the large number of “COVID deaths” which are actually attributable to some other cause. We’re not talking about an elderly person with chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder pushed over the edge by the Chinese Coronavirus. We’re talking about people who died of gunshot wounds, got into motorcycle accidents, fell off a ladder or had a drug-related heart attack while a police officer kneeled on their neck who were counted as COVID deaths.

We’re talking about people who died of gunshot wounds, got into motorcycle accidents, fell off a ladder or had a drug-related heart attack while a police officer kneeled on their neck who were counted as COVID deaths.

With fat government subsidies for COVID cases, it’s unsurprising that hospitals and other healthcare facilities would diagnose people as having COVID who actually did not.

We know very little about COVID and how it is spread, but here are a few things we do know: First, we know that there are a number of comorbidities that make it far more dangerous, one of which is obesity, which increases the risk of COVID death by a whopping 48 percent. But even that might not be as dangerous as it first sounds: In California where they have had 18,000 deaths, a scant two of these were people under the age of 18, one with underlying health conditions.

A much more important factor is age. A large study conducted on data from cases in South Korea, Italy, China, and Spain, three of the early breeding grounds for the virus, found a 0 percent death rate for those under the age of 9, The death rate didn’t climb above 1 percent until the age of 50-59 — and then only in China and Italy and then only just barely, at 1.3 and 1 percent respectively.

It climbed slightly above 1 percent for all four countries in the 60-69 age bracket, staying below 2 percent in South Korea and Spain, but below 4 percent for Italy and China. Death rates then spike dramatically over the age of 70.

This tracks with flu deaths over the 2017-18 “flu season” in the United States: Very few deaths under the age of 18 (a little over 600), slightly more for 18-49 (2803), another modest jump between 50 and 64 (6,751) and then a huge spike over the age of 65 (over 50,000). Of course, there are more cases of the flu, which has a lower death rate overall: The overall death rate for COVID-19 is 1.5 percent, regardless of age, with an average season’s flu killing about .1 percent of everyone who gets it.

Closer to home, we’re finding that there’s absolutely nothing to be concerned about for most healthy people. The COVID survival rates according to the CDC are 99.997 percent for those under the age of 20, 99.98 percent for those between the ages of 20 and 49, 99.5 percent for those between the age of 50 and 69 and even 94.6 percent for those over the age of 70.

These numbers include people with comorbidities such as respiratory diseases. And even these numbers are likely off, as only 6 percent of all COVID deaths are attributed to COVID alone. The rest had, on average, at least two comorbidities.

The average death rate annually for the flu is about .1 percent.

It’s worth noting that this data all comes from the early stages of the pandemic when medical professionals had little way of treating the disease other than ventilating — and thus, probably killing — severe cases.

Now we know quite a bit more about therapeutics that aid in recovery. President Donald Trump, a clinically obese 74-year-old man, recovered from the disease in less than a week. There is ample evidence that the disease is becoming less deadly, not more. Death rates fall because of increased testing, but the median age of infection has likewise gone down.

Do Lockdowns And Masks Even Work?

All of this raises an important central question: Why do the elderly, those with underlying health conditions and the obese simply sequester themselves or take reasonable precautions rather than shutting down the world economy?

Indeed, there is mounting evidence that government intervention has, surprise of surprises, actually made things worse. As of November 18, 2020, there have been 34,058 COVID deaths in the state of New York. Of these, over 6,500 (or approximately one in seven total deaths) were nursing home deaths that were a direct result of Governor Andrew Cuomo’s policy of forcing nursing homes to accept COVID patients and lock them down with the vulnerable and uninfected.

This is a concrete example of government lockdown measures killing people. But you won’t hear about it in the controlled media.

What about the omnipresent masks that we are now seeing everywhere to the point where someone without a mask is seen as the strange one. They must work, of course!

But there is scant evidence that masks prevent the transmission of COVID or any other respiratory infection. In every randomized clinical trial ever conducted, there have been inconclusive findings that mask wearing aided in suppressing transmission of respiratory diseases. Studies generally rely upon fitted N95 respirators that must be sterilized after every use or surgical masks that should be thrown away. We have more evidence that typical masks cause headaches than that they prevent against COVID.

Compare this to what you see on your average trip to the grocery store: People wearing unfitted cloth masks that get occasionally cleaned — maybe. Many people don’t even bother to pull them up over their noses. Thus, most mask wearing is useless and little more than a form of social control or forced act of “solidarity.”

There’s magical thinking involved in the current mask mandates: If cases go up, it’s because people weren’t good little boys and girls and didn’t wear their masks. If they go down, everyone has been well behaved and gets to pat themselves on the back for wearing their face diaper.

Some evidence suggests that masks make people feel magically protected from the virus and thus they do not take common-sense precautions against all disease, such as handwashing, keeping fingers off the face, covering their nose when they sneeze and the like.

What this means at its root is that people are trading effective measures for ineffective theater. Mask reuse likewise increases infection rates and who among us isn’t guilty of that?

What’s more, studies suggest that people who wear the cloth masks, that are now virtually required to do anything outside one’s home, lead to an increase of flu-like symptoms — and thus create lots of COVID paranoia where there ought not to be any.

It was only in March that many experts were urging people not to wear masks at all, with this article from April likewise urging people to not wear masks.

There are also the “soft” effects of mask wearing. There is significant evidence to suggest that children living under COVID will have their emotional and psychological development severely stunted and warped thanks to mask orders. As if you needed another reason to pull your kids out of public school.

Indeed, we have a mountain of troubling data about the social effects of mass mask wearing that go back decades. Put simply, masks make people stupid, pliant and anti-social. Examples of findings from mask studies include:

• A 1976 study where people were more likely and required less pay to carry a sign reading “masturbation is fun” if they were masked.
• A 1979 study found children were more likely to take more than their allotted amount of Halloween candy if they were masked.
• A 1989 study found that masking led people to abandon defense mechanism and revert to more primitive psychological states.
• Studies conducted in 2005 and 2017 found neurological evidence inhibit both impulse control and identity formation, decreasing prefrontal cortex activity.
• Repeated studies have found that masking reduces blood flow to the brain.

A number of public figures have backed off of masking as a panacea, instead pushing it as an act of “social solidarity.” Sure, masks might not actually do anything — but what about feelings? British politicians Michael Gove and Nicole Sturgeon are indicative of this trend.

Your Social Betters Are Not Actually Afraid of COVID

But perhaps the best evidence that this is all just a bit of political theater is seeing how our media and political class actually behave when they think no one is watching.

Chris Cuomo, brother of Governor Andrew Cuomo, often referred to as “Fredo” due to paling in comparison with his brother, was quarantined for two weeks, not for abstract reasons, but because he was actually exposed to COVID. This didn’t stop him from leaving his house unmasked after he got tired of lifting fake weights on camera.

Bill De Blasio, the Mayor of New York with questionable connections to Communist organizations and a daughter in Antifa, was caught at the gym and didn’t feel even a twinge of shame about it, explaining that he needs to go to the gym, but you do not.

Lori Lightfoot, Mayor of Chicago, told Chicagoans to stay home for Thanksgiving. This didn’t stop her from taking to the streets following Joe Biden’s ersatz “victory” in the 2020 Presidential election to celebrate.

Gavin Newsome, Governor of California has presided over some of the harshest lockdowns in the nation, going so far as to shut off power and water to people who defy his lockdown diktats. He somehow finds time to dine out at the three Michelin star restaurant French Laundry with some of the top medical bureaucrats in the state.

He’s not the only governor who believes in “lockdowns for thee, but not for me.” Gretchen Whitmer from Michigan went as far as to threaten lockdown protesters with further lockdowns because of their protests. She is a bit of a poster child for the mediocre people who have appointed themselves COVID cops.

Whitmer put in some of the most restrictive lockdowns in the country, then attempted to use them to blackmail Michiganders into voting for Joe Biden. In November, she began threatening jail time for businesses who did not record personal details of their customers for her personal perusal. Her husband attempted to throw his weight around to get his boat moved into place for vacation early in violation of state orders.

Nancy Pelosi’s lockdown-violating haircut is well known. Less known is that she planned to carry on with the reception dinner for new members of Congress until her plan was exposed and widely mocked at a time when she and other political elites were telling average Americans to skip Thanksgiving and Christmas.

The elephant in the room, of course, were the BLM riots of the summer of 2020. In cities such as New York, Portland (where riots literally went on every night for months), and Seattle (where insurrectionists took over several blocks of the capitol district and demanded ethnic cleansing of whites from the area), there were leftist riots growing out of a media manufactured panic centered around the death of George Floyd, a criminal who died of a drug overdose while resisting arrest and whose death is officially listed as COVID.

These riots were fine, indeed necessary and it wasn’t just politicians who were saying so. The medical profession also chimed in, predictably declaring that “racism” was the “real pandemic.”

Compare with the reaction to anti-lockdown protests. Those seeking a consolidation of power upward in the form of breaking police unions and disbanding local police departments, who terrorized small businesses and local communities, not just in big blue cities, but also in places like Kenosha, Wisconsin and Lancaster, Pennsylvania — the latter of these sensibly held rioters on $1 million bail.

The message is simple and clear: Freedom fighters are superspreaders. The freelance goons of government repression and Big Tech labor discipline enforcement are free to do as they will. Their “protests” aren’t just safe, but vitally important.

The Coming COVID Police State

There is no other term for the COVID regime than a nascent police state. Governors and bureaucrats, without any legislative authority have demanded that people remain in the homes at their personal whim for a disease with a 99.9% survival rate.

Australia is an example of a country that has moved very firmly and decisively into police state territory. Zoe Buhler, a 28-year-old pregnant mother was arrested, handcuffed and had her electronic devices confiscated for the crime of posting about an anti-lockdown protest on Facebook in a town with four active cases. The name of the crime? “The planning and encouragement of protest activity.” The punishment? Mrs. Buhler is looking at 15 years in prison.

You can watch the video of Mrs. Buhler’s arrest here. It should make your stomach turn. The Premier of Victoria (equivalent to the governor of this Australian state) allowed and encouraged BLM protests of up to 10,000 that summer.

In Victoria, as elsewhere in Australia, as well as in many American states, people are not allowed to leave their houses except for reasons deemed “essential” by their government, then only for so long and between certain hours and you might need a hall pass explaining to officers where you are going and why you are going there.

Among people harassed for the crime of sitting down on park benches include a law professor with cerebral palsy and her 70-year-old mother and a heavily pregnant woman while a young tradesman was harassed and fined for not having his papers filled out properly.

With new lockdowns rolling out that involve requirements to wear masks in your own home and a prohibition on all visitors, it is clear that some are attempting to bring back the bad old days of Spring 2020, but with even more restriction and enforcement.

Thinking about protesting? Forget about being arrested and manhandled by police. If your protests get too large, as they have done in Germany, the police will turn fire hoses on you like you’re in Alabama in 1956.

And then there’s the prospect of the vaccine, two versions of which will soon be available, if not mandatory.

Could the coronavirus vaccine be “the Mark of the Beast?” One doesn’t have to be religious to see it as such. Public health officials are already boasting that no one will be able to work, travel or go to school without this vaccine that was rushed through approvals for political theater.

Former Vice President Joe Biden hasn’t ruled out making the vaccine mandatory, though the federal government will likely just punt enforcement to large corporations, similar to how they use Big Tech to manage information on the Internet and Big Finance to take banking services away from dissidents.

Bill Gates has called not only for mandatory vaccines, but also mandatory tracking of people who have received them.

It’s worth noting that “asymptomatic transmission,” the notion that people who don’t know they’re sick are passing the disease around and thus, the entire basis of mask mandates and lockdowns, is patently false.

Are our elites deliberately conspiring to instill fear or are they just idiotic dupes? Probably a little from Column A and a little from Column B. But one thing is clear — the economic, political, academic, and media elites in this country are using a disease with a 99.9% survival rate to transform the country into a police state. Patriots and freedom lovers must resist this by any means necessary.

One way to do this is by patronizing local businesses who are openly defying mask mandates. But in many cases you can circumvent these laws — particularly at big box stores — by saying :”I have a health concern.” The law prevents them from asking anything further and risk averse large companies generally won’t for fear of a lawsuit or an Americans with Disabilities Act or HIPAA complaint.

 

COVID-19 Lockdowns: Liberty and Science (Part-1)

 

 

 This is a very long post which resumes almost everything about a year of Covid-19 so I have divided it into 2 parts. This is part 1.

COVID-19 Lockdowns: Liberty and Science by Ammo.com‘s lead writer, Sam Jacobs, originally appeared in Thought Grenades, the blog at LibertasBella.com.

COVID-19 Lockdowns: Liberty and Science

The Chinese Coronavirus (COVID-19) hit American shores — officially, anyway, there is significant evidence that it arrived earlier — in late January 2020. The American public was then told that a two-week shutdown of the economy would “flatten the curve,” relieving the pressure on hospital intensive care units and saving lives in the long run.

The average American, including conservatives, being people of good faith, complied, thinking that this was a common-sense measure that would save lives in the wake of a new and mysterious pandemic.

But two things quickly happened: First, the goalposts moved. No longer was it enough to “flatten the curve.” Now we were to be locked down until there was a cure.

No longer was it enough to “flatten the curve.” Now we were to be locked down until there was a cure.

Even the cure was not enough for some figures like the lionized-by-liberals Dr. Anthony Fauci — we would continue to be locked down even after a vaccine had been rammed through the approvals process with limited testing. When would we be allowed out by our masters? No one could answer this.

Second, there was an intensification of the authoritarian measures. Some states, aided by Big Tech, introduced “contact tracing” where people had to sign in with extensive personal information if they wanted to, for example, eat out at a restaurant. This was so that, in the event of infection with COVID-19, the state health department would be able to track and trace everyone you had contact with.

We should add that a third thing didn’t so much “happen” but was discovered: As it turns out unless you are old (over the age of 65), morbidly obese or suffer from a complicating disorder (such as diabetes or asthma), COVID-19 was little more than a bad cold or the flu.

What’s more, there was a financial incentive from the government to mark deaths as COVID-19 deaths when they were not. George Floyd, the man who died while being arrested by the Minneapolis Police Department, sparking riots over the summer of 2020, is officially a COVID-19 death because he died with COVID-19, despite not dying of COVID-19.

By the fall of 2020, the facts became clear: While COVID-19 was dangerous for select populations, it had an extremely low death rate among the young and healthy.

The generous or naive might say that the COVID-19 health measures are misguided attempts to protect the population. A more hard-nosed or cynical person likely thinks that these measures are a deliberate attempt to enact totalitarian measures leveraging public panic.

This, of course, would not be the first time the government and its toadies took advantage of such a panic, with the 9/11 attacks presenting a recent example of such.

We believe that COVID-19 measures are little more than a cynical power grab. We also believe that they have no basis in “the science” often breathlessly invoked by the toadies of this power grab.

In this article, we will make a compelling case that there is nothing scientific about this attack on the individual civil liberties of Americans. As Canadian Dr. Roger Hodkinson, a top pathologist, virologist, and CEO of a biotech company manufacturing COVID tests said, “this (COVID-19) is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting public.”

 

Who Is Hurt By Lockdowns… And Who Isn’t?

Before launching into specifics about “the science” of lockdowns, it is worth discussing who was impacted by lockdowns and who wasn’t. Despite the rhetoric from the political and media class about how “we are all in this together,” there is clearly no “we” and there are different impacts on different people.

First, let’s discuss the American and international media elites. These jobs are largely done remotely and, where they are not customarily performed so, can easily be transitioned to be done remotely. Then there is the small matter of the political class of bureaucrats who receive their paychecks whether they perform any ostensible “work” — to say nothing of obtaining results — or not.

Unsurprisingly, these are two groups heavily invested in both lockdowns and in policing the behavior of ordinary citizens. Compare with the working- and middle-class Americans who do not see a dime unless they actually show up to work, work which often cannot be done under the restrictive and arbitrary rules of the lockdowns.

While one can write clickbait articles about how anti-mask and anti-lockdown protesters are agents of white supremacy from the comfort of one’s own home, the same cannot be said for tasks like construction, manufacturing, many forms of retail sales or hospitality.

This isn’t just a matter of a few people missing out on a few weeks of work. CNBC host Jim Cramer has noted that the Chinese Coronavirus pandemic led to one of the biggest wealth transfers in all of American history. Wall Street cleaned up at the expense of Main Street.

Small businesses shuttered at an astonishing rate with restaurants and retailers hardest hit. All told, 60 percent of business closures were expected to be permanent, for a total of over 100,000 businesses.

While Main Street businesses were locked down, Amazon was making a killing — all while Jeff Bezos’ vanity blog, the Washington Post was pushing lockdown policies. Walmart, Lowe’s, and Target were likewise seeing booming profits.

This is emblematic of the massive transfer of wealth from small Main Street businesses to Big Tech and the financial sector. Indeed, the tale of the Chinese coronavirus in total might well be described as a massive upward consolidation of power.

The point of all this is to point out that there is a massive social and economic cost to the lockdowns that is borne entirely by the plebeians and not at all by the political and media elites who push the lockdowns hard.

People’s lives have been ruined by the lockdown. And while the projected increase in suicide rates has thus far failed to materialize, why does someone have to kill themselves for us to be concerned about how COVID-19 has impacted their lives?

Further, we have evidence that people die of “despair” — effectively giving up on life and failing to perform adequate self-care, overdosing on drugs or other similar types of deaths — at an alarming rate during the pandemic lockdowns.

Indeed, there is even a mathematical formula for this, whereby there is an expected 5,300 to 10,000 deaths for every 1 percent of unemployment.  Unemployment during COVID lockdowns peaked at 14.7 percent, which would be an expected excess death total of between 77,910 and 147,000.

The COVID lockdowns of Spring 2020 saw an uptick in a number of other serious conditions. Increased suicide was one, but also drug overdoses, alcohol-related illness, tuberculosis infections and on the non-lethal side of things, increased alcohol abuse generally as well as increased spousal and child abuse.

Delayed cancer screenings were another problem during the lockdowns. The United Kingdom, which has socialized medicine, believes that there are tens of thousands of deaths related to delayed treatment because of COVID alone.

Conservative news and opinion website Revolver has conducted an extensive study of just how impacted American quality of life has been by COVID lockdowns, in terms of actual months of life lost. They concluded that over 10 times as much life has been lost due to COVID lockdowns than due to the disease itself.

The Revolver study is largely based on “back of the envelope” type calculations, but is still worth reading to get a sense of the scope of how COVID-19 lockdowns have negatively impacted the lives of Americans significantly more than the disease itself.

The Great Barrington Declaration, signed by over 7,000 scientists, virologists, and infectious disease experts believes that lockdowns are destroying “at least seven times as much life” as the disease itself and that in the United States and the United Kingdom, there is “irreparable damage” being done.

The declaration notes clearly that “seven times as much damage” is the absolute minimum, putting a more realistic figure at 90 times.

There is another metric worth mentioning in our quest to quantify how bad the lockdown has been for non-sick people. Global debt has ballooned, growing by $20 trillion since the lockdowns began, according to the Institute of International Finance. This is thought to be the biggest increase in debt in the world’s history

Perhaps worst of all, none of this is ever explained to the public as being necessary. It is simply not acknowledged at all. It is an article of faith in the COVID cult that any measure that will prevent even a single death is worth it no matter what the social or economic consequences.

Covid-19: Warp Speed Ahead!

 

If you are not scared yet, you did not pay attention...

 Guest Post by John W. Whitehead

Warp Speed Ahead: COVID-19 Vaccines Pave the Way for a New Frontier in Surveillance

“Man’s conquest of Nature, if the dreams of some scientific planners are realized, means the rule of a few hundreds of men over billions upon billions of men.” —C. S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man

Like it or not, the COVID-19 pandemic with its veiled threat of forced vaccinations, contact tracing, and genetically encoded vaccines is propelling humanity at warp speed into a whole new frontier—a surveillance matrix—the likes of which we’ve only previously encountered in science fiction.

Those who eye these developments with lingering mistrust have good reason to be leery: the government has long had a tendency to unleash untold horrors upon the world in the name of global conquest, the acquisition of greater wealth, scientific experimentation, and technological advances, all packaged in the guise of the greater good.

Indeed, “we the people” have been treated like lab rats by government agencies for decades now: caged, branded, experimented upon without our knowledge or consent, and then conveniently discarded and left to suffer from the after-effects.

You don’t have to dig very deep or go very back in the nation’s history to uncover numerous cases in which the government deliberately conducted secret experiments on an unsuspecting populace, making healthy people sick by spraying them with chemicals, injecting them with infectious diseases and exposing them to airborne toxins.

Now this same government—which has taken every bit of technology sold to us as being in our best interests (GPS devices, surveillance, nonlethal weapons, etc.) and used it against us, to track, control and trap us—wants us to fall in line as it prepares to roll out COVID-19 vaccines that owe a great debt to the Pentagon’s Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency for its past work on how to weaponize and defend against infectious diseases.

The Trump Administration by way of the National Institute of Health awarded $22.8 million to seven corporations to develop artificial intelligence (AI), machine learning, etc., with smart phone apps, wearable devices and software “that can identify and trace contacts of infected individuals, keep track of verified COVID-19 test results, and monitor the health status of infected and potentially infected individuals.”

This is all part of Operation Warp Speed, which President Trump has likened to the Manhattan Project, a covert government effort spearheaded by the military to engineer and build the world’s first atomic bomb.

There is every reason to tread cautiously.

There is a sinister world beyond that which we perceive, one in which power players jockey for control over the one commodity that is a necessary ingredient for total domination: you.

By you, I mean you the individual in all your singular humanness.

Remaining singularly human and retaining your individuality and dominion over yourself—mind, body and soul—in the face of corporate and government technologies that aim to invade, intrude, monitor, manipulate and control us may be one of the greatest challenges before us.

These COVID-19 vaccines, which rely on messenger RNA technology that influences everything from viruses to memory, are merely the tipping point.

The groundwork being laid with these vaccines is a prologue to what will become the police state’s conquest of a new, relatively uncharted, frontier: inner space, specifically, the inner workings (genetic, biological, biometric, mental, emotional) of the human race.

If you were unnerved by the rapid deterioration of privacy under the Surveillance State, prepare to be terrified by the surveillance matrix that will be ushered in on the heels of the government’s rollout of this COVID-19 vaccine.

The term “matrix” was introduced into our cultural lexicon by the 1999 film The Matrix in which Neo, a computer programmer/hacker, awakens to the reality that humans have been enslaved by artificial intelligence and are being harvested for their bio-electrical energy.

Hardwired to a neuro-interactive simulation of reality called the “Matrix,” humans are kept inactive and docile while robotic androids gather the electricity their bodies generate. In order for the machines who run the Matrix to maintain control, they impose what appears to be a perfect world for humans to keep them distracted, content, and submissive.

Here’s the thing: Neo’s Matrix is not so far removed from our own technologically-hardwired worlds in which we’re increasingly beholden to corporate giants such as Google for powering so much of our lives. As journalist Ben Thompson explains:

Google+ is about unifying all of Google’s services under a single log-in which can be tracked across the Internet on every site that serves Google ads, uses Google sign-in, or utilizes Google analytics. Every feature of Google+—or of YouTube, or Maps, or Gmail, or any other service—is a flytrap meant to ensure you are logged in and being logged by Google at all times.

Everything we do is increasingly dependent on and, ultimately, controlled by our internet-connected, electronic devices. For example, in 2007, there were an estimated 10 million sensor devices connecting human utilized electronic devices (cell phones, laptops, etc.) to the Internet. By 2013, it had increased to 3.5 billion. By 2030, it is estimated to reach 100 trillion.

Much, if not all, of our electronic devices will be connected to Google, a neural network that approximates a massive global brain.

Google’s resources, beyond anything the world has ever seen, includes the huge data sets that result from one billion people using Google every single day and the Google knowledge graph “which consists of 800 million concepts and billions of relationships between them.”

The end goal? The creation of a new “human” species, so to speak, and the NSA, the Pentagon and the “Matrix” of surveillance agencies are part of the plan. As William Binney, one of the highest-level whistleblowers to ever emerge from the NSA, said, “The ultimate goal of the NSA is total population control.”

Mind you, this isn’t population control in the classic sense. It’s more about controlling the population through singularity, a marriage of sorts between machine and human beings in which artificial intelligence and the human brain will merge to form a superhuman mind.

“Google will know the answer to your question before you have asked it,” predicts transhumanist scientist Ray Kurzweil. “It will have read every email you’ve ever written, every document, every idle thought you’ve ever tapped into a search-engine box. It will know you better than your intimate partner does. Better, perhaps, than even yourself.”

The term “singularity”—that is, computers simulating human life itself—was coined years ago by mathematical geniuses Stanislaw Ulam and John von Neumann. “The ever accelerating progress of technology,” warned von Neumann, “gives the appearance of approaching some essential singularity in the history of the race beyond which human affairs, as we know them, could not continue.”

The plan is to develop a computer network that will exhibit intelligent behavior equivalent to or indistinguishable from that of human beings by 2029. And this goal is to have computers that will be “a billion times more powerful than all of the human brains on earth.”

Neuralink, a brain-computer chip interface (BCI), paves the way for AI control of the human brain, at which point the disconnect between humans and AI-controlled computers will become blurred and human minds and computers will essentially become one and the same. “In the most severe scenario, hacking a Neuralink-like device could turn ‘hosts’ into programmable drone armies capable of doing anything their ‘master’ wanted,” writes Jason Lau for Forbes.

Advances in neuroscience indicate that future behavior can be predicted based upon activity in certain portions of the brain, potentially creating a nightmare scenario in which government officials select certain segments of the population for more invasive surveillance or quarantine based solely upon their brain chemistry.

Case in point: researchers at the Mind Research Center scanned the brains of thousands of prison inmates in order to track their brain chemistry and their behavior after release. In one experiment, researchers determined that inmates with lower levels of activity in the area of the brain associated with error processing allegedly had a higher likelihood of committing a crime within four years of being released from prison. While researchers have cautioned against using the results of their research as a method of predicting future crime, it will undoubtedly become a focus of study for government officials.

There’s no limit to what can be accomplished—for good or ill—using brain-computer interfaces.

Researchers at Duke University Medical Center have created a brain-to-brain interface between lab rats, which allows them to transfer information directly between brains. In one particular experiment, researchers trained a rat to perform a task where it would hit a lever when lit. The trained rat then had its brain connected to an untrained rat’s brain via electrodes. The untrained rat was then able to learn the trained rat’s behavior via electrical stimulation. This even worked over great distances using the Internet, with a lab rat in North Carolina guiding the actions of a lab rat in Brazil.

Clearly, we are rapidly moving into the “posthuman era,” one in which humans will become a new type of being. “Technological devices,” writes journalist Marcelo Gleiser, “will be implanted in our heads and bodies, or used peripherally, like Google Glass, extending our senses and cognitive abilities.”

Transhumanism—the fusing of machines and people—is here to stay and will continue to grow.

In fact, as science and technology continue to advance, the ability to control humans will only increase. In 2014, for example, it was revealed that scientists have discovered how to deactivate that part of our brains that controls whether we are conscious or not. When researchers at George Washington University sent high frequency electrical signals to the claustrum—that thin sheet of neurons running between the left and right sides of the brain—their patients lost consciousness. Indeed, one patient started speaking more slowly until she became silent and still. When she regained consciousness, she had no memory of the event.

Add to this the fact that increasingly humans will be implanted with microchips for such benign purposes as tracking children or as medical devices to assist with our health. Such devices “point to an uber-surveillance society that is Big Brother on the inside looking out,” warns Dr. Katina Michael. “Governments or large corporations would have the ability to track people’s actions and movements, categorize them into different socio-economic, political, racial, or consumer groups and ultimately even control them.”

As I make clear in my book Battlefield America: The War on the American People, control is the issue.

In fact, Facebook and the Department of Defense are working to manipulate our behavior. In a 2012 study, Facebook tracked the emotional states of over 600,000 of its users. The goal of the study was to see if the emotions of users could be manipulated based upon whether they were fed positive or negative information in their news feeds. The conclusion of the study was that “emotional states can be transferred to others via emotional contagion, leading people to experience the same emotions without their awareness.”

All of this indicates a new path forward for large corporations and government entities that want to achieve absolute social control. Instead of relying solely on marauding SWAT teams and full-fledged surveillance apparatuses, they will work to manipulate our emotions to keep us in lock step with the American police state.

Now add this warp speed-deployed vaccine to that mix, with all of the associated unknown and fearsome possibilities for altering or controlling human epigenetics, and you start to see the perils inherent in blindly adopting emerging technologies without any restrictions in place to guard against technological tyranny and abuse.

It’s one thing for the starship Enterprise to boldly go where no man has gone before, but even Mr. Spock recognized the dangers of a world dominated by AI. “Computers make excellent and efficient servants,” he observed in “The Ultimate Computer” episode of Star Trek, “but I have no wish to serve under them.”

 

 When facing a paradigm shift, you have to change your frame of reference. In this respect, the individual and social dynamics are not the same...

 Guest Post by The Zman

Suspicious Minds

The Panic of 1873 is one of those events that was important at the time, but gets little discussion today. One reason is it does not fit modern narratives, as the villains and victims are not familiar today. It is one of those events that just seemed to happen and all of these years later it is not clear why it happened. There are lots of possible causes, but not one obvious cause. The resulting decades long depression, however, setup the 20th century and the two great industrial wars.

Another important event that gets little attention these days is the Great Fear that preceded the French Revolution. This was a period of panic, fear and conspiracy theories that swept rural France. Rumors circulated about various plots by the King and the aristocratic classes. For reasons no one has been able to explain, the peasants became increasingly sure the First Estate was about to overthrow the Third Estate, which eventually led to the revolution.

One of the many interesting things about the Bolshevik Resolution is the parallels between it and the French Revolution. Lenin was supposedly a student of the latter, so the lessons of it informed his decisions. Whether this is true or not is like so much else about our history. No one can say for sure now. One clear parallel, however, was the fear and panic preceding the February revolution. Suddenly, no one could trust anyone, so everyone was willing to believe the most outlandish tales.

The one thread that runs through economic panics, periods of civil unrest and great social upheavals like revolutions is the collapse in trust. It is not just the trust in individuals like a king or rich people. Human societies have been dealing with dishonest rulers for a long time. Monarchs come and go and people quickly adjust. When everyone knows the problem is a man or group of men, the solution to the problem is always at hand. No man, no more problems.

Panics are different. The fear is driven by the sense that nothing can be trusted, even one’s own assessment of events. In the case of economic panics, when a big powerful bank fails, impoverishing its clients, how can one trust anything about the financial system at that point? If all of a sudden the currency loses a big chunk of its value, how can anyone trust the economic system itself? In times when the foundations of the system lose credibility, no one can trust anything in the system.

A simple example makes this clear. If in your place of work, the software system used by the company suddenly produces errors, everyone raises an alarm. Work stops until the people in charge of the software either explain why the unexpected result is, in fact, correct or they find the cause and repair it. The software system holds the business rules of the company, so when those rules appear to be to failing, the logic of the business is called into question. The users begin to panic.

The reason people panic is that trust is built on predictability and predictability relies on rules and the orderly enforcement of those rules. When the rules stop making sense or their enforcement becomes arbitrary, it becomes impossible to predict the outcome of one’s actions. When you cannot trust the rules, you cannot trust the results of your own decisions, which means you cannot trust even yourself. When people can trust nothing they are willing to believe anything.

America appears to be in one of those moments when the people are suddenly thrust into a world in which they can no longer trust anything. The extraordinary events of the last election have caused tens of millions to question the system itself. Even those who voted for Biden are coming around to the idea that it was not on the level. Now we are seeing wild claims rocketing around the internet about what is happening to various people and what is happening behind the scenes.

The new rumors and claims are a bit nutty, but the fact is this has been building for a while, going back to before the prior election. Think back and there were all sorts of rumors about Hillary Clinton. People were willing to believe them because she is a terribly corrupt person and a notorious liar. You cannot trust anything that is said by her, her associates or anyone aligned with her. Today, everyone views the system the same way we have viewed Hillary Clinton for decades.

Another interesting aspect to this time of rumor and panic is the fact that the political class has not learned from the economic class. The lesson the bankers learned from the depression of 1929 is that one tool in their arsenal had to be a form of shock and awe as they addressed the crisis. The display of power by the central bank would fill the void of trust and quell the panic. This has proven to be highly effective, as we saw with the mortgage crisis in 2008. Everyone trusted the Fed.

Looking back at the French and Russian revolutions, there were points when the ruling class could have restored some trust in themselves and the system. They had opportunities to change the dynamic and bring people back into a political process they could trust. They failed to do so, often choosing a path that further eroded what little trust the people had in them. We’re seeing similar failures today, as the ruling class carries on as if nothing is happening outside their mansions.

This is how suspicious minds become radical minds. When people get suspicious over something like the election anomalies, they are looking for an explanation from a source they want to trust. When that natural authority mocks or dismisses their suspicion, that becomes part of a new narrative to explain both the anomalies and the unexpected reaction to it. That why the rumors are flying. Suddenly, tens of millions are in the market for a new narrative to explain what they are seeing.

Just as important, tens of millions of American are moving from a mode where they think the government has bad elements to a mode where the suspect the government itself is the bad element. When public trust in the system sharply declined a generation ago, the system had a solution. Reagan channeled that distrust into a reform effort that restored trust in the system. Today, the Pretender Biden and his coterie of flunkies and door holders is channeling that distrust into conspiracies.

The Digital 'Iron Curtain' Descends

 

 However you look at it, there is obviously some truth to this view...

Authored by Alastair Crooke via The Strategic Culture Foundation,

What is a ‘digital Iron Curtain’?

It is when Big Digital, as Professor Michael Rectenwald terms these western Tech Goliaths, become ‘governmentalities’, using a word originally coined by Michel Foucault to refer to the means by which the ‘governed’ (i.e. ‘we the people’) assimilate, and reflect outwardly, a mental attitude desired by the élites: “One might point to masking and social distancing as instances of what Foucault meant by his notion of governmentality”, Rectenwald suggests.

And what is that desired ‘mentality’?

It is to embrace the transfiguration of American and European identity and way-of-life. The presumptive U.S. President Elect, the European élites, and top ‘woke’ élites moreover, are publicly committed to such “transformation”: “Now we take Georgia, then we change the world,” (Chuck Schumer, Senate Minority Leader, declared, celebrating Joe Biden’s ‘victory’); “Trump’s defeat can be the beginning of the end of the triumph of far-right populisms also in Europe”, claimed Donald Tusk, former president of the European Council.

In short, the ‘Iron Curtain’ descends when supposedly private enterprises (Big Digital) mutually inter-penetrate with – and then claim – the State: No longer the non-believer facing this coming metamorphosis is to be persuaded – he can be compelled. Regressive values held on identity, race and gender quickly slipped into a ‘heresy’ labelling. And as the BLM activists endlessly repeat: “Silence is no option: Silence is complicity”.

With the advent of Silicon Valley ideology’s ubiquitous ‘reach’, the diktat can be achieved through weaponising ‘Truth’ via AI, to achieve a ‘machine learning fairness’ that reflects only the values of the coming revolution – and through AI ‘learning’ mounting that version of binary ‘truth’, up and against an adversarial ‘non-truth’ (its polar opposite). How this inter-penetration came about is through a mix of early CIA start-up funding; connections and contracts with state agencies, particularly relating to defence; and in support for propaganda campaigns in service to ‘governmentalist’ narratives.

These U.S. Tech platforms have, for some time, become effectively fused into the ‘Blue State’ – particularly in the realms of intelligence and defence – to the extent that these CEOs no longer see themselves as state ‘partners’ or contractors, but rather, as some higher élite leadership, precisely shaping and directing the future of the U.S. Their objective however, is to advance beyond the American ‘sphere’, to a notion that such an élite oligarchy eventually would be directing a future ‘planetary governance’. One, in which their tech tools of AI, analytics, robotics and machine-learning, would become the mathematical and digital scaffold around whose structure, the globe in all its dimensions is administered. There would be no polity – only analytics.

The blatant attempt by Big Tech platforms and MSM to write the narrative of the 2020 Facebook and Twitter U.S. Election – coupled with their campaign to insist that dissent is either the intrusion of enemy disinformation, ‘lies’ coming from the U.S. President, or plain bullsh*t – is but the first step to re-defining ‘dissenters’ as security risks and enemies of the good.

The mention of ‘heresy and disinformation’ additionally plays the role of pushing attention away from the gulf of inequality between smug élites and skeptical swathes of ordinary citizenry. Party élites might be notoriously well-known for unfairly enriching themselves, but as fearless knights leading the faithful to battle, élites can become again objects of public and media veneration – heroes who can call believers ‘once more unto the breach!’.

The next step is already being prepared – as Whitney Webb notes:

A new cyber offensive was launched on Monday by the UK’s signal intelligence agency, GCHQ, which seeks to target websites that publish content deemed to be “propaganda”, [and that] raise concerns regarding state-sponsored Covid-19 vaccine development – and the multi-national pharmaceutical corporations involved.

Similar efforts are underway in the U.S., with the military recently funding a CIA-backed firm … to develop an AI algorithm aimed specifically at new websites promoting “suspected” disinformation related to the Covid-19 crisis, and the U.S. military–led Covid-19 vaccination effort known as Operation Warp Speed …

The Times reported that GCHQ “has begun an offensive cyber-operation to disrupt anti-vaccine propaganda being spread by hostile states” and “is using a toolkit developed to tackle disinformation and recruitment material peddled by Islamic State” to do so … The GCHQ cyber war will not only take down “anti-vaccine propaganda”, but will also seek to “disrupt the operations of the cyberactors responsible for it, including encrypting their data so they cannot access it and blocking their communications with each other.”

The Times stated that “the government regards tackling false information about inoculation as a rising priority as the prospect of a reliable vaccine against the coronavirus draws closer,” suggesting that efforts will continue to ramp up as a vaccine candidate gets closer to approval.

This larger pivot toward treating alleged “anti-vaxxers” as “national security threats” has been ongoing for much of this year, spearheaded in part by Imran Ahmed, the CEO of the UK-based Center for Countering Digital Hate, a member of the UK government’s Steering Committee on Countering Extremism Pilot Task Force, which is part of the UK government’s Commission for Countering Extremism.

Ahmed told the UK newspaper The Independent in July that “I would go beyond calling anti-vaxxers conspiracy theorists to say they are an extremist group that pose a national security risk.” He then stated that “once someone has been exposed to one type of conspiracy it’s easy to lead them down a path where they embrace more radical world views that can lead to violent extremism … Similarly, a think tank tied to U.S. intelligence argued in a research paper published just months before the onset of the Covid-19 crisis that “the U.S. ‘anti-vaxxer’ movement would pose a threat to national security in the event of a ‘pandemic with a novel organism.’”

Just to be clear, it is not just the ‘Five Eyes’ Intelligence Community at work – YouTube, the dominant video platform owned by Google, decided this week to remove a Ludwig von Mises Institute video, with more than 1.5 million views, for challenging aspects of U.S. policy on the Coronavirus.

What on earth is going on? The Mises Institute as ‘extremist’, or purveyor of enemy disinformation? (Of course, there are countless other examples.)

Well, in a word, it is ‘China’. Maybe it is about fears that China will surpass the U.S. economically and in Tech quite shortly. It is no secret that the U.S., the UK and Europe, more generally, have botched their handling of Covid, and may stand at the brink of recession and financial crisis.

China, and Asia more generally, has Covid under much better control. Indeed, China may prove to be the one state likely to grow economically over the year ahead.

Here’s the rub: The pandemic persists. Western governments largely have eschewed full lockdowns, whilst hoping to toggle between partial social-distancing, and keeping the economy open – oscillating between turning the dials up or down on both. But they are achieving neither the one (pandemic under control), nor the other (saving themselves from looming economic breakdown). The only exit from this conundrum that the élites can see is to vaccinate everyone as soon as possible, so that they can go full-steam on the economy – and thus stop China stealing a march on the West.

But 40%-50% of Americans say they would refuse vaccination. They are concerned about the long term safety for humans of the new mRNA technique – concerns, it seems, that are destined to be rigorously de-platformed to make way for the “required” saturation of pro-vaccine messaging across the English-speaking media landscape.

There is no evidence, yet, that either the Moderna or the Pfizer experimental vaccine prevented any hospitalizations or any deaths. If there were, the public has not been told. There is no information about how long any protective benefit from the vaccine would persist. There is no information about safety. Not surprisingly there is public caution, which GCHQ and Big Digital intend to squash.

The digital Iron Curtain is not just about America. U.S. algorithms, and social media, saturate Europe too. And Europe has its ‘populists’ and state ‘deplorables’ (currently Hungary and Poland), on which Brussels would like to see the digital ‘Curtain’ of denigration and political ostracism descend.

This month, Hungary and Poland vetoed the EU bloc’s €1.8 trillion budget and recovery package in retaliation for Brussel’s plan effectively to fine them for violating the EU’s ‘rule of law’ principles. As the Telegraph notes, “Many European businesses are depending on the cash and, given the ‘second wave’ of coronavirus hitting the continent, Brussels fears that the Visegrád Group allies” could hold a recovery hostage to their objections to the EU ‘rule-of-law’ ‘fines’).

What’s this all about? Well, Orbán’s justice minister has introduced a series of constitutional changes. Each of them triggering ‘rule-of-law’ disputes with the EU. The most contentious amendment is an anti-LGBT one, stating explicitly that the mother is a woman, the father is a man. It will add further restrictions for singles and gay couples adopting children, and it will confine gender transition to adults.

Orbán’s veto is yet more evidence of a new Iron Curtain descending down the spine of – this time – Europe. The ‘Curtain’ again is cultural, and has nothing to do with ‘law’. Brussels makes no secret of its displeasure that many Central and Eastern European member-states will not sign up to ‘progressive’ (i.e. woke) values. At its root lies the tension that “whilst Western Europe is de-Christianising, Europe’s central and eastern states are re-Christianising – the faith having been earlier a rallying point against communism”, and now serving as the well-spring to these states’ post-Cold War emerging identity. (It is not so dissimilar to some ‘Red’ American conservative constituencies that also are reaching back to their Christian roots, in the face of America’s political polarisation.)

These combined events point to a key point of inflection occurring in the western polity: A constellation of state and state-extended apparatuses has openly declared war on dissent (‘untruths’), foreign ‘disinformation’ and opinion unsupported by their own ‘fact-checking’.

It takes concrete form through Big Digital’s quiet sanctioning and punitive policing of online platforms, under the guise of tackling abuse; through nation-wide mandatory re-education and training programmes in anti-racism and critical social theory in schools and places of work; by embedding passive obedience and acquiescence amongst the public through casting anti-vaxxers as extremists, or as security risks; and finally, by mounting a series of public spectacles and theatre by ‘calling out’ and shaming sovereigntists and cultural ‘regressives’, who merit being ‘cancelled’.

In turn, it advances an entire canon of progressivism rooted in critical social theory, anti-racism and gender studies. It has too its own revisionist history (narratives such as the 1619 Project) and progressive jurisprudence for translation into concrete law.

But what if half of America rejects the next President? What if Brussels persists with imposing its separate progressive cannon? Then the Iron Curtain will descend with the ring of metal falling onto stone. Why? Precisely because those adhering to their transformative mission see ‘calling out’ transgressors as their path to power – a state in which dissent and cultural heresy can be met with enforcement (euphemistically called the ‘rule of law’ in Brussels). Its’ intent is to permanently keep dissenters passive, and on the defensive, fearing being labelled ‘extremist’, and through panicking fence-sitters into acquiescence.

Maintaining a unified western polity may no longer be possible under such conditions. Should the losers in this struggle (whomsoever that may be), come to fear being culturally overwhelmed by forces that see their way-of-being as a heresy which must be purged, we may witness a powerful turn towards political self-determination.

When political differences become irreconcilable, the only (non-violent) alternative might come to be seen to lie with the fissuring of political union.