Until November of last year, I held a part-time position in a small university of applied sciences in Austria. In September, the institution implemented a heath and safety monitoring system that required every person who stepped onto the campus to show proof of being pecked, having recovered, or a negative test.
I ignored the requirements for the most part. After a couple of months, I was finally confronted. When asked why I refused to comply with rules that were put in place to keep the campus "safe", I responded that I wanted to do my job, but that I did not believe in the measures, and that they were also a direct violation of my fundamental rights.
I was immediately terminated. The "danger" I posed justified the firing and the trampling of my rights.
A week after my termination, Austria declared a nationwide peck mandate it would implement and locked down the country. A few weeks later, it eased the lock down for the pecked, but kept the unpecked locked down.
The country's media unleashed a brutal assault on the unpecked. It dehumanized them. Marginalized them. Threatened them. Lawmakers went into overdrive and issued all sorts of "none are safe until all are safe" legislation that would make life impossible for any person who chose to remain unpecked.
The legislation suggested that the unpecked would eventually be barred from employment, services, and society. They would also face hefty annual fines that were commensurate with a third or half of an average annual salary in Austria.
In the months that followed, the number of pecked adults rose from about 65% to 75%. My former place of employment embraced the peck mandate with great enthusiasm by declaring it be "the only way to end the birdemic."
The peck mandate -- which was engineered to "legally" force the peck on every single Austrian adult -- went into effect at the beginning of last month. Today, a mere four weeks later, the Austrian authorities have decided to suspend it. The reason for the suspension? "The law's encroachment of fundamental rights could no longer be justified by the danger posed."
So, aside from intensified open warfare on Austria's citizenry, what did the "none are safe until all are safe" peck mandate accomplish?
Well, it achieved nothing in terms of keeping people safe, but it did lead to a ten percent increase in the number of pecked. Simply put, it got the pecked numbers up. And that was all the mandate was meant to do.
Once the numbers stopped going up, the mandate stopped being useful because it would entail a lot of work -- messy things like implementation, fines, jail time, paperwork, etc.
This reveals that the Austrian government never had any intentions of keeping the mandate in place. It was all just manipulation aimed at coercing its citizenry into "making the personal choice" for the peck. Once the influence behind the manipulation began to fade, the whole thing was suspended.
Roughly 700,000 Austrians allowed themselves to be manipulated into the peck via the mandate and its associated terror campaign. This increase in pecked people has not increased safety in the country. It has not ended the birdemic. On the contrary, if official data is to be believed, Austria is currently experiencing an extremely high level of "cases". But who cares? What matters is this -- 700,000 "voluntarily" chose to be pecked.
You see how that works?
The next round of manipulation, which is bound to come eventually, will happen when then next big threat emerges. When that happens, the government will reverse its current logic and declare that "the danger posed can no longer justify the respect for fundamental rights." It will then focus its attention on the remaining 25% of its citizens that have thus far managed to overcome the coercion and manipulation.
The future threat may not involve in the birdemic or the peck, but rest assured it will feature some danger that can only be overcome via the three things every individual must be "forced" into "freely" choosing -- enslavement, destruction, and damnation.
I ignored the requirements for the most part. After a couple of months, I was finally confronted. When asked why I refused to comply with rules that were put in place to keep the campus "safe", I responded that I wanted to do my job, but that I did not believe in the measures, and that they were also a direct violation of my fundamental rights.
I was immediately terminated. The "danger" I posed justified the firing and the trampling of my rights.
A week after my termination, Austria declared a nationwide peck mandate it would implement and locked down the country. A few weeks later, it eased the lock down for the pecked, but kept the unpecked locked down.
The country's media unleashed a brutal assault on the unpecked. It dehumanized them. Marginalized them. Threatened them. Lawmakers went into overdrive and issued all sorts of "none are safe until all are safe" legislation that would make life impossible for any person who chose to remain unpecked.
The legislation suggested that the unpecked would eventually be barred from employment, services, and society. They would also face hefty annual fines that were commensurate with a third or half of an average annual salary in Austria.
In the months that followed, the number of pecked adults rose from about 65% to 75%. My former place of employment embraced the peck mandate with great enthusiasm by declaring it be "the only way to end the birdemic."
The peck mandate -- which was engineered to "legally" force the peck on every single Austrian adult -- went into effect at the beginning of last month. Today, a mere four weeks later, the Austrian authorities have decided to suspend it. The reason for the suspension? "The law's encroachment of fundamental rights could no longer be justified by the danger posed."
So, aside from intensified open warfare on Austria's citizenry, what did the "none are safe until all are safe" peck mandate accomplish?
Well, it achieved nothing in terms of keeping people safe, but it did lead to a ten percent increase in the number of pecked. Simply put, it got the pecked numbers up. And that was all the mandate was meant to do.
Once the numbers stopped going up, the mandate stopped being useful because it would entail a lot of work -- messy things like implementation, fines, jail time, paperwork, etc.
This reveals that the Austrian government never had any intentions of keeping the mandate in place. It was all just manipulation aimed at coercing its citizenry into "making the personal choice" for the peck. Once the influence behind the manipulation began to fade, the whole thing was suspended.
Roughly 700,000 Austrians allowed themselves to be manipulated into the peck via the mandate and its associated terror campaign. This increase in pecked people has not increased safety in the country. It has not ended the birdemic. On the contrary, if official data is to be believed, Austria is currently experiencing an extremely high level of "cases". But who cares? What matters is this -- 700,000 "voluntarily" chose to be pecked.
You see how that works?
The next round of manipulation, which is bound to come eventually, will happen when then next big threat emerges. When that happens, the government will reverse its current logic and declare that "the danger posed can no longer justify the respect for fundamental rights." It will then focus its attention on the remaining 25% of its citizens that have thus far managed to overcome the coercion and manipulation.
The future threat may not involve in the birdemic or the peck, but rest assured it will feature some danger that can only be overcome via the three things every individual must be "forced" into "freely" choosing -- enslavement, destruction, and damnation.
RSS Feed
