I recently suggested that our new totalitarian world could be neatly summed up by the motto "none are safe until all are safe", which various Establishment figures and System apparatchiks have been bandying around since the outbreak of the birdemic a little over one year ago.
I later surmised the motto had become more of an edict; one that perfectly and lucidly encapsulates the tyrannical ethos that inspires and motivates our new totalitarian overlords.
The perniciousness of "none are safe until all are safe" is rather striking. On the surface, the altruistic motto/edict appears rooted in concern for common good and the genuine desire to safeguard the health and welfare of all individuals; however,scratch away this thin, abstract "love of mankind" veneer, and the ruthless, tyrannical undercurrents hiding beneath it all is readily exposed.
The evil behind "none are safe until all are safe" lies in the observable fact that it grants the authorities that wield and implement the edict free reign to take whatever measures they deem necessary and essential to ensure the safety of every single global citizen on the planet.
In theory, the abstraction that "no one is safe until all are safe" could justify the continued implementation of any and all sorts of repressive mandatory measures even if and when only a handful of individuals or even just one individual within the global population remains "unsafe."
The birdemic peck - which is being rolled out on a mostly voluntary basis in many countries around the world - possesses the potential to develop into the next and most significant repressive mandatory measure that our new tyrannical overlords aim to implement.
Calls to make the peck obligatory worldwide have already risen up from various corners of the globe. Here in Hungary - where the government has been feverishly propagandizing to motivate every one of its citizens to voluntary get themselves pecked under the auspices of the global "none are safe until all are safe" edict - the most vociferous support for mandatory pecks has come from a vehement virologist who rabidly insists that pecking should be stringently pursued, by force if necessary:
The coronavirus pandemic can be stopped only if everyone is vaccinated against it, old and young alike, said virologist Ernő Duda, associate professor at the University of Szeged. He told daily Népszava on Saturday that in an extreme case the choice will be either you get your COVID-19 shot, go live like a hermit in the woods, or die.
He stressed that "there should be intensive propaganda stressing the pandemic is not over, wear those masks. And those that do not, should be fined. We don't need more stringent measures but the enforcement of existing ones."
In order to enforce this interest, a drastic means may be deployed in an extreme case, for example, making vaccination mandatory.
"Those (who resist) will sooner or later need to make a choice: become hermits in the woods, die out, or get vaccinated."
Seems like a pleasant chap. Well-balanced and sensible, too. Nonetheless, his tyrannical nobility and high-mindedness is clearly on display through his voicing of the "none are safe until all are safe edict."
Of course, this Duda fellow is not the government, and as of yet, the Hungarian government has not made any overt moves to make pecking mandatory, but I have a sinking feeling that legislation to implement such measures are already being drawn up by some poor clerk chained to a radiator in the basement of the Hungarian parliament building.
It's worth noting that the government itself has not shied away from using tyrannical measures since the outbreak of the birdemic and continues to apply a slew of them today, so I'm sure it would not shy away from mandatory vaccination if push ever came to shove.
It's also worth noting that Orbán and his government pride themselves on being Christian nationalists, so hey . . .
I use the example of Hungary because it is the one closest to me, but I suspect the same conditions and forces are at play around the world, albeit to greater or lesser degrees; however, this lack of uniform tyranny on the ground does not imply that some form of uniform tyranny does not already exist at the global level of governance.
The magic behind "none are safe until all are safe" is it renders all places vulnerable to ruthless tyranny. Those in areas with relaxed measures or in areas governed by independently-minded politicians should not fall into the trap of becoming overly complacent about their situations. In a world ruled by the "none are safe until all are safe" edict, circumstances can change in an instant and the age-old assurance of "that will never happen" can evaporate as quickly as a drop of water hitting a red-hot frying pan.
What I find immensely fascinating (as well as indescribably depressing) is the continuing lack of awareness the masses continue to display in the face of obvious totalitarianism. Tell most people that we are all being effectively been crushed under the heel of global dictatorial boot, and they are bound to stare at you and scornfully question your sanity.
If pressed about mandatory pecks, I suspect most people would reply in the following manner:
"Well, I'm going to get the peck voluntarily regardless . . . you know, because none are safe until all are safe, and I want to show everyone how nice and caring I am. I also want to be sure I don't die from this horrible, terrible virus. So for me, pecking is a real win-win. Sure, the pecks are still technically in the experimental stages, but I trust experts. I mean, just look at all the effective measures they've taken over the past year. Boy, without those measures, things could have really gotten grim.
Anyway, if pecking were obligatory - which would never happen because we live in a democracy and have inalienable human rights - but if for some weird reason it suddenly were to become mandatory, and I were to object the idea of mandatory pecking - which I never would because I am nice and caring and definitely not one of those crazy anti-peckers - why I would just write to my local, democratically-elected representative or file a petition with the human rights court. I mean, when all is said done, we have rights over own bodies . . . bodily integrity, I think they call it . . . and our society is full of dedicated, hardworking people who ensure those personal rights and liberties are never violated. Anyway, thankfully we don't have to worry about any of that because we live in free democracies full of nice, caring people who definitely aren't racist."
Let's get back to the vigorous virologist and see what he has to say about democracies:
"In a democratic country one can trust sensible people realise that it is their interest to be inoculated. If one is in capable of this [realisation] they must be forced. One way is that the police will detain them, and another way is to issue green cards granting special rights to those vaccinated. If one has one of these they can go to cafeterias, the movies and board airplanes. And if one doesn’t they cannot do any of these things," said Duda.
Sensible people in "democracies" do what their totalitarian rulers tell them to do. Insensible people who don't will be arrested and forced into pecking or into exile.
So in our much vaunted democracies, a citizen's choice might very well boil down to choosing between perpetual lock down or perpetual lock out. Or physical death.
As for the human rights angle, here's a recently delivered verdict from European Court of Human Rights in response to a group of parents from Czechia who resisted mandatory vaccination for their children before the outbreak of the birdemic:
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has backed the Czech Republic in its requirement for mandatory pre-school vaccinations.
The case was brought by families who were fined or whose children were refused entry to pre-schools because they had not been vaccinated.
In a landmark ruling, the court found that while the Czech policy interfered with the right to a private life, there was a need to protect public health.
All the cases pre-date the pandemic.
However, the issue of routine childhood vaccinations has come under increasing scrutiny due to the spread of Covid-19.
This is the first ruling from the ECHR on compulsory vaccination against childhood diseases.
The judges backed the Czech legislation by 16 to 1.
"The... measures could be regarded as being 'necessary in a democratic society'" the court said, adding: "The objective has to be that every child is protected against serious diseases, through vaccination or by virtue of herd immunity."
Keep in mind that this ruling was for a case predating the birdemic. Nonetheless, the "none are safe until all are safe" ethos is already prevalent. Yes, the Czech policy interfered with personal rights, but this is superseded by the need to protect the public. All simply must be safe. Period.
I find the frank admission of evil in the court's ruling quite unremarkable - it's exactly the sort of thing you expect to see after things have come to a point.
If anything, the birdemic has only fortified this ethos, very much implying that the "normal" ethos of democracy and human rights - which was always a sham - has been completely discarded.
Tyranny is on full display everywhere you turn, and it intensifies with every passing day; yet still, barely anyone notices.
But I do. And maybe you do, too.
I don't know about you, but the more of it I see, the more of it I experience, the closer I draw to the freedom no worldly tyranny will ever be able to strip away.
I later surmised the motto had become more of an edict; one that perfectly and lucidly encapsulates the tyrannical ethos that inspires and motivates our new totalitarian overlords.
The perniciousness of "none are safe until all are safe" is rather striking. On the surface, the altruistic motto/edict appears rooted in concern for common good and the genuine desire to safeguard the health and welfare of all individuals; however,scratch away this thin, abstract "love of mankind" veneer, and the ruthless, tyrannical undercurrents hiding beneath it all is readily exposed.
The evil behind "none are safe until all are safe" lies in the observable fact that it grants the authorities that wield and implement the edict free reign to take whatever measures they deem necessary and essential to ensure the safety of every single global citizen on the planet.
In theory, the abstraction that "no one is safe until all are safe" could justify the continued implementation of any and all sorts of repressive mandatory measures even if and when only a handful of individuals or even just one individual within the global population remains "unsafe."
The birdemic peck - which is being rolled out on a mostly voluntary basis in many countries around the world - possesses the potential to develop into the next and most significant repressive mandatory measure that our new tyrannical overlords aim to implement.
Calls to make the peck obligatory worldwide have already risen up from various corners of the globe. Here in Hungary - where the government has been feverishly propagandizing to motivate every one of its citizens to voluntary get themselves pecked under the auspices of the global "none are safe until all are safe" edict - the most vociferous support for mandatory pecks has come from a vehement virologist who rabidly insists that pecking should be stringently pursued, by force if necessary:
The coronavirus pandemic can be stopped only if everyone is vaccinated against it, old and young alike, said virologist Ernő Duda, associate professor at the University of Szeged. He told daily Népszava on Saturday that in an extreme case the choice will be either you get your COVID-19 shot, go live like a hermit in the woods, or die.
He stressed that "there should be intensive propaganda stressing the pandemic is not over, wear those masks. And those that do not, should be fined. We don't need more stringent measures but the enforcement of existing ones."
In order to enforce this interest, a drastic means may be deployed in an extreme case, for example, making vaccination mandatory.
"Those (who resist) will sooner or later need to make a choice: become hermits in the woods, die out, or get vaccinated."
Seems like a pleasant chap. Well-balanced and sensible, too. Nonetheless, his tyrannical nobility and high-mindedness is clearly on display through his voicing of the "none are safe until all are safe edict."
Of course, this Duda fellow is not the government, and as of yet, the Hungarian government has not made any overt moves to make pecking mandatory, but I have a sinking feeling that legislation to implement such measures are already being drawn up by some poor clerk chained to a radiator in the basement of the Hungarian parliament building.
It's worth noting that the government itself has not shied away from using tyrannical measures since the outbreak of the birdemic and continues to apply a slew of them today, so I'm sure it would not shy away from mandatory vaccination if push ever came to shove.
It's also worth noting that Orbán and his government pride themselves on being Christian nationalists, so hey . . .
I use the example of Hungary because it is the one closest to me, but I suspect the same conditions and forces are at play around the world, albeit to greater or lesser degrees; however, this lack of uniform tyranny on the ground does not imply that some form of uniform tyranny does not already exist at the global level of governance.
The magic behind "none are safe until all are safe" is it renders all places vulnerable to ruthless tyranny. Those in areas with relaxed measures or in areas governed by independently-minded politicians should not fall into the trap of becoming overly complacent about their situations. In a world ruled by the "none are safe until all are safe" edict, circumstances can change in an instant and the age-old assurance of "that will never happen" can evaporate as quickly as a drop of water hitting a red-hot frying pan.
What I find immensely fascinating (as well as indescribably depressing) is the continuing lack of awareness the masses continue to display in the face of obvious totalitarianism. Tell most people that we are all being effectively been crushed under the heel of global dictatorial boot, and they are bound to stare at you and scornfully question your sanity.
If pressed about mandatory pecks, I suspect most people would reply in the following manner:
"Well, I'm going to get the peck voluntarily regardless . . . you know, because none are safe until all are safe, and I want to show everyone how nice and caring I am. I also want to be sure I don't die from this horrible, terrible virus. So for me, pecking is a real win-win. Sure, the pecks are still technically in the experimental stages, but I trust experts. I mean, just look at all the effective measures they've taken over the past year. Boy, without those measures, things could have really gotten grim.
Anyway, if pecking were obligatory - which would never happen because we live in a democracy and have inalienable human rights - but if for some weird reason it suddenly were to become mandatory, and I were to object the idea of mandatory pecking - which I never would because I am nice and caring and definitely not one of those crazy anti-peckers - why I would just write to my local, democratically-elected representative or file a petition with the human rights court. I mean, when all is said done, we have rights over own bodies . . . bodily integrity, I think they call it . . . and our society is full of dedicated, hardworking people who ensure those personal rights and liberties are never violated. Anyway, thankfully we don't have to worry about any of that because we live in free democracies full of nice, caring people who definitely aren't racist."
Let's get back to the vigorous virologist and see what he has to say about democracies:
"In a democratic country one can trust sensible people realise that it is their interest to be inoculated. If one is in capable of this [realisation] they must be forced. One way is that the police will detain them, and another way is to issue green cards granting special rights to those vaccinated. If one has one of these they can go to cafeterias, the movies and board airplanes. And if one doesn’t they cannot do any of these things," said Duda.
Sensible people in "democracies" do what their totalitarian rulers tell them to do. Insensible people who don't will be arrested and forced into pecking or into exile.
So in our much vaunted democracies, a citizen's choice might very well boil down to choosing between perpetual lock down or perpetual lock out. Or physical death.
As for the human rights angle, here's a recently delivered verdict from European Court of Human Rights in response to a group of parents from Czechia who resisted mandatory vaccination for their children before the outbreak of the birdemic:
The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has backed the Czech Republic in its requirement for mandatory pre-school vaccinations.
The case was brought by families who were fined or whose children were refused entry to pre-schools because they had not been vaccinated.
In a landmark ruling, the court found that while the Czech policy interfered with the right to a private life, there was a need to protect public health.
All the cases pre-date the pandemic.
However, the issue of routine childhood vaccinations has come under increasing scrutiny due to the spread of Covid-19.
This is the first ruling from the ECHR on compulsory vaccination against childhood diseases.
The judges backed the Czech legislation by 16 to 1.
"The... measures could be regarded as being 'necessary in a democratic society'" the court said, adding: "The objective has to be that every child is protected against serious diseases, through vaccination or by virtue of herd immunity."
Keep in mind that this ruling was for a case predating the birdemic. Nonetheless, the "none are safe until all are safe" ethos is already prevalent. Yes, the Czech policy interfered with personal rights, but this is superseded by the need to protect the public. All simply must be safe. Period.
I find the frank admission of evil in the court's ruling quite unremarkable - it's exactly the sort of thing you expect to see after things have come to a point.
If anything, the birdemic has only fortified this ethos, very much implying that the "normal" ethos of democracy and human rights - which was always a sham - has been completely discarded.
Tyranny is on full display everywhere you turn, and it intensifies with every passing day; yet still, barely anyone notices.
But I do. And maybe you do, too.
I don't know about you, but the more of it I see, the more of it I experience, the closer I draw to the freedom no worldly tyranny will ever be able to strip away.
RSS Feed
