Canary In a Covid World: How Propaganda and Censorship Changed Our World

by C.H. Klotz

But on the most important scientific matters, things where it’s not known what’s true and false yet, because we’re still in the midst of our ignorance over it, you have to have that debate. On the edge of scientific discussion and scientific knowledge is controversy and debate. If you don’t allow that process to happen, science is dead.

The problem during the pandemic was that public health abdicated responsibility to convey scientific ideas, ideas about benefit and harm in a reasonable way. They treated people like children, as opposed to treating people like adults and reasoning with them.

People mostly think that COVID is over in one sense or the other, at least as far as their own lives are concerned. They don’t view it with the same kind of concern that they did in March 2020. At the same time, governments have essentially institutionalized these policies. We haven’t firmly repudiated them, and so we’re in actually quite a dangerous place.

We have to have an honest discussion, and I would hope that it would be bipartisan. I don’t see any reason why it needs to be inherently political, because it’s a failure of public health in my view. Public health isn’t supposed to be Democrat or Republican. It’s just supposed to be public health. So, the polity has a responsibility to do the assessment in the bipartisan way of public health, which is supposed to serve the polity.

It’s not to say that everything we did was wrong. I don’t agree with that, but I think that so much that we did was wrong. So much that we did in the name of public health was unethical, and so much that we did in the name of public health was so destructive. You have to have an honest assessment

You can go to the nursing home where your mom or dad is and say, “When they were depressed, why didn’t you let me come and say hello? Why didn’t you try to figure out some safe ways to allow humane treatment?” You go to the hospital where your parents died and say, “Look, why didn’t you let me say goodbye?” You can push your elected leaders for reform so that things like this never happen again.

CDC Partners With ‘Social and Behavior Change’ Initiative to Silence Vaccine Hesitancy”, The Epoch Times, April 7, 2023) https://www.theepochtimes.com/cdc-partners-with-social-and-behavior-change-initiative-to-silence-vaccine-hesitancy_5175172.html)

A tactic utilized by the World Economic forum (WEF) uses influencers and social media to exploit the non-scalable nature of the internet and social media. The WEF has enlisted almost 10,000 “global shapers” to help spread their messaging. The global shapers are a group of high-profile young people that volunteer for the WEF to share and create enthusiasm for the WEF agenda worldwide. This agenda includes visions for a new world order based on transnational corporations working together with the UN, to effect climate change solutions through agenda 2030, and stakeholder capitalism. This messaging is particularly compelling to younger people, who view many of the global shapers as heroes. Understanding 5th-Gen warfare is critical in fighting effectively in this battlespace of minds, ideas and memes.

With a 5th-Gen warfare campaign, it is easy to get involved. Just follow the social media posts, news stories from alternative sources, trends and jump in! Anyone can play. Just be aware of false flag operations.

Challenge authority when it is wrong. Don’t allow yourself to be bullied. Don’t give up, and don’t get depressed.

The term for 5th-Gen warfare is war. This is not a game, with rules to which we all agree. There are no rules in 5th-Gen warfare, only tactics and strategy. Nothing is fair, and your mind, thought and emotions are the battlefield. However, I choose to have a set of ethical boundaries for myself, and expect those that I work with to adhere to a similar moral code. I stand by my ethics. I don’t lie. I don’t cheat and I don’t break the law. I seek to maintain personal integrity, and respect others, and act to heal and build community wherever I can. If I break these rules for myself, I will never be able to claim victory.

Stay true. Stay sovereign. Don’t be a victim. Be a 5th Gen warrior for truth, and for the sake of our children, and for their children. The Truth is like a Lion. Set it free, and let it defend itself.

there has been a dramatic rise in public demands on the state: as the provider of amenities, as a guarantor of minimum standards of economic security and as a regulator of an ever-widening range of human activities. As a result, the language of government has become much more authoritarian. In many ways the intellectual goalposts have shifted. It is more difficult to be a liberal conservative and an individualist in those conditions.

The Spanish flu pandemic of 1918-1921 is the event most closely comparable to the Covid-19 pandemic of 2020. It is estimated to have killed 200,000 people in the United Kingdom at a time when its population was about two thirds what it is now. Estimates of global mortality range from 20 to 100 million people at a time when the world’s population was about a sixth of what it is now. Australia was largely protected by distance and quarantine. In Europe, where Spanish flu took a much heavier toll, governments took no special steps to curtail its transmission, apart from isolating the infected and the sick, which had been the classic response to epidemics from time immemorial. No one criticised them for this.

The related pathogens behind Asiatic flu pandemic of 1957 and Hong Kong flu in 1968 had an infection and mortality rate roughly comparable to Covid-19. No special steps were taken to control transmission. In the US a deliberate decision was made not to take such steps because of the disruption that they would have had on the life of the nation.

In the intervening century between Covid-19 and Spanish flu, something radically changed in our collective outlook. Two things in particular have changed. One is that we now expect more of the state, and are less inclined to accept that there are limits to what it can do. The other is that we are no longer willing to accept risks that have always been inherent in life itself.

Covid-19 is a relatively serious epidemic but historically it is well within the range of health risks which are inseparable from ordinary existence. In Europe, bubonic plague, smallpox, cholera and tuberculosis were all worse in their time. Worldwide, the list of comparable or worse epidemics is substantially longer, even if they did not happen to strike Europe or North America. The pandemic, serious as it was, was well within the broad range of mortal diseases with which human beings have always had to live.

In modern conditions, risk-aversion and the fear that goes with it, are a standing invitation to authoritarian government. If we hold governments responsible for everything that goes wrong, they will take away our autonomy so that nothing can go wrong.

The protecting power of the state, he wrote, “extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered. But it is softened, bent, and guided. Men are seldom forced to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence; it does not tyrannise, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes. It stupefies a people until each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.” Most regulation is designed to limit risk by limiting freedom. Governments do this not in order to protect us from risk, but mainly in order to protect themselves from criticism.

Governments were willing to accept considerable collateral damage to mental health resulting from the lockdown, and large increases in deaths from cancer, ischaemic heart disease and dementia, because they believed that they were less likely to be criticised for those.

If we confer despotic powers on the government to deal with perils which are an ordinary feature of human existence, we will end up doing it most or all of the time. It is because the perils against which we now demand protection from the state are so much more numerous than they were, that they are likely to lead to a more fundamental and durable change in our attitudes to the state. This is a more serious problem for the future of democracy than war.

Hobbes’s state was an unpleasant thing, but he had grasped a profound truth. Most despotisms come into being not because a despot has seized power, but because people willingly surrender their freedoms in return for security. Our culture has always rejected Hobbes’s model of society. Intellectually, it still does. But in recent years it has increasingly tended to act on it. The response to Covid-19 took that tendency a long way further. I could not have imagined in 2019 that my concerns would be so dramatically vindicated so quickly.

It is not simply the assault on the concept of liberty that matters. It is the particular liberty which has been most obviously discarded, namely the liberty to associate with other human beings. Association with other human beings is not just an optional extra. It is fundamental to our humanity.

Something extraordinary has happened to a society if people feel that they need to ask the Prime Minister if it is OK to hug their grand-daughter. I would sum up the change in this way. What was previously a right inherent in a free people, has come to depend on government licence. We have come to regard the right to live normal lives as a gift of the state.

All of this was made possible by fear. Throughout history fear has been the principal instrument of the authoritarian state.

A senior figure in the UK government told me during the early stages of the pandemic that in his view the liberal state was an unsuitable set-up for a situation like this. What was needed, he said, was something more “Napoleonic.” That says it all. Napoleon was a despot.

Instead of the rule of law, we have the Unholy Trinity of the Administrative State: delegation from the legislature, deference from the courts, and discretion for the administration to decide the public good. Instead of separation, we have concentrated power. Instead of checks and balances between the three branches, they are all on the same page, cooperating to empower the state’s management of society. Officials and experts place individual autonomy aside in the name of public welfare and progressive causes. Broad discretion in the hands of a technocratic managerial class has become the foundation of our modern system of government.

An avalanche of data showing that electric cars provide no comparable environmental benefit will not nullify rules that mandate the sale of electric vehicles. Through their own ideological lens, governments decide where the public interest lies.

As Professor Denis Rancourt put it to the National Citizens Inquiry in Ottawa, if governments had done nothing out of the ordinary, had not announced a pandemic, and had not responded to a presumed pathogen in the way that it did, there would have been no excess mortality.

As Friedrich Hayek observed, “Freedom granted only when it is known beforehand that its effects will be beneficial is not freedom.”

With few exceptions, the problem is not the content of policy but its very existence. If lockdowns had succeeded, they would still have restrained people against their will. If COVID vaccines were safe and effective, mandates still take medical decisions away from individuals. These policies were wrong for the coercion they imposed, not the goals they failed to achieve. The conceit of our functionaries

Few things are more illustrative of government corruption during the COVID-19 pandemic than the clandestine capture of private medical organizations by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), in what would eventually be exposed as a covert propaganda campaign to push experimental mRNA shots into every arm. Of all the lessons learned from the pandemic, this lesson is among the most important for those who envision the U.S. as a free democracy protected by the First Amendment.

There is still no government acknowledgment of harms caused by reckless pandemic policies which sent sick people home to die in the treatable first stage of the disease, while silencing and maligning medical professionals who advocated for the use of safe, repurposed medicines. There is still no meaningful redress for millions in this country who are COVID-19 “vaccine” injured, who have lost a loved one to the “vaccine,” and who continue to endure silencing by their government, their physicians, and corporate media. To avoid further erosion of the First Amendment, it is essential that Americans come to understand how all this unfolded:

Even Pfizer’s own 90-day 5.3.6 post marketing experience, which both Pfizer and the FDA had in early 2021, showed its mRNA vaccine to be the most lethal drug ever rolled out, with 1223 deaths in the first 90 days (page 7), a multitude of adverse pregnancy outcomes (page 12) and nine pages of “Adverse Events of Special Interest” (Appendix).[1]

Walensky publicly declared that the vaccines appeared to be safe for pregnant women. However, Walensky neglected to mention that the Shimabukuro article was another mRNA marketing product of the CDC. In addition to serving as Director of the CDC’s Immunization Safety Office, over the course of the pandemic, Shimabukuro has been deeply entrenched in the CDC. He has reportedly served as VAERS “team lead” (raising valid questions about why the CDC seems to be ignoring the VAERS database) and “acting team lead” of the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) team.[33] He has also served on the CDC “COVID-19 Vaccine Coordination Unit.”[34] With Shimabukuro’s deep ties to the CDC and pro-COVID-19 “vaccine” stance, his serving as lead author on this critically timed and flawed study constituted a flagrant conflict of interest and never should have been allowed.[35]

Following the lead of CDC, on July 30, 2021 ACOG, along with the Society for Maternal Fetal Medicine (SMFM), recklessly began endorsing COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy,[36] even though the clinical trials failed to include pregnant women.

Multiple sources, including the government’s own data contained in VAERS, [40] casts doubt on the veracity of the claim that the COVID-19 vaccines are safe in pregnancy. One published investigational study, led by ObGyn and Maternal Fetal Medicine physician James A. Thorp, looked at adverse events reported in VAERS following COVID-19 “vaccination” in pregnancy compared to adverse events reported following Influenza vaccines since 1998.[41] The results of this VAERS investigational retrospective study are catastrophic: the FDA and CDC use a 2-fold increase as a breach in the safety signal, yet the study led by Thorp found a 57-fold increase in miscarriage, and a 38-fold increase in fetal death (stillbirth) following COVID-19 vaccination when compared to Influenza vaccines.

According to a recent troubling report from Naomi Wolf’s organization, DailyClout, the April 2023 batch of Pfizer clinical documents released under court order demonstrate that both Pfizer and FDA knew the mRNA shots caused serious harm to both fetuses and infants – yet CDC pushed the shots anyway.[43]

45] Donation records show that the CDC Foundation has, in past years leading up to the pandemic, received donations from Pfizer, Inc.,[46] the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation,[47] and a host of other pharmaceutical companies and private entities.[48]

“Naomi Wolf was banned from Twitter for misinformation.” “Misinformation” is never in quotes; the accurate caveat — “what Twitter called “misinformation”’ — is never added, in describing me, in spite of this phrasing being actually the journalistically ethical and correct phrasing. This damning but really meaningless summary then is to what 35 years of labor, a status as a feminist leader, two degrees, eight bestsellers, thousands of footnotes, and the publication of essays in every major news site in North America, as well as most of Western Europe — got reduced.

I re-trained for almost a decade, in the middle of my life, to teach. It is all I had ever really wanted to do with my life. Now I will never be able to be the only thing I ever wanted to be — a Professor of English Literature at a university. I am now sixty. It’s too late for me. Twitter, in collusion with the Biden administration, cost me my hard-won lifelong dream.

Twitter has not sent an advisory to all of the news outlets around the world that depicted me, at Twitter’s own direction, as crazy, that they were wrong to do so; there has been no press release stating that they erred, and that I was right, and that they are sorry for wrongly abusing my reputation (and destroying women). No, forever I remain “deplatformed from Twitter for misinformation,” even though it is finally being established that sadly I was deplatformed for telling God’s truth.

Yoel Roth is to this very minute, defending the de-platforming of people due to their having “spread COVID misinformation.” A nonentity, to this very day defending debunked magical thinking. To which Rep Marjorie Taylor Greene rightly responded: “Mr Roth: who put you in charge of what is true and what is not?”

So this issue brings us squarely into the cultural climate of 1933, when books were dragged from university libraries to be burned in a pile, in Berlin: or of 1937, when the Nazi party curated and hosted a “Degenerate Art” exhibit in Munich. What happened to me brings us squarely into a climate in which specific American writers, artists, sculptors, musicians, social activists, can be identified as enemies of the state, or identified as culturally or socially untouchable. “Degeneracy” in 1937 was defined essentially as that of which the Nazi party did not approve.

As far as I can see, nobody wants to discuss anything anymore.

Ostracizing dissenters is bad science

In 1943, the Lutheran pastor and member of the German resistance, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, was arrested and incarcerated in Tegel Prison. There he meditated on the question of why the German people—in spite of their vast education, culture, and intellectual achievements—had fallen so far from reason and morality. He concluded that they, as a people, had been afflicted with collective stupidity (German: Dummheit).

To understand how to deal with stupidity, we must try to understand its nature. This much is certain: it is not essentially an intellectual, but a human defect. There are people who are intellectually agile who are stupid, while intellectually inept people may be anything but stupid. We discover this to our surprise in certain situations.

Upon reading Bonhoeffer’s reflections, some might protest that “stupidity” is a pejorative term that lacks scientific precision. However, it seems to me that the word is, in fact, an accurate characterization of the COVID-19 pandemic response. Consider the unfathomable fit of stupidity required to believe that hydroxychloroquine and ivermectin are dangerous while at the same time believing that novel mRNA vaccines—developed at “warp speed”—are perfectly safe. As Bonhoeffer pointed out, such stupidity is not an expression of the victim’s lack of native intelligence, but of his inability to think when political or religious power is being exerted on his society.

Bonhoeffer’s observation: “There are people who are intellectually agile who are stupid, while intellectually inept people may be anything but stupid.”