More on this book
Kindle Notes & Highlights
Read between
February 21 - March 8, 2022
Beginning at Tiananmen Square, the CCP sought to prove that even the newest information technology could be subverted to tyrannical ends, and that ideas really could be killed with the right amount of violence.
Over the coming decades, information did not liberalize the authoritarian world. Instead, the world became more like China. And 30 years later, the free world would be forced to confront the true cost of the devil’s bargain it had struck with the Chinese Communist Party in the aftermath of Tiananmen Square.
Having stampeded into lockdowns with no clear goal in mind, governments bumbled from one justification to another—“flattening the curve,” preventing a “second wave,” getting the outbreak “under control,” “waiting for a vaccine,” or even “eliminating COVID-19” entirely—importing an ever-darker swathe of illiberal mandates along the way, all in the supposed interest of “public health.”
For if crime and disease are to be regarded as the same thing, it follows that any state of mind which our masters choose to call ‘disease’ can be treated as crime; and compulsorily cured.
Little reliable information reaches the outside world, but what is known is that at least half a million Tibetans have been detained in a massive system of concentration camps constructed across China’s western provinces, pursuant to the CCP’s unique hybrid of public health and security policy: Fangkong.[81]
Over decades in power, the CCP had constructed a multilayered system for stifling dissent in China based on the Soviet psychological warfare technique of Zersetzung, which translates roughly to “psychological decomposition.”[96] The regime’s threats instill fear of open discourse about reality, resulting in self-censorship. To avoid the cognitive dissonance of this silence, individuals willfully play down the evidence before their own eyes. The collective psychological effects are deceptively enormous.
The idea of locking down an entire state or country and forcibly shutting its businesses had never been entertained, discussed, or implemented in any pandemic literature until it was done by Xi Jinping in January 2020. Lockdowns had never been tried before 2020 or tested before 2020, even on a theoretical basis. Xi had brought the concept of “lockdown” into human history; it otherwise never would have entered the collective imagination. Anytime anyone endorsed a lockdown, they were endorsing a Xi Jinping policy.
By May 2020, it was common knowledge in the medical community that early ventilator use was hurting, rather than helping, COVID-19 patients, and that less invasive measures were in fact very effective in assisting recoveries.[271] A New York City study found a 97.2% mortality rate among those over age 65 who received mechanical ventilation.[272] The WHO’s “early action” ventilator guidance, citing Chinese journal articles, had killed countless thousands of patients across the world.
In March 2020, the Dutch government commissioned a cost-benefit analysis concluding that the health damage from lockdown would be six times greater than the benefit.[279] They ignored it, claiming “society would not accept” the optics of an elderly person unable to get an ICU bed. The Dutch government knowingly took a course of action that would cause health damage—let alone economic damage—six times worse for the Dutch people, out of a concern for optics.
The PCR test could pick up any amount of viral matter any time and yield endless “cases”—a permanent pandemic. Of this feature, Xi Jinping, a longtime fan of both Mullis and Fauci’s work, was well aware.
Western media outlets came about as close as possible to an outright merger with Chinese state media while projecting the superficial criticism necessary to maintain the illusion of independence. Inconvenient facts were suppressed, inconvenient questions silenced, and all of it was built on the collective fantasy of controlling a common respiratory pathogen—a feat the epidemiology profession had agreed was impossible and self-destructive just months prior.
The world was fighting a virus from China with a public health policy from China that effectively turned the world into China, and the narrative of the day was that all this was perfectly normal.
the world was stampeded away from the light-touch methods that were previously acknowledged to be the only practicable means to fight a respiratory virus—hygiene, shielding the vulnerable, expanding hospital capacity, and generally letting healthy people go about their lives. Instead, the world was driven mad with the fantasy of emulating the “success” of a totalitarian dictatorship.
Health professionals have a reputation for being a bit gullible, owing to their work in a high-trust environment. At the same time, they enjoy unparalleled public trust. What better conduit to popularize totalitarianism as “science”?
Roberts asserts that “medical and scientific” actions of “politically accountable officials” should not be second-guessed by an “unelected federal judiciary”—apparently forgetting that not only are health officials unelected, but “second guessing” the actions of officials is the sole purpose of judicial review.
Whatever the reason, western governments proved unprepared to cope with or even comprehend wide-scale scientific fraud. The judges deferred to the politicians. The politicians deferred to the health officials. The health officials deferred the WHO. The WHO deferred to China. And China deferred to Xi.
The lockdown fraud was mostly textbook, but Xi claimed two major breakthroughs in the art of tyranny. One: Tanks, planes, and boats don’t matter if one’s system of propaganda and censorship is embraced directly by the enemy. Two: Those who talk a big talk about freedom and human rights are often the most willing to sell them cheap.
Totalitarianism is a virus. It starts with a single aberrant individual or cell, and pathologically corrupts, replicates, and kills by any available means. Any policy from a totalitarian China, including lockdowns, should have been presumed to be advancing that singular goal.