by Robert Gore, Straight Line Logic:

Our dystopia is their utopia.

The only way to control a substantial population is to murder enough that the rest are terrified into submission. But it isn’t really the control that’s the objective, it’s the murder. At root, murder stems from a grotesque hatred of one’s self, which animates a craven fear of anything and everything, particularly death, and paradoxically, a psychotic desire to kill one’s self and every other value. Only by understanding our enemies do we have any chance of defeating them.

The twentieth century and the two decades of this one offer ample material to study the psychology of evil. In the nineteenth century, Fyodor Dostoyevsky masterfully plumbed those depths. In the barren desert that constitutes today’s intellectual life, the study of history has been discarded and great literature ignored or burned. They’re casualties in the war being waged on anything that helps us understand ourselves. In one sense Dostoyevsky couldn’t have anticipated the collectivist charnel houses of the century to follow, but in one sense he did. He knew charnel houses were the work of individual souls, and one couldn’t grasp the one without examining the other.

With many minority groups claiming historical injustices against them and demanding remedial recognition and reparation, with official endorsement by many institutions of those claims and demands, and with their propagation via all major channels of communication, no voices have been raised in support of the indisputably smallest and most persecuted minority group—the individual. “Individual” and “individual rights” are words that must not be spoken.

Any recognition of the individual draws attention to the fundamental and massive violation of individual rights stemming from coronavirus totalitarianism and governments’ encouragement of riots, vandalism, and violence. In a Peanuts cartoon, Linus exclaims, “I love mankind… it’s people I can’t stand.” The game is always the same. In the name of some collective greater good—safety, anti-racism, fill in the blank—the wealth, property, work, rights, freedom, and lives of individuals are stolen. Of course the alleged greater good is never realized, but that was never the point. The fountainhead of any collectivist ideology is the hatred these lovers of mankind have for people and their pursuit of happiness.

For coronavirus, the blueprint has been to test restrictive measures in one jurisdiction, see if they fly, and then move to universal implementation. China’s lockdown was the model for global lockdown. Sweden was condemned and smeared for refusing to follow the crowd, but its condemners have no more concern for the Swedish population than they do for any other population.

Sweden has demonstrated that lockdowns are unnecessary. Its death rate is no higher than other European countries, and would have been substantially lower, perhaps cut by one-half to three-quarters, had it done a better job of protecting its elderly and nursing home patients. Unlike Andrew Cuomo and several other Democratic governors who made the same mistake, Swedish officials have admitted theirs.

Swedish openness is antithetical to coronavirus commissars bent on propagating propaganda and enforcing draconian dictates. However, the ultimate danger to their regime will come when a vaccine arrives. After almost five months of what were supposed to be two weeks of lockdowns ostensibly sold as necessary to “flatten the curve,” it’s obvious the lockdowns are meant to prevent herd immunity, keeping people away from sunlight and fresh air, both of which bolster the immune system, and enforcing isolation and loneliness, which impair it. In other words, they’re designed to make the outbreak worse. If you’re surprised—regular readers won’t be—welcome to reality.

When the vaccine arrives, the Swedish people will have achieved herd immunity (apparently they already have in urban centers), which traditionally has been the way humanity has dealt with viruses. An immune herd doesn’t need a vaccine and while the Swedish government probably won’t prevent anyone who wants one from getting one, it probably won’t be mandatory, unlike most of the rest of the world.

That will prompt unwelcome questions among the thinking remnant. If herd immunity works, why did we have to lockdown? Why can’t we just complete the herd immunization we’ve already started? Will a vaccine, like lockdowns, make the outbreak worse? Why are we running the risks and bearing the enormous expense of a vaccine that’s been rushed to market and inadequately tested, will be only partially effective, will be adulterated with unhealthy preservatives and adjuvants, and will undoubtedly have unanticipated side effects, some of which may be severe? What’s the rights-destructive, life-threatening agenda behind the vaccine?

While China was the beta test for lockdowns, apparently New Zealand and Australia serve as such for the next iteration of totalitarianism. China’s draconian measures were instituted in Wuhan, which actually had a serious coronavirus outbreak. New Zealand’s and Australia’s coronavirus death rates are infinitesimal: 4 per million in the former, 18 per million in the latter (Worldometers.info). Despite these scant numbers, New Zealand is under lockdown and has postponed an election (nobody has died of the coronavirus since May) and Melbourne has instituted, “the harshest lockdown conditions of all Western democracies” (“Letters From Melbourne, a ‘Ghost Town Police State’ Under Brutal Covid Lockdown,” Robert Bridge, strategic-culture.org). Here are Melbourne’s restrictions, the preview of coming attractions that will eventually be rolled out around the globe:

Read More @ StraightLineLogic.com