Virus: feared vector of health

 [This article is a companion piece to The real Great Conspiracy]

I knew these vaccines were not going to protect against infection, and I think we overplayed the vaccines and it made people then worry that it’s not gonna protect against severe disease and hospitalisation – it will – but let’s be very clear: 50% of the people who died from the omicron surge were older and vaccinated. – Deborah Birx 

In a time of universal deceit, the truth is a revolutionary act. – Wrongly attributed to George Orwell

Nothing ever goes away until it teaches us what we need to know. – Pema Chödrön

Introduction

I’ve already planted the above Birx quote at the top of a previous post; it reveals so much about our modern situation. Appointed by Trump as “Coronavirus Response Coordinator”, Birx recently admitted on Fox News that she withheld critical information on, and therefore “overplayed” the effectiveness of, the so-called ‘vaccines’. In a single sentence, she asserts these medical devices “will” protect against “severe disease and hospitalisation”, but then proceeds to inform us that 50% of those who died “from” omicron were “vaccinated” – two, three or four jabs? – and “older” – older than average life expectancy? 

“But let’s be very clear”.

What a sentence she put forth into the world! One dizzying contradiction following a garbled passage on overplaying vaccine effectiveness somehow worrying people about that effectiveness – huh? – in a hurried gush of bewildering blah. How is she, or the government, or the official covid narrative, remotely trusted? 

Well, mass formation is the answer, but it still bedazzles me.

I could say more about Birx’s Blurt, but will leave it at that. It stands at the top of this article as an exemplary expression of advanced civilisational decadence. Below, we’re going to take a look at the nature of that decadence, and what it might teach us about ourselves and civilisation.

In a nutshell

It boils down to this: There is far too much power in the hands of far too few people. To make matters worse, The System does not promote the wise and humble to its power-management echelons. Worse still, modernity’s education systems dumb down the majority. Actually, probably every single one of us is dumbed down by establishment education systems, worldwide. 

And these are not the only fatal problems modernity faces. There are several other fundamental issues also pertaining to power accumulation that are rooted in how we culturally understand success and value. I’ve repeatedly addressed these matters here at Econosophy.

Consequently, there is now far too much to change in too short a timeframe if we are to avert some manner of very messy collapse. This was the likely outcome of a human world intractably entangled (invested) in decisions made over the last three centuries or so. Our hands and feet are bound by such convoluted knots, our societal nimbleness now spasms one weak breath above nothing.

Despite many thinkers and activists having written, sung, shouted, and otherwise agitated on these points all along the way, somehow this situation has crept up on us. I think this is because a civilisation’s defining paradigms – this time around materialism’s definitional hold on wealth, value and success – determine its vector far more than valid criticism thereof. Critics are effectively asking a partying throng of teenagers to stop what they’re doing and go clean their rooms. By the time the house is visibly falling down, it’s too late.

This dynamic is, I suspect, endemic to civilisation to some degree, and perhaps even to life itself. It is thus not conspiratorial in the first instance. That said, it requires conspiring to get us to the stage where the house is falling down and we didn’t see it coming. Otherwise, I suspect the critics would have become sufficiently effective at pointing out the negative consequences of the constant partying, such that less dramatic corrections would have been possible. Humans are not stupid, just manipulatable towards both wisdom and folly. It takes sustained effort to ensure the majority of humanity is nudged away from wisdom across several centuries. And vice versa of course, albeit in the latter instance an organic, loving manner of effort fundamentally different from the former.

To repeat a point I make often: The primary beneficiaries of the partying want to remain its primary beneficiaries. Like vigilant gardeners, they are therefore constantly obliged to nix any serious threat to that partying, the very partying on which their lofty status rests. Being systemic, then, this obligation remains regardless of churn within civilisation’s upper echelons. “Meet the new boss; same as the old boss.” After all, this is essentially what the upper echelon’s job involves: ensuring maximally stable continuity; their ‘livelihoods’ depend on it. Their efforts to that end must, I believe, include some amount of conspiring. It is, however, beyond my wisdom to make any confident pronouncement on whether all this is somehow for the ‘greater good’. Were I forced to address that possibility, I would, like a good philosopher-poet, respond, “It is, and it is not.”

One way or another, then, we now find ourselves in clown world, in upside-down world. Humanity has been here many times before; historical dawn to historical decadence is a repeating pattern. At its end stage, as if a paranoid cocaine addict, civilisation peers out at the world that sustains it and confuses the health-restoring correction rushing towards it from the horizon as a virus-like existential threat. 

To the ramparts!

Desperately seeking correction

I’ve been pondering the ‘rightness’ of majority desires and expectations as a true indication of where humanity stands in terms of its quality of consciousness. We get the most accurate read possible on where we’re at as a people by looking at the quality of our choices, fears, desires and expectations. 

In other words, I’m exploring this alarming idea: while ego dominates the vast majority – thanks to all that dumbing down and the sacred cow of consumerism –, totalitarianism might be the only ‘healthy’ way through this historical moment. Rephrased as a question: Is the disruptive, psychic-toxin-purging frenzy of totalitarianism now the only possible experience powerful enough to bring us to our senses, to bring us back towards our better selves?

Just as with all sicknesses, totalitarianism’s particular presentation of collective symptoms would also be a mechanism for purging the patient of particular toxins. Would that make totalitarianism the ‘right’ choice, the painful-but-healing choice, for what ails us? 

If sufficient numbers of us fail to do the work to self-heal, fail to communicate our experiences and perspectives lovingly and effectively enough, are we thereby ‘choosing’ totalitarianism by default? It’s not an easy question to answer.

As argued above, there are manipulators perpetuating our ego-based state of being, manipulators who ‘benefit’ – for want of a better word – from the status quo. Nevertheless, we are each responsible for our own evolution, for our own quality of consciousness. The only alternative I can see to this unvarnished truth, is choosing victimhood by blaming the powerful “Black Hats” for our intractable predicament. Victimhood, however, can only choose to passively await the powerful “White Hats” to come clear up the mess. I see that as a sugar pill to more of the same a little way down the line. 

Only we – each last man, woman and child of us – can do what it takes to evolve the quality of our consciousness. That’s up to us. That’s our job. We are responsible for how we react to reality. After all, no one else can react to reality for us.

It follows, then, that we can ‘want’ totalitarianism by default. By refusing to summon the courage and desire required to look ourselves in the eye and face what we have become, we fail to develop the drive to do what it takes not to slip into totalitarianism. 

And yet at the same time, I’m convinced we don’t really, actively want that vector. Sadly, though, it seems we can only discover this by walking – sleepwalking – into it, then awaking to find ourselves in a nightmare.

So what if we do find ourselves in global totalitarianism a few years from now? Will we see it, clearly and honestly, for what it is? Perhaps not initially – not openly anyway. But we’ll feel it in the pits of our stomachs. It will be a regretful, guilty knowing working away at us in our depths. For how long will we remain ‘sane’ soothing ourselves with the mantra, “This is fine”?

Our choices are investments in the future they yield. The longer we persist in repeating choices of the quality we’ve tended to make thus far, the more invested in that quality of ever-unfolding future we become. As the saying goes, you can’t teach an old dog new tricks. This applies individually and collectively, where collective ‘old dogs’ are far harder to teach. 

Globally, then, we are about as invested in narcissistic consumerism as it is possible to be. We have flunked every single opportunity available to us these past 60 years to correct our deep dependency, our systemic and personal addiction, to this decaying vector. The correction, therefore, will be mighty, is mighty; I suspect it is well underway. In the end, though, it is understandable that we have so feared it, kicked it down the road for our children to face. 

Well, here we are.

Correction back to health perceived as ‘virus’

Correction is sickness. Sickness is the presentation of symptoms. Symptoms are the body’s mechanisms for leading itself back to health. For those fearfully opposed to going through a needed correction – symptoms are hardly pleasant experiences –, that which triggers the onset of symptoms is the enemy, something to be assiduously avoided. 

So then what would the ‘successful’ installation of global totalitarianism mean for those of us who have committed so much to preventing it? After all, we, too, would be its subjects, its serfs.

My obvious yet important answer is that we would then have the more difficult challenge – the exquisitely difficult challenge – of healing humanity from within totalitarianism. Humour, love, humility, compassion, strength, courage, gentle cunning, wisdom, art, poetry, logic … all these things and more would be needed, as now, but with yet greater subtlety and firmness. I suspect the hysterical-allergic response to potential correction would intensify; the perception of that which attempts to heal the dysfunction would be experienced as a ‘virus’ by the dysfunctional system: a thing capable of replication within, and thus infecting the entire body of, totalitarianism. Of course, it’s like that today to a large degree, but would be even more so should all planned control infrastructure be installed. It would be far harder to effect resistance, for example, with the very targeted and effective control of our behaviours and actions made possible by digital central-bank money. Harder, but not impossible. 

The more gently and humbly we love those around us, the harder it is for them not to trust and respect us. All living beings can pick up on that quality of love, feel it in those from whom it radiates. Just as now and always, this is the healthiest and most effective foundation any resistance to tyranny can work from. In other words, the difficulty of the challenge would change, but not its essential quality: gently coaxing a frightened but deadly child from its secure hiding place, out into a larger, more open, richer reality.

Conclusion

No system of control can be total. Life is, in essence, the unstoppable drive towards freedom of expression. Opposed, it always finds a way to reassert the freedom that is its spirit. I like the analogy of a teacher confronted with a classroom of children. Every rule laid down as The Law can be ‘innocently’ misinterpreted by her students, or bent, or kinda-sorta breached, recalcitrantly ignored, etc. 

Total control is impossible. Indeed, I’m not embarrassed making the tautological assertion that the ‘successful’ implementation of total control is the guarantee of that system’s demise because total control is impossible. 

As you do unto self, so you do unto other. 

For example, the education systems of the world are designed to dumb us down, to break our wills. Those who designed them likely thought it was ‘for the greater good’ – industrialisation, economic growth, writing, arithmetic, etc. We are educated towards narrowing stupidity by standardisation, measurement, curricula, specialisation, promotion of efficiency at the cost of resilience… And yet the ever-repeating processes initiated by upper-echelon groups against the rest of humanity harm the whole, not just the unwashed masses Out There. Global education systems produce a particular quality of population, nation by nation, spawn peoples decreasingly capable of wise, creative decision making, manufacture citizens too obedient and dependent to build and sustain healthy lives in any meaningful way. Which poisons the whole, poisons the upper echelons, who become spoilt, ego driven, seduced into seeing themselves as Natural Rulers, as gods among men, etc. This further poisons the whole by exacerbating the situation in a positive feedback loop whose bitter fruits are falling from the trees today, in abundance. The pattern repeats across media, business, law, politics … everywhere. It is a civilisational pattern called Us Against Them. 

As simple as all this sounds, it is our most fundamental blindspot.

So I don’t care who you are, you cannot beat life itself. You are, we all are, expressions of life. Trying to control life Out There is as futile and absurd as trying to live meaningfully while obsessed, 24/7, with forcing your shadow to behave abnormally.

In other words, hope springs eternal. 

With the exception of suicide, we don’t choose how and when we die, but we do all die. Fearing that beautiful inevitability, that beginning of a new chapter, is obviously not worth the effort. It is therefore how we live that is worth infinitely more than how long we live. By this simple logic, love, not fear, is the answer.

What I find fascinating about all this is how healthy processes become ‘virus’ from the perspective of the dysfunction; correction becomes dysfunction’s terrifying, karma-like momentum back towards health. This is because dysfunction is experienced as ‘normal’; it emerges too incrementally, too organically, to be discerned. Health-restoring, corrective information – the truth – is thus perceived defensive-aggressively as ‘virus’: disruptive, traitorous, terrifying. Today, modernity sees ‘virus’ everywhere it looks, and does everything it can to avoid it, come hell or high water.

On the whole, then, being a truth teller is a thankless task. But that’s no biggie; love, like health, is its own reward. 

The real Great Conspiracy

[This article is a companion piece to Virus: feared vector of health]

 There is no great conspiracy. – Me and lots of other people

There is a great conspiracy. – Me and lots of other people

I have come to the conclusion, after everything we’ve seen and heard, that the problem is not the virus. The problem is the so-called vaccines. And I am even close to coming to another conclusion, and that is: I really have very, very serious doubts that this virus, this alleged novel corona virus, has ever been isolated, properly. I think there is a very distinct possibility that all we’re seeing is a gigantic illusion, that was created by hundreds and hundreds of psychologists, psychiatrists and sociologists in order to put us in panic mode. Maybe even the gain-of-function experiments, or part of these experiments, serve that purpose. – Dr Reiner Füllmich

I knew these vaccines were not going to protect against infection, and I think we overplayed the vaccines and it made people then worry that it’s not gonna protect against severe disease and hospitalisation – it will – but let’s be very clear: 50% of the people who died from the omicron surge were older and vaccinated. – Deborah Birx

Introduction

There is a great conspiracy afoot. I’ve argued this point on several occasions. And yet, there is in fact no great conspiracy afoot. 

While the above paragraph may seem the basest semantic chicanery on my part, there is and there is not a great conspiracy afoot. It all depends on how we define “conspiracy”.

What I don’t believe

I do not believe there is a shadowy group controlling everything that happens in history in close accordance with some carefully constructed plan that evil ruling elites have been pursuing for centuries or millennia. Life is organic, not mechanistic. As such, it cannot be controlled. Further, being organic, we are of life much as fish are of the sea. As fish evolve, so evolves the sea, and, to some unknowable degree, vice versa. Symbiosis is the name of the game. 

Hence, control is an illusion, albeit a persistently alluring one.

On the other hand, civilisation must always be composed of shadowy groups that influence history. Civilisation is hierarchical (the vast majority of the time), so almost every instance thereof must have at least one group at the top of the pyramid, by definition. Any civilisation’s top-most group may, if so chosen, be perceived as shadowy by those outside that group. Or, it can be perceived as noble, elite, paternal, maternal, caring. This crude polarity represents the extreme ends of a dynamic range of interpretations available to us when perceiving those who have life-and-death power over us, like children trying to make sense of their caregivers. 

When we have very little information about a set of phenomena, we can project much of our hidden psychological material onto it. 

It is thus logically unavoidable that one consequence of how humans tend to operate, in combination with how civilisational structures influence human activity, is the perception of (shadowy) power groups up to no good.

But this tendency will also occur in the individuals that compose that top-most group. Just as we do, they look out into the world and project onto the various out groups that ‘surround’ them whatever of their own psychologies they are unfamiliar with. No doubt they spy great conspiracies afoot all around. No doubt, with so much to protect, with so much at stake, they feel surrounded by potential thieves and usurpers. No doubt some amount of paranoia is warranted!

So there is always, in potential, a great conspiracy afoot. It’s just a matter of context and perspective. In civilisation, there is much to gain and lose. History shows us this is so; people battle and struggle ceaselessly for as large a share of the pie as they can get their hands on. Conspiring will always represent some proportion of that process, and those who conspire will enjoy or suffer very differing degrees of ‘success’ and ‘failure’ as their plans play out.

But! Far more important than this, we are one; reality is one. We are creatures of the reality we jointly constitute. We are not cut off from reality, watching on from the sidelines of our private, isolated minds as though through a separating divide. It can seem that way, but it can only ever seem that way. Our ever changing context is composed of all of us doing, feeling and thinking everything we do, feel and think. Self and Other is necessarily a symbiosis, but one that is also a whole in its own right. 

Within that whole, it just so happens that ego needs to protect Self, at all costs, and finds Other threatening – to some extent. Ego, by my definition thereof, simply cannot perceive this organic symbiosis between Self and Other – what Darren Allen calls the “panjective” perspective –, cannot see how jointly responsible we all are as co-contributors to the context, the total situation, All That Is. Ego’s priorities are self-defence, self-defence and self-defence. So, if there is a great conspiracy afoot, you can bet your bottom pound sterling ego is responsible. And, most revealingly, ego will also be fundamentally wrong about what is actually afoot, seeing as it must filter out most of reality by virtue of its function: “consciousness in the service of fear” (Tom Campbell said that).

In my view, then, there is no shadowy group controlling all historical events.

What I believe

There is an unknowable number of shadowy groups failing to control everything that happens in history, and that failure is history. Further, our knowledge of historical events, and our perception thereof – here I mean everything that is available to humanity about the past – must forever be extravagantly incomplete, as well as subject to power struggles and groupthink, ego fears and ego ambitions around status and fame. 

As I’ve said before, it’s a mess out there, and authentic humility is the healthiest way through.

With regards to great conspiracies such as the ‘faked’ moon landing: I don’t know, nor do I really care. The same goes for lizard overlords; I neither know nor care. There are any number of ‘crazy’ conspiracy theories that appear to me as glitzy spectacle. I suspect these are nine parts opportunistic money making or mischievous attention-mania, and one part deliberate misinformation. It benefits those tasked with guiding how history unfolds – however self-deceptively and unsuccessfully – to muddy the waters, to poison the information pool just enough to keep real conspiring nicely hidden. Whether for ‘good’ or ‘ill’ – what’s wrong with maintaining control structures by any means possible and thereby preventing collapse into societal breakdown –, all sorts of tactics will be used to keep society ticking along as stably as possible. How else could it be. 

As the army chap played by Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men bellowed, “You can’t handle the truth!” Thanks to modernity’s extreme specialisation and how different humans are from person to person, most of us do not want to know the whole truth about how society is kept more or less stable over time. Eggs are always being broken to make omelettes. We may well have the stomach to consume the omelettes modernity offers us for consumption, but very little appetite to inquire into how they came to be on our plates.

What I believe with regards to the covid phenomenon is that it is partly a great conspiracy, but mostly groupthink, hysteria, incompetence and error. Why would any group want to set this hysterical state of affairs into motion – i.e. trigger mass formation? Because we are at a pivotal historical juncture – perhaps peak oil is a part of this, perhaps ‘overpopulation’, perhaps technological advance, perhaps all that and more – and something historically new is being birthed. 

Those accustomed to modernity’s top-most positions want to keep their hands on history’s reins. They feel threatened by the potential for more sovereignty to the ‘masses’ implied by the internet’s stupendous power to instantly share information globally; feel threatened by the serious potential for messy, unpredictable societal collapse as economic growth hits its own brick wall; are afraid of the havoc unmanaged collapse would wreak perhaps for centuries to come, so have grasped the nettle and are attempting to steer history through this change and, by their management, keep the unavoidable destruction to a minimum. How much patrician disdain of the hoi polloi is at play, how much avuncular noblesse oblige, I do not know; it surely differs from person to person. But I can say this: I would be very surprised if my interpretation is wide of the mark.

And yet we are all involved. We are all participants in this ‘conspiracy’ by not wanting to grow up and take responsibility for our lives, by remaining unwilling to examine our preferences, our addictions, our fears. For as long as we shy from true maturity, we remain joint architects of our victimhood, distanced from our true sovereignty and power by our fearful state of being, and thus at the mercy of those we thereby implicitly command to push history on in the direction they choose, however erroneously, however self-deceptively. 

While things remain this way, we all willingly submit to the nature of the beast. As such, we are the great conspiracy. 

(I have a sneaking suspicion we all know this, however dimly.)

Viruses are currently conspiring to infect $cience!

This is why I wrote this article. This is the accidental but oh so poetic understory bubbling along at the bottom of it all. This is the unintended consequence well underway in the form of accidentally coalescing conspiracy concealed in a mass self-deception posing as an effective conspiracy that has many people fooled into mass-formation compliance. This is the dismantling of the plans of mice and men as life grows on anyway, right under our feet and up through the thin cracks of the plan’s poorly poured concrete.

There is contagion, there is infection; we are always subject to these processes, though often want to deny it. Everything infects everything else by virtue of being co-contributors to All That Is. My thoughts affect yours, yours affect mine; my body language influences yours, yours influences mine; their advertising is infectious; their politicising contagious; their weaponising pathogenic; their music seductive; their films bewitching; their farming nourishes us, assisted by the buzzing of bees, the slithering of worms, the crawling of beetles, the health of the soil. Everything ‘infects’ everything else. 

Except for viruses. They can’t do anything at all.

Viruses are not what we think they are. Viruses are a theorised explanation for disease phenomena – contagion vectors – we still understand but poorly. Viruses are a theoretical error, a projection by flawed humans onto poorly understood observed particles that do not function as argued by virology. Those shapes arrows point at in images from electromicroscopy are not vectors of disease as claimed, are not pathogenic as claimed, they are something else; biological or biochemical phenomena that are the consequence of the experimental methods used since 1954 to ‘prove’ the existence of viruses. They are not actually the ‘viruses’ looked for so fervently by means of that methodology. They are cell detritus produced by the process virology self-deceptively calls “isolation”.

Could this be true? My previously idle curiosity on this point is now tilting strongly towards soft conviction because it is poetically resonant it should be so, namely that the only non-contagious thing in reality is ‘virus’. And the result of this beautiful possibility, should it come to light properly, could be to dissolve $cience almost over night. Just think how much money is made because ‘viruses’ are thought to be vectors of disease.

The $cience is dead! Long live the sciences!

It would be divinely sweet, humbling, and all encompassing. This is the burning question: What can science tell us? What are the sure fruits of dependent and independent variables, falsifiability, and correctly impartial experimentation? How much of reality can be defined and understood by these means? I suspect far less than we want to be the case. 

Is virology about to cause $cience to ail and wither, to purge it of its corruption, its financial toxins? Is virology pathogenic to $cience?

If ‘viruses’ deliver this outcome – ‘virus’ as chosen reason for draconian lockdowns, total surveillance, digital currencies, endlessly sustained pandemics, social-credit systems and digital IDs, ‘virus’ as the launchpad for all that totalitarian architecture –, then the erroneous idea of ‘virus’ will have reverse infected society into a beautifully crude yet poetically elegant awakening that no other thing could possibly have managed. How sweetly poetic that accidental conspiracy would be!

The biologically microscopic, the pre-life mists of proteins and RNA we have misperceived – because we can – as dirty little buggers, not to be trusted, insidious assassins infecting us all by lurking invisibly on the wind, on your children’s hands, on your shopping bags, on the words “I love you” breathed from your partner … those tiny things are a collectively projected nightmare more darkly redolent of the spiritual void where community trust used to be than anything else I could ever have imagined. 

Of viruses and convenience (rewritten)

[Added Jung quote 10 March 2021] 

Without pain, there is no awareness. People do everything, no matter how absurd, to avoid an encounter with their own soul. We do not become enlightened by imagining figures of light, but by becoming aware of the darkness. (Carl Jung)

Oh how we love convenience! Isn’t civilisation at root a process that removes the inconvenient from our lives and replaces it with more and more convenience? “I just want an easy life!” Civilisation: flight from the jungle, escape from danger, mastery of nature … a veritable factory for convenient things!

Yes, I’m being provocative; civilisation is much else besides, good and bad, and humans can and do romanticise everything, including Nature and The Wild. But because nothing is perfect and all human creativity produces unintended consequences, it’s healthy to take a critical look, especially when civilisation has turned decadent yet again and things are falling apart. 

Why do we repeatedly end up here? Partly, I argue, because we’re drawn, accustomed and then addicted to an easy life, a life filled with convenience. Once there were slaves. Today, there are smart phones and microwave ovens: modern slaves even the poor can afford. But they’re slaves that enslave, as all slaves do in the end. It’s part of the curse-blessing of Convenience, Divine Child of Civilisation.

It is also fantasy, an advertiser’s confection. Advertisers know what they’re doing. Check out the work of Vance Packard and Edward Bernays if you don’t believe me, or simply consider how much money is spent on advertising every year. Our fantasies and fears are the fields advertisers plough. Armed with the information they harvest, they create worlds we cannot help but desire, and associate those worlds with products. These products, we then believe, will make our lives better, even though they never do. We’re addicts blind to the obvious: the drugs don’t work. Failing to see this, glued glassy eyed to our gadgets and TVs because … well, what else is there, frankly … we remain hooked into the pursuit of The Next Best Thing but end up living vicarious lives of empty circularity.

Convenience is a powerful myth, immaculately conceived dark aeons ago by innocent seed planting and the taming of animals: the birth of the domestic sphere, the hearth, the fixed abode. Fast forward tens of thousands of years, and now, apparently, we save buckets of time thanks to washing machines and fridges, but choose to use that time for far less vital and meaningful activities, a set of things we might today call Netflix And Pizza and the jobs we have to do to afford it. How bestial civilisation has made us. We are dehumanised, stagnant machine beings programmed to want to consume whatever they’re selling, too numbed to notice how empty we’ve become. Then we’re enticed into causes like Black Lives Matter or The Environment, which act as vessels for all that repressed impotence-rage that grows and festers in the unexamined shadows cast by our emptiness. (Yes, advertisers and propagandists farm those fields too.)

Mature discussion has become almost impossible. We’re bitterly divided along an unknowable number of fault lines, squaring off, trench to trench, screaming redly into each other’s faces, refusing to budge because we know we’re right. We’re addicted to being right, too. Being right is a tasty morsel that somehow doesn’t quite assuage that odd, at-the-edge-of-our-vision hunger for something real and true; we keep coming back for yet further confirmation that we mean something to someone. We keep returning to Authority Figures who happily lead us by the nose for another empty circuit of the prison yard we’ve learned to call Freedom.

This is the bed we’ve allowed to be made for us, the bed we’ve helped make; again and again we choose convenience over tough struggle, over facing reality as it is, over growing up into genuine adulthood, taking responsibility for our actions and so ridding ourselves of the emotional triggers our rulers know and love. We’re a mess, an embarrassment to history. The Great They are right; we are useless eaters. We’re civilisation’s trash about to be taken out and forgotten. And we richly deserve it.

But then, as if by magic, the virus came. The virus! That thief of convenience yet uniter of all people everywhere who now understand: Yes, we’re at war; sacrifices must be made! We are given to believe that the cherished Old Normal is dead. Long live the New Normal! We shall build back better than ever before, create a world free from freedom this time, blissfully infantile, a good-breast-bad-breast, womb-like utopia-dystopia throbbing with threat and promise. It will stop history in its tracks to finally keep us safe in place, safe at home. We will suckle forever at its many teats content to own nothing and be paid pittance for our uncritical obedience: convenience’s logical end, its zenith and nadir, its mewling doom.

Except the virus is like a gathering storm that never quite makes landfall. It builds and builds in the offing, a non-stop miniseries of endless twists and turns spiralling off in too many directions. The screams and cheap thrills, the dashed hopes and broken promises, the not-quite logic of the measures meant to hold the virus back just won’t add up but keep mounting anyway. It is an overload of spectacle, an endless information tsunami forming to a crucible that fuses each of us to our bitterest foe: our selves. Disintegrated down to isolated individuals, family members set against each other, there’s nowhere left to turn but within. 

Within is the only place the work can be done, the work that could reignite history. Each of us must face this challenge one way or the other. Indeed, it is an artefact of being human. We are always driven towards it, inexorably, by fate, by the way things are. Mostly we wriggle heroically to avoid it, but now we face an historical moment that has made this confrontation more pressing than ever. Deep in the intimidating shadows cast by the emptiness that is the fruit of meaningless lives are riches we can hardly imagine. 

Try not to yield to fear. Though alone with the work, which is as it must be, you are not on your own. I am rooting for you, you are rooting for me. Underneath it all, the emptiness and desperation are in fact born of something almost painfully beautiful: love of love. How else could meaninglessness be so bitter? 

Evil, the product of unchecked and wounded fear, insatiably perverts good to bad: fatherhood becomes tyranny; motherhood, smothering, devouring concern. Sensuality becomes pornography; friendship becomes social-media likes; wise governance becomes party politics; commerce, corporate greed and sociopathy; freedom and responsibility, narcissistic infantilism. 

Love, the product of true maturity and wise transcendence of fear, walks a very different path, a path created by the gentle desire for the healthiest possible outcomes. It has nothing to do with utopia, or romance, or escape from difficulty and tragedy. Love is a fluid, ever-evolving process of looking out for each other while encouraging, in everyone, true maturity, reasonable self-sufficiency and robust independence. That is the alternative that lies before us. It won’t be easy to set it in motion, but nor is it impossible. I like to think it’s unstoppable.

The virus is an anti-convenience, a shadow-projection called into being to shepherd us into ever smaller pens the so-called ‘elites’ would rather we occupy. But it must, by virtue of this very function, also force us out of our convenience zones toward the difficult work of growing up into true adulthood. Only a minority will do the work, but will then be on hand to help others through the challenges ahead should evil fail, as it must sooner or later through its inherent malfunctioning. The work begins when we awaken to our emptiness, intuit what must be done and no longer want to avoid it. 

Does evil possess sufficient finesse to neatly steer us all into those pens – with many falling along the way –, expertly deceive us such that we prefer what evil offers – prettily decorated conveniences masking steady moral decay – over walking the path toward true freedom and maturity? I don’t think so.

Let all that is not rooted in truth and love wither and fall away.

Open Appeal to Virologists from Corona_Fakten (translation)

[I translated the article below from German because I consider much of the data it contains to be pivotal to the prevailing medical paradigm of 'mechanical' bodies under continuous attack from threatening, and also mechanical, exogenous pathogens. Although rather breathless in tone, it raises important questions that are scientific as they can be quickly addressed via experiment. More comment from me below.]

What do a fraudulent scientist, a scientist who is victim of an erroneous assumption, and a scientist who uncovered this erroneous assumption have in common? Not much, actually, but in this particular story they are all pivotal in immediately bringing “corona mania” to an end. Not only that, they also have the power to dispatch virology in its entirety to the realm of the damned. They could initiate a long overdue paradigm change in medicine. Why is this so important? I’ll tell you. It would not only end the pandemic; never again could any pandemic be declared. There would be no more vaccinations, people’s fears would be ended and, most importantly, the way could be paved towards a real medicine: we call it Universal Biology. 

Which three scientists am I talking about? Our story features the science-fraud Prof. Christian Drosten, the honest scientist Prof. Sucharit Bhakdi – victim of a profound error within medical science – and a scientist who is not often talked about, is in fact deliberately avoided by most despite having exposed a disservice to humanity: Dr. Stefan Lanka, winner of the measles legal process. My concern in this article is not to discredit anyone, or to diminish their work – with the exception Prof. Drosten; his title should be revoked with immediate effect. Prof. Drosten is in my eyes a felon who has been reported to the police several times, and for good reason. Among others by Dr. Stefan Lanka. 

I ask you all to distribute this article, especially to those who have the power to make a difference: to all scientists, to both Corona Inquiries and of course to the few remaining honest politicians. 

Now let’s begin.

The reason why the hidden operators’ scheme works every 2 years is that even those who expose it – be it a Bhakdi, Mölling, Kämmerer or Wodarg etc. – still speak of viruses that do not exist. Request scientific evidence of pathogenic viruses, request experiments conducted with full and proper scientific rigour, including required control experiments; either you get no response, or are directed to publications that do not satisfy scientific criteria. This is wherein the problem lies.

What benefit is there in successfully persuading people with endless mortality statistics and PCR tests relative to the number of people testing positive? What is the point of demonstrating that the virus is completely harmless – and this with several studies worldwide factually substantiating that claim? Very little, because it only buys us time until next year, when those hidden operators will simply ‘discover’ a new virus, just as they always do and always have done. From BSE to avian flu, on to swine flu, ebola, zika and now SARS-CoV-2… Who has the energy to debunk these fairy tales year after year? How many lockdowns can we survive?

It’s just skirmishes going nowhere. What do we do if we’re not fortunate enough to have a mild winter – as was the case this year – but are hit by a hard winter, basically meaning more death and serious illnesses? Who will still believe our statistical analyses? They will be of no use; more people will die than the year before. These endless skirmishes wouldn’t be needed if all the scientists and doctors who have exposed the myth of the dangerous corona virus joined forces to carry out control experiments with Dr. Stefan Lanka. In contrast to the hard-earned facts collected over the last 8 months, the control experiments are a triviality that can be completed very quickly. Real science can be simple sometimes.

Why don’t Bhakdi and co. conduct the required control experiments as requested by Dr. Stefan Lanka, among others?

To avoid refuting their own discipline, virologists consistently disregard two rules of science. One is to critically assess every claim. The other is to test all assumptions and methods used by means of control experiments. If they were to conduct control experiments, they would find that ALL short gene sequences they theoretically link together to form viral genetic strands in fact originate endogenously within human metabolism and not exogenously from some theorised virus!

On 13.06.2020, Dr. Stefan Lanka called on all biochemists, bioinformaticians, virologists and cell-culture specialists to carry out and publish these control experiments and to inform him about them. He has created a control experiment whose design precludes the possibility of the sample material being contaminated with the SARS-CoV-2 virus before or during the experiment. 

Why haven’t Prof. Sucharit Bhakdi, Prof. Karin Mölling, Prof. Ulrike Kämmerer, Dr. Wodarg, Prof. Drosten, RKI director Prof. Wieler and all the others conducted these control experiments or contacted Dr. Lanka? I know why the RKI haven’t responded; I have the proof in the form of email correspondence that the institute does not care about facts. This should be reason enough to have the institution shut down – I will publish an article about this correspondence in due course. But I consider the first four scientists mentioned to be honest.

Dr. Stefan Lanka was the first to explain in detail that Drosten’s PCR test was not based on clinical data!

After Dr. Heiko Schöning read out four names at the Querdenker 711 demo on August 29, 2020 of scientists who had confirmed that the PCR test from the Berlin Charité and Drosten was not based on clinical data – as no sequences had been available at the time – I didn’t hear the name of the man who had disclosed this fact in detail to the experts. It was Dr. Stefan Lanka who clearly demonstrated that Prof. Drosten committed science fraud, and that the WHO went along with it. Doesn’t the person who has been working for over 30 years to ensure that the truth comes out also deserve credit? During the measles-virus trial, Dr. Stefan Lanka was able to demonstrate with sound facts that there is no scientific proof [for the existence of] the measles virus, and has also shown there is no scientific evidence for any alleged pathogenic virus. I ask the organisers of Querdenken, Doctors for Enlightenment and the chairs of the two corona-inquiry committees – who are doing important work – to please talk to Dr. Stefan Lanka. I have tried to mediate several times and I am always ready to do so again. Anyone may get in touch with me about this. I would like to mention once again that Dr. Stefan Lanka filed criminal charges against Prof. Christian Drosten for precisely these and other reasons. Everyone should take Lanka’s proposal seriously, especially the other experts who have also confirmed that Drosten’s approach is unscientific.

The required control experiments have already been conducted. They confirm as erroneous the assumption that viruses cause disease.

Dr. Stefan Lanka had these necessary control experiments carried out as part of the measles-virus trial, and submitted the findings to the court. The results do not stand in scientific isolation: Expert opinion on the cytopathic effect refutes the alleged specific infectivity of the measles virus.

Cytopathic effect in monkey kidney cells is not specific to measles viruses - Author: Laboratory manager of an independent laboratory in Germany

Results from the laboratory:

“Depending on the added non-viral and non-infectious substances, changes in cell morphology could be observed at different points in time, which since 1954 has been equated with the “isolation” of the “measles virus”. 

Particularly after the addition of high concentrations of penicillin/streptomycin (20%) or cultivation under deficient conditions (1% FCS), changes in cell morphology were observed that were microscopically identical to the formation of syncytia described by the measles virus (Table 1: Chemicals, solutions and cell culture media used). 

The studies clearly showed that the formation of syncytia is not specific to a measles infection. This confirmed the forgotten observations of both Enders & Peebles and Bech & von Magnus and refuted the assumption that Enders & Peebles and successors had used this technique to prove the existence of a virus.”

Table 1: Chemicals, solutions and cell culture media used

The mother of all publications on the measles virus by Enders and Peebles never claimed to have proved the presence of a measles virus; they had serious doubts and recorded them clearly in their publication. You can read about this in my article. 

Also in the publication by Bech, V. & von Magnus, P. (1958) Studies on measles virus in monkey kidney tissue cultures, Acta Pathologica Microbiologica Scandinavica 42(1):75-85, the authors explain that the cytopathic effect is not measles-specific, but caused by other factors. On p.80 we read:

“cytopathic changes similar to those caused by measles virus may be observed also in uninoculated cultures of monkey kidney tissue (Fig. 4-5). These changes are probably caused by virus-like agents, so called ‘foamy agents’, which seem to be frequently present in kidney cells from apparently healthy monkeys”

This sentence is remarkable as it points to the non-specificity of precisely those pathological changes that are used as the starting point for visual evidence of an infection, presented in the first publication from Enders & Peebles.

Prof. Karlheinz Lüdtke, Max Planck Institute for the History of Science, Early History of Virology, offprint 125, 89 pages, 1999. i. K. (A 2) Preprint 1999. [Toby: I’m not sure why this is in original article but I'm including it anyway.]

This finding is critical because it shows how important control experiments are in establishing that you might have been wrong. It shows that until 1953, it was clearly understood by every virologist and the scientific community that all components, which had been understood as components of viruses until that time – were revealed by control experiments to be components of dead tissues and cells. This is why it is crucial to keep highlighting the absence of control experiments in the publications presented.

Further information and test set-up can be found in Wissenschafftplus Magazine, 2017, 4th issue.

“The tissues and cells used to ‘detect and multiply’ the ‘viruses’ are pre-treated in a very specific way before the act of alleged ‘infection’. They are deprived of 80% of their nutrients so that they become hungry and absorb the viruses. They are treated with antibiotics to rule out that bacteria – which are always and everywhere present in all tissues and sera – cause the expected cell death. It was not until 1972 that biochemists realised that the antibiotics used were independently damaging and killing cells without this being noticed and taken into account by virologists. It is exactly the factors of ‘starvation’ and ‘poisoning’ that lead to the visible death of the cells, which was and is misinterpreted solely as the presence, isolation, effect and reproduction of the suspected viruses.”

To which scientific publication or publications does the state government refer in asserting the existence of the corona virus SARS-CoV-2 and justifying the “corona” measures taken?

Justification: In all publications to which Prof. Christian Drosten refers in the design of his PCR test, only the steps taken to arithmetically align nucleic acids from patient fluids to form a viral genome strand appear.

And there are no control experiments to rule out the possibility that entirely normal nucleic acids from the patient were used to calculate the genome of the claimed virus.

The fact that these crucial control experiments are absent in all publications on the ‘isolation’ of SARS-CoV-2 makes it impossible to designate these publications as scientific. Since the publication of international scientific rules by the DFG in 1998, control experiments have been a requirement for designating a publication scientific.

My question aims at, among other things, ascertaining whether the corona measures taken by the government are at all legally justifiable, since the Infection Protection Act (IfSG) on which the measures are based requires that all parties involved comply with the latest scientific and technical standards.

This question should be asked by all scientists and sincere seekers after truth. The linchpin in stopping this pandemic is compliance with required scientific regulations made mandatory by the DFG in 1998. This includes conducting the necessary control experiments. All scientists and academics who evade this step should not be called scientists and academics; they disregard scientific regulations that are binding for all!

What should we do now?

1. Work together to ensure that honest scientists step out of their comfort zones and get in touch with Dr. Stefan Lanka to conduct these control experiments, and jointly publish the results.
2. Help to distribute this information to the appropriate parties. All costs of setting up the control experiments are covered, so costs cannot be used as an excuse. 
3. If those responsible refuse to conduct the control experiments, they are acting against scientific regulations and thus violating their own principles. If they continue to refuse, you should ask them to name the publication in which the scientific regulations were followed, including the control experiments that properly detect a virus. Their answers can be sent to me.
4. Make it clear to them that they will not lose face, but will emerge as honourable scientists.
5. Explain to them that these control experiments are a triviality that will have a huge impact.

Follow us on Telegram for further summaries and important news. Main channel: https://t.me/Corona_Fakten 

Questions can be emailed to: coronafaktenfragen@gmail.com  

Channel for discussion: Corona_Facts_Discussion

Mail: https://t.me/Corona_Fakten/313

Link for Facebook, Twitter and co.: https://telegra.ph/Das-Ende-der-Virologie-ist-nur-ein-einziges-Kontrollexperiment-entfernt-08-30

[Germany has been the centre of what I see as global resistance to tyranny, tyranny that is being rolled out under the guise of a 'deadly virus' we need to be 'protected' from. As such, my focus these last corona months has been there. This article is in some ways an extension of my first article on the alleged corona virus, even though I did not reveal my growing suspicions about this element at that time; I was not sufficiently convinced to give it an airing. Now, while still not convinced terrain theory holds all the aces – sickness is the body handling and expelling environmental toxins, including things like fear and stress as responses to environmental stimuli – I do increasingly see the (currently) oppositional tension between the germ and terrain theories as paradigmatically reflective of the deeper paradigm shift occurring around the collapse of materialism at the core of human understanding, all towards what we might tentatively term a new 'spirituality'. It is this reflection, this synonymity, that lies behind my publication of this material.

In addition to this article, interested readers might want to view these two German YouTube videos I subtitled (my very first efforts as a YouTuber), one concerning a detailed analysis of the Stefan Lanka measles-virus case mentioned above, the other setting out the reasoning behind bringing a class-action suit in the US against governments, and manufacturers and sellers of the PCR test, internationally, because the test is not fit for purpose, a fact now slowly emerging even in the mass media.

Much is happening in Germany now that looks strongly like a rapid walking back of the entire fake-pandemic narrative, far too much for me to report on here in detail. As it develops, I will be sharing and commenting on the key elements. Watch this space.]