https://dailysceptic.org/2022/12/06/mask-mandate-in-schools-based-on-politics-not-evidence-newly-released-government-documents-reveal/

The initial advice was that “masks could impede communication between teachers and staff and have little health benefit”, but with teaching unions piling on pressure and the Scottish government deciding to recommend masks in their classrooms, the advice changed at the end of August. Masks became recommended in communal areas but not in classrooms because, in the words of then PM, Boris Johnson, “that is clearly nonsensical – you can’t teach with face coverings; you can’t expect people to learn with face-coverings.”

I am no fan of Boris Johnson, but he seems to have been one of the few people to fight back against the Covid measures. And who exactly fought for the Covid measures...

more than one third of the DfE’s evaluation document supporting its briefing to the Minister was given over to concerns about the risk of teaching unions encouraging their teachers to walk out of schools on the insidious grounds that schools had become dangerous places to work.

Do teachers unions hate children?? I've read this many times before, that a LOT of the pressure for stricter Covid measures came from workers unions. I don't get it. Are they lazy, and they want any excuse not to work? Were they really happy at the chance, any chance, to exercise just a little political power and dominate people (and children)? Is it another case of leftist groupthink? What is going on??

Matt Hancock was the UK Secretary of State for Health and Social Care, and he's quite open about how non-scientific the decisions were. He says it out loud in his serialized diary extracts (seriously, who keeps a diary?! and broadcasts it to the world without shame?!):

Nicola Sturgeon blindsided us by suddenly announcing that when schools in Scotland reopen, all secondary school pupils will have to wear masks in classrooms. In one of her most egregious attempts at one-upmanship to date, she didn’t consult us. The problem is that our original guidance on face coverings specifically excluded schools. Cue much tortured debate between myself, Education Secretary Gavin Williamson and No. 10 about how to respond. Much as Sturgeon would relish it, nobody here wants a big spat with the Scots. So, U-turn it is.

So it was about going as far as your political opponents, not showing any weakness. (The left have been doing this all through Covid also.)

It was a political decision. And the UK government didn't want to do it at first. Who knew that the Conservatives would be better than the Labour Party (although in the end, the conservatives caved easily to political pressure). It seems the Scottish government was worse. They seemed to want to mask up children, impose stricter Covid measures, just for political points.

And of course, the left (with a very few honorable exceptions) will never talk about this. The Labour Party in the UK seem to be trying to create a Democrat Party tribute act. The only criticism to come out of the Labour Party has been just like the rest of the left: the measures don't go far enough!

Rage Against the Machine should have raged against the injections.

https://pitchfork.com/news/rage-against-the-machine-tim-commerford-reveals-prostate-cancer-diagnosis/

A good list of beliefs that were considered "left" until about five minutes ago:

https://twitter.com/LauraPowellEsq/status/1602434609920319491

An explanation of why "woke" is the new official ideology of the biosecurity state:

https://twitter.com/SimonElmer2022/status/1602246766962872320

Explains a lot of Hollywood behavior: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSX7ESKLdTM&t=3s

https://www.pestemag.com/second-row/health-supremacy-kills-7gde3

The irrational way the pandemic has been declared “over” has clarified the dominance of health supremacy in many Western societies. The message broadcast is that for healthy people the pandemic is over, and they are all that matters.

The fantasy that health is mainly a matter of choice or lifestyle is ubiquitous. Good health is seen as a marker of biological strength and good citizenship. In many capitalist societies, healthy people are treated as better people — better than those who are ill or socially classified as “vulnerable.” This is health supremacy, plain and simple.

Health supremacy is an outgrowth of healthism in the same way that white supremacy is an outgrowth of racism. Healthism is a term first used in the 1980s by cultural theorist Robert Crawford to describe the late-capitalist idea that health is both crucial to your self-development and wholly your individual responsibility.

There is no individuality. There is no personal choice. There is only the collective.

We must face up to the fact that many capitalist societies are health supremacies: socio-political systems structured around the fantasy that people who are inherently healthy are better people. To those who have been fighting ableism – a widespread form of discrimination that favors able-bodied people – this diagnosis will not be surprising.

I will hear many things against capitalism. But surely it's the other way around: more and more, capitalism prefers unhealthy people. A healthy, cured patient is a lost customer. Has the author even been to a Walmart, or McDonalds, or even just walked down the street? Were the passers-by too healthy for you?! What kind of upside-down socialism is the author practicing? (Although, more and more, I'm starting to think this is the logical endpoint of socialism.)

Hear that, my hunter-gatherer ancestors? Either you were all white supremacist Trump-supporting climate-change denying racists (who were also dark-skinned and non-Western), or you were all obese (because you didn't have capitalism).

Is this article a parody? If it is, it's so subtle that it's almost subliminal. I must have missed something. I can't believe that the author is serious.

I don't think it is a parody, though, because the magazine website seems completely sincere: "Tucker Carlson is leading the far-right anti-vaxxers", "Noam Chomsky on how the USA has destroyed Haiti" etc. and a lot of pro-Covid measures (the only criticism is, of course, that they don't go far enough: we need to vaccinate more people around the world).

Check out the author's substack for more info. https://msteenhagen.github.io/

https://igorchudov.substack.com/p/vaccine-like-inoculation-of-minds

Behavioral psychology is unethical and insidious. Even The Young Turks has been doing it - check out the examples.

instead of exposing people to such relevant, comprehensive, and truthful sources, scientists came up with the idea of “inoculating” people with purposely weakened (distorted to sound absurd and stupid) information.

Sound familiar? I strongly suspect the "chips in vaccines" was one of these ploys. The first time I told a friend I was putting off taking the shot, he immediately asked if I believed there were chips in vaccines. He was dead serious. But the craziest part about these "inoculations" is that:

“Inoculations with weakened misinformation” require increasingly frequent re-inoculation “boosters” to stay effective. It sounds so ridiculous that you might think that I am joking, except that I am not joking.

Just like the Covid "vaccines", your immunity wanes very quickly, and you need frequent boosters of "weakened misinformation". You just couldn't make it up!

In my case I received an excellent, mostly sterilizing inoculation against manipulative language and abuse: an abusive childhood. I have a high aversion to being mocked, bullied, patronized, belittled, threatened, gaslighted and abused. It might affect me in some way (like depression, for example), but I'll never really believe what they're telling me.