From my private correspondence:
The buzz word among our adversaries right now is reset. I think we are coming to a turning point but it isn’t what they expect. What the governmental response to Covid has done is expose just how poor most global leadership tends to be. When put to the test they failed miserably, most of them, and had to fall back on the age old techniques of coercion and censorship, always the first and last resorts of ruling classes which have forgotten how to lead. Rapidly expanding technology, and the elite attempts to control it are truly farcical, mean that shrewd ordinary people can be just as well informed, if not better informed, than those who call themselves leaders. If I had to pick out buzzwords for the coming era it would be Ignore, Bypass and Associate. Ignore, as far as possible, leaders in and out of government who are not leading in a positive direction. Bypass such leaders as far as possible. Freely associate with like like minded people and groups to accomplish goals large and small. I think the future of humanity is bright, and, as always, rough patches, and our response to them, will show us the way. Of course I tend to be an optimist, but I do know my history. Nothing is written, but I have been heartened by the rebels that have emerged against the Covid restrictions and the censorship of the Tech Lords. I feel like an American colonist in 1765 observing the beginnings of the Stamp Act protests. It is an exciting time to be alive, and I envy the young.
Amen.
When I trained to be a principal (not that I was mad enough ever to take such a job) I had some good coursework. In my classes on leadership and management, we talked about “span of control”. Institutions that need one leader can become too large for that one person to oversee, hence the need of assistants and bureaucrats. But the same limits apply to them as well. We have asked government since FDR’s time to do too much (and perhaps I’m too contrarian for some here when I insist that demand from below often preceded grasping from above) and it’s breaking itself on span of control issues. If we wish less government authority, we need to take back some of the responsibilities and handle them ourselves.
Another major malfunction of their ‘model’ is the proclivity of the supine serfs and fraudulent mail-in ballots to grant the bilious bureaucrats and onerous oligarchs more discretion and power after each and every inevitable policy calamity.
Irish Democracy – massive, passive resistance to the idiocrats’ dolorous diktats.
Very good to see a reasoned yet optimistic view of where this is all headed. Thanks for posting. I love the motto “Ignore, Bypass and Associate.”
And Tom Byrne and T. Shaw, I think you’re both right about the role of demand (and acquiescence) from below in our having reached this pass.
Any specifics the author cares to share? Does he find it odd that countries such as Germany and Japan, which imposed tougher covid restrictions, have infection and death rates substantially lower those of countries that hemmed and hawed, such as the US? Is it really “pro-life” to let people do what they want even at the risk of more people dying?
Any specifics the author cares to share? Does he find it odd that countries such as Germany and Japan, which imposed tougher covid restrictions, have infection and death rates substantially lower those of countries that hemmed and hawed, such as the US?
Untrue. Covid restrictions seem to have had no impact on the death rate of the virus:
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1104709/coronavirus-deaths-worldwide-per-million-inhabitants/
The death rates do not seem to bear any relationship to the covid restrictions imposed. What we are learning is that covid restrictions themselves had had an immensely negative impact on the mental and physical health of populations, the economic havoc being self-evident.
How the qualify something as a COVID death can help– the US uses the most extreme “but it COULD have influenced it” method, while Germany, RoK and Japan use stricter definitions.
https://www.bmj.com/content/369/bmj.m1395
Is it really “pro-life” to let people do what they want even at the risk of more people dying?
Quit trying to hijack opposition to murder for your pet causes, you unethical unspeakable.
I lost a much loved family friend, at least one relative, possibly four more relatives to come, to your unspeakable “but you must do this to avoid risk” nonsense. We had a good family friend barely escape near certain death via canceling his “we’re not sure he’ll make it to the surgery” job because it was ‘elective,’ ie, non-emergency-services. His wife managed to bully the hospital into doing it anyways. There wasn’t a single case in the entire county for several months after that.
But oh, their actual deaths don’t count, while the hypothetical deaths that you can use to force others to do what you want, those are super important.