The Numbers Don’t Support Scapegoating the Unvaccinated

https://www.intellectualtakeout.org/the-numbers-don-t-support-scapegoating-the-unvaccinated/

graphic added by Think for Yourself

Jul 29, 2021 by Annie Holmquist, Intellectual Takeout

The unvaccinated are getting the blame for rising COVID numbers. But digging into the data suggests a different story.By Annie Holmquist

If you’re tired of the pandemic and just want to go back to normal, David Frum at The Atlantic has news for you: It’s all the stupid people who refuse to take the vaccine that are prolonging our COVID misery.

Oh, wait, that’s not it exactly. In actuality, it’s all Trump’s fault. Frum, once a leading voice of the conservative establishment, declares: “Pro-Trump America has decided that vaccine refusal is a statement of identity and a test of loyalty.”

That’s an odd statement given Trump was in favor of the COVID vaccine, got it himself, and even launched Operation Warp Speed to develop and roll out the vaccine quickly. Frum also seems to forget that many liberals have been skeptical of the vaccine as well, while numbers of conservatives—including Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey, who also recently suggested we blame the unvaccinated for the pandemic surge—have staunchly supported the vaccine.

The fact is, many unvaccinated people may not be acting out of willfulness or spite as Frum suggests. They may instead be looking at the data and wisely expressing caution until more is known about the vaccine and its effects. More information is surfacing on that front every day…but you probably wouldn’t know that unless you looked past the talking points of our ruling elites.

As I mentioned in a recent article, Israel, one of the most vaccinated countries in the world, is a good indicator of how the vaccine is working. A few weeks ago it was reported in The Times of Israel that 60 percent of those vaccinated had not contracted COVID, a startlingly low rate considering the vaccine has only been in effect for a few months. However, the latest data out of Israel is even worse, for now that number has dropped to 39 percent, though the vaccine is 91 percent effective at preventing severe cases of COVID. The vaccine’s benefits also appear to be very short-lived.

Unfortunately, statistics like that are often overlooked in the U.S., a fact former New York Times reporter turned author Alex Berenson has been carefully documenting. In a recent article, Berenson explained that the U.S. doesn’t give the full truth about who is dying or having complications from the COVID vaccine. The official narrative advanced by Dr. Anthony Fauci and others is that the unvaccinated are the ones getting sick and dying, yet data shows such a narrative is false.

As Berenson notes, official numbers in the U.S. do not include the partially vaccinated. Authorities claim a person is not fully protected until several weeks after they have had both doses, and so anyone who has received a shot but not completed the full course of treatment is treated as unvaccinated for statistical purposes. This is not how things are usually done with most medical treatments, nor is it the case in other countries. Thus, many U.S. COVID cases in the last few months attributed to unvaccinated individuals actually occurred in those who were partially vaccinated, a fact that is often suppressed and never reaches the ears of mainstream Americans.

Berenson also uses data from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to show officials like Fauci are flat out lying when they say that only about 1 percent of the fully vaccinated are contracting or dying from COVID, when in reality around 10 percent of U.S. COVID deaths since the beginning of May 2021 have been in the vaccinated. That still is not a number to be ashamed of, Berenson says, so why don’t officials like Fauci simply tell the truth and admit that the vaccines last for a short time and won’t necessarily stop the virus from spreading?

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn’s 1970 Nobel Lecture sheds some light on this question. “We shall be told,” he says, “what can literature possibly do against the ruthless onslaught of open violence? But let us not forget that violence does not live alone and is not capable of living alone: it is necessarily interwoven with falsehood. Between them lies the most intimate, the deepest of natural bonds.”

According to the good ol’ dictionary, the use of force can be one meaning of the word violence. We may not yet be seeing physical force to get us to wear masks, take the vaccine, or stay locked down (although in some cases people actually have), but we are definitely seeing our government officials use other forms of coercion, through mass media messages and official talking points, to get us to conform to their way of thinking. And that force or violence, Solzhenitsyn explains, can only survive when it’s cloaked in falsehood:

Violence finds its only refuge in falsehood, falsehood its only support in violence. Any man who has once acclaimed violence as his METHOD must inexorably choose falsehood as his PRINCIPLE. At its birth violence acts openly and even with pride. But no sooner does it become strong, firmly established, than it senses the rarefaction of the air around it and it cannot continue to exist without descending into a fog of lies, clothing them in sweet talk. It does not always, not necessarily, openly throttle the throat, more often it demands from its subjects only an oath of allegiance to falsehood, only complicity in falsehood.

We are being throttled with ever more force, a fact revealed by Berenson’s information about COVID, as well as by the increasing censorship he is encountering. This throttling will only continue in the weeks ahead, not only with regards to COVID, but in other realms as well. The question we must ask ourselves is whether we will allow this throttling and violence to continue. If we do not speak up, then we are a party to falsehood and violence just as much as are our elites.

The time to make a conscious choice about whether to choose truth or falsehood is fast approaching.

Source: The Numbers Don’t Support Scapegoating the Unvaccinated | Intellectual Takeout

The Cracking Fault Lines of Our ‘Well-Meaning’ COVID Despots

graphic added by Think for Yourself

By Annie Holmquist, Townhall

If you’ve been watching closely, you may have seen a number of fault lines widening in the COVID pandemic narrative. These fault lines are vindicating for those convinced of the underhanded dealings of pandemic authorities for many months, and horrifying for those realizing their trust and confidence in authorities was betrayed.

Regardless of which camp you are in, these fault lines paint a good picture of why our experts and authorities have been so effective at entrapping us in the new world of COVID despotism. By allegedly putting the well-being of each citizen first, they effectively put it dead last.

The first example of this is in a recent Wall Street Journal article by Dr. Marty Makary, a Johns Hopkins School of Medicine professor. Makary studied data on 48,000 children diagnosed with the virus and discovered otherwise healthy children have a COVID mortality rate of zero, a fact which should comfort the many parents who have lived in terror that their children would catch the virus. “If that trend holds,” Makary declares, “it has significant implications for healthy kids and whether they need two vaccine doses.”

An odd thing has happened, though. The few childhood deaths that have allegedly resulted from COVID have not been thoroughly researched by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). This is unfathomable to Makary, particularly given the debate over whether children should even be vaccinated. Those “eager to get every living American vaccinated are following the CDC without understanding the limitations of the methodology,” he says. In other words, the CDC wants you to be vaccinated because it’s for your own good, never mind that we don’t really know if it’s necessary, or even whether it actually does more good than harm.

Sadly, this lack of information isn’t limited to children. Makary calls out the CDC on their limited information or understanding on a number of COVID aspects. This includes their failure to collect information on the major role underlying health conditions play in COVID deaths, the underreporting of vaccine complications, and even the lack of data on naturally acquired COVID immunity. On that last point Makary says, “The low priority given to this indicator is consistent with how public-health officials have played down and ignored natural immunity in their drive to get everyone vaccinated.”

But while America’s CDC isn’t saying much about natural immunity, other countries are beginning to leak information suggesting it’s far stronger than the vaccine. In Israel, only 1 percent of confirmed new COVID cases since May 1 came from those who had had COVID previouslyThe Times of Israel reports. Forty percent of these new COVID cases, however, were contracted by vaccinated individuals, a statistic identical to recent data out of the UK. If that data holds, it would seem the vaccine is far less effective than we’ve been told, yet we never would have guessed that based on the information our authorities continually push.

Unfortunately, information related to the vaccine isn’t the only COVID-related instance where our authorities pretend to put our well-being first. Dr. Fauci’s exchange with Sen. Rand Paul (R-KY.) in a Senate hearing the other day is a demonstration of this, with Fauci acting like he is taking the moral high ground and calling Paul a liar for the data he presents on gain of function research.

These are only a few of the cracks beginning to show in the COVID narrative, and it’s likely we’ll see many more in the coming weeks.

Sadly, they are a sign of what Robert Nisbet called “the greatest single revolution of the last century” in his book, Twilight of AuthorityThis revolution transfers power from our constitutionally established leaders to “the vast network of power that has been brought into being in the name of protection of the people from their exploiters.” In other words, bureaucrats and other alleged experts who claim to champion our best interests, but refuse to let us have a say in what those best interests are.

Nisbet continues: It is this kind of power that Justice Brandeis warned against in a decision nearly half a century ago: ‘Experience should teach us to be most on guard to protect liberty when the Government’s purposes are beneficent. Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious encroachments by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding.’ What gives the new despotism its peculiar effectiveness is indeed its liaison with humanitarianism, but beyond this fact is its capacity for entering into the smallest details of human life. (Emphasis added.)

On the surface, our authorities certainly appear well-meaning, but given the information emerging with ever greater rapidity, it seems that at the very least they are sorely misguided. If we want to guard against their encroachments on our liberties, then we must do our own research to make sure their narrative rings true with the data we uncover, rather than comfortably following the crowd to a life under COVID despots.

_____________________________________________________________

TWILIGHT OF AUTHORITY abstract

“We had thought, or our forefathers had, that modern liberal democracy would be spared the kind of erosion and decay that both Plato and Aristotle declared endemic in all forms of state. Now we are not so sure.”

So wrote Robert Nisbet in the first edition of Twilight of Authority, published by Oxford University Press in 1975.

“The centralization and, increasingly, individualization of power is matched in the social and cultural spheres by a combined hedonism and egalitarianism, each in its own way a reflection of the destructive impact of power on the hierarchy that is native to the social bond,” he writes.

Published by

Ungekrzte

"Enlightenment is man's emergence from his self-imposed immaturity ... the inability to use one's own understanding without another's guidance. This immaturity is self-imposed if its cause lies not in lack of understanding but in indecision and lack of courage to use one's own mind without another's guidance. Dare to know! (Sapere aude.) "Have the courage to use your own understanding," is therefore the motto of the [European] Enlightenment. "Laziness and cowardice are the reasons why such a large part of mankind gladly remain minors all their lives, long after nature has freed them from external guidance. They are the reasons why it is so easy for others to set themselves up as guardians. It is so comfortable to be a minor. If I have a book that thinks for me, a pastor who acts as my conscience, a physician who prescribes my diet [or vaccine], and so on--then I have no need to exert myself. I have no need to think, if only I can pay; others will take care of that disagreeable business for me. Those guardians who have kindly taken supervision upon themselves see to it that the overwhelming majority of mankind ... should consider the step to maturity, not only as hard, but as extremely dangerous. First, these guardians make their domestic cattle stupid and carefully prevent the docile creatures from taking a single step without the leading-strings to which they have fastened them. Then they show them the danger that would threaten them if they should try to walk by themselves. Now this danger is really not very great; after stumbling a few times they would, at last, learn to walk. However, examples of such failures intimidate and generally discourage all further attempts. "Thus it is very difficult for the individual to work himself out of the immaturity which has become almost second nature to him. He has even grown to like it, and is at first really incapable of using his own understanding because he has never been permitted to try it. Dogmas and formulas [e.g., Leftist ideology, identity politics] these mechanical tools designed for reasonable use--or rather abuse--of his natural gifts, are the fetters of an everlasting immaturity. The man who casts them off would make an uncertain leap over the narrowest ditch, because he is not used to such free movement. That is why there are only a few men who walk firmly, and who have emerged from immaturity by cultivating their own minds." - Kant, "An Answer to the Question: What is Enlightenment"

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s