In April I wrote a postscript to my critique of the 'unofficial left' (David Graeber, Noam Chomsky, Media Lens, etc.), criticising their non-response to the already highly suspicious coronavirus narrative. Things have moved on — now into the past tense — so here is the same summary, now updated and revised.
Solidarity with the international working class is 'on hold' for the duration of 'the Covid-19 Pandemic'. In fact, anyone from said working class questioning the basis for lockdown measures is a tinfoil hat-wearing flat-earther agent for Big Capitalism.
A deadly pandemic, we are told, swept across the planet, forcing governments to massively enhance state and police power, lock everyone up in their homes and bork the economy. National governments, transnational institutions and all media outlets were of one voice. Panic. We just
had to put millions and millions of people out of work then shut them up in a heavily policed panic room. Anyone unable to perceive the foundations of the unofficial left might imagine that they would have interrogated this extraordinary situation, that they would have critically appraised official accounts of the severity of the 'pandemic', that they would have asked themselves what the likely effects might be of putting so many people out of work; or that it would have been the perfect time for 'radicals' to seriously question the functioning of the system, to explore wider questions about its stability and to critically investigate vested interests; perhaps also take a look at the universal denial of death and how easily people can be manipulated by playing on their fears, or even explore the possibilities for genuine revolt as the economy contracted. They would have been disappointed.
What was the response of the unofficial socialists mentioned
in the original article? Did they criticise the official story? Did they ask if anything else
might have been motivating their leaders than altruistic concern for human life? Did they question the extraordinarily repressive measures governments have taken to contain the problem? Did they question official figures (or even looked at them — many were surprisingly frank)? Did they take a second look at other epidemics and pandemics (such as the flu pandemics of 57 and 68: each of which were
twice as deadly as C-19), or at deaths from influenza under normal conditions (around half a million a year — about the same as C-19), or at deaths from other similar illnesses, like pneumonia? Did they sound any alarm bells about
rather suspicious proposed solutions such as an express vaccine, contact-tracing and so forth? Did any of these people ask
any seriously critical, or even very interesting, questions? The answer to all of these questions was an
almost entirely predictable no. Every man jack of them fell straight into line. Jonathan Cook peeped his head about the parapet for a split-second, spiritual astronaut Caitlin Johnstone asked one or two questions on peripheral matters before concluding that she finds 'the whole thing ultimately irrelevant and boring', XR started rubbing their hands, Afshin Rattansi vaguely gestured towards a few sceptical RT pieces and Paul Kingsnorth sat in a barley field and stared majestically into the sunset.
But that was pretty much it.
Comment: "Our measures are working because they give people freedoms," she says... as she TAKES AWAY ALL THOSE FREEDOMS.
Don't you just love how Ardern and her collaborators present their policy decisions as if those were the only 'obvious', 'scientific' options?
Sweden, hello!?!
This New Zealand govt is - like its Aussie and British counterparts - stark raving mad.
Who would have thought 'the Nazis' this time around would be, first and foremost, British liberals and their descendants, all joyfully goosestepping us towards the New World Order...
UPDATE: No surprise, the lockdown will be extended from 3 to 12 days. Because the "cluster" is now 30 people. Never mind that that's what viruses do, and there's no evidence the lockdowns had ANY positive effect - as noted above, the only evidence we have suggests they are responsible for a lot of unnecessary deaths.