As best anyone can tell, the idea of locking down when faced with a new virus emerged in the US and the UK around 2005-2006. It started with a small group of fanatics who dissented from traditional public health. They posited that they could manage a virus by dictating people’s behavior: how closely they stood next to each other, where they travelled, what events they attended, where they sat and for how long. They pushed the idea of closures and restrictions, which they branded “nonpharmaceutical interventions” through “targeted layered containment.” What they proposed was medieval in practice but with a veneer of computer science and epidemiology. When the idea was first floated, it was greeted with ferocious opposition. Over time, the lockdown paradigm made progress, with funding from the Gates Foundation and more recruits from within academia and public health bureaucracies.
The Most Revolutionary Act
Uncensored updates on world events, economics, the environment and medicine
thats one way of looking at it. i, on the otherhand, agree with kit knightly: https://stuartbramhall.wordpress.com/?s=it+was+never+supposed+to+work&submit=Search
this was not a bumble on the part of lockdowners. the carnage lockdowns would cause was entirely forseeable and was apparently the goal. these people are not bumbling fools. theyre evil. see next link.
LikeLike
“I am interested in asking why so many people can’t accept that radical evil is real. Is that a right-wing question? Of course not. It’s a human question that has been asked down through the ages.
I do think we are today in the grip of “radical evil”, “demonic forces”. The refusal to see and accept this is not new.”
LikeLike
No, nomad, I don’t think the question of radical evil is a right wing question. In my view capitalism is a radically evil proposition that allows radically evil people to flourish at the expense of the majority of the population.
LikeLike