Omicron is a Mild Flu

Trust the science. Trust the doctors. The “horrific” Omicron variant is about the best possible outcome, except for the globalists, the vaccine manufacturers, and the political scaremongers:

What we are seeing clinically in South Africa — and remember I’m at the epicenter of this where I’m practicing — is extremely mild, for us [these are] mild cases. We haven’t admitted anyone, I’ve spoken to other colleagues of mine and they give the same picture.

Dr. Angelique Coetzee

In other words, Omicron is the end toward which all viruses naturally mutate. Highly contagious, not dangerous, with mild to zero symptoms. And since the natural immunity it conveys is lasting, contracting the omicron variant may be the best possible Covid outcome for any individual, vaccinated or unvaccinated.


Not Whether but Which

Doug Wilson points out that discipline has never been a problem in the churches, it has merely been converged, twisted, and redirected:

This niceness vibe has been advanced in such a way as to make conservative believers think that they have been attending churches that have real trouble disciplining for error. But . . . not whether but which. In this world, it is absolutely necessary for every group that has defined boundaries to discipline for error, or for what they consider to be error.

Do you remember those times when conservative believers were chafing over the fact that no discipline ever seemed to be applied when young people drifted into sexual immorality, or into drugs? Or when middle aged businessmen abandoned their families and nothing happened? Or when someone announced that they were gay, and everyone thought it was a shame, but nobody did anything? It was easy back then to assume that this was because such churches didn’t know how to discipline.

But they did know how to discipline. Not whether but which. If you ever had pressed your concerns about the ongoing grab-assing in the youth group,, you would find out that they did know how to crack down on sin. They would crack down on you for your use of the word grab-assing in your letter to the session, which was totally unnecessary, and not becoming to one who names the name of Christ. In addition, they would discipline you for the legalistic spirit you were unfortunately starting to display. The discipline was there, just not aimed in the direction it ought to have been.

And how many churches over the last couple years have vigorously policed their congregations when it came to the wearing of masks? And they did this when to your knowledge they had never vigorously policed anything before. The one thing this should have told you is that they do know how to do it. They do know how to withstand pressure and blow back—but just from certain quarters. Not whether but which.

They had earlier refused to apply discipline in certain directions because they were concerned about the reaction they would get (from certain quarters). But on a different issue they applied discipline unambiguously and they were entirely unconcerned about the reaction they would get (from other quarters). When it came to you and your concerns about your aunt, who didn’t want to get the jab or wear a mask, but who had the antibodies, they were a rock wall. When it came to the concerns of those whose feelings were hurt by a visiting speaker who spoke insensitively about sex roles in marriage, they were a mound of marshmallows. Not whether but which.

This was because they feared the CDC (and the people who feared the CDC), and they did not fear God (or the people who fear God). Some went this way because health is their god, and they feared the virus. Others did it because the state is their god, and they feared the voice of officialdom.

At this point, the average church – be it Catholic or Protestant – is more likely to expel you from the congregation for quoting a Biblical passage deemed excessively racist or judgemental than for having a gay affair with the pastor’s son-in-law.

DISCUSS ON SG


Monday Arktoons

SAVAGE MEMES Episode 49: Turkey

CHUCK DIXON PRESENTS: WAR Old Leatherneck 3: War in the Atomic Age

HOW TO SUCCEED LIKE A DARK LORD Episode 1: All Hail!

Today Arkhaven is introducing a new Arktoons series from Anthony Gonzales Clark and me; the introductory trailer is here. The series tells of trials and travails of Davos the Doom Lord, a dark lord who faces the daunting challenge of how to keep himself occupied after successfully conquering the whole of Metal Earth, subjugating all his enemies, and establishing himself as The Sum of All Terror.

HOW TO SUCCEED LIKE A DARK LORD Episode 1

Why the Vaccine Nazis are Winning

Karl Denninger points out that, as usual, a reactionary and tactical approach is defeated by an offensive and logistical approach:

The pure bloods need a plan, milestones, and victory conditions. They need logistics and tactics to support them. But they need a few other things:

Stakes

Line in the sand

Boundaries

An outline of the enemy’s battle plan

These guidelines can be applied to life’s daily battles. Clown world won’t quit, perhaps this mindset will come in handy in other ways. There’s not a pure blood leader at the moment to implement and direct logistics. What follows gives individuals ideas for what to do until a leader or leaders arise.

Concrete victory conditions are essential. The concept of “return to NORMAL” can be expressed by things like:

No masks.

Laws against vaccine mandates.

No social distancing.

Laws against vaxports.

Pure blood victory conditions are diametrically opposed to Karens. There can be only one winner for each. Milestones track progress towards victory. Once a victory condition is decisively met, that particular battle is over. When all are decisively accomplished, the war is finished.

Stakes is number one on the list because everyone needs a reason to fight. Concrete stakes are better than vague doom and gloom. Stating stakes crystalize what happens if one side fails.

“If they can make my kids wear a mask, they can make them get the shot.”

If you want to win, you need a line in the sand that you stick to. No cucking. Cucking means it was never a line in the first place. The line has to be compatible with victory conditions. If you are a go along to get along type of person, be honest with yourself. For example, if you are planning to get the shot rather than lose your job, set your victory conditions and line appropriately.

Boundaries means what someone is willing to do and not do. The list of “will dos” forms a list of possible tactics. Now is the time to plan when to employ them.

Finally we come to the most important part of winning a war: Knowing your enemy’s battle plan.

“If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.” –Sun Tzu, Art of War

Karen’s battle plan was outlined above. Based on it, pure bloods can predict what happens after General Karen directs a logistical maneuver and when pure bloods take the offensive.

The gaslighting campaign of the past two years is a successful tactic. We’ve all experienced it many times now, but look at it in the context of Karen’s battle plan.

Someone mentions reality or a scientific fact around a General Karen (like Fraudci or Pants ter) and the next thing out of their mouth is gaslighting. Pure bloods scramble to explain why what the General stated is bull. More gaslighting, fear porn, and shaming follows.

“But I don’t want to kill Grandma,” the pure blood stammers. It’s a poor tactic and plays right into Karen’s logistics. Gaslighting allows their battle plan to proceed because the pure bloods are distracted and defending instead of going on the offensive.

Now you know what to look for and what to expect. Don’t be shocked when it happens…again.

As soon as pure bloods have victory conditions and logistics and tactics to support them, they join the battle. Until then it’s a one sided battle into cattle cars.

The fundamental problem is that most people, and virtually all conservatives, are unwilling to lift a finger until they are personally affected, even in the event that they can see the trouble coming down the road. And by then, it’s too late for anything but reactionary tactical action.

Astute readers will also note how the purebloods have been losing the tactical battle due to their insistence on dialectic.

DISCUSS ON SG


Less Human Than Human

VAXX TRAX has released its first vaccine-themed cover, Less Human Than Human, based on the original song by White Zombie.

Yeah, I am the judgement day
I rape the mind and body with the DNA, hey
I am the filthy blood
I mutilate genetics and I call it good, yeah
Vaccine suicide
Canine-killing freaks, read their fucking lies, yeah
Scratch off the graphene skin
Jab into your arm then they do it again, yeah

Less human than human, less human than human
Less human than human, less human than human
Less human than human, less human than human

Yeah, I am the science man
I turn the world around with a skeleton hand, say
I am the narrative
A cannibal core, a television head, yeah
I live to victimize
Telling all the suckers sociopathic lies, yeah
I am the predator
I tear the world apart and I eat it some more, yeah

Less human than human, less human than human
Less human than human, less human than human
Less human than human, less human than human

Yeah, you are the walking dead
A vaccinated stroke blowing up your head, yeah
You are the heart poison
You wanted more life, sucker, now you’re done, yeah

Less human than human, less human than human
Less human than human, less human than human
Less human than human, less human than human

DISCUSS ON SG


That Sounds… Familiar

The gatekeeper selected for France’s nationalist right is certainly utilizing some interesting rhetoric:

We’re now on to the issue that drives Zemmour’s political mission and fuels his incendiary campaign. ‘Immigration is war,’ he says, hitting his rhetorical stride. ‘They want to invade our European countries. That’s all. It’s nothing else. It’s war.’

‘Do you think Macron is deploying migrants as a weapon of war?’ I ask, fishing without a licence for a newsline.

‘I don’t think he has such malicious intent,’ he replies. ‘He’s not Erdogan. No, you mustn’t exaggerate. I just think that he is, how can I put, ideologically in favour of immigration.’

Zemmour has for some years been a leading public intellectual in France, a popular historian as well as a television provocateur and one of the country’s most famous journalists. He litters his speech with great quotes: ‘As Victor Hugo said… As Voltaire said… As Chateaubriand said…’ He speaks in newspaper columns: press his opinion button and he’s off. His eloquence is almost hypnotic.

Macron, he goes on, is gripped by ‘an individualistic ideology. He thinks every individual is basically the same and can live everywhere. Of course, he will enforce rules here and there, but fundamentally…the existence of peoples to him seems outdated.’

Does he blame the economic liberalism of Thatcher and Reagan for the excessive individualism to which Macron subscribes? ‘I wouldn’t say that,’ he replies. ‘It’s more a deviation from Christian humanism. As Chesterton said: “It’s Christian virtues gone mad.”’

Western societies, Zemmour suggests, have ‘simply forgotten that in Christian humanism there is indeed the respect for the individual but that is rooted in a culture, a religion, a people, a land… [today] we have the individual who is sacred, very well, but who is completely isolated from his people, his historical context, his customs. You see it is believed that individuals are interchangeable, that they are only consumers. It’s an economistic view that I don’t share. I think that people are first of all a product of their culture, their people, their customs.’

I rather like Zemmour, but I don’t trust him in the slightest and not merely because he isn’t French. Remember, Macron once talked a semi-reasonable game too. And “Christian humanism” is a half-step toward “our judeochristian values”. But the biggest problem is the way in which a journalist is suddenly being taken seriously as a political candidate. It’s rather as if the Republicans suddenly put forward Ben Shapiro for the 2024 presidential nomination because he was so accomplished at “owning the liberals”.

As the Germans and the Russians learned, nationalist leaders who aren’t actually of the nation don’t tend to work out very well for anyone involved.


Verdict: Not Unfair

I’ll admit to occasionally getting frustrated with Larry Correia’s insistence on abiding with the mainstream platforms that hate him rather than throwing in with the alternative economy and friendly platforms, but I also have to admit that there is no one like him for pure literary vituperation and excoriation, be it personal or political.

Anytime there is a breaking news story, there will be legions of howling leftists, and blue check mark idiots, lying their asses off and saying the most horrific things imaginable. And since they literally own social media, they get an official pass while the uppity on the right get officially squashed. We’ve all seen it. From trending hash tags that mysterious vanish, shadow bans, to ultra-biased fact checkers, to Youtube demonetizing wrong thinkers or even getting rid of the thumbs down button.

Yet as your fellow travelers are saying all this horrid shit, where are you? You’re supposedly sane. You claim to have a voice of moderation, but it must be a whisper because we certainly can’t hear it.

Social media is a constant barrage of Common Internet Shit Gibbons popping in and screaming at everybody who diverges from the accepted leftist narrative. They work off a standardized playbook and repetitive talking points, sneering derision, and passive aggressive insults designed to get around algorithms, and it is all designed to shame people into silence.

Yet many people on the right are slowly waking up to this game, and they’re beginning to fight back, skipping the false civility, and getting right to the meat of things, and returning insult for insult… Oh THEN I can count on the Caring Liberals to show up! Inevitably, every fucking time. Whenever someone on the right fights back, that’s when the real-life liberals you know magically appear to cry about “civility” and “tone” and such rudeness!

Gee whiz, Aunt Margaret/coworker #7/guy from the gym. Where the fuck were you when the leftist assholes were screeching at me and wiping their diseased anus on my carpet? Nowhere. Oh yeah, that’s right. It’s because you voices of reason don’t actually care about civility, you just care about shaming your wrong thinking friends and family into compliance. You emotionally manipulative motherfuckers.

Why do I have such scorn and derision for the so-called reasonable voices on the left? A. I don’t believe most of you. B. If you do exist, you’re cowards, who do nothing, say nothing, and then maybe show up after the dust settles to chide the rest of us about our tone.

Anybody with the courage to speak up on the left is swiftly set upon by the rest and devoured. They’re the cow and social justice warriors are the piranhas.

Sad part is I know many liberals in real life who will admit that they helped create a monster, and its now gone out of control, and the beast will eat them if they draw its ire. Oh, they’ll tell me this in person, but they won’t say shit in public. Because they know they’ll get cancelled, boycotted, fired, mocked, threatened, and kicked out of the Goodthinkers Club.

There is more. There is a LOT more where that came from. And it’s all true. The key line: “Liberal “friends” will sell you out in a heartbeat.”

DISCUSS ON SG



The Facts on the Ground

Karl Denninger reminds us of what we now know from experience, rather than theory, as the media begins its latest round of fearmongering over the so-called “omicron” variant which supposedly emerged in Botswana. Or South Africa. Or, possibly, Australia.

This “variant” has been found all over the world already. Therefore its already everywhere. Locking down travel after it is already in your nation is stupid and does nothing. The variant is either going to become dominant or it will not. You cannot alter that course once it gets to you — and no matter where you are it already has.

This “variant” has no evidence of being more deadly; it may in fact be less-so. Indeed that is the natural mutational pattern coronaviruses follow over time. There is no evidence in the form, for example, of higher hospital admissions, ICU utilization and death in those in which this variant has been detected. In other words thus far all the scaremongering has been based on….. exactly nothing as there are no facts currently in evidence to support such fear.

The vaccines clearly do not work. International travel has been vaccinated-only everywhere for quite some time. So the person(s) who brought the virus into your nation with this “variant” were vaccinated. The market, of course, responded to this news by spiking the vaccine companies, specifically Moderna. You have to wonder what sort of stupidity would drive someone to consider a firm that has one product which clearly did not work a “buy” in a situation like this. Mass psychosis is the only reasonable explanation.

Lockdowns and constraints clearly do not work either. The virus mutated because that’s what viruses do, and specifically coronaviruses do this all the time. It’s common. Further, vaccinating into an outbreak promotes vaccine-resistant strains because that’s just how natural selection works. You want the opposite but you can’t get there from here by vaccinating people while an outbreak is going on so the better option is to focus on early treatments and even prophylaxis which does not place immune pressure on the virus to evade your jabs.

Meanwhile the evidence continues to mount that prior infection confers better resistance than vaccines. Perfect immunity? No. But much better immunity and, to three nines, perfect protection against critical illness and death.
There were no cases of critical disease at reinfection and 28 cases at primary infection (Table S3), for an odds ratio of 0.00 (95% CI, 0.00 to 0.64). There were no cases of death from Covid-19 at reinfection and 7 cases at primary infection resulting in an odds ratio of 0.00…

So which do you prefer, since while the jabs do appear to provide some protection it wanes and it certainly does not prevent 100% of the severe and fatal outcomes.

Never mind the jab side effect profiles, which are quite dangerous, the evidence is mounting that the intermediate and long-term dangers are very significant and, in addition, there is mounting evidence that if you get jabbed and then are infected, and you will get infected, you are likely to not build “N” protein recognition so you can get infected again and again until you get the bad case that screws you. This is due to a well-recognized phenomena called “OAS” (“Original Antigenic Sin”) and is directly caused by the vaccines as they “train” your body to produce “S” antibodies, which is all they contain coding for and not “N” protein antibodies which are critical as the virus cannot mutate in that part to any material degree and remain a viable virus.

On the other hand the evidence is that beating the disease without a jab once means you have durable protection against critical and fatal outcomes on an extremely reliable basis including potential mutations since the “N” protein does not and cannot undergo substantial change.

The latter, by the way, is the pattern for every serious viral disease outbreak through history.

It’s becoming increasingly obvious that this entire two-year global anti-virus campaign has been a charade. Whatever the true objective was, neither saving lives nor health care was actually the purpose. Which reminds us, once again, that the one thing we can be absolutely certain is not true is whatever the official story being pushed by the government-media complex is.

DISCUSS ON SG


Don’t Believe the Numbers

As with most official government numbers, the number of vaccinated people is an estimate of a supposedly representative sample:

Pennsylvania on Wednesday said 68.8% of adult residents are fully vaccinated against COVID-19 — far less than the 73.7% cited on Tuesday and numbers highlighted in news releases for weeks.

A news release gave little explanation beyond saying the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on Tuesday “began to rectify their data to match Pennsylvania COVID-19 vaccine data and we anticipate the CDC to go through a similar process with other states across the country.”

In human terms, it equals 1,076,911 adult Pennsylvanians who were believed to be fully vaccinated on Tuesday and who, as it turns out, are not, according to data from health department spokeswoman Maggi Barton.

The number pertains to people 18 or older.

I’m not saying that the future reductions will compare to the 97 percent reduction in fatal Covid cases that was seen once Italy began to report more honest statistics, but it’s quite safe to assume that most governments are exaggerating the number of vaccinated people out there.