We are entering territory where the idea of decertifying some universities and some political parties is becoming worthy of consideration. How many injection deaths and injuries can now be anticipated because of the zombie antics of those in the process of destroying the University of Western Ontario and other asylums like it? Clearly there needs to be serious attention given to revving up the criminal law as well as civil law in addressing the lunacies of the COVID-19 power grab.
• UK’s Office for National Statistics, published a dataset on deaths by vaccination status in England between Jan. 1, 2021 and May 31, 2022, revealing that one in every 482 people vaccinated against COVID-19 in England died within a month of receiving a dose of a COVID-19 injection.
• Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data released by CDC showed 1,385,401 reports of adverse events from all age groups following COVID-19 vaccines, including 30,347 deaths and. 252,294 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020 and Aug. 12, 2022. These numbers continue to rise each week and still represent only a small fraction of total injury and harm occurring.
• A study published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine found that individuals fully vaccinated and boosted against COVID-19 actually recover markedly more slowly from the illness and remain five times more contagious 10 days after infection.
If we are take Vera at her word, it is not much of a stretch for me to assert that our university campuses have become 'Operation Paperclip' batch-plant processing facilities for churning out obedient fascists. But that would be hyperbolic. How dare I?
Thanks for another necessary and impeccably Swiftian dispatch, Douglas. We are firmly in the realm of Anything Goes and Nothing Matters; what I like to call the "or else" era.
The funny thing is, many of us act surprised. Come to think of it, far too many don't even notice. Yet, the formative circumstances have been creeping us on us for quite some time now, as you rightly allude to in your comment herein. The chickens have come to roost, so to speak.
We should have been more vigilant. We should have been more humble. We might have at least forestalled the vomiting forth of the likes of Albert Bourla, Bancel and Harari et al had our culture been more attentive and responsibly grounded in moral fundamentals.
Instead, we allowed ourselves to be cajoled and seduced by an epic "free lunch" story which has led us straight in to this damnation.
In an essay entitled "Two Minds", which I highly recommend, Wendell Berry got to the core of our post-modern ailments:
"It is often proposed, nowadays, that if we would only get rid of religion and other leftovers from
our primitive past and become enlightened by scientific rationalism, we could invent the new
values and ethics that are needed to preserve the natural world. This proposal is perfectly
reasonable, and perfectly doubtful. It supposes that we can empirically know and rationally
understand everything involved, which is exactly the supposition that has underwritten our
transgressions against the natural world in the first place."
[...]
Obviously we need to use our intelligence. But how much intelligence have we got? And what
sort of intelligence is it that we have? And how, at its best, does human intelligence work?
In order to try to answer these questions I am going to suppose for a while that there are two
different kinds of human mind: the Rational Mind and another which, for want of a better term, I
will call the Sympathetic Mind. I will say now, and try to keep myself reminded, that these terms
are going to appear to be allegorical, too neat and too separate – though I need to say also that
their separation was not invented by me.
The Rational Mind, without being anywhere perfectly embodied, is the mind we all are supposed
to be trying to have. It is the mind that the most powerful and influential people think they have.
Our schools exist mainly to educate and propagate and authorize the Rational Mind. The Rational Mind is objective, analytical, and empirical; it makes itself up only by considering facts;
it pursues truth by experimentation; it is uncorrupted by preconception, received authority,
religious belief, or feeling. Its ideal products are the proven fact, the accurate prediction, and the
“informed decision.” It is, you might say, the official mind of science, industry, and government.
The Sympathetic Mind differs from the Rational Mind, not by being unreasonable, but by
refusing to limit knowledge or reality to the scope of reason or factuality or experimentation, and
by making reason the servant of things it considers precedent and higher.
The Rational Mind is motivated by the fear of being misled, of being wrong. Its purpose is to
exclude everything that cannot empirically or experimentally be proven to be a fact.
The Sympathetic Mind is motivated by fear of error of a very different kind: the error of
carelessness, of being unloving. Its purpose is to be considerate of whatever is present, to leave
nothing out.
The Rational Mind is exclusive; the Sympathetic Mind, however failingly, wishes to be
inclusive.
These two types certainly don’t exhaust the taxonomy of minds. They are merely the two that the
intellectual fashions of our age have most deliberately separated and thrown into opposition."
Dear Douglas, I feel a bit of despair in this post. Isn't it time to create new institutions of education? Can we initiate a new form of knowledge based on truth and rationality? Let us defund those devil institutions and create a world of real knowledge. Universities, Parlements and actual institutions are rotten. Why don't we organize a real revolution with new forms of knowledge that would bring down the actual tyranny? I would like to propose great ideas about knowledge. But nobody is ready, in the West, to ear them...
I had a conversation the other day, over a Guinness as it happens—I asked the waitress for "a pint of the vaccine" and she took my order in stride—with a philosopher who would like to see universities shorn of their safetyism and other such freedom-sapping faults. Unfortunately he found it difficult to reckon with the fact that these faults are bound up with the notion, a notion he shares, that nothing has intrinsic value; if it is valuable it is only because we choose to value it. This is the nominalist heritage, and nominalism—like the dragon in Rev. 12—attended the birth of the university with a view to swallowing it whole. Unlike said dragon, it succeeded, by about the fifteenth century. The university afterward took some time to digest, but we are now (forgive the expression) at the shitty end of things. What is needed, on my view, is a radical return to the original principles, which were not nominalist (cf. Theological Negotiations, chap. 7). But I am interested also in other analyses and proposals, remarking only that time appears to be short. I am inclined to agree that what we currently have is not salvageable, and that to say so need not amount to despair.
Please don't hold back André Meloche. Please propose us some great ideas about knowledge. Please help point us away from the disgrace of the Western fiasco towards some more promising ground for intellectual cultivation.
I wrote an essay intitled "Sharing of knowledge". When I see great scholars, incredible teachers, amazing scientists being denied their expertise and wisdom by authoritarian and mediocre politicians, I feel it is time to unite those knowledges in new institutions. I agree with Douglas. We have to go back to the origin of time and put nominalism - and politics - back where it belongs: in the toilets of History. What we see actually is an intellectual and spiritual defeat facing the unknown an a putsch form little tyrants without culture. The so-called "Artificial Intelligence" is the fear of unknown and the need for absolute control, which means death. Why not create new institutions and boycott everything that cannot support a real debate and not a virtual illusion like the one the World Economic Forum is trying to push down into our throat? I cannot believe intelligent and wise people will accept this situation. It is when we are facing reality, destiny, pain and suffering that we are at our best! Let us roll up our sleeves, look-up to the sky (God), pray and act! Like Pierre Bezukhov said in the magnificent novel from Tolstoy (War and Peace): "They cannot take my soul!" Let us not forget that when "they" don't want to accept the debate, we have already won!
It is possible, today with the technological possibilities we have, to create and offer knowledge. But we need intelligent people to run the "show", not politics, bureaucrats and technocrats. Like Hannah Arendt wrote : "Socialism leads to capitalism to bureaucracy and fascism." So, with those "new" institutions where we would "exclude" vicious ideologies (transgenderism, woke culture - forgive me this oxymoron, Artificial Intelligence as a form of human domination, etc.), we could hire people who are educated and have a strong cultural background. Even today, many teachers (including teachers in universities) cannot even write a decent text without horrible grammatical mistakes! One criteria: You cannot write correctly or explain yourself with rationalism and knowledge, you cannot be part of this "Real New World". Go back to primary school! Let us "discriminate" those who scream about inclusion while marginalizing people at the same time, a typical schizophrenic behaviour. I would gladly propose a first seminar on knowledge and its history, its multiple definitions through time and their impacts on human intellectual environnement in every domaine (economic, spirit, material, scientific, technology, evolution, epistemology, etc.). There is an enormous task to reunite people who want to act, but not just by "sending" money to an institution without having nothing else to do. Yes, financing is important. But without truth and knowledge, money is just usury and an instrument of domination, like wrote Eugene Michael Jones in his book "Baren metal"!
We’re also looking for Canadian student author/contributors to write on a casual basis (at their own pace/frequency) for the S.A.M. blog; see below link to view and contact us SAM-science@protonmail.com if you’re interested in becoming a student contributor
Get involved, support these folk; they are on the front line and will be for some time to come. Holding universities to account is essential: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/brown-university-covid-vaccine-mandate-injury/. So is refusing to comply, beginning with groundless mask mandates such as Western is trying to impose along with the injections. These are linked, as the resistance must be.
Hi, I would like to contribute with my writings. I write since thirty years in French, many essays, novels, plays, short stories, articles. I am an "iconoclast" and I am not afraid of contreversies! I will visit you site. I could also write in English, but I express myself with so much more elegance and strength in French!
We are entering territory where the idea of decertifying some universities and some political parties is becoming worthy of consideration. How many injection deaths and injuries can now be anticipated because of the zombie antics of those in the process of destroying the University of Western Ontario and other asylums like it? Clearly there needs to be serious attention given to revving up the criminal law as well as civil law in addressing the lunacies of the COVID-19 power grab.
Useful idiots of the 'love your neighbour' variety: https://statement.biologos.org/
See further:
Anarchy from Above, part III: https://douglasfarrow.substack.com/p/anarchy-from-above-part-iii
A New Catholicism / Test of Fidelity: https://douglasfarrow.substack.com/p/a-new-catholicism
And behind all that, Let the Dead Bury their Dead: https://www.catholicworldreport.com/2020/05/18/let-the-dead-bury-their-dead/
So the (first) legal challenge has failed: https://www.westernstandard.news/news/judge-dismisses-students-challenge-of-western-universitys-vaccine-mandate/article_e6539788-3cf2-11ed-8c95-7b46f105641c.html. What, if not appeal, is left? Defiance, which tests Western's resolve. Or withdrawal from a corrupt institution. Or a $1 donation to that same institution, that one may be numbered among its donors and so excepted from its regulation? In the long run, the most effective is probably to vote with one's feet. Punish corrupt institutions, support those with integrity.
Here's another bit of good news: donors and prospective donors, no less, are exempt: https://thepostmillennial.com/donors-and-prospective-donors-exempt-from-western-university-vaccine-policy/. I suppose that includes Pharma folk, for example, but it might in principle include you too. I can only assure you that it doesn't include me.
From Children's Health Defense (see here for links to the sources of evidence: https://childrenshealthdefense.salsalabs.org/chd-deplatformed)
• UK’s Office for National Statistics, published a dataset on deaths by vaccination status in England between Jan. 1, 2021 and May 31, 2022, revealing that one in every 482 people vaccinated against COVID-19 in England died within a month of receiving a dose of a COVID-19 injection.
• Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) data released by CDC showed 1,385,401 reports of adverse events from all age groups following COVID-19 vaccines, including 30,347 deaths and. 252,294 serious injuries between Dec. 14, 2020 and Aug. 12, 2022. These numbers continue to rise each week and still represent only a small fraction of total injury and harm occurring.
• A study published in the prestigious New England Journal of Medicine found that individuals fully vaccinated and boosted against COVID-19 actually recover markedly more slowly from the illness and remain five times more contagious 10 days after infection.
DBF: This finding is not apparent in the summary provided by the authors, but a close look at Figure 1 seems to confirm it: https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMc2202092. See also this: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/vaccinated-higher-risk-dying-covid-vaccine-canadian-province-manitoba/. And what does all that do the logic of Western's policy, even leaving aside the first two bullet points? The only logic at work is the logic of fear.
I wrote about Western a few months ago when it became apparent they would continue to employ the Scientism of the New Religion and Medical Lysenkoism.
https://mortalcoil.substack.com/p/ethical-bankruptcy-and-western-university
Thanks for this. I encourage readers to have a look.
Douglas, have you seen or heard Vera Sharav's testimony at Nuremburg 75?
If not, I leave this for you and your readers.
Holocaust Survivor, Vera Sharav Speech at Nuremberg 75
https://sp.rmbl.ws/s8/2/N/o/C/s/NoCsf.caa.mp4?u=3&b=0
We would do well to take her seriously.
Yes, thanks. It is worth watching.
If we are take Vera at her word, it is not much of a stretch for me to assert that our university campuses have become 'Operation Paperclip' batch-plant processing facilities for churning out obedient fascists. But that would be hyperbolic. How dare I?
Bishop's University "Moments Like These"
https://youtu.be/Tx3RmGEiip0
And the Brownshirts are coming (these, e.g., though they wear green shirts: https://thecountersignal.com/exclusive-leak-trudeau-installing-weapons-armouries-interrogation-rooms-for-ministry-of-climate-change/) unless we put our collective foot down.
Thanks for another necessary and impeccably Swiftian dispatch, Douglas. We are firmly in the realm of Anything Goes and Nothing Matters; what I like to call the "or else" era.
The funny thing is, many of us act surprised. Come to think of it, far too many don't even notice. Yet, the formative circumstances have been creeping us on us for quite some time now, as you rightly allude to in your comment herein. The chickens have come to roost, so to speak.
We should have been more vigilant. We should have been more humble. We might have at least forestalled the vomiting forth of the likes of Albert Bourla, Bancel and Harari et al had our culture been more attentive and responsibly grounded in moral fundamentals.
Instead, we allowed ourselves to be cajoled and seduced by an epic "free lunch" story which has led us straight in to this damnation.
In an essay entitled "Two Minds", which I highly recommend, Wendell Berry got to the core of our post-modern ailments:
"It is often proposed, nowadays, that if we would only get rid of religion and other leftovers from
our primitive past and become enlightened by scientific rationalism, we could invent the new
values and ethics that are needed to preserve the natural world. This proposal is perfectly
reasonable, and perfectly doubtful. It supposes that we can empirically know and rationally
understand everything involved, which is exactly the supposition that has underwritten our
transgressions against the natural world in the first place."
[...]
Obviously we need to use our intelligence. But how much intelligence have we got? And what
sort of intelligence is it that we have? And how, at its best, does human intelligence work?
In order to try to answer these questions I am going to suppose for a while that there are two
different kinds of human mind: the Rational Mind and another which, for want of a better term, I
will call the Sympathetic Mind. I will say now, and try to keep myself reminded, that these terms
are going to appear to be allegorical, too neat and too separate – though I need to say also that
their separation was not invented by me.
The Rational Mind, without being anywhere perfectly embodied, is the mind we all are supposed
to be trying to have. It is the mind that the most powerful and influential people think they have.
Our schools exist mainly to educate and propagate and authorize the Rational Mind. The Rational Mind is objective, analytical, and empirical; it makes itself up only by considering facts;
it pursues truth by experimentation; it is uncorrupted by preconception, received authority,
religious belief, or feeling. Its ideal products are the proven fact, the accurate prediction, and the
“informed decision.” It is, you might say, the official mind of science, industry, and government.
The Sympathetic Mind differs from the Rational Mind, not by being unreasonable, but by
refusing to limit knowledge or reality to the scope of reason or factuality or experimentation, and
by making reason the servant of things it considers precedent and higher.
The Rational Mind is motivated by the fear of being misled, of being wrong. Its purpose is to
exclude everything that cannot empirically or experimentally be proven to be a fact.
The Sympathetic Mind is motivated by fear of error of a very different kind: the error of
carelessness, of being unloving. Its purpose is to be considerate of whatever is present, to leave
nothing out.
The Rational Mind is exclusive; the Sympathetic Mind, however failingly, wishes to be
inclusive.
These two types certainly don’t exhaust the taxonomy of minds. They are merely the two that the
intellectual fashions of our age have most deliberately separated and thrown into opposition."
https://www.clarionreview.org/2015/02/two-minds/
And for the teetotalers, may I suggest three helpings of probiotic yogurt?!
Dear Douglas, I feel a bit of despair in this post. Isn't it time to create new institutions of education? Can we initiate a new form of knowledge based on truth and rationality? Let us defund those devil institutions and create a world of real knowledge. Universities, Parlements and actual institutions are rotten. Why don't we organize a real revolution with new forms of knowledge that would bring down the actual tyranny? I would like to propose great ideas about knowledge. But nobody is ready, in the West, to ear them...
I had a conversation the other day, over a Guinness as it happens—I asked the waitress for "a pint of the vaccine" and she took my order in stride—with a philosopher who would like to see universities shorn of their safetyism and other such freedom-sapping faults. Unfortunately he found it difficult to reckon with the fact that these faults are bound up with the notion, a notion he shares, that nothing has intrinsic value; if it is valuable it is only because we choose to value it. This is the nominalist heritage, and nominalism—like the dragon in Rev. 12—attended the birth of the university with a view to swallowing it whole. Unlike said dragon, it succeeded, by about the fifteenth century. The university afterward took some time to digest, but we are now (forgive the expression) at the shitty end of things. What is needed, on my view, is a radical return to the original principles, which were not nominalist (cf. Theological Negotiations, chap. 7). But I am interested also in other analyses and proposals, remarking only that time appears to be short. I am inclined to agree that what we currently have is not salvageable, and that to say so need not amount to despair.
Please don't hold back André Meloche. Please propose us some great ideas about knowledge. Please help point us away from the disgrace of the Western fiasco towards some more promising ground for intellectual cultivation.
I wrote an essay intitled "Sharing of knowledge". When I see great scholars, incredible teachers, amazing scientists being denied their expertise and wisdom by authoritarian and mediocre politicians, I feel it is time to unite those knowledges in new institutions. I agree with Douglas. We have to go back to the origin of time and put nominalism - and politics - back where it belongs: in the toilets of History. What we see actually is an intellectual and spiritual defeat facing the unknown an a putsch form little tyrants without culture. The so-called "Artificial Intelligence" is the fear of unknown and the need for absolute control, which means death. Why not create new institutions and boycott everything that cannot support a real debate and not a virtual illusion like the one the World Economic Forum is trying to push down into our throat? I cannot believe intelligent and wise people will accept this situation. It is when we are facing reality, destiny, pain and suffering that we are at our best! Let us roll up our sleeves, look-up to the sky (God), pray and act! Like Pierre Bezukhov said in the magnificent novel from Tolstoy (War and Peace): "They cannot take my soul!" Let us not forget that when "they" don't want to accept the debate, we have already won!
Thanks
It is possible, today with the technological possibilities we have, to create and offer knowledge. But we need intelligent people to run the "show", not politics, bureaucrats and technocrats. Like Hannah Arendt wrote : "Socialism leads to capitalism to bureaucracy and fascism." So, with those "new" institutions where we would "exclude" vicious ideologies (transgenderism, woke culture - forgive me this oxymoron, Artificial Intelligence as a form of human domination, etc.), we could hire people who are educated and have a strong cultural background. Even today, many teachers (including teachers in universities) cannot even write a decent text without horrible grammatical mistakes! One criteria: You cannot write correctly or explain yourself with rationalism and knowledge, you cannot be part of this "Real New World". Go back to primary school! Let us "discriminate" those who scream about inclusion while marginalizing people at the same time, a typical schizophrenic behaviour. I would gladly propose a first seminar on knowledge and its history, its multiple definitions through time and their impacts on human intellectual environnement in every domaine (economic, spirit, material, scientific, technology, evolution, epistemology, etc.). There is an enormous task to reunite people who want to act, but not just by "sending" money to an institution without having nothing else to do. Yes, financing is important. But without truth and knowledge, money is just usury and an instrument of domination, like wrote Eugene Michael Jones in his book "Baren metal"!
Buy my t-shirt: I followed the science and got myocarditis AND Covid.
For any students out there, I help run a Canadian student group “Students Against Mandates”. We are looking to take legal action against the past ‘vaccine’ mandates committed by U Manitoba. You can support here https://studentsagainstmandates.square.site/product/donate/4?cs=true&cst=popular
We’re also looking for Canadian student author/contributors to write on a casual basis (at their own pace/frequency) for the S.A.M. blog; see below link to view and contact us SAM-science@protonmail.com if you’re interested in becoming a student contributor
https://www.studentsagainstmandates.ca/sam-blog
Get involved, support these folk; they are on the front line and will be for some time to come. Holding universities to account is essential: https://childrenshealthdefense.org/defender/brown-university-covid-vaccine-mandate-injury/. So is refusing to comply, beginning with groundless mask mandates such as Western is trying to impose along with the injections. These are linked, as the resistance must be.
Hi, I would like to contribute with my writings. I write since thirty years in French, many essays, novels, plays, short stories, articles. I am an "iconoclast" and I am not afraid of contreversies! I will visit you site. I could also write in English, but I express myself with so much more elegance and strength in French!