Friday, November 19, 2021

Malonic Ambivalence

As I implied in my last posting, I remain ambivalent about Dr. Malone's effectiveness in our Covid war of ideas.  On the one hand, he, refreshingly adverts to the looming threat of a "global totalitarianism".  On the other hand, he along with a still small, but hopefully growing nucleus of other scientific and medical experts pushing back against the Mainstream Covid Narrative, in subtle ways continue to reinforce that Narrative even as they critique it.

I don't know what that phenomenon is called, when a person reinforces the very thing he is otherwise opposing; but it seems that Malone et al. are doing that.

How are they doing it?  This is a complex question, and I will only touch on it here now.  On the deepest most radical level, they perpetuate the unproven dogma of the existence of the Covid virus itself.  Short of that, there are receding concentric levels, as it were -- from conceding the existence of a pandemic (which isn't necessarily connected at the hip to a concession to the existence of the virus itself); to conceding, if not an actual pandemic, the viable potential of a pandemic if we don't do X, Y, and Z.  Closely related at a perpendicular tangent, so to say, are concerns about "immunity" and "early treatment with other medications" -- both implying there exists an actual deadly problem at all.

 Further reading: Click here.

No comments:

Post a Comment