The sudden death of liberal democracy, in what were once heralded as the bastions of democratic process and personal freedom, like Canada, Australia and New Zealand, has left millions of people in despair. Many who’d always claimed, “that can’t happen here” are still in denial about the state of their countries, but when parliament has been suspended in favour of a small cabal of decision makers for almost two years, the reality must sink in some time … mustn’t it?
Governments, both state and federal, in these once free countries have employed the most aggressive tactics imaginable to enforce submission to their will. Melbourne, Australia, holds the dubious record of being the world’s most locked down city, a lockdown which was brutal in its conception, with things like curfews and ruthless in its enforcement, with people arrested for posting something which the government doesn’t like on facebook and mostly peaceful protesters shot in the back with rubber bullets as they fled the violent crackdown by Police.
For the growing number of people waking up to the abuse of the State of Emergency powers by their governments, there seems to be little that they can do – where do you turn when the people who are responsible for implementing the rule of law, become the very people who break those laws? Relying on opposition MPs has been useless, as most have said nothing while the abuse continues. In Victoria, Australia, dissenting MPs who refuse to hand over private medical information have been banished from the Parliament, unable to vote. Anybody with a modicum of intellect knows that this is a political move to remove the last vestiges of dissent against government abuse, but no media is challenging the rationale or the legality of such a move and the people, bar a few brutalised protesters, are not in the streets demanding their rights back.
Any fleeting glance at political history should warn us all of the risk of our compliance with ridiculous and unfair rules from a government which treats constitutionally protected rights as something they can trample on at their whim. Ayn Rand, presciently warned us that “the government was set to protect man from criminals and the constitution was written to protect man from the government”, but what happens when the government are the criminals?
The separation of powers between the executive and the judiciary was an important protection against rogue governments who may ignore the law, but the legal process is slow and expensive, and the courts have been increasingly populated with political appointees. Even if decisions go against the government, like the recent decision regarding the legal status of National Cabinet in Australia, the governments seem to just ignore the ruling and carry on.
Throughout the last 80 years, people have questioned how the Nazis were able to implement their genocidal policies without intervention from the people. The grim truth is that people willingly went along, driven by a diet of fear mongering propaganda – the main message of which was that “the Jews are diseased and, unless isolated, they will spread that disease”. After many years of hate filled bile, that “isolation” turned into “extermination”. Many claimed they knew nothing of the extermination camps, but few could claim innocence from the genesis of this abhorrent episode in human history – the isolation of the Jews from civil society, when they were banned from restaurants, bars, theatres and civic buildings.
Of course, everybody knew that the premise for isolating a segment of the population was false, yet few spoke out; either in the deluded belief that their compliance would earn them privileges from the ruling regime, or out of fear of reprisal. Many even supported the appalling treatment of their fellow German citizens, persecuted for nothing more than making a different religious choice than the majority.
Following the harrowing reign of the Nazis, the victorious nations emerged with a unanimous mantra – “never again”. To ensure this was enshrined in reality, countless international human rights treaties were written and ratified. Australia, New Zealand and Canada were amongst the most vocal supporters of these treaties, still to this day boasting that they were core to their design.
So, what did it take for current governments to abandon this resounding global mantra of “never again” and begin to segregate people based on dubious medical claims once again? A virus with an infection fatality rate below 0.3%.
Just as in the 1930’s, anybody capable of the most basic level of research knows that the approved “solution” to this relatively mild virus, does not make sense. It fails to induce sterilising immunity and thus is incapable of preventing or, given recent overwhelming evidence, even slowing disease spread. So, the abhorrent social isolation and vilification of people refusing/incapable of taking the vaccine is based on … what?
Judging by the zeal of politicians, the adoring media gallery and the curtain twitching populace to marginalise citizens who’ve done nothing more than exercise their free will, pose no more threat to society than those who are vaccinated and just wish to be left alone to get on with their lives, free from persecution, something darker is at play than the illogical cry of “it’s for health”.
While it’s probably easy to point out why governments are pushing this narrative: fear increases their grip on power and punishing those who bravely stand up to their tyrannical ways, scares the already afraid even more. In the presence of fear, warranted or otherwise, the weak in the population will submit to almost anything. One thing that this pandemic has shown is that the “weak” outnumber the strong by multitudes.
The acquiescence of the media is harder to understand – these are people whose very existence is premised on holding power to account. With some notable exceptions, the media has simply acted as an amplifier for the propaganda of the governments and has railed against the people, shilling for segregation and censoring anything which potentially counters the prevailing narrative. But why? Is there some secret conspiracy between media empires and governments? I doubt it. Have they been gagged by State of Emergency powers from questioning the governments narrative? Possibly, to some extent. Or are they, based on political partisanship, secretly cheering on the vile acts of governments, hell bent on driving an immovable wedge of hatred between people.
The willingness of the public to accept and re-distribute the hate speech of government leaders highlights something deeply troubling in our society – that a large number of people are willing to destroy the lives of others for nothing more than to parade their own perceived virtuousness. Many have taken to social media to proclaim their superiority, even whishing death upon the great unwashed. These people are the true cowards of society, it’s their tacit support for the victimisation of other people which allows governments to get away with it and, as this hatred progresses to violence, as history surely teaches us it will, they’re just as much the perpetrators of crimes against humanity as those who vociferously spew hatred in the government.
Another lesson from history is that tyranny always has a day of reckoning and when that reckoning comes, those who supported it don’t fare well. So, it’s time for the public to decide whether they want to support the illogical, unscientific, evil segregation and de-humanisation of people who were recently their friends and stand on the side of medical fascism, watching on as their fellow citizens lives are decimated for nothing more than believing they have a right to say what is injected into their body. Or will they stand for what they know is right, reject the hatred spewed by governments and bring to an expedited close this dark chapter in our history, before it goes too far?