Medical or Health Fascism what is it and why are we living un a unfree society?
“Medical fascism is an offshoot of political fascism, and those who hold power in a medically fascist state behave in roughly the same manner. Examples of medical fascism include medical kidnapping, forced medical treatments, censoring or falsely altering the dissemination of medical information, and the elimination of medical choice, among others.” Truthwiki
The underling ideas of Health Fascism is the basic premise that the health of population is determined primarily by social rather than environmental factors, that the health of individuals and the aggregate populations is determined by diet, costumery practices, lifestyle, patterns of work and social structures such as house hold organization and the class system. Assuming that the state can best assure the health of individuals and of society at large by controlling these factors. Rather than using therapeutic medicine. Too preventive action involving the use of an unregulated social life, in itself this is not necessarily controversial – a great deal of health and illness is can only be negated in this way, however in Health Fascism other normative assumptions are made making this belief a profoundly dangerous one.
First there is the assumption of methodological and ethical collectivism, in this way of thinking, wither defined as a nation, race or society is primary not the individuals. The health and wellbeing individuals is only important in so far as it contributes to the wellbeing of the Collective. Thus sickness of any form and ill health on the part of the individual is harmful not only to them, rather the individual’s ill health is harmful to the primary collective entity. As individuals can only exist within in the group that defines there identity in the primary collective narrative, so they are obliged to contribute to the group: they do not have an autonomous existence in there own right. Thus the individuals ill health is not just the concern of the of the individual or those associated with them but also of society at large. Health then is not a privet matter nor such associated things such as recreation, diet and reproduction.
Secondly, its denied wither implicitly or explicitly, the choices made by an individual in private matters are truly free, instead they permitted only by impersonal social forces or biological necessity, or subsequently by malign influences such as advertising and the desire to conform. Too even if an element of free will is admitted, it would be argued that people through ignorance and weakness of will are not the best judges of what is good for themselves. Given the collectivist assumptions, such choices should not and cannot be made on a self-regarded basis. There would be a superior collectivist interest in wither would should smoke, drink or have children.
Third, there is supposed to be an elite class, possessed with superior knowledge, witch does know better than the masses what is good for them. The most prominent in this reality are Doctors and medical scientists, though other groups and persons can be added to this elect. The others lower or working classes are singled out as those most reprobate and in need of guidance.
Fourthly, the superior knowledge of the elites is seen as scientific, based upon neutral, value free investigation, superior precisely because of its scientific origin. Plying upon the high status enjoyed by science in modernity thus these arguments from the elite are rendered immune from criticism by ordinary people.
This all leads to the conclusion that collective interests taken with the unfree and mistaken choices of the majority and the superior knowledge of the elite, justifies compelling individuals to act and live in a certain way or desist from doing this they would otherwise do. The public authority the sate has the an overriding interest to promote the public good, in pursuit of this end acting on the advice of this elite then would justify the state inferring in people’s privet lives. Using such methods as taxation, licencing and the full force of state powers, thus matters such as life style become a mater of public policy.
What’s most alarming about Health Fascism is that it is a Global Fascism, an all-encompassing social, political & economic ideology— stripping people of their liberty their rights to choose good health or not. It is a collectivist agenda from the top down to interfere in all aspects of life, touted as the greater good. It is the simple case that it is not in any government authority to dictate to individuals their level of involvement in society, nor does it have the right to demand of individuals to be the apex of good health. (Which is not to say people by contrast should strive to be in poor health.) The role of the state contrary to the acceptance of “Alma-Ata 1987 declaration”, namely that the role of the state is Primary Health Care. (Meaning that every individual must be in good health as elaborated in a paper by World Health Organisation 1981 “Global Strategy For Health Of All By 2000” which persists today having its origins eugenics.) the role of the state is as a functionary permitting & safeguarding the freedom & interests of its body, the people. World Health Organisation states the “attainment of the best possible health of all.” The wording of this is clear: it is not the statement that all people have the right to access the best possible health care, quality nutrition & education rather that all people in all countries should be in the best possible health by the year 2000. This means the conformity of undesirable people as labelled through the deployment of Eugenics & Psychology as well as Psychiatry, the negation of liberty, forced through by indoctrination of the masses through propaganda in mass media A good example is that of the anti-smoker— that believes it is acceptable to excessively tax & segregate the smoker making such a life-style choice socially unacceptable, while making it increasingly expensive through taxation of the smoker. In the U.K. above fifty percent of the price of twenty cigarettes is tax. This was not something individuals chose, rather it was a planned strategy to alienate the smoker from social acceptance, too this disproportionately affects the working “class”. As to do many other policies adopted to make the “human stalk” healthier as if humanity were some type of cattle possessing no free will, no rights to self-determination & having no choice in the matter of how one lives one’s own life. We are in an age of Global Fascism & no one noticed except the very few, these few are simply not able to penetrate the collective mindset, being seen as undesirable— people to be excised from societal acceptance under the cry or plea of the greater good of the public health. A slogan that can now be said to be as a dying metaphor. A symbol that has lost its original meaning, used by political entities & the scientific community to stifle any notions of decent or non-compliance. “The Thirteenth World Health Assembly decided” this in 1977. However, it is generous enough to allow Individual nations to decide how best to impose this on their people.
In the case SARS-Cov 2, Eugenic ideologies form the basis of the protocols being imposed on people. Protocols that may be justified in more extreme cases. However, cannot be justified in this instance. The protocols too disproportionately affect the working class & small business owners. They destroy lives in & of themselves, a fate far worse than death itself, to see your life destroyed not by a virus— no! By the choices made by governments on the advice of supposed experts or elites completely consumed by the prevailing collective ideology. In the most inverse manner of the collective good, which is extremely ironic. As if economic collapse, increased poverty, malnutrition, poor mental health & inflation are in the best interest of the greater good of all man. Further it is demonstrated that information has been wrongfully used (QED.) to create a state of panic as derived from the World Health Organization’s strategy. Sighted as a practice in Eugenics too through the compulsion of language. The use of mass media plays a huge role in this too does the social media of modernity not foreseen in 1981. Applying social pressures on individuals to conform. There are huge legal penalties comprising fines & detainment. Under the guise of public health. During this pandemic, police gained massive new power previously cast aside in such nations Britain as they were draconian while interfering in people’s liberty. Their rights to work & live with minimal interface from the Government. A notion cast aside by Eugenic ideology & by the Global Agenda set out by World Health Organisation & UN, of which members are coerced to conform under threat of international penalties. So, the statement can be made: Globally Governments have since 1981 been heavily interfering in the lives of ordinary people, to the extent it is diminishing the individual’s liberty by design. Their behaviour subverted & coerced by outside interests, by elites claiming science while scheming behind closed doors— as to how best to influence the private lives of people. Conform is the message from society in the latter half of the 20th & beginning of the 21st century.
It is the case that we could have protected the most vulnerable in society without such devastating interventions, however that would mean healthy people taking the burden of risk. Something they or rather we should have done. People would have been very cooperative with protecting care homes & people such as those with immune deficiency, diabetes etc. These things could have been done with a lot less cost in both financial terms & terms of job losses. In the crocodile cry to protect the NHS in the UK, we may have supplemented the NHS with Army reservists & Royal Army Medical Corps erecting dedicated CoV centres adding to the number of critical care beds, of which there is alarmingly few in the U.K. (A problem exacerbated in Scotland by the centralisation of health care facilities, resulting in a significant number of beds disappearing at time the NHS was complaining about a shortage of available beds around 2016.) This too would have been far cheaper & far more efficient too more effective than the protocols imposed. This talk of cost brings me to another factor, the printing of money AKA the increasing of the national debit to pay for these disastrous interventions in the private lives of individuals.
There is a fear of pouting value back in people’s pockets during an already disastrous economic collapse. As opposed to deflation they wish to inflate & further devalue the pound, because they don’t understand that when people feel a bit better off they are willing to spend & they feel safer. Any damage that could have been done by deflation is exceeded greatly by the economic crisis unfolding before our eyes, in the form of government intervention. The government refuses to accept each round of quantitative easing makes people poorer & have convinced people with doggy math that it’s not the case. While quantitative easing injects money into the economy, especially over time it inflates the currency making it less valuable. Both deflation & quantitative easing (inflation) are legitimate tools to manage economics, modern economists however are casting deflation aside for no real reason at all other than it has been used by some political figures throughout history ranging from fascism to communism. Too it may in certain instances indicate a weak economy. Ignorant of the fact that it actually works in certain scenarios such as the one we face today & can improve the qualities of life of individuals. When money inflates it makes the purchasing power weaker, when money deflates it makes the purchasing power stronger. E.U economists & economists in general believe deflation is a bad thing! Over the past fifty years the cumulative effect on Western currency is between five hundred- & six-hundred percent inflation. It is why one can’t effectively live off a minimum wage anymore. Why single income households struggle so badly. (The current solution is state dependency.) It wouldn’t be much of a problem if wages increased relative to inflation however, they don’t. To do that would decrease profit margins & collapse business as well as lower growth. Because they are just as affected by weaker currency as the individual is. The argument is that for some weird reason, as prices decrease so do people’s willingness to buy. In the initial phase perhaps, however If in deflation your purchasing power is up then you will be able to buy more as your money goes further. They also suggested that it is bad because people tend to borrow less living within their means comfortably. While what little they have just sitting on it becomes an investment. This seems to be a good thing to me. Particularly with such drastic times ahead of us.
So, in closing it is my assessment that if the current policies & tear systems remain in place people’s lives will be irreparably damaged by them, that these government interventions are extremely harmful, resulting in more suffering than will ever be caused by SARS-Cov 2. To that end the governments have acted criminally in response to this virus, put lives at risk & acted against the public interest on the behest of Eugenic ideology not science. Too, the government will continue to extract the increasing cost of their failures from the public, making them as a result increasingly poorer with all the associated hardships & suffering that brings. We were brought into Health Fascism by ruminates of Eugenic in international policy and the high minded notions of collectivism that strips form the individual their liberty.