Vaccines? Focused protection? Not if you ask the fine libertarians at the Brownstone Institute.
Pre-COVID, who would have thought that a significant part of the libertarian thought collective would go anti-vax? Not me. But I stand corrected. From a recent blog post at the illustrious Brownstone Institute:
The people whose directives you are following talk a lot about “pseudoscience,” always accusing those of us who disagree with their directives of pushing it. But you know what pseudoscience actually is? It’s putting forth a premise that cannot be disproven.
For example: “my COVID would have been worse without my vaccine.” “More grandmas would have died if we would not have locked down, worn masks and taken vaccines.” These two assertions can actually be easily refuted (look at the nations that did not lock down, and the health of the unvaccinated).
Words fail me.
Moving on, last week Brownstone Institute founder Jeffrey Tucker published this on the CDC’s COVID tracking system:
There is no remorse at the CDC. Far from it. The model of virus control deployed over the last 27 months is now part of normal operations. It wants it institutionalized.
The bureaucracy has now codified this into a new online tool that instructs cities and states precisely of what they are supposed to do given a certain level of community spread. The new tool doesn’t say lockdowns as such but the entire model of containment via masks and distancing is baked in, and it can be easily expanded at will.
Oooh, sounds scary. Road to Serfdom, anyone? I mean, the CDC has no actual authority here, but still very scary, right? And then there’s this (no indent; bullet points are selective quotations from the CDC, the rest is Tucker):
As for “additional precautions” we know what that means: lockdowns. Even now, the suggestions are to
- Follow CDC recommendations for isolation and quarantine, including getting tested if you are exposed to COVID-19 or have symptoms of COVID-19
- Implementing screening testing or other testing strategies for people who are exposed to COVID-19 in workplaces, schools, or other community settings as appropriate
- Implement enhanced prevention measures in high-risk congregate settings
- Consider setting-specific recommendations for prevention strategies based on local factors
We’ve seen this movie before. It’s a recipe for full government control of life. [End quote.]
Sure, full government control of life. You would think a learned libertarian intellectual like Tucker would be more familiar with the reality of life under totalitarian government, but whatever. The point I want to focus on here is that Tucker evidently opposes “enhanced prevention measures in high-risk congregate settings.” But protecting people in high-risk congregate settings is essential to “focused protection” which was a central element of the Great Barrington Declaration. (The GBD made two basic recommendations – eliminate all “lockdowns” immediately, and protect the vulnerable while the virus rips through the population creating “herd immunity”.)
As I have noted previously, focused protection was a con.
You know Eric, I am convinced (under statement) Tucker’s dialogue has nothing to do with the facts of Covid or other things.
It is all about pushing a sophistry, of control, using the loss of independence or freedom as their reasoning. It is all lies.
One can only be as free as the individual next to us and yours and ours should not impede on each other. The Tuckers of the world want to skew this to mean one side is taking the rights of the other.
It should be about establishing a dimension where we can all live together in the Shining City on the hill Reagan talked about and not denying others entry in Cuomo’s eloquent response.
The logic is there as is the reality and the science. Their answer is to just simply lie.
Gail Tverberg, who some of you might know as Gail the Actuary from the Oil Drum, has an excellent, detailed post up on her blog, on the history and efficacy of US vaccines…
lots of graphics, and she’ll respond to comments/questions…
New Institute Has Ties to the Great Barrington Declaration
MedPage Today – Nov 12, 2021
All three GBD lead authors contribute to Brownstone Institute
A new think tank is promoting some old, controversial ideas about COVID-19 — and has strong ties to the parties involved in the Great Barrington Declaration.
The Brownstone Institute for Social and Economic Research aims to evaluate the “global crisis” stemming from the policy response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Its stated mission is “constructively to come to terms with what happened, understand why, discover and explain alternative paths, and prevent such events from happening again.” …
” . . . learned libertarian intellectual like Tucker . . . “
Objection. Assumes facts not in evidence.