The Official Covid Narrative – the idea that Covid-19 is such a deadly disease that we all need to change our lives – has always been absurd to anyone who has been paying attention. However, a large number of people in Britain have agreed with the Covid Narrative (to differing degrees), supporting mandatory masks, lockdowns and (voluntary) Covid injections. This article will discuss to what degree the Official Covid Narrative has been stretched to breaking point in the UK and whether the idea of a ‘collapsing narrative’ is realistic.
The Boris Johnson Party Story
The first news story worthy of our attention in this discussion is the ‘scandal’ of Boris Johnson having a party during lockdown restrictions. This story has been simmering since December 2021. Mainstream coverage has put a lot of emphasis on this story over the past two months. For example, we can examine the coverage of the lockdown-loving middle class rag The Guardian on this issue.
Johnson’s appearance at PMQs on Wednesday was his first response to the video, uncovered by ITV, in which his then-press secretary, Allegra Stratton, and other No 10 staff talked jokingly on 22 December last year about a staff party four days earlier, and how media questions about it could be countered.
Another party later emerged, that took place on the eve of the funeral of Prince Philip. Boris Johnson has come out and ‘apologised’ for that party as well. Meanwhile the Guardian is running articles with analysis by “a member of the Sage subcommittee advising on behavioural science”. No, seriously.
Unfortunately, I don’t think it can be convincingly argued that is Boris Johnson incident heralds the collapse of the Covid Narrative. We have already seen this before, first with Dominic Cummings and Neil Ferguson and then with Matt Hancock. Furthermore, the media is still focusing on the same discredited angle with the Johnson story as they were with the Cummings story from over 18 months ago:
The press divided between the lockdown enthusiasts defending him, or the anti-lockdowners eagerly calling him a hypocrite.
Both, again, were missing the point.
We’re all meant to be “sheltering in place” and “protecting the NHS” and “saving lives” because there is a “deadly virus”. We’re being told this is for our own safety. Because the virus is allegedly dangerous.
When the people giving us these orders do not follow them themselves, they are not showing themselves to be “hypocrites”. They are showing themselves to be liars. They are admitting they don’t really believe what they’re saying.
This particularly vile example from the Labour Party is a good example of this mentality. I have screenshotted it below in case they try to backtrack later:
Labour is trying to portray this inhumane ‘NHS Nurse’ (whether the story is real or not is beside the point) as virtuous because she ‘followed the rules’ and this is meant to rebuke Boris Johnson for not ‘following the rules’. They didn’t get the response they were looking for in the comments, with multiple tweets calling them out for being even more fanatical lockdowners than the Tories.
We must not forget the moral of the ‘Matt Hancock affair’ story when discussing this case. Matt Hancock had become unpopular with the public and so it conveniently came out that he had been having an affair, with photos of him snogging his mistress being slapped all over The Sun. Hancock was a ‘sacrifice’ from within the narrative to save the narrative, by projecting all of the narrative failures on to him as designated scapegoat. Meanwhile his successor, Sajid Javid, has amped up the ‘vaccine’ program with the roll out of jabs to children and the forcing of jabs onto NHS staff.
Just because Boris Johnson is the Prime Minister does not mean that the same forces cannot be at work here, and indeed, this is the most plausible explanation for the ‘Party Scandal’.
The Dr. Steve James/Sajid Javid Story
But what about more substantive issues relating to the Official Covid Narrative? In particular, the forced jabs for NHS staff?
The government passed legislation in December 2021, and published it this month, stating that ‘frontline’ NHS staff (frontline being defined extremely broadly) have to have 2 Covid-19 jabs by April. There has been a campaign opposing this legislation from NHS100K, the Together Campaign and the Workers of England Union.
However, recently a video was released of a doctor, Steve James, directly challenging Sajid Javid on the jab mandate. The doctor himself is unvaccinated and has natural immunity against Sars-Cov-2 according to his own account:
Furthermore, he has been invited on to other news channels to discuss the reasons why he won’t be vaccinated in more depth:
I do find this story quite interesting, I must say. The initial video was released by Sky News, i.e. the mainstream media. Not some random undercover phone video. If the mainstream media released this video, rather than pretending none of the doctors challenged Javid, there must be some sort of function within the mainstream narrative for that to happen. (We could further ask why Javid was even in the earshot of an unvaccinated doctor as HR, etc. in the NHS know who is vaccinated).
So why has this video been released to the public?
I don’t have all the answers on this question. The most favourable interpretation for the anti-lockdown/vaxpass/mandate people is that the government knows that they cannot get away with the NHS mandate. On this interpretation, this is a soft walk back in the narrative, priming the public for when the mandate is dropped.
Personally I think they are more likely to try and go through with the mandate although I don’t think them dropping it is impossible if a large number of NHS staff remain uninjected (more likely some sort of fudge option will be taken rather than outright dropping it).
If they are not going to drop the mandate there are other possible reasons that could be considered for the release of this clip to the public. For example, the creation of a hate figure, represented by James himself as the ‘selfish unjabbed doctor’. The aim in this scenario (regardless of whether this strategy is effective) is to target the public’s ire at James to distract from the likely devastation to NHS services that will be inflicted by the mandate.
The Daily Mail, which is highly schizophrenic when it comes to the Covid Narrative, has published an article attacking Dr. Steve James. After having a dig at James’s religious beliefs, the article spouts claims about how he is ‘enabling anti-vaxxers’ (none of the media ever define the term ‘anti-vaxxer’). The article then goes on to attack him for mentioning NHS100K, with the usual assertions that James is citing a ‘conspiracy theorist’ organisation. This is achieved through the notion that both right wingers and NHS100K use Telegram.
They also state that the mandate is popular, without providing any evidence of that claim (not even a manipulated YouGov poll!) There is a bunch of other nonsense in the article that to address it all would get off topic.
The Scrapping Vaccine Passports Story
The UK government introduced vaccine passports at the same time that they passed the vote forcing NHS staff to be jabbed. The vaccine passport applies to (in England):
- indoor unseated venues with more than 500 people
- unseated outdoor venues with more than 4,000 people
- any venue with more than 10,000 people
There has been speculation that Boris Johnson is to drop the requirement for vaccine passports from January 26th in the mainstream media. The original passports had a ‘review’ built in to them on this date where the extension can be rubber stamped – now the media is saying it will not be.
I am very sceptical of such a narrative for a number of reasons. The government now have the infrastructure for such a scheme in place. Even if it is scrapped due to the unpopularity of the passport, it can be brought back in at any time with the reactivation of the NHS Covid pass. Any event – such as a ‘spike in cases’ caused by false positives – can be used to either not scrap the legislation or bring it back in at any time.
We must also bear in mind that there have been multiple other times where the narrative has been temporarily weakened in order to drive it forward, such as the ‘scrapping’ of vaccine passports in September only to bring them back via ‘Plan B’.
Narrative weaknesses in the official Covid-19 account are becoming more obvious to the British public. Because of this, the government and media have been soft pedalling the narrative, but these are not unequivocal signs of victory. The Covid Narrative is far from defeated – and we must not forget that Covid itself is just the means to the end of digital identity and transhumanism.