Circuit Boards and Hammers: Thoughts on Vaccination Abolition

Introduction

Vaccination is touted as the biggest success of modern medicine. Fundamentally, it it seen as a victory over nature, where the powers of man’s inventiveness have conquered the evils of disease. Unfortunately, such ‘victories’ over nature are more hubris than reality.

Vaccination as Victory over Nature?

“Let us not, however, flatter ourselves overmuch on account of our human victories over nature. For each such victory nature takes its revenge on us. Each victory, it is true, in the first place brings about the results we expected, but in the second and third places it has quite different, unforeseen effects which only too often cancel the first.”

Friedrich Engels

The official narrative on vaccination is as follows.

In the past, human beings died of preventable diseases because the pathogens that they were exposed to were inherently extremely deadly. This mass death could not have been significantly prevented by factors such as better living conditions or diet, even if those would have had a positive effect. It wasn’t until the introduction of vaccination, starting with Edward Jenner’s smallpox vaccine, that the mass death caused by disease began to subside. The introduction of mass vaccination for diseases like polio, measles, etc. in the 20th century saved millions of lives. The further development of vaccination to encompass influenza, rotavirus, etc., are a positive development for humanity and we should try to develop vaccines for all human diseases. This includes things like HIV and RSV. mRNA vaccines, as developed for Covid-19, are a new and highly promising step forward in the development of the technology. Vaccines are safe and effective outside of very rare cases of anaphylaxis. Taking any vaccine that you are offered is the best thing that you can do for your health.

So, what are the problems of this official narrative? There is data from alternative sources demonstrating that at least some of these claims are clearly false. For example: measles vaccination was only introduced after measles mortality had massively declined and thus vaccination could not have been responsible for the decline. Newer vaccinations, such as the Gardasil vaccine, have clearly unfavourable risk-benefit profiles, to the extent that some countries have stopped using it, or do not include it on official vaccine schedules.

However, I would like to go beyond this and state that there is a problem with the whole concept of vaccination. I use an analogy to illustrate the point. As it is a Computer Age analogy, hopefully, it should be understood by those most technology obsessed invokers of the Cult of Vaccination:

Vaccination is like trying to fix a circuit board with a hammer.

The reality is the human immune system is extremely complex and multifaceted. It has been developed by millions of years of Mother Nature to protect us from disease. It does that job superbly well, so long as the environment supports it, that is, that it is not undermined through poor living conditions, exposure to toxic chemicals, and poor diet.

To give an idea of how complex the immune system actually is, we can look at the scientific literature. This article gives this description of immune response:

Immune cells sense infection and other environmental cues through a variety of extracellular and intracellular receptors. Ligation of these receptors leads to signaling cascades consisting of many dynamic processes including signal‐induced protein binding, phosphorylation, degradation, and nuclear localization. These signaling events lead to changes in gene expression, and subsequently to the production of both effector proteins required to combat infection and proteins involved in regulation of the ensuing, potentially host‐damaging, response. The number of molecular players or variables involved in any such activity can vary from hundreds to thousands, making immune responses immensely complex. This complexity is amplified by the multiscalar nature of the immune system, as these signaling and transcriptional responses occur in the context of diverse and dynamic cell–cell interactions.

Vaccination is essentially trying to ‘hack’ this extremely complex system through the extremely crude method of antigen and adjuvant injection. Vaccination sees the natural immune system as ‘insert A = get B’ or ‘insert needle = get antibodies = protection against disease’. The complex cascades of multiple interlinking factors are not present in this equation. Nor are factors such as route of exposure, and that injection of a dead/attenuated pathogen is a fundamentally different mechanism to the natural exposure which would be through, for example, aerosol. And here I am talking only of what we know or can surmise, because there is a large number of things about the immune response that we probably do not know.

There are certainly some individuals who are pushing vaccination for sinister motivations. An excellent example is Bill Gates, who is interested in vaccination as a means of depopulation. But the system of vaccination could not have gained such success in society without a massive degree of hubris on the part of scientists, governments, and everyone else in society who is going along with the vaccination narrative. Instead of being driven by the specific desire to do evil, they are blinded by the hubris of a victory that is impossible.

This hubris, of course, comes back around to us when we see massive levels of vaccination injury in our population. It is difficult to estimate how much vaccine injury there is in our population, given that all information about vaccine injury is suppressed. But there is enough evidence to link vaccination to a large number of health problems including autism, anxiety and mental health problems, autoimmune diseases, heart problems, brain inflammation, narcolepsy, and multiple other conditions.

A Note on the mRNA ‘Vaccines’

I trust nature more than I trust scientists like Dr. Anthony Fauci.

Dr. Andrew Wakefield

In some respects, the mRNA ‘vaccines’ do not belong here, as they are not vaccines by the actual definition of the term, however they are promoted as vaccines by the establishment.

The hubris discussion, however, is even more relevant when it comes to the mRNA concoctions. The hubris of traditional vaccination was bad enough, with the direct injection of an antigen and adjuvant, expecting the ‘hacking’ of the immune system to function effectively to create the antigen and not to have adverse long term reactions. The mRNA injections, on the other hand, mess with this system in an even deeper and more intrusive – and more dangerous – way by making the body produce the spike protein itself. This kind of immune hacking has caused disastrous consequences, with spike protein running rampant in the body and causing myocarditis, pericarditis, blood clots, and neurological injury, along with a massive amount of ‘sudden death‘ that is otherwise unexplained. The mRNA experiment is portrayed as, and considered to be by insane scientists, a ‘way cool’ experiment where they get to play God.

Conclusion

The concept of vaccination has always been a fundamentally flawed method to prevent disease. Instead of having to endure natural exposure to the pathogen, vaccination allows human beings to ‘cheat’ the process of gaining natural immunity through infection. In this way, ‘victory’ over disease can be declared. The price of this hubris is a skyrocketing of chronic illness.

Note: I was inspired to write this article by Toby Rogers and his piece on ‘Why I’m an Abolitionist’. This article is a massive expansion of something I dropped in the comments over at the uTobian substack.

Infertility and Toxins (Part 1): The Inculcation of Infertility

Introduction

Infertility is a significant issue in Western societies. This two part article will explore the issue of how modern life causes infertility among both men and women, and then how actors concerned with profit, such as Big Pharma, seek to exploit this inculcated infertility. It will also discuss how this increased reliance on Pharma for a natural function drives into other agendas such as transhumanism.

The Decline In Human Fertility

In this article I will be focusing on the Western world as people there would be the main consumers of fertility based big pharma products, such as IVF or surrogacy. This should not be construed as believing that the fertility issues faced by women in developing countries – such as those deliberately invoked by the WHO – are unimportant.

There is significant evidence of birth rate decline in the Western world. Some of this can be put down to social factors (access to contraception for example). However, there are also physical factors at work. According to the CDC, 12% of women in America have issues conceiving. Sperm counts have also been on the decline for years with a total decline of 50-60% since 1973.

Does Aluminium Cause Infertility?

Aluminium has no productive role within the human body, and because the aluminium on Earth was bound up with silica compounds for our entire history, the human body does not have defense mechanisms against it. Human activity as unleashed aluminium on the environment, and so we suffer from every day exposures from air, food, water, cosmetics, and vaccination. Any amount of aluminium harms the body. Aluminium has inflammatory effects as well as causing neurological injury and cancer. But can it also cause infertility?

Aluminium is present in high quantities in human sperm. A study ‘Aluminium Content of Human Semen‘ found that the levels of aluminium in the sperm were on average 339 μg/L. Men with a low sperm count in the study also had higher levels of aluminium suggesting possible causation.

Do Phthalates Cause Infertility?

Phthalates are a product that are in a large number of plastics:

Phthalates are a group of chemicals used to make plastics more durable. Phthalates are in hundreds of products, such as vinyl flooring, lubricating oils, and personal-care products (soaps, shampoos, hair sprays).

CDC

Their effects on fertility come from the fact that they can mimic estrogen in the human body. In terms of fertility, this can negatively affect men and there have been several studies on this topic. The below review lists some of these studies.

Recent studies have showed that exposure to some phthalates results in profound and irreversible changes in the development of reproductive tract (Foster et al., 2001, Sharpe, 2001) especially in males, rising the possibility that phthalate exposures could be the leading cause of the reproductive disorders in humans (Ablake et al., 2004, Ema et al., 2003, Foster et al., 2000, Latini et al., 2004a, Latini et al., 2004b, Moore et al., 2001, Mylchreest et al., 1998, Parks et al., 2000, Wilson et al., 2004). In particular, prenatal exposure to these environmental chemicals, by interfering with the androgen signaling pathway seems to cause permanent adverse effects on reproductive development in male rats (Carruthers and Foster, 2005, Kai et al., 2005, Lehmann et al., 2004, Thompson et al., 2004).

Phthalate Exposure and Male Infertility

Regarding women’s fertility, a study looked at the effects of phthalates on success of IVF, and found to was less likely to be successful if the woman had a higher concentration of phthalates in the body.

Is Infertility Linked to Vaccination?

There is evidence that vaccination can negatively affect fertility. One vaccine where this issue has been examined is Gardasil, sold as a preventative for cervical cancer. There is a strong correlation between the introduction of the Gardasil vaccine and a decline in the fertility of the age groups exposed to that vaccine.

Clinical trial researchers for Merck, Gardasil’s manufacturer, reported an explosion of reproductive injuries among the 20,000 trial volunteers. An astronomical 15% – 17% of trial participants experienced a range of reproductive harms, including premature ovarian failure.

Is Gardasil Vaccine linked to Record Birth Rate Declines?

Gardasil contains extremely high levels of aluminium, but also many other ingredients that are negative for human health, such as L-histidine, polysorbate 80 and sodium borate. These substances are listed as possible causes of female infertility. There is also evidence that the Gardasil vaccine can cause anti-phospholipid syndrome, an autoimmune disease that can affect the reproductive organs.

Is Infertility Linked to Covid-19 ‘Vaccination’?

There have been many speculations early on in the Covid-19 ‘vaccine’ rollout that the jab would cause infertility. For example, Dr. Judy Mikovits was one of the first people to draw attention to this, especially the issue of possible autoimmune to a protein crucial in pregnancy, Syncytin-1. Unfortunately, more and more evidence is stacking up that the Covid-19 ‘vaccinations’ do indeed cause infertility.

Steve Kirsch’s analysis of VAERS shows that one of the most elevated adverse events after ‘vaccination’ in comparison with other injections is menstrual problems.

If a medical intervention can affect a woman’s menstruation, it can obviously affect the ability to conceive.

There have also been reports of an extremely high number of miscarriages, spontaneous abortion, and fetal demise post roll out of this experimental ‘vaccination’. Dr. Jessica Rose has pointed to the fact that there have been over 4,000 miscarriages reported to VAERS as of June 2022.

Meanwhile, an Israeli study showed some issues with male fertility after ‘vaccination’.

Post day 150, sperm concentration was -15.9% vs baseline, lower even than in the 75-120 day period. Average time post vaxx for T3 collection was 174 +/- 26.8 days so we’re talking about 6 months post vaxx with NO recovery in sperm concentration.

Pfizer Vaccine Effects on Total Motile Count in Sperm Donors

More recently, birth statistics have shown a significant decline in a large number of Western countries, and that decline is holding firm and not rebounding to pre-Covid levels. A good visual example is this decline in Sweden, from the El Gato Malo substack:

Synthetic Sex Identities and Sterilisation

No discussion of infertility would be complete without the discussion of the deliberate infliction of infertility via the use of puberty blockers, wrong-sex hormone dosage, and ‘transgender’ surgery. This inculcation of infertility affects a small but growing number of the population.

‘Puberty blockers’, medically known as GnRH agonists, stop the production of sex hormones. Since the ‘Dutch protocol’ began in 1996, the drugs have increasingly been used to facilitate ‘gender transition’ of children. The drugs prevent the child from going through puberty, meaning that there is no development of the gonads. This leads to infertility for obvious reasons, as the correct sex hormone is never present to lead to fertility. Incorrect hormones can also cause reproductive harms, for example, testosterone dosage in women who identify as men causes atrophy in the female reproductive organs. ‘Transgender’ surgery, such as hysterectomy, oophorectomy, and orchiectomy (castration) also create permanent sterilisation in those that receive these surgeries.

Conclusion

Multiple toxins, that are created by modern industrial society, reduce human fertility to a significant extent. This article merely covers some of the ways in which this happens. This opens up new markets for Big Pharma and other actors, which will be explored in Part 2.

Tory Party Conference Protest 2 October 2022

This was a fun day.

Let’s start with who was there.

Save Our Rights

As promised, there was a small contingent of anti-lockdown/scamdemic protesters from the group Save Our Rights. They are now putting some of their focus on authoritarian bills being passed by the Tory government, and were out there to oppose that.

This guy won the sign of the day award.

The Anti-Brexit Liberals

Yes, the anti-Brexit liberals were there and they did some dancing around too.

A group of people opposing smart motorways.

Jewish people supporting Palestine.

This group was protesting the attempts by the Tories to prevent boycott of Israeli goods.

A group of people protesting against what is going on in Tigray.

The People’s Assembly.

Extinction Rebellion.

A whole cavalcade of left leaning political groups and unions.

There was also an anti-Iranian government protest in a completely different place that converged on Centenary Square later on.

…and me, there to represent the Free Julian Assange message.

The leftist groups were in Victoria Square, and the others were in Centenary Square. (For those who don’t know the geography these are 5min away from each other).

The left-wing protest in Victoria Square was due to kick off at 1pm. The other protesters in Centenary Square were there earlier. The left wingers also went for a march around the city centre before convening on Centenary Square about 3pm.

I was hanging around Centenary Square between about 11.20 and 12.30 (mostly) and was able to get film footage of many of the different groups and their causes. I went to Victoria Square to film there. Just before 1pm, Jacob Rees-Mogg walked right next to the protest where he predictably got heckled. I followed the hecklers round from Victoria Square to Centenary Square and the entrance to the Tory Party Conference. Lots of lovely messages got yelled at Rees-Mogg as you can see from these clips (he is visible in the second video, but not the first).

Rees Mogg Being Heckled.
More footage of Rees-Mogg being Heckled.

By the time I got back to Victoria Square some of the speeches had started. I didn’t bother filming all of these. It was a similar lineup to the Enough is Enough protest of activist trade union types. Instead I was able to get some footage of RMT boss Mick Lynch liaising with his supporters:

I also have lots of footage of the crowd at various different points, there are some bits and pieces of the speeches on them. I also have some footage of Mick Lynch speaking to the crowd, as he was the most high-profile person in attendance.

RIP NHS protesters.

Then there was the march, which went round the city centre and then looped back to Centenary Square.

It was the biggest protest in Birmingham I had seen in a while. For further footage of the events see my youtube/odysee/rumble/bitchute channels.

Enough is Enough Rally Birmingham 1st October 2022

I attended the rally organised by Enough is Enough outside New Street Station in Birmingham.

I was there early in order to leaflet attendees about Julian Assange, and in particular the event in London on the 8th October. Every obscure leftist political party was there handing out literature and selling their papers. The RMT and the other rail unions were there for a picket line alongside the protest.

The turnout was pretty decent to be fair.

The demands of the Enough is Enough movement can be seen here. In summary, it’s standard soft-left fare: higher wages and lowering energy bills, as well as supporting the current rail and postal strikes. It was mostly a mix of fringe leftist groups, striking workers, millennial types with rainbow badges, the usual sort of people who turn up to these kinds of events. As far as I know, there was no presence from Labour Party MPs or councilors.

The speeches were the usual thing you get at these kinds of events. Several union workers stood up and spoke about the strikes, such as the rail strikes and the postal office strikes. A couple of female activists spoke on the issues of foodbanks and rented housing, respectively.

With the speeches and placards at these kinds of events, they are always framed in a particular way that I think is misleading. In other words, they talk about ‘the Tory government’. Now, as is pretty obvious from this website, I hate the current incumbents in Westminster. But the subtext here is that if we had a Labour government – things would be different. No, they would not. Look at Keir Starmer, for god’s sake. The man openly declares that he is ‘Zionist without qualification’ and his Crown Prosecution Service told the Swedish government not to drop the fraudulent ‘rape’ investigation into Julian Assange. If you think he is going to do a damn thing for you, you are naive beyond belief. He might be a bit less brazen than Liz Truss but that is about it.

Furthermore, the word ‘lockdown’ was not mentioned by any of the speakers. Lockdown is obviously a massive cause of the current economic crisis, but the unions were happy to support it as it meant they got furlough money (let’s just be honest here). If you know anything about how economies work, you will know that you can’t disrupt local, national and international supply chains via lockdowns for months on end and have no economic consequences from that. Instead, the left cheered lockdowns and in fact, demanded harder lockdowns, and those of us who pointed out that lockdowns would crash the economy were mocked as ‘valuing the economy over human life’.

I don’t want ordinary people to have to suffer economic hardship, but I also feel like the kind of speeches on display narrow the focus in a way that is unhelpful. One thing that was not mentioned, for example, is the push towards Central Digital Bank Currencies on the part of a multitude of states. Governments around the world are looking to abolish cash as a means to increase control. Why not bring this up? After all, this would hurt vulnerable people the most, such as people who are homeless. The answer is because the debate is corralled into a limited framework in which broader causative factors are not considered, instead being reduced down into the personal evils of ‘the Tory government’.

Or what about the fact that a year or so ago, care home workers were fired if they refused to take an extremely dangerous experimental injection proven to cause strokes, myocarditis and sudden death? Why not bring that up as an example of a monstrous policy pursued by these psychopathic elites? Well, that would contradict the fact that the left has done nothing but push the Covid scam for two years and to be honest, I think a lot of them would rather quietly forget about it. Basically no one was wearing a mask or bothering with any ‘social distancing’ at the protest, so they are clearly not worried about the ‘threat of Covid’ they told us we were monsters for ignoring for two years. In my view the left’s compliance with this scam cannot be forgotten so quickly and so easily. I personally will never forget how us ‘granny killers’, ‘conspiracy theorists’ and ‘anti-vaxxers’ were treated.

I would almost always rather that people protest than don’t protest, but the limitations of these kind of events are abundantly clear unfortunately. The left will not get anywhere until it admits its mistakes and that is something that is very unlikely to happen, as it would require an honesty that does not exist within the milieu, whether from sinister motives (such as sheepdogging) or simply ignorance or ideological blindness.

Cost of Living Crisis Protest Birmingham 2nd April 2022

The People’s Assembly organised another round of protests against the rising costs of living in the UK (although of course, issues like inflation are not just affecting the UK). This included another Birmingham protest. The previous action took place on the 12 February, although there was also supposed to be an action on the 5 March. No one turned up to this action other than a few activists with tables (I have a couple of videos on my channel, see here).

There was a larger selection of speakers at this event with a presence of a few hundred people. This included some people from the crowd as well as many union, climate activist, etc speakers that you would expect to appear at a bread and butter left wing event such as this.

Several unions were represented with the University and College Union and the Musicians’ Union as well as others. There were housing campaigners speaking as well as pensioners and climate activists (of course, there is a bit of a contradiction here with the fuel costs issue).

I thought the speeches at this one were a little bit better than the previous one, though there was some left wing/woke liberal nonsense involved in some of them, including references to Brexit (I really don’t get why anyone is talking about Brexit at this point) and the ‘pandemic’ and ‘Covid’ being the cause of things that were actually caused by lockdowns. For example, this speaker talks about the legitimate issues caused by lockdowns for jobbing musicians, but frames it as if it was caused by ‘the pandemic’ as some sort of disembodied entity not connected to government policy. So ultimately the root of the issue still was not attacked.

The Birmingham Stop the War leader Stuart Richardson also talked about the Ukraine issue and how that was affecting prices. Although placing sanctions on Russia will clearly exacerbate this issue I do not see it as a root cause, rather the government/elites will try to blame Putin for what they created. While any Russian retaliation is understandable in the context of sanctions the media will pretend it is all down to Putin being a ‘maniac’ and ‘madman’ (and hell, maybe Maddow was right about Russians wanting to freeze us to death?)

I spoke in my previous article on this issue about the difficulties relating to this issue of the cost of living, and I am still not sure how to resolve it:

I don’t want working class people to have to pay more money for energy bills etc., especially since they were the primary victims of lockdowns. I think that is fairly obvious. The question is how we tackle the problem. In general, even though I disagree with capitalist economics I have become a lot more sceptical of calling on the (capitalist) state to do anything about anything, since they will just use it to push more pain onto working people (a good example is the environment: while it’s clear that many things humans are doing are negatively affecting the environment, any state action is likely to be more authoritarian nonsense that will punish the working class like carbon based digital IDs). Unlike libertarians I believe that this authoritarianism is inherently interlinked with the capitalist system.

Alternative systems within the current one such as opting out as much as possible and doing other things within the freedom based community are a good idea. However, they are difficult to implement in practice given that people still have to survive within the current system (e.g. people have to go to work full time, leaving limited time and energy for alternatives). Such suggestions can come across as a bit naïve in some cases though I advocate them where realistically possible.

There is due to be further protests on the cost of living issue with a protest taking place on June 12 in London.

Footage from the protest has been uploaded to Bitchute.

Oh and the award for the worst protest sign:

The Myth of Government Incompetence: Part 1 – Imperialism

Introduction

Many supporters of the current powers-that-be often talk about the idea of ‘government incompetence’ when it comes to certain policies. This first part of the article will discuss the idea of imperialist war as an incompetent mistake rather than a criminal act.

Imperialism as an Incompetent Mistake: The Case Of Vietnam

Whenever there is an imperialist conflict, such as in Vietnam or Iraq, liberal pundits write the government actions off as a ‘mistake’. This most often tends to happen after it has become obvious to the general public that the war effort was based on lies. The benevolence of the powers-that-be needs salvaging from the radical critique that their actions were based upon malice, and so the ‘incompetence’ narrative comes into play.

This article will focus on the Vietnam war as an example of this strategy. This war was waged in order to preferably keep the puppet state elites in power in South Vietnam so that the country could be exploited for natural resources, to destroy the capacity to build an independent, anti-colonial socialist government, and to deter other countries from taking an anti-imperialist path.

However, this conflict has been framed by many as a mistake, an unwinnable quagmire that the US leaders plunged into despite the fact that they knew they could not win. They were simply blinded by ideology or sunk cost fallacy.

One book that discusses government incompetence as a topic is The March of Folly by Barbara Tuchman. The definition of ‘folly’ in the book is as follows:

The pursuit of policy contrary to the self-interest of the constituency of the state involved. Self interest is whatever conduces to the to the welfare or the advantage of the body being governed, folly is a policy that in these terms is counter-productive.

The March of Folly, p. 5

Furthermore, the book states that to be perceived as folly the policy must have been pointed out as bad for the state or constituency’s self interest at the time by actors that were there and not just viewed as bad in hindsight.

The book discusses four examples, but this article is only going to address the Vietnam war.

The book discusses the doubts behind the scenes that the Americans could ‘win’ in Vietnam due to the unviability of the South Vietnamese puppet state. Instead, the book argues, they wasted trillions of dollars and thousands of American lives on trying to prop up this puppet state.

Tuchman states that the reasons that American policy makers continued to pursue this policy despite the costs are as follows:

American policy makers took it for granted that on a given aim , especially in Asia, American will could be made to prevail. […] Enemy motivation was a missing element in American calculations[.] […] [R]efusal to credit the evidence and, more fundamentally, refusal to grant stature and fixed purpose to a “fourth rate” Asiatic country were determining factors[.] […] Underestimation was matched by overestimation of South Vietnam, […] Western verbiage equated any non-Communist group with the “free” nations, fostering the delusion that its people were prepared to fight for their “freedom”…

The March of Folly pp. 375-6.

The Reality of Vietnam: Calculated Mass Destruction

We can now return to the question of how we are classifying ‘irrational’ behaviour. The truth is that whether behaviour is rational or irrational is defined by the goal of that behaviour. As outlined above, there were several goals of the Vietnam war. While the goal of propping up the South Vietnamese puppet state failed, the goal of the destruction of Vietnam to prevent the building of an alternative society clearly succeeded to a significant extent.

If we assume malice on the part of the government, the behaviour in Vietnam – of launching constant bombing campaigns, using chemical weapons, and assassination programs such as Phoenix make perfect sense as a measure to attempt to destroy a society.

A few examples.

The defoliation campaign was a devastating crusade against the Vietnamese people. This was achieved through the use of the chemical weapon Agent Orange.

According to Monthly Review:

During the ten years (1961-1971) of aerial chemical warfare in Vietnam, US warplanes sprayed more than 20 million gallons of herbicide defoliants in an operation code-named Ranch Hand.

This had a horrific effect on the environment in Vietnam and thus also upon the population of the country. It destroyed forests and farming land, and ensured the chemical got into the food chain, meaning mass exposure to the toxin. The chemical itself produces birth defects and disabilities and has been demonstrated to do so among both the citizens of Vietnam and US fighters in the imperialist conflict.

The CIA also ran a program in Vietnam called Phoenix.

Phoenix was a systemic attempt to find and kill Vietnamese fighting against the US and its designs. It did this through terror, torture, intelligence-gathering and the relocation (and murder) of the insurgency’s civilian supporters.

This involved the murder of people who supported the National Liberation Front in South Vietnam (known as the ‘Vietcong’ by the Americans). This is still euphemistically termed ‘counterinsurgency’ by supporters of the establishment.

The policy murdered a large number of people in South Vietnam:

By 1971, a US House Operations Subcommittee investigation heard the CIA’s William Colby acknowledge that in three years from 1968, Phoenix killed 20,587 Vietnamese civilians — though the New York Times independently estimated the figure at more like 60,000.

The destabilisation of neighbouring countries also negatively affected Vietnam. Massive bombing campaigns in Cambodia by Richard Nixon helped to lead to the rise of the Khmer Rouge. The Vietnamese government militarily intervened in Cambodia in 1978 and removed Pol Pot from power. The US government started funding Pol Pot after the Vietnamese removed his government from power.

[T]he US had been secretly funding Pol Pot in exile since January 1980. The extent of this support – $85m from 1980 to 1986 – was revealed in correspondence to a member of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. On the Thai border with Cambodia, the CIA and other intelligence agencies set up the Kampuchea Emergency Group, which ensured that humanitarian aid went to Khmer Rouge enclaves in the refugee camps and across the border.

The effects of all of this destruction on the Vietnamese society was to destroy traditional structures, to kill and maim many Vietnamese fighters and citizens, to force the Vietnamese to use their resources for war rather than peaceful construction, and to devastate much of the environment and farming land. This was not an ‘incompetent mistake’ or a ‘quagmire’ but a policy of mass murder.

Conclusion

The concept of government incompetence is not a valid explanation of major policy decisions such as the war in Vietnam. The idea of government incompetence is a shield used by people who defend the powers-that-be in order to cover up their mass murder.

Youth March for Jobs 9th October 2021

I attended this event primarily as a leafleting opportunity for Julian Assange and the upcoming American appeal this month. I knew about it from leafleting by the Socialist Party, the organisers of the event.

As I was attending anyway I thought I would take a few pictures and videos for the website.

Apparently there were events organised all over the country as well.

This event had primarily left wing activists known to each other. The Stop the War coalition was also there as well as the Socialist Party. It was a small crowd of maybe 30 people.

None of the attendees were bothered that we had turned up to leaflet for Assange. In fact they were probably pleased that someone outside of the usual suspects had turned up.

The event consisted of a few speeches followed by a relatively short march through Birmingham City Centre, down New Street and back around to Victoria Square via St Philip’s Cathedral.

Unfortunately, the speakers did not seem too comfortable with the megaphone and so you had to be quite close to them to hear what they were saying. I doubt passersby could hear that much of the speeches. The man introducing the speakers and leading the chants later on was the exception but he didn’t give a speech.

I took some footage of the speakers but most of it was compromised by a mixture of the limited sound systems and the limitations of my device. Here is a couple of the ones that are comprehensible.

First one speech by a student:

Watch on Bitchute.

Another speech by an older worker:

Watch on Bitchute.

The complaints and demands made by the activists were the usual kinds of demands that you would expect from a Socialist event. Various speakers talked about apprenticeships, universities, pensions, zero hours contracts and poor wages.

Their list of demands is shown below.

The protesters then went on the short march around the city centre.

Watch on Bitchute.

Big Pharma Is No Different From Any Other Capitalist Corporation

A left-wing perspective offers a structural critique of capitalist firms, arguing that they are focused only on profit, and not issues such as safety or the common good. In reality, however, the modern left has failed to sufficiently apply this critique to Big Pharma and their operations in creating medications – although they will sometimes acknowledge it in a haphazard way. What is not taken into account is the way that Big Pharma – in allegiance with the state – creates new medical ‘needs’ and new markets based on these needs, particularly in relation to the Covid-19 vaccinations.

The General Anti-Capitalist Viewpoint

The concern of any business is to make profit. The only way for any corporation to make profit is to effectively exploit their workers and extract excess labour from them (or to extract excess labour from other people’s workers – for example, banks). Other concerns must be subordinated to the need for profit. For example, product safety is not in itself a concern for a business. It would only become a concern to the extent that it affected profit – for example if people refused to buy a such a product, or if a government fined the company more than the profits made on the product for producing something unsafe.

In order to keep making profits, capitalist companies must create new markets. It is in the inherent nature of capitalism that it must keep expanding. The entire history of capitalism demonstrates this, as it expanded from Western Europe to the whole world. This is also why the capitalist world was locked in a death struggle with the USSR: not only because the socialist USSR offered a viable alternative to capitalism but also because the USSR and its allies represented untapped markets and resources. New inventions and the creation of new ‘needs’ can also be seen in the history of capitalism. Items like automobiles and mobile phones have become ‘necessary’ to human life in the West despite not actually being necessary in the technical sense.

Big Pharma and Capitalism

This logic applies as much to Big Pharma as any other corporation. One of the most important points to make specifically regarding Big Pharma is that the main market in Western countries is the state rather than individuals or private companies, due to state run healthcare services. This is different in the US due to their health insurance system. The relationship between the state and Big Pharma means that the attempt to sell more products will be centralised rather than dispersed, as it is with consumer products (this is similar to the arms industry).

There is a certain amount of genuine health issues within a population, whether caused by genetic factors or environmental factors. These health issues create demands for medications and other products sold by Big Pharma. While on the surface, the idea of a health issue is objective, in reality there is an element of subjectivity. This allows for the creation of new medications to treat these issues. If one wants to get more cynical, we can consider the idea of iatrogenic conditions, i.e. those that are created by medical treatment. This can create a market for more medical interventions to correct these iatrogenic conditions.  

The construction of the deadly disease ‘Covid-19’ has multiple uses, as I have discussed in previous articles. It is without doubt that this narrative massively benefits Big Pharma. Capitalist companies have ‘developed’ Covid-19 vaccines as quickly as possible in order to cash in on the market of selling these vaccines to the state for mass distribution. The Covid-19 narrative also promotes the idea that every single person in the country needs the vaccine which creates a massive market.

However, the Covid 19 narrative is more than just opportunistic. One function of the construction of this narrative – along with the pushing of transhumanist totalitarianism – is the transfer of wealth upward from ordinary people to capitalists. As has been known since the days of the early bourgeois economists such as David Ricardo, the rate of profit declines over time under a capitalist system. As capitalism has existed for centuries at this point this tendency has become significantly advanced. The recovery from the 2008 crisis was weak.

The ‘pandemic’ narrative was used to justify lockdowns, which have been an absolute disaster for the working class in terms of lost income. Importantly, lockdowns have helped to destroy small businesses, which has increased wealth centralisation. Under capitalism, capital becomes concentrated in fewer and fewer companies, banks, etc. as more successful firms drive weaker competition out of business. Lockdowns accelerate this process in several ways: closing small firms’ premises so forcing people to buy online, channeling purchases through a small number of businesses; causing small businesses to go bust so their assets can be bought on the cheap; and encouraging small businesses to take loans to ‘weather the pandemic’ which will mean their assets will be appropriated by banks.

The Covid-19 vaccinations then are just one part of transference of wealth into the pockets of a few large firms created by this narrative. Some might question this argument by saying that the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine was not developed for profit. However, as explained by Whitney Webb, AstraZeneca plans to make their profit further down the line through boosters given to people who received the original AstraZeneca jab. Their hope for profit was based on getting a wider spread of the vaccine due to the initial lack of profit, then doubling up on profit later – just another means to the same end.

Isn’t This Obvious?

Yes, I would consider the points raised about Big Pharma profiteering to be rather obvious. However, it seems that the Left needs a reminder of the realities of Big Pharma, and that they do not care about individuals’ health, only profit.

This is because many on the Left have fallen hook, line and sinker for the Official Covid Narrative, advocating any and all forms of capitalist ‘health’ authoritarianism so long as the government justifies it as ‘protecting us from a deadly virus’. Furthermore, the left has mocked anyone who questioned this narrative as a ‘conspiracy theorist’.

This puts the left in awkward position in terms of the profit motive behind the vaccines. The left has really pushed the idea of endless lockdowns, to the extent that it is difficult to see what would satisfy them (welding us in our homes, maybe?) This puts them in a position of having to support the vaccine because they are going to look ridiculous if they advocate for 50-year lockdowns until there is no more Covid (though of course, that doesn’t stop some of them – see the ‘Zero Covid’ fanatics).

People who question the vaccine, according to the left, are thus put in a bucket of being ‘Conspiracy theorists’, despite the obvious point that there is a certain motivation behind these vaccines that the left would have to admit: profit.

The left resolves this by unconsciously/cynically (take your pick) recognising the fact that profit is important for Big Pharma but only in terms of denying people the vaccine if they do not have the money to pay for it. The narrative involves criticism of Big Pharma in the sense that they have patented these vaccines and will not let generic versions of the vaccines be marketed because of their profit margins. The idea that the vaccine itself could be contaminated by profit motives is not considered.

Conclusion

The Covid-19 Narrative has created a windfall for Big Pharma, which is minimised by the left because they have fallen for the Covid Narrative. Although this minimisation is required given the support for the Covid narrative, it also warrants further explanation.