The WHO’s catapulting of the SARS-CoV-2 virus into pandemic territory has, as a side effect, revealed some very dire limitations in range of inquiry that the political Left in the US has set for itself.
When it comes to questioning the validity and truthfulness of mainstream Establishment narratives, the Left in the US seems to be only willing to challenge those narratives to a certain point, a point beyond which they tend to stick their fingers in their ears, close their eyes and start yelling “Blah blah blah!” at the top of their lungs to drown out what they don’t want to hear. This was true when the veracity of government claims around 9/11 were being challenged, and it is definitely true in 2020 with the advent of the coronavirus “pandemic”.
The US Left has accepted the whole coronavirus “pandemic” narrative without question, despite the fact that there is ample evidence circulating to raise serious questions about it. These are people who are comfortable challenging the intentions of corporations, but when it comes to corporate-owned media (which is most of it), the US Left is seemingly afraid to disagree with “official” sources and grant them the benefit of the doubt.
The very fact that oligarch-controlled groupings like the World Economic Forum held a pandemic role-playing scenario (the now-infamous Event 201 or the older “Lockstep” scenario) last year prior to the WHO’s pandemic declaration just zips by the Left as if it is completely irrelevant. No conspiracy here, just the 1% holding meaningless meetings and making meaningless recommendations that have no import for the 99%. This is pretty much the attitude of the US Left – blind faith in Establishment media sources and a strange desire to believe the oligarchs don’t really mean us any harm.
The professional Left in the US is afraid of challenging the Establishment because many are ultimately at the mercy of the oligarchs for their livelihood. Those who hold positions at universities are careful not to dig too deep or to suggest the obvious because they face the possibility of being run off campus. The fear of the “conspiracy theorist” label is enough to frighten most academics – their professional status and reputation is more important than actually digging too deep into the darkness that should not be dug into.
And we should not diminish the basic human social desire to “fit in”, to have the social acceptance of one’s peer group, to be taken seriously. It is a powerful force in human relations and the kind of people who sit around and plan “pandemics” definitely understand this and they put forth a lot of effort in controlling the narratives they’ve fashioned.
In my opinion, the academic Left seems overly concerned with their reputations and how they’re seen by their peers – being tarred as a “conspiracy theorist” can be career-ending, so they limit the range of their criticism of power. According to the Left, Dick Cheney is a bad man, but there’s no fucking way he’d plan to have thousands of Americans killed in order to catalyze changes to American society that probably wouldn’t happen absent a 9/11. Dick is a bad man, but not that bad.
The Left in the US could use a healthy injection of skepticism and a lot less faith in the inherent goodness of oligarchs and their institutions.





You must be logged in to post a comment.