What was, what has been, where we are now

Are we going to find out that the poison and the antidote were brewed in the same laboratory?

The distressed are willing to oppress the un-distressed so that the un-distressed become distressed.

But let the Present Author begin, well, at the beginning.

What was

In the days of the old, there was science and she was good.¹ There was poison and there was a gift of science: an antidote. People get poisoned, people are given the antidote.

What has been

In the days of the young, there is science and she is very good. There also is poison, but science has improved the antidote: now there is a “pre-antidote”. People may be given the pre-antidote at the scientifically-modelled risk of being poisoned.

Some things had happened. Poison came. Risk modelling wheels were spun. Some people have been pre-antidoted, some other people declined.

Now it may be said that the currently pre-antidoted submitted to their distressed “doctor” (the government²), who himself had been distressed by the scientifically modelled risk, because the pre-antidoted were sufficiently distressed by what their distressed doctor had told them about the dangers of a certain poison. Therefore, I wish to call the pre-antidoted “the distressed”.

Now it may also be said that those who declined, the currently un-pre-antidoted, have not submitted to their distressed doctor, who himself had been distressed by the scientifically-modelled risk, because the un-pre-antidoted were not sufficiently distressed by what their distressed doctor told them about the dangers of the poison. Therefore, I wish to call the un-pre-antidoted “the un-distressed”.

Where we are now

The distressed are willing to oppress the un-distressed so that the un-distressed become distressed. It must be said that the current oppression of the un-distressed by the distressed is a greater evil than what it is that makes the distressed distressed.

What will be

What will be cannot be said. Or, rather, what will be cannot be said with certainty.

Will the pre-antidoted remain distressed and continue to oppress the un-distressed?

Will the un-distressed remain undistressed?

Will the very good science persist in the modelling of risk?

Will the distressed doctor remain distressed in the grip of the very good science’s modelling?

Are we going to find out that the poison and the antidote were brewed in the same laboratory?

Many other questions are possible.

What may be said when what will be cannot be said

Science, the distressed, and the doctor (again, the government) strive to do great good, but they also augment so much vice and multiply so much suffering that it is open to argument whether they will continue to be or will not continue to be an evil to the world. This is entirely because excellent people fancy, in the current time of the plague, that they can do much by rapid action—that they will most benefit the world when they most relieve their own feelings of distress; that as soon as an evil is seen, ‘some thing’ instantly and efficiently ought to be done to prevent it. One may incline to hope that the balance of Good and Evil favours benevolence, but its burden of harm might have been spared us if our doctors and our very good science enthusiasts had not succumbed to a passion for instant action—and took the trouble to think.³

“Fortunately, consciences are awakening, minds are rebelling, whistleblowers are flourishing, and the masks are about to come off.”⁴

A NOTE FROM THE PRESENT AUTHOR (last update: December 2023)

The oppression of the un-distressed by the distressed is not taking place without language. (And not without location. In several countries, quarantine camps have been set up. For example, Instagram influencers have been posting happy snaps from Howard Springs quarantine camp in Darwin, Australia, calling it “almost like a vacation.”)⁵

As for the ‘language’. Violent statements, not lacking in the media. Here are some examples, lest someone would think that the Present Author exaggerates.⁶

• “I will have you taken by force by police officers to the vaccination center”, Emmanuel Lechypre, French journalist, June 2021;

• “Vaccinated, cured or dead by the end of winter”, Jens Spahn, German Minister of Health, November 2021 (not specifying whether he was considering opening up a new market: vaccinating the dead);

• A “pandemic of the unvaccinated”(?), the vaccinated are likened to criminals.

We have more. Let’s go to Repubblica Italiana and see some of the public declarations that were made, and the Present Reader will be able to ask himself whether or not it is legitimate for the Present Author to worry about such a climate of stigmatisation of the so-called non-vaccinated people by the parasites/murderers/criminals, suggesting Nazi German action be taken in the literal sense:

• “I wish to see you drop like flies", Andrea Scanzi, journalist;

• “I am very democratic: extermination camps for those who do not want to be vaccinated”, Giuseppe Gigantino, cardiologist;

• “The solution: extermination camps and gas chambers”. Marianna Rubino, M.D.

• “Separate cars in the train for the non-vaccinated”, Mauro Felicori, in charge of culture in the Emilia-Romagna region;

• “I would like a virus that eats your organs in ten minutes reducing you to a greenish mush that is in a glass to see how many inflexible Un-Vaxxed remain in the world”, Selvaggia Lucarelli, journalist;

• “Let them be like rats locked in the house and assigned to their home”, Roberto Burioni, virologist;

• “People who are not vaccinated, they must wear a sign around their neck, this will allow us to avoid them”, Angelo Giovannini, the former head of the Press Office of the Municipality of Carpi, as well as mayor of Bomporto since 2019 (resigned in January 2022, seeing himself as a man who “who tried to help solve people’s problems and do a good service to the community”);

• “We are waiting for the un-vaxxed to die out on their own”, Paolo Guzzanti, journalist;

• “Anti vax are terrorists, and they must be fed with lead”, Giuliano Cazzola, journalist.

If the Author may be permitted a digression. For his above “writing gymnastics”, as he calls them, he has no excuse other than they oblige the hygienic necessity of airing his grievances. The fulfilment of necessity is the motive and the resulting improvement in hygiene is his reward, wretched man that he is. What it is that he thinks our doctors and science enthusiasts should be thinking should they take the trouble to think, he will write about another time, having booked a flight ticket to Patagonia, or possibly Kamchatka, first. (Until then, a little sustenance might be found here.)

Let’s change the subject. What about Pfizer setting up its production headquarters in one of the cities historically known to be the epicentre of German Nazism, is this a curious coincidence, a kind of irony of history? The Present Author, who I am, does not know what to say about that.⁷

But, the “real, legal monstrosity”, as Maestro Giorgio Agamben called it, voiced as a question “How can the State accuse of irresponsibility those who choose not to be vaccinated, when it is the same State that first declines, formally, any responsibility for the possible serious consequences?”, I am leaving without comment for now.⁸

Thanks for reading my stuff. I hope to remain not (not) unvaccinated. I hope to remain un-distressed—I wish you the same. May we pay no mind to the substantial minority who will continue to promote hysteria and demand seasonal mass-containment forever.⁹

Stabunt iusti in magna constantia adversus eos, qui se angustiaverunt. (“The righteous will stand with great steadfastness against those who have distressed them.”)

Kissing you coyly on the mouth in the time of the plague,

Tomasz Goetel
December 5, AD 2021
Ibiza, Spain

P.S. Want more? Read the text linked below.

Book Your Concentration Camp Now

UPDATE: 6 May, 2024:

“In the clown-infested reality that we currently inhabit, the international government-military blob is claiming that they can predict pandemics and declare emergencies based on one fake PCR case of a made-up virus somewhere in the world.” More below:

When "pandemics are declared" - what does this mean in practice?

1. “Science, when practiced as the application of man's God-given talents for the production of appropriate technology on a human-scale, relief of misery and the reverential exploration and appreciation of the glory of Divine Providence as revealed in nature, is a useful tool for mankind.”—Michael A. Hoffman II, Secret Societies and Psychological Warfare, (2001).

2. I’ve chosen the term “doctor” to mean the government in order to highlight my observation that, at least for the past two years, the government clearly wants to be a doctor, talks like a doctor, and acts like a doctor. It’s been said that “if it walks like a duck and sounds like a duck…”.

And another side-note: One cannot help but notice that the so-called Public Health—an administrative discipline that oftentimes drifts dangerously towards pure mathematical speculation—should not be confused with medical practice: an ethical discipline in the art of alleviating suffering. (To me, it even seems certain that the two are opposed.)

3. This paragraph contains my paraphrase of a part of the splendid book by Frank Prochaska, (2013), The Memoirs of Walter Bagehot.

4. « Heureusement, des consciences se réveillent, des esprits entrent en rébellion, les lanceurs d’alerte fleurissent, les masques vont tomber. » —Philippe de Villiers, Le jour daprès: ce que je ne savais pas... et vous non plus, (2021), here.

5. “Book Your Concentration Camp Now: ‘A cheap holiday in other people’s misery’”, (December 2021), by Moneycircus, here.

6. I quote here, in machine translation with my own manual corrections, from Le débat interdit Langage, Covid et totalitarisme, (“The Forbidden Debate: Language, Covid and Totalitarianism”), (2022), by Ariane Bilheran and Vincent Pavan. The book is available here. I also quote from the article “The Pandemic Has Created Dishumanity and Lies. They Use Them to Narrate the War”, (2022), by Marco Tosatti, here.

7. “Bienvenue à « Pfizer City », ville au passé nazi devenue épicentre mondial du vaccin” (“Welcome to ‘Pfizer City’, a city with a Nazi past that has become the world’s vaccine epicenter”), L’Obs, 31 January, 2021, here.

8. The text of Agamben’s address to Italian senators, on the occasion of the debates on the “sanitary pass” (law 2394) on October 7, 2021 can be found here.

9. Lacan had something to say in 1974: “It seems that the moment of anguish has arrived for scientists too. In their aseptic laboratories, clad in starched lab coats, these old children who play with unknown things, manipulating ever more complicated apparatus and inventing ever more abstruse formulae, are beginning to wonder what may happen tomorrow and what this ever new research will bring in the end. But what if it’s too late? They are called biologists, physicists and chemists, and to me they are madmen.

“Only now, when they are already in the process of destroying the universe, does it occur to them to wonder whether by any chance it might not be dangerous. What if everything blew up? What if the bacteria so lovingly nurtured in the white laboratories transmuted into mortal enemies? What if the world was swept away by a horde of these bacteria, along with all the other shit that inhabits it, starting with the scientists in the laboratories?

“To Freud’s three impossible positions—governing, educating and psychoanalysing—I would add a fourth: science. Except that they, the scientists, don’t know that they are in an untenable position.”

Mr. Lacan never read Alfred Korzybski, it seems, and so he might have missed out a bit or more than a bit. Here’s the Polish giant Korzybski:

“There is a tremendous difference between “thinking” in verbal terms, and “contemplating”, inwardly silent, on nonverbal levels, and then searching for the proper structure of language to fit the supposedly discovered structure of the silent processes that modern science tries to find. If we “think” verbally, we act as biased observers and project onto the silent levels the structure of the language we use, so remaining in our rut of old orientations which make keen, unbiased observations (“perceptions”?) and creative work well-nigh impossible. In contrast, when we “think” without words, or in pictures or visualizations (which involve structure and, therefore, relations), we may discover new aspects and relations on silent levels, and so may formulate important theoretical results in the general search for a similarity of structure between the two levels, silent and verbal. Practically all important advances are made in that way.”—(Korzybski, A., “The Role of Language In The Perceptual Processes”, (1951), read more)