Fixated On Fear
The Cultivated Paralysis Of Social Narcosis
Preamble
The ability of government to use all elements of the ladder [of coercion] rests on social licence or the population’s acceptance of the government’s governance.
National Ethics Advisory Committee (NEAC), 2022, ‘Ethical Guidance for a Pandemic’, Wellington: New Zealand Ministry of Health
The media de rigueur propaganda and indoctrination, the mis- and dis- informational excrescences of the ‘winking hoods’, those State hoods (hoodlum),
the so called ‘polite society’ of safe and effective appears hypnotically transfixed by a stampeding herd of rainbow infused unicorns anchored to a cushion of pink icing. This bizarre ideological mélange is relentlessly underscored by an inane imbroglio of TV advertising for infantilised online gaming apps, air freshners, toilet tissue, elec-trick cars, novel Pharma drugs, fast foods, apps for instant free credit, and stunning vacations bathed in impossible sybaritic extravagance. The cumulative affect seems to be to further a disconnection with reality augmented by intense fragmented distraction and a dulling of critical perception. It foments social narcosis. It is the means by which the literal and figurative dead-ends of ‘UNsustainable goals’ and ‘Net-Zero’ appear to be taking place: the biological, social, economic, moral and ethical denouement of the planet.
Abetting The Narrative?
FIXATING ON FEAR abetts the extant narrative. This fixation was exemplified recently by the broad range of ‘freedom’ commentators who commented about the New Zealand Ministry of Health July 2024 Pandemic Plan. The ‘Plan’ even garnered international attention.
Oddly though, the same attention appeared largely absent when the New Zealand COVID-19 Act (2020) was implemented, which also included reference to the dreaded ‘Health Act 1956’ and its Part 3 section, Infectious and notifiable diseases; 70. Special powers of medical officer of health; 71. Powers of medical officer of health on outbreak of infectious disease; 71A. Power of constables to assist medical officer of health in relation to infectious diseases.
Actually nothing had changed. What played out was a tactical reignition of fear.
The NZ Pandemic Plan (2024) was “ethically” prepped a priori in 2022 by the NZ National Ethics Advisory Committee. It then became locked into future NZ Ministry of Health (MOH) policy that had previously been tested by the COVID-19 (2020) Act (now repealed).
THE NATIONAL ETHICS ADVISORY COMMITTEE …(NEAC), publication, ‘Ethical Guidance for a Pandemic’, Wellington: Ministry of Health that formed the backbone of the 2024 New Zealand MOH pandemic plan was published in 2022, and it categorically embraced and elevated draconian measures that had already been tested and played out in the COVID-19 Public Health Response Act 2020.
It also revealed the terrible Ladder of ‘Vaccine’ Coercion (pp. 32) ~ ‘The Nuffield Council on Bioethics’ intervention ladder (which NEAC has adapted below for relevance to a pandemic) highlights the general strategies, across increasing levels of coerciveness, available to “decision-makers” when intervening for “public health.” (DrLD “irony”)
‘The ability of governments to use all elements of the ladder rests on social licence or the population’s acceptance of the government’s governance’.
As one may see from The Ladder below, the NZ National Ethics Advisory Committee were rightly rather leery of public buy-in, but not it seems, the NZ MOH.
The current July 2024 NZ Pandemic Plan also incorporates the societal deconstructivism of incoherence, DIE ideology (division, exclusion and inequality), entrenching explicit discrimination and its noxious ideology based on a political construct of a non-contestable self-selected “identity” that also aims to control free speech.
It is neither a reflection of social license nor a submission to governance.
The Social Licence Is Evaporating 20 October 2022
Once again, please keep in mind that The National Ethics Advisory Committee tellingly noted, ‘The ability of governments to use all elements of the ladder rests on social licence or the population’s acceptance of the government’s governance’.
THE 2023 REVEAL
or
HOW TO PUNCTURE A FIXATION ON FEAR
…the following document, National Ethics Advisory Committee. 2023. Summary of Submissions – Consultation on the Ethical Guidance for a Pandemic. Wellington: Ministry of Health
This critically important 2023 document appears to have been stifled and buried under the social narcosis and hysteria induced by the fixation-on-fear narrative. In my own review, I have not seen it referred to anywhere. Yet it provides an incredibly valuable reference to which few if any in New Zealand appear to be paying attention.
It articulated the results of a public consultation process undertaken by the NZ National Ethics Advisory Committee that began on 26 July 2022 and closed on the 1st November 2022. It received 428 submissions including 21 written submissions and held three online focus groups with stakeholders. The submissions were analysed by the NEAC Secretariat (the ‘Secretariat’) at the Ministry of Health.
I will merely highlight some salient points that indicate the complete absence of social licence and more importantly, the contempt and disregard apparently maintained by the NZ MOH to the results captured by public consultation. The absence of acceptance by the populace of a narrative peddled by the NZ MOH with its medical acolytes and supra-national masters is as self-evident as it was explicit in the 2023 public consultation process undertaken by the NZ National Ethics Advisory Committee.
This seems a critically important nexus of high political and bureaucratic sensitivity. It is a manifest and effective lever for public pressure that is thus far, not being applied.
Many of the respondents noted a desire for an independent review of the COVID-19 pandemic response and for lessons to be taken from this. Hopefully the Royal Commission of Inquiry into COVID-19 Lessons will meet this desire.
Mandatory Interventions: Concerns were expressed about the use of mandatory interventions, particularly mandates and lockdowns and that greater transparency was required about what evidence is used to make these decisions
‘Upholding human rights’ (92%) eclipsed all by a country mile. Build back better’ (19%) and taking an ‘intersectional approach’ (18%) or embedding mātauranga Māori (17%)’ garned little support.
‘Building Back Better’: “A few individuals” were concerned about ‘Building back better’ as a foundational element and suggested it be removed. Although few respondents outlined why they wanted ‘Building Back Better’ removed, their responses indicated that their concerns were around the role of international organisations, like the World Economic Forum and the United Nations, and whether the ‘Building Back Better’ framework was appropriate for Aotearoa New Zealand.
‘Liberty’ was strongly supported as an ethical principle (81%). ‘Health and wellbeing’ (70%) was “moderately supported,” however, it was also noted that health and wellbeing is not an ethical principle’.
‘There was strong support that restrictions should be agreed rather than imposed’.
‘There was moderate support that imposed restrictive measures should aim to minimise any restrictions on liberty and carefully describe the justification for that limitation. There were mixed responses to the following:
• reciprocal support may be appropriate for people who, to protect others, have restrictions imposed upon them
• restrictive measures can be justified only when all the narrowly defined circumstances set out in human rights law, known as the Siracusa Principles’. (The Siracusa Principles were not the focus of the comments received ~ see below.)
‘There was significant concern expressed about communications during the COVID-19 pandemic, with some noting the quantity of messaging to the public, the ‘one source of truth’ approach and suggesting more opportunities for open debate would have been useful’.
‘The following statements were strongly supported:
• Ideally, vaccination should be voluntary rather than non-voluntary (82%).’
• People who cannot safely receive the vaccine for medical reasons should be given an exemption to vaccine certificate requirements’.
‘This statement was “moderately” supported: The use of vaccine certificates must be based on scientific evidence that they are effective at achieving their stated outcome (46%)’.
‘If a vaccine certificate is required to access essential goods and services, vaccines are no longer truly voluntary. (Vaccine Certificates – Supplementary effects) (89%)’.
People who cannot safely receive the vaccine for medical reasons should be given an exemption to vaccine certificate requirements (Vaccine Certificates – Equity) (90%)’.
‘The comments on reopening mainly address lockdowns rather than reopening, with a few comments stating that lockdowns should rarely or never be used’.
Summary
To reiterate, what may be clearly seen here is the loss of social license required to implement the NZ Pandemic Plan (2024) advocated by the New Zealand Ministry of Health.
Keep in mind that most respondents commenting in the National Ethics Advisory Committee (NEAC), 2023, Summary of Submissions – Consultation on the Ethical Guidance for a Pandemic in regard to the earlier NEAC 2022 publication ‘Ethical Guidance for a Pandemic’, resoundingly rejected dystopian measures envisaged by the Ladder of ‘Vaccine’ Coercion that remain part of the 2024 New Zealand MOH pandemic plan, which also implements its own repulsive disregard of a wider sentiment regarding societal cohesion, and a preference for open and unconstrained debate.
New Zealanders appear increasingly aware of informational grooming, surveillance, psychological and quasi-legal control being installed under a guise of ‘managing’ information. The measures propelled by the globalista aligned Ministry-Of-We-Know-Best-For-Your-Own-Good were clearly rejected by the 2023 consultation respondents who favoured transparency of information and open debate.
The preposterous assertion of, ‘continue to be your single source of truth’ spruiked by the NZ government merely served to channel Orwell and alert a fair proportion of the the NZ populace to nascent tyranny. This dystopian institutional bureaucratic culture formerly led with sinister focus by political and medical players, Bloomfield, Ardern, Hipkins, Robertson, Little, NZ Medical Council et al., is led again today by the WEF aligned New Zealand government of succession and its bureaucrats, all of whom are collectively determined to protect their extremely fragile, media dependent narratives.
So, let us hold in our thoughts: ‘The numerical odds are overwhelmingly in favor of humanity. Violence is not a prerequisite for emancipation: it simply takes a critical mass to see what is happening and to refuse to comply with its own enslavement’.
Post Script
Siracusa Principles
For those unacquainted with these principles, they state that there are NO circumstances that permit medical or scientific experimentation without freely given consent.
United Nations, Economic and Social Council (UN ECOSOC), Siracusa Principles on the Limitation and Derogation Provisions in the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, U.N. Doc. E/CN.4/1985/4, Annex (1985).
Whilst these principles “allow” for a brief and measured derogation of freedoms they nonetheless hold as explicit and sacrosanct that such derogations NEVER permit medical or scientific experimentation without FREE CONSENT. “These rights are not derogable under any conditions even for the asserted purpose of preserving the life of the nation.”
Interesting article, thanks.
And for me the take away is do not give your power to any one who wants to control you and the Predators will always try to justify their need to control you (It's for the Grator (sicK) Good).
As a person in New Zealand who defended my freedom and those of others who valued it during the Covid1984 totalitarian takeover, I know of what you are writing on.
As a Voluntaryist, we phrase it, simply:
"No one rules if no one obeys."
All the rest is black magic and smoke and mirrors by those who want to legitimate their rule over others.
Get free, stay free.
Excellent ... and thank you for bringing the Siracusa Principles to our attention.