I was off by four years. I wrongly assumed back then that society was still functioning and that our elites would be responsive to the obvious flop of the whole lockdown scheme. I assumed that people were smarter than they proved to be. I also did not anticipate just how devastating the effects of lockdown would be: in terms of learning loss, economic chaos, cultural shock, and the population-wide demoralization and loss of trust.

The forces that set in motion those grim days were far more deep than I knew at the time. They involved a willing complicity from tech, media, pharma, and the administrative state at all levels of society.

There is every evidence that it was planned to be exactly what it became; not just a foolish deployment of public health powers but a “great reset” of our lives. The newfound powers of the ruling class were not given up so easily, and it took far longer for people to shake off the trauma than I had anticipated.

Is that backlash finally here? If so, it’s about time.

New literature is emerging to document it all.

The new book White Rural Rage: The Threat to American Democracy is a viciously partisan, histrionic, and gravely inaccurate account that gets nearly everything wrong but one: vast swaths of the public are fed up, not with democracy but its opposite of ruling class hegemony. The revolt is not racial and not geographically determined. It’s not even about left and right, categories that are mostly a distraction. it’s class-based in large part but more precisely about the rulers vs. the ruled.

With more precision, new voices are emerging among people who detect a “vibe change” in the population. One is Elizabeth Nickson’s article “Strongholds Falling; Populists Seize the Culture.” She argues, quoting Bret Weinstein, that “The lessons of [C]ovid are profound. The most important lesson of Covid is that without knowing the game, we outfoxed them and their narrative collapsed…The revolution is happening all over the socials, especially in videos. And the disgust is palpable.”

A second article is “Vibe Shift” by Santiago Pliego:

The Vibe Shift I’m talking about is the speaking of previously unspeakable truths, the noticing of previously suppressed facts. I’m talking about the give you feel when the walls of Propaganda and Bureaucracy start to move as you push; the very visible dust kicked up in the air as Experts and Fact Checkers scramble to hold on to decaying institutions; the cautious but electric rush of energy when dictatorial edifices designed to stifle innovation, enterprise, and thought are exposed or toppled. Fundamentally, the Vibe Shift is a return to—a championing of—Reality, a rejection of the bureaucratic, the cowardly, the guilt-driven; a return to greatness, courage, and joyous ambition.

We truly want to believe this is true. And this much is certainly correct: the battle lines are incredibly clear these days. The media that uncritically echo the deep-state line are known: Slate, Wired, Rolling Stone, Mother Jones, New Republic, New Yorker, and so on, to say nothing of the New York Times. What used to be politically partisan venues with certain predictable biases are now more readily described as ruling-class mouthpieces, forever instructing you precisely how to think while demonizing disagreement.

After all, all of these venues, in addition to the obvious case of the science journals, are still defending the lockdowns and everything that followed. Rather than express regret for their bad models and immoral means of control, they have continued to insist that they did the right thing, regardless of the civilization-wide carnage everywhere in evidence, while ignoring the relationship between the policies they championed and the terrible results.

Instead of allowing their mistakes to change their own outlook, they have adapted their own worldview to allow for snap lockdowns anytime they deem them necessary. In holding this view, they have forged a view of politics that it is embarrassingly acquiescent to the powerful.

The liberalism that once questioned authority and demanded free speech seems extinct. This transmogrified and captured liberalism now demands compliance with authority and calls for further restrictions on free speech. Now anyone who makes a basic demand for normal freedom – to speak or choose one’s own medical treatment or to decline to wear a mask – can reliably anticipate being denounced as “right-wing” even when it makes absolutely no sense.

The smears, cancellations, and denunciations are out of control, and so unbearably predictable.

It’s enough to make one’s head spin. As for the pandemic protocols themselves, there have been no apologies but only more insistence that they were imposed with the best of intentions and mostly correct. The World Health Organization wants more power, and so does the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Even though the evidence of the failure of pharma pours in daily, major media venues pretend that all is well, and thereby out themselves as mouthpieces for the ruling regime.

The issue is that major and unbearably obvious failures have never been admitted. Institutions and individuals who only double down on preposterous lies that everyone knows are lies only end up discrediting themselves.

That’s a pretty good summary of where we are today, with vast swaths of elite culture facing an unprecedented loss of trust. Elites have chosen the lie over truth and cover-up over transparency.

This is becoming operationalized in declining traffic for legacy media, which is shedding costly staff as fast as possible. The social media venues that cooperated closely with government during the lockdowns are losing cultural sway while uncensored ones like Elon Musk’s X are gaining attention. Disney is reeling from its partisanship, while states are passing new laws against WHO policies and interventions.

Sometimes this whole revolt can be quite entertaining. When the CDC or WHO posts an update on X, when they allow comments, it is followed by thousands of reader comments of denunciation and poking fun, with flurries of comments to the effect of “I will not comply.”

DEI is being systematically defunded by major corporations while financial institutions are turning on it. Indeed, the culture in general has come to regard DEI as a sure indication of incompetence. Meanwhile, the outer reaches of the “great reset” such as the hope that EVs would replace internal combustion have come to naught as the EV market has collapsed, along with consumer demand for fake meat to say nothing of bug eating.

As for politics, yes, it does seem like the backlash has empowered populist movements all over the world. We see them in the farmers’ revolt in Europe, the street protests in Brazil against a sketchy election, the widespread discontent in Canada over government policies, and even in migration trends out of US blue states toward red ones. Already, the administrative state in D.C. is working to secure itself against a possible unfriendly president in the form of Trump or RFK, Jr.

So, yes, there are many signs of revolt. These are all very encouraging.

What does all this mean in practice? How does this end? How precisely does a revolt take shape in an industrialized democracy? What is the mostly likely pathway for long-term social change? These are legitimate questions.

For hundreds of years, our best political philosophers have opined that no system can function in a sustainable way in which a huge majority is coercively governed by a tiny elite with a class interest in serving themselves at public expense.

That seems correct. In the days of the Occupy Wall Street movement of 15 years ago, the street protesters spoke of the 1 percent vs. the 99 percent. They were speaking of those with the money inside the traders’ buildings as opposed to the people on the streets and everywhere else.

Even if that movement misidentified the full nature of the problem, the intuition into which it tapped spoke to a truth. Such a disproportionate distribution of power and wealth is dangerously unsustainable. Revolution of some sort threatens. The mystery right now is what form this takes. It’s unknown because we’ve never been here before.

There is no real historical record of a highly developed society ostensibly living under a civilized code of law that experiences an upheaval of the type that would be required to unseat the rulers of all the commanding heights. We’ve seen political reform movements that take place from the top down but not really anything that approximates a genuine bottom-up revolution of the sort that is shaping up right now.

We know, or think we know, how it all transpires in a tinpot dictatorship or a socialist society of the old Soviet bloc. The government loses all legitimacy, the military flips loyalties, there is a popular revolt that boils over, and the leaders of the government flee. Or they simply lose their jobs and take up new positions in civilian life. These revolutions can be violent or peaceful but the end result is the same. One regime replaces another.

It’s hard to know how this translates to a society that is heavily modernized and seen as non-totalitarian and even existing under the rule of law, more or less. How does revolution occur in this case? How does the regime come around to adapting itself to a public revolt against governance as we know it in the US, UK, and Europe?

Yes, there is the vote, if we can trust that. But even here, there are the candidates, which are that for a reason. They specialize in politics, which does not necessarily mean doing the right thing or reflecting the aspirations of the voters behind them. They are responsive to their donors first, as we have long discovered. Public opinion can matter but there is no mechanism that guarantees a smoothly responsive pathway from popular attitudes to political outcomes.

There is also the pathway of industrial change, a migration of resources out of legacy venues to new ones. Indeed, in the marketplace of ideas, the amplifiers of regime propaganda are failing but we also observe the response: widened censorship. What’s happening in Brazil with the full criminalization of free speech can easily happen in the US.

In social media, were it not for Elon’s takeover of Twitter, it’s hard to know where we would be. We have no large platform in which to influence the culture more broadly. And yet the attacks on that platform and other enterprises owned by Musk are growing. This is emblematic of a much more robust upheaval taking place, one that suggests change is on the way.

But how long does such a paradigm shift take? Thomas Kuhn’s The Structure of Scientific Revolutions is a bracing account of how one orthodoxy migrates to another not by the ebb and flow of proof and evidence but through dramatic paradigm shifts. An abundance of anomalies can wholly discredit a current praxis but that doesn’t make it go away. Ego and institutional inertia perpetuate the problem until its most prominent exponents retire and die and a new elite replaces them with different ideas.

In this model, we can expect that a failed innovation in science, politics, or technology could last as long as 70 years before finally being displaced, which is roughly how long the Soviet experiment lasted. That’s a depressing thought. If this is true, we still have another 60 plus years of rule by the management professionals who enacted lockdowns, closures, shot mandates, population propaganda, and censorship.

And yet, people say that history is moving faster now than in the past. If a future of freedom is ours just lying in wait, we need that future here sooner rather than later, before it is too late to do anything about it.

The slogan became popular about ten years ago: the revolution will be decentralized with the creation of robust parallel institutions. There is no other path. The intellectual parlor game is over. This is a real-life struggle for freedom itself. It’s resist and rebuild or doom.

Published under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

For reprints, please set the canonical link back to the original Brownstone Institute Article and Author.

Consider the big-picture thinking. Nearly every nation in the world attempted the eradication of a respiratory pathogen that is spread through aerosols and has an animal reservoir – an ambition that any competent medical professional could have told you was insane. And they sought to achieve this great goal through maximum control of the human population. And toward this end, they exercised total control for several years.

A devastating feature of total wars in history is the loss of cultural continuity from prewar to postwar. What came before fades into memory, replaced by trauma, and then the desperate desire to forget that it ever happened and then create something new.

The development of society and its growth – technological, informational, political, cultural – is supposed to be organic. War changes that, deprecating some features and elevating others, usually to the detriment of human flourishing.

We saw this after the Great War. The difference between 1910 and 1920 was more than a decade. It was a different age. The fashions, music, literature, painting, and architecture all changed and dramatically so. The Belle Epoque and its manners, customs, and ideals receded far into the past, and were replaced by something else entirely.

Monarchies and old multinational states were blown away completely, and nationality came to mean any and every external sign of group solidarity, each struggling for recognition. Most cultural signs were suddenly darker, embedding a new awareness of the grim realities of life and death on earth. The old writers were forgotten, as were old habits, professions, and ways of being. The old idealism was gone too.

This was especially obvious in high-end art culture, which turned against all forms of the past. It was precisely in this period when what we call “modern” art took hold. In the lower rungs of society, the trauma was palpable in broken homes, displaced workers, permanent consciousness of mass death, public distrust, and a turn toward substance abuse and ill-health. The only fortunes were depleted and divested and a cultural anomie gained ascendence throughout the West.

Only a few decades later, the same upheaval took place during and after the Second World War. Following that war, once again, the music shifted as did the architecture, painting, literature, demographics, and the ideas we held about the future. Optimism in general experienced its second massive blow in a century, replaced by an advancing nihilism that could not be contained until it exploded two decades later.

One again, the distance between 1940 and 1950 was far more than a decade. There was a multinational reset with the formation of “neo-liberal” world political institutions like the IMF and World Bank, plus GATT, which were supposed to guarantee global peace. And only a few years later, the Cold War wrecked those plans with the creation of walled trading blocs.

The writers of the interwar period seemed to vanish, dismissed as old-fashioned and out of touch. Faulkner, Fitzgerald, Hemingway, Nock, Mencken, Wharton, Garrett, Flynn – these were all household names in the 20s and 30s but gradually evaporated from the 1950s and onward. Magazines changed and industry too, with the old wiped away and the new granted a subsidized prominence.

This is a consequence of the perception of new times and the irrelevance of everything that came before. This was coupled with a Freudian-style unwillingness to speak about the horrors of the war.

Though never announced and rarely acknowledged by corporate media, we’ve lived through our own form of trauma with the policy response to Covid. It took a form without precedent. Without a shooting war and without a declared peace, all the signs of war surrounded us from March 2020 onward.

It was characterized by an explosive shattering of how life was supposed to work. Holidays were canceled. We faced global and domestic travel restrictions. We obeyed sudden and untested protocols from anti-social distancing to masking to closures of everything, together with the turn-key socialism of multiple trillions in stimulus spending (and money printing).

The conscription came later, as millions were pumped full of an experimental medicine called mRNA delivered through a novel system with an injection. Most had no choice. Whole cities were closed down to the refuseniks. Even the students and kids were drafted into the great push for what was called vaccination – a moniker playing off past successes – but had no sterilizing effects and made no serious contribution to ending the pandemic.

The more we learn about what provoked this horrifying experiment in virus control, the more we are discovering the central role of the military in shaping the policy response, dictating rules to public health, and shepherding the vaccine into being. From long before the American people had a clue what was coming, the military was already treating the virus as a bioweapon leak in need of countermeasures.

It was more like war than is usually admitted. Certainly most countries imposed a form of what felt like martial law. It felt that way because it was that way.

Robert F. Kennedy, Jr’s book The Wuhan Coverup explains the larger context. The military had long worked with labs around the world in undertaking gain-of-function research in its bioweapons program of anticipating both the pathogen and the antidote – mad scientist stuff from the movies.

When the lab leak from China became obvious – sometime in the fall of 2019 – the preparations began, without consultation of elected leaders or even career civilian bureaucrats. By the time the response was implemented, it must have seemed like the only viable path, which is probably why Trump agreed to the preposterous plan of shutting down society.

The US Constitution nowhere authorizes such emergency-based abolition of liberties and rights. Justice Neil Gorsuch was correct in calling this “the greatest intrusions on civil liberties in the peacetime history of this country.” And notice the qualification: in peacetime. But can anyone think of any wartime measures that included canceling holidays, mass quarantines of the healthy, closed business and schools, and universal censorship of dissidents?

Both the Great War and the Second World War authorized universal censorship and surveillance but the targeting was specific to high-profile objectors and hardly touched the average person. And no time during these wars did government dare to issue countrywide edicts that everyone had to stand 6 feet apart from each other at all times or cover their faces just to shop. This did not happen in wartime.

We can safely edit Gorsuch’s comment to simply say the greatest intrusions on civil liberties, period.

And so what cultural trends can we track as marking the difference in pre-lockdown and post-lockdown times? We can note five terrible trends in particular.

1. The entrenchment of new trading blocs that began to form with renewed protectionism but now foreshadow the end of dollar supremacy and close ties between Russia and China. Events of this past week – in which the whole world was invited to compare the relative erudition of the Russian and US presidents – suggest the end of the American empire.
2. Dramatic declines in fertility. We are seeing this in every country but especially those countries that locked down the hardest like Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, Italy, and Spain. Counties in Africa that did the least to enforce lockdowns have the highest rates of fertility. As part of this, gender dysphoria has taken hold. Yes the trans trend pre-exists Covid but the isolation, the digital addiction, the loss of purpose of the young, and the pause button on relationships cultivated a strange movement toward confusing men and women, and creating the illusion that biological sex is infinitely malleable.
3. The ruination of literacy. Surveys are showing the lowest rates of book reading on record in addition to the lowest rates of even the ability of young people to read anywhere close to grade level. Those trends might be related, as is the rise of digital addiction.
4. The deprecation of work. You can no doubt confirm this trend: work and the work ethic are deeply unfashionable, as an entire generation experienced what it was like to lounge all day in PJs and still get flooded with income courtesy of government. Labor dropouts in the UK, US, and EU remain very high.
5. Up with dependency. The US and other nations show a greater number of people than ever living off government welfare, including disability benefits but more besides. The bureaucracy has taken full charge.

Add it all together and you get less individualism, initiative, and even desire to grow in prosperity. In other words, no surprise, the dramatic collectivized response has led to a greater degree of collectivism than we have heretofore experienced. With that comes inevitable spiritual despair.

As for changes in art and music, it is too early to say but here we can detect something unusual as wartime goes, not a forward-thinking effort to create the new but a clawing back of the old forms, probably because there is nowhere else to go.

And this introduces the other side of the coin, which is that the dramatic loss of trust in media, government, academia, corporate power, and science has led to:

1. A new search for what is true, using every tool. This pertains not only to science and health but also to religion and a general philosophy of life. When the elites fail, it falls to everyone else to figure things out.
2. A new emphasis on homeschooling. This practice lived under a legal cloud for decades until suddenly it became mandatory and the schools closed for as much as a year or two. Still education has to go on, so millions of parents have taken it upon themselves.
3. A turn against college is part of this. They demand all the students get jabbed up, again and again, despite firm evidence that the shot was necessary, safe, or effective. Is this why people are paying six figures in tuition?
4. Millions have realized that government can be trusted to take care of people and so there is a dramatic turn toward financial independence and new forms of independent living.
5. New institutions are being founded. So many nonprofits, foundations, media outlets, and houses of worship utterly failed to show courage throughout the lockdown and mandate period. Hence new institutions are being founded by the day that have paid close attention and are preparing a culture for new times.

Brownstone Institute is certainly part of this but there are many more besides, in addition to alternative media which is growing so fast that it is swamping the legacy media.

This is only a sketch and it is too early to see precisely what kinds of changes have been initiated in our country and world due to the wartime tactics of the Covid response. The closest analogy we can name is the Great War more than a century ago, which closed one chapter in history and opened a new one.

To make sure that what comes next is better than the corruption we left behind will take all our efforts. It is precisely for this reason that there is so much mandatory forgetting that is being urged upon us. You can see daily in the corporate news, which wants to forget about the whole ugly chapter for fear that the peasants will get too restless. Anthony Fauci in his depositions and Congressional testimony sums up the theme of all official institutions today: “I cannot recall.”

We dare not comply with this mandatory forgetting. We must remember, and take full account of the deception and destruction the ruling class has caused for no other reason than profits and power. Only then we can learn the right lessons and rebuild on a better foundation for the future.

About the Author

Jeffrey Tucker is Founder, Author, and President at Brownstone Institute. He is also Senior Economics Columnist for Epoch Times, author of 10 books, including Liberty or Lockdown, and thousands of articles in the scholarly and popular press. He speaks widely on topics of economics, technology, social philosophy, and culture.

Many parts of China have been hit by a surge in the illness, which has particularly affected children. Northern provinces in China experienced a jump in cases for five consecutive weeks since mid-October. The news triggered global concern following China’s lack of transparency regarding the origins of COVID-19, the spread of which prompted strict public health restrictions and quarantine measures, according to a report by Newsweek.

But China isn’t the only totalitarian ruling class to suggest strict measures to control the population once again. Senator Marco Rubio, a Republican from Florida, has since urged the leader of the rulers and head tyrant, Joe Biden to ban United States travel to and from China to stop the spread of any contagions. The World Health Organization (WHO) has requested more information from China about the illness, but Rubio advised that Biden shouldn’t wait any longer before implementing the travel restrictions.

Several states in the U.S. have also reported an uptick in child pneumonia cases this week. This has further raised the alarm about the illness, although health officials alleged there is “zero evidence” that the increase is connected to China.

But the ruling class got away with completely controlling and surveilling the public before over a COVID-19 scare, a pathogen that amounted to nothing more than a common cold. We have always felt that if the tyrants feel like they could get away with another totalitarian lockdown they will attempt it.

A letter to Biden from republican rulers reads:

“We must take the necessary steps to protect the health of Americans and our economy. That means we should immediately restrict travel between the United States and the [People’s Republic of China] until we know more about the dangers posed by this new illness. A ban on travel now could save our country from death, lockdowns, mandates, and further outbreaks later.”

“The Chinese Communist Party has proven that they cannot be trusted to provide transparency about diseases originating in China,” Rubio told Newsweek. “I hope that President Biden will take our request for a travel ban seriously. A travel ban is necessary while we wait for more information about this pathogen.”

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says that it is continuing to monitor the situation in China and the U.S. “Initial reports indicate that there have been simultaneous increases in a number of known respiratory illnesses, resulting in a spike in hospitalizations. We continue to monitor the situation, collaborating with global health partners,” a CDC statement said.

Sound off about this post and video on the End Medical Tyranny Substack.

(Mercola)—Children’s Health Defense (CHD) recently released a four-part documentary called “COVID Unmasked.” Part 4 is featured above. The trailer and previous three episodes can be found on CHD.TV.

Parts 1 details the problem. The medical system is destroying health; lawyers destroy justice; psychiatrists destroy minds; scientists destroy truth; major media destroy information; religions destroy spirituality; and governments destroy freedom.

Part 2 reveals how the COVID pandemic — which was sold to us as a fight against a novel and deadly zoonotic virus that had jumped species at a Chinese wet market — was merely the first part of a pandemic for-profit business model, where mass vaccination is a tool to gain more control, more power and, of course, more money.

In Part 3, the big picture is revealed, showing how the COVID pandemic was a convenient opening act of a “Great Reset,” at the end of which regular people will “own nothing and be happy.”

The interests behind the COVID “plandemic” and the global coup are documented, how long this plan has been in the works and, in Part 4, above, how we can stop it, before we lose our country, our liberty, and our humanity.

Understanding Our Constitutional Rights

The Fourth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees the right to privacy, the right to be left alone and to make our own decisions. Like other amendments in the Bill of Rights, it doesn’t create the right to privacy; it secures it, thereby limiting government interference with it.

The Bill of Rights precede the existence of the U.S government, and are based on basic principles inherent in humanity itself, i.e., “Natural Law.” The U.S. Constitution is the supreme law of the land, and cannot be superseded or nullified by any other law. As stated in Article IV:

“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”

Any law that violates the Constitution is null and void, no matter who makes it, and an unconstitutional law “imposes no duties, confers no right, creates no office, bestows no power or authority on anyone, affords no protection, and justifies no acts performed under it.” That’s a quote from an 1886 Supreme Court case (Norton v. Shelby County, 118 U.S. 425¹).

Quoting further from that decision, “No one is bound to obey an unconstitutional law and no courts are bound to enforce it.” Yet, during the COVID pandemic, unconstitutional rules and mandates were not only issued but in most cases also upheld. Without a trace of shame, government officials even called for barring the unvaccinated from society at large.

Constitution Cannot Be Suspended Under Any Circumstance

These actions were justified on the basis that we were in “an emergency” that required some basic rights to be temporarily suspended. However, no matter how dire the emergency, the Constitution may not be suspended or violated.

In a 2020 fact check,² Reuters tried to debunk the claim that constitutional rights cannot be suspended by citing the 1988 Stafford Act, which grants the president the authority to declare a major disaster and empowers the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to coordinate the nation’s response — completely missing the point that no law can supersede the Constitution and is void if in violation with it.

… the Constitution sets certain lines that may not be crossed, even in an emergency. ~ U.S. District Judge William S. Stickman IV

As noted by U.S. District Judge William S. Stickman IV, in a September 2020 ruling in the case of County of Butler et. al. v. Governor Thomas W. Wolf et. al., “the Constitution sets certain lines that may not be crossed, even in an emergency.” As noted in the film, dozens of court rulings have affirmed this basic fact.

The Last Line of Defense Against Government Overreach

Over the past three years, we’ve seen countless examples of local, state and federal officials granting themselves unconstitutional powers and suspending people’s rights under the auspice of a “public health emergency.” It would seem there’s no office left to rein in these power hungry despots. Or is there? Yes, fortunately there is, and it’s your county sheriff.

The County sheriff is one of the most important elected officials we all have the opportunity to vote for, so making sure they understand their role in protecting your Constitutional rights is crucial.

Ultimately, your local sheriff is in charge of actually enforcing whatever rules and regulations are laid down by state lawmakers, your city or county councils, and executive orders from city mayors or governors.

Contrary to what some people think, mayors and governors don’t make laws — the state legislatures do that — but they can influence city and state legislation as well as invoke executive orders under certain circumstances.³

Sometimes sheriffs and local and state police may be asked by their mayor or governor to enforce an executive order. However, sheriffs can refuse if they believe the executive order is unconstitutional.

For example, during the pandemic, county sheriffs in Michigan,⁴ Texas,⁵ Ohio,⁶ even California,⁷ informed their governors they would not enforce mandatory mask orders since they weren’t actual laws. The sheriffs of Pinal County, Arizona,⁸ Douglas County, Illinois,⁹ Snohomish County and Klickitat County, Washington,¹⁰ and many others also refused to enforce their states’ stay-at-home orders.

Lincoln County, New Mexico, Sheriff Michael Wood even issued a cease-and-desist order to Gov. Michelle Grisham when she tried to order stores to close in January 2021, and one rural Oregon sheriff single-handedly ended the business closures simply by declaring the closures unconstitutional.

These are actions that every sheriff, in every county across the nation could, and should, have taken, because mask mandates aren’t laws (and would be unconstitutional if they were made into law) and government does not have the constitutional right to decide who can work and make a living, and who cannot.

These sheriffs understood that forcing people to wear masks and stay at home is something government does not have the power to do under the Constitution, and they protected their citizens from what was obvious overreach and abuse of power. And, importantly, no government agent or agency in the land had the authority to overrule their decisions.

No One Can Tell the Sheriff What to Do

We owe this to Richard Mack, a retired sheriff and current president of Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers (CSPOA),¹¹ who sued^12,13 the U.S. government over the Brady Bill, also known as the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act,¹⁴ signed into law by President Clinton in November 1993.

For the first time in U.S. history, the Brady Bill conscripted county sheriffs to enforce federal law, in clear violation of the Constitution. Mack sued to protect state sovereignty, and had it not been for Mack winning this lawsuit, sheriffs would not have had the legal ability to stand against tyranny and protect Constitutional rights today. They’d by just another arm of the federal government.

In winning this Supreme Court case, Mack pushed the federal government back and reaffirmed the rights of states and the people. Justice Antonin Scalia wrote the decision, and several quotes from that decision are featured in “COVID Unmasked.”

Scalia noted that the Constitution “protects us from our own best intentions” and “prevents the temptation to concentrate power in one location as an expedient solution to the crisis of the day.” And the COVID-19 pandemic was just that. The crisis of the day.

Now, the WHO is trying to seize the authority to make decisions about all future crises, and we can be sure there won’t be an end to crises when the power to rule is tied to there being one.

Does Your Sheriff Understand and Exercise His Power?

Unfortunately, many sheriffs are as clueless about the Constitution — and their unique role in upholding it — as the average person is. But as noted in the film, “the county sheriff is the last line of defense against a government gone rogue.” The sheriff has “an obligation to protect the Constitutional rights of the citizens,” including “the right to free speech, the right to assemble, and the right to bear arms.”

In the summer of 2022, I interviewed Mack (video above) about the crucial role of sheriffs when it comes to safeguarding your Constitutional rights and protecting your civil liberties against unlawful government overreach. As explained by Mack:

“This is a crucial time in American history, and we actually have a peaceful and effective solution to it. The only thing that needs to happen is your local officials, especially your sheriff, keep [their] oath of office … The sheriff is here to protect your civil liberties, your God given rights.

As the founding fathers put it in the Declaration of Independence, ‘The laws of nature are nature’s God.’ Either way, you don’t have to believe in God to appreciate this or to be a part of it. You don’t, because these are the rights you were born with.”

The End of Government Tyranny Starts With You

There are more than 3,100 counties in the U.S., and each of these counties has a sheriff, who is elected by the local community. Three states — Alaska, Hawaii and Connecticut — do not have sheriffs, so their laws are enforced by other officers such as marshals or deputy sheriffs.¹⁵

Some large cities also have their own sheriffs, including Denver, St. Louis, Richmond and Baltimore. Many large-city sheriffs also typically have several hundred to a couple of thousand full-time personnel.

As explained by Mack and detailed in “COVID Unmasked,” county sheriffs are the best solution to the problem posed by tyrannical despots. Here’s what you can do to help put an end to government overreach, which is growing by the day. This list is a compilation of the recommendations of both sources.

1. Look up who your local sheriff is. States will typically have a “State Sheriff’s Directory” website listing the sheriffs of each county in that state.
2. Find out where your sheriff stands on the subject of Constitutional rights and the need to protect them, as evidenced by actual record, not just talk.
3. If your local sheriff proves to be a puppet for those who would enslave us, initiate an immediate recall petition, and persist until he or she is replaced by someone who is willing and able to fulfill their sworn duty to protect the Constitutional rights of residents.
4. Forward a copy of “COVID Unmasked, Part 4,” to your sheriff, so he or she can fully appreciate the scope of their powers and responsibilities.
5. If your sheriff is not already a member of the CSPOA — the Constitutional Sheriffs and Peace Officers Association — ask them to join and become a recognized Constitutional Sheriff. The CSPOA educates sheriffs about their constitutional powers and responsibilities, and it’s the only organization out there that does that. The training CSPOA offers is crucial, as the traditional training sheriffs receive is fairly inadequate with respect to the understanding and appreciation of their oath, which is to protect and uphold constitutional rights. Many get distracted or confused by the belief or idea that they must enforce things that really are not within their scope of duty.
6. Join the SCPOA yourself. Funding for the CSPOA’s educational programs comes from private donations and member dues. Joining the CSPOA is really one of the most highly leveraged investments you could make to secure your personal liberties. All funds go directly toward the education of sheriffs. The organization doesn’t even have paid employees.
7. Support your constitutionally-minded sheriff any way you can.
8. Get friends, family and neighbors to take these steps as well.

If you want to get even more involved, inquire whether your sheriff allows residents to be deputized, and if the answer is yes (and you fulfill whatever requirements there might be), you can become a deputy sheriff.

Taking Back America, County by County

The next step is for Constitutional sheriffs everywhere to make it known that, from this point forward, they will prosecute those who use drones, helicopters and other surveillance means to spy on law-abiding residents, those who construct and operate illegal checkpoints and detention camps, those who install 5G towers against the will of the local residents, and every other violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights.

Ignorance of the law — and in this case, that’s the Constitution, the supreme law of the land — does not excuse you from prosecution or legal liability.

That includes police officers, security guards, military personnel, alphabet-soup agency agents, doctors, nurses, hospital administrators, school principals, school board members, government officials of every stripe, and everyone else you can think of who violate people’s Constitutional rights by following unconstitutional (null and void) orders. The sheriff can prosecute them all.

If enough people get involved and engage their sheriffs in this fight, we can create constitutional counties and take back America, county by county, one sheriff at a time. Eventually, all the police forces will be on the same page as well, and will no longer enforce unlawful, unconstitutional orders, whatever they might be.

As noted in “COVID Unmasked,” “without the military or the police to do their bidding, the tyrants are powerless against us.” That’s how we take back America without raising so much as a fist.

• ¹ Justia Norton v. Shelby County 118 U.S. 425 (1886)
• ² Reuters May 14, 2020
• ³ National Governors Association
• ⁴ Detroit Free Press July 13, 2020
• ⁵ Fox 6 NOW July 9, 2020
• ⁶ CHD.TV COVID Unmasked Part 4, 15:50
• ⁷ CHD.TV COVID Unmasked Part 4, 15 minutes
• ⁸ CHD.TV COVID Unmasked Part 4, 16:30
• ⁹ CHD.TV COVID Unmasked Part 4, 17:30
• ¹⁰ CHD.TV COVID Unmasked Part 4, 17:57
• ¹¹ CSPOA Website
• ¹² Oyez.org Printz v. United States
• ¹³ Cornell Law School Printz v. United States
• ¹⁴ Congress.gov HR 1025, Brady Handgun Control (PDF)
• ¹⁵ National Sheriffs’ Association

While the national health emergency due to the COVID-19 outbreak officially came to an end on May 11, 2023, in some ways the country hasn’t returned to “normal.”

In a study seeking to gauge stress levels among Americans, APA concluded that there are “signs of collective trauma among all age cohorts” in the United States.

“The COVID-19 pandemic created a collective experience among Americans. While the early-pandemic lockdowns may seem like the distant past, the aftermath remains,” Arthur C. Evans Jr., APA’s chief executive officer, said in a statement.

The study found that adults between the ages of 34 and 44 reported the biggest surge in chronic health conditions since the pandemic, rising from 48 percent in 2019 to 58 percent in 2023.

The same age group also experienced the biggest jump in mental health illnesses, chiefly anxiety and depression. These rose from 31 percent in 2019 to 45 percent in 2023, according to the study.

Chronically elevated levels of stress create risks for various mental health challenges and wear down the immune system, APA said. The association noted that the data suggest that long-term stress sustained since the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has had a significant impact on Americans’ well-being.

“We cannot ignore the fact that we have been significantly changed by the loss of more than one million Americans, as well as the shift in our workplaces, school systems, and culture at large,” Mr. Evans said. “To move toward posttraumatic growth, we must first identify and understand the psychological wounds that remain.”

Chronic stress can cause inflammation, breaking down the immune system and raising the risk of all sorts of ailments, including stroke and heart disease, APA warned.

The study is the latest that suggests the heavy-handed response to the outbreak, which included school closures, business shutdowns, and near-universal mask-wearing, has had a negative impact on people’s physical and mental health.

Lockdowns and Explosion of Child Gun Deaths

Recent research on child gun deaths adds heart-wrenching evidence to the growing pile of data suggesting that COVID-19 lockdowns and other restrictions had a devastating impact on society.

The study, authored by researchers from Boston Children’s Hospital and published on Oct. 5 in a journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics, found that injury-related deaths among children rose sharply during the pandemic years 2020-2021.

The spike in pediatric fatal injuries was driven by drugs and injuries involving firearms.

In 2021, when lockdowns and other COVID-19 restrictions were pervasive, more child homicides (2,279) and suicides (1,078) by gun were recorded than in any year since 1999, per the study.

Some see a clear causal link between the explosion in child gun deaths and pandemic lockdown policies, which other studies have linked to a variety of negative outcomes including delayed health treatments, learning loss, and mental health crises.

“Due to lockdowns and other misconceived pandemic policies, child gun deaths in the United States exploded exponentially in 2020,” wrote Kevin Bass, a researcher and PhD student in medicine, said in a post on X.

While the study shows that firearm-related homicides began rising in 2018, Mr. Bass said that it’s “very clear that the huge leap to record levels occurred between 2019 and 2020, which is when lockdowns happened.”

The study’s findings dovetail with an April 2023 report from the Pew Research Center, which found that the number of children and teenagers killed by gunfire surged by 50 percent between 2019 and 2021.

Some studies have identified lockdowns as contributing to jumps in suicides, mental health crises, learning loss, and delayed health treatments.

Other studies have suggested that lockdowns worked to stem the spread of the virus.

“Our results show that major non-pharmaceutical interventions—and lockdowns in particular—have had a large effect on reducing transmission,” wrote the authors of the study backing restrictive measures, though the research did not evaluate any other unintended impacts of the measures.

But one recent study that looked at a wide array of research into lockdowns concluded that such measures can be an effective tool in controlling the COVID-19 pandemic but only if “long-term collateral damage is neglected.”

“The price tag of lockdowns in terms of public health is high: by using the known connection between health and wealth, we estimate that lockdowns may claim 20 times more life years than they save,” the study’s authors wrote.

The authors also said that what deserves a “special and urgent analysis” is the question of “to what extent, why, and how the dissenting (disapproved by healthcare officials) scientific opinions were suppressed during COVID-19.”

“Suppression of ‘misleading’ opinions causes not only grave consequences for scientists’ moral compass; it prevents the scientific community from correcting mistakes and jeopardizes (with a good reason) public trust in science,” they wrote.

Vance has been raising concerns for weeks about the possibility of returning to pandemic protocols. However, his attempts to bring his Freedom to Breathe Act for floor consideration were unsuccessful. The legislation aims to prevent the federal government from imposing mask mandates for domestic air travel, public transportation, and schools.

During a press conference with Senate GOP colleagues, Vance stated, “We’re working on a number of different angles to actually try to get it passed, or some version of it passed. I was really disappointed that the UC was blocked.”

He further pointed out the contradiction by noting that when the legislation was initially introduced, Democrats claimed that no one wanted to bring back mask mandates. Nevertheless, Democrats objected when the bill aimed to ban such mandates. Vance expressed that this does not make sense.

Vance remains determined to pursue the legislation and believes there are several avenues through which it can be passed.

Senators Josh Hawley (R-MO), Eric Schmitt (R-MO), and Mike Braun (R-IN) co-sponsored the bill. However, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) is unlikely to bring it to the Senate floor. Addressing criticism about prioritizing the potential government shutdown, Senator Schmitt argued that there are numerous issues that can be simultaneously addressed. He emphasized the importance of proactively preventing the traumatizing experiences caused by the COVID-19 pandemic from happening again.

Schmitt highlighted the current existence of school districts with mask mandates and federal programs like Head Start that may influence future mandates. He believes it is crucial to be proactive and get ahead of these potential mandates.

“Of course that’s a big issue, but I think we can walk and chew gum at the same time,” he said. “Imean, there’s a lot of things to do. [The COVID-19 pandemic] is a lesson in something that we can’t let happen again, so I think this is proactive.”

The press conference included both Senator Vance and Senator Schmitt, along with Senate Minority Whip John Thune (R-SD) and Senate Republican Conference Chairman John Barrasso (R-WY). Thune and Barrasso are among the top three candidates expected to succeed Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) when he retires. The third candidate is Senator John Cornyn (R-TX), the former majority whip.

Thune expressed his frustration, saying, “It’s an example of when you give the Democrats an inch, they’ll take a mile. This stuff is crazy.” He hopes for an addressal of the issue to eliminate burdensome policies and mandates that make life more difficult for children and people in general.

Barrasso, a former orthopedic surgeon, stated that the legislation protects individual rights and preserves state rights. He emphasized the need to avoid a one-size-fits-all approach from the federal government and stressed the importance of common sense.

“This protects our individual rights as citizens and it preserves state’s rights,” he said. “The last thing we need is another one-size-fits-all approach from the federal government, Washington telling us what to do once again — it only makes common sense.”

The push for this legislation partly stems from a recent effort by a Maryland school district to reinstate mask mandates. It also came after the White House announced that President Joe Biden would wear a mask indoors following the positive COVID-19 test of First Lady Jill Biden. President Biden was subsequently seen occasionally not adhering to his own rules.

Although the bill has better prospects in the GOP-controlled House, Republicans have faced limited success in repealing COVID-19 measures in the Senate, including the military’s vaccine mandate last year.

Article generated from corporate media reports.

(Article cross-posted from Natural News)

Writer Annika Kim Constantino claims that COVID “cases and hospitalizations” across the United States are rising, as are the number of new “variants.” Because of this, CNBC believes that Americans should once again slap on a mask, even if they already got “vaccinated.”

“People infected with Covid should wear masks [sic] around others to prevent the spread of the virus,” Constantino commanded.

“For those not infected, the decision to mask depends on a few things. That includes your personal risk level, Covid rates in your region and who you might make contact with,” she added, citing unnamed “experts.”

(Related: Did you know that the earliest deaths from “COVID” in Australia occurred exclusively in the “fully vaccinated?”)

The COVID charade is so worn out – will they EVER stop with this nonsense?

Constantino’s piece goes on to rehash the same flawed advice from more than three years ago when government officials tried to scare the elderly, the immunocompromised, and others into fearing fresh air.

In her view, people who consider themselves to be at “high risk of serious illness” should consider covering their breathing holes with cloth or plastic to prevent oxygen from getting inside.

“That applies to elderly adults and people with diabetes, cancer, HIV, a history of heart disease or stroke or other immunocompromising conditions,” Constantino wrote, citing official guidelines from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).

CNBC also brought in a Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health professor by the name of Andrew Pekosz who reiterated the official government claims from more than three years ago – claims that have since been thoroughly debunked as pseudoscience, by the way.

“Anytime we’re seeing an uptick in cases, we should start with telling highly vulnerable populations that they should prepare for this and be a little bit more cognizant of the things they can do to protect themselves,” Pekosz said. “And I think masking is one of them.”

For the sixth straight week, according to the CDC, COVID hospitalizations have jumped by nearly 19 percent. The official story is that these people are afflicted with the latest strains like EG.5 or “Eris,” as well as a handful of so-called XBB strains.

No mention is made in the CNBC piece about the fact that most, if not all, of these hospitalizations are occurring in people who got “fully vaccinated” for COVID like they were commanded to do by government overlords.

In fact, CNBC is pushing its readers and viewers to line up for the latest “booster” COVID shots from Pfizer, Moderna, and this time Novavax, all of which are slated to unleash new COVID jabs around mid-September.

Until these injections are officially released, CNBC wants all members of the public to wear a mask, feel scared at all times, and act like anti-social weirdos whenever out in public.

CNBC also wants “institution-level mask mandates in certain health-care settings and businesses,” which Pavitra Roychoudhury, a professor of laboratory medicine at the University of Washington School of Medicine, says will “really reduce the risk of running into large outbreaks.”

CNBC does admit, however, that getting people of any political persuasion to mask again will be tough because “[m]any people don’t appear to be worried enough about the recent rise in cases to change their behavior.”

A recent poll from Axios and Ipsos found that COVID was at the very bottom of respondents’ list of concerns, meaning pretty much everyone except the media and the government are done with all things COVID.

The latest news about the coming COVID 2.0 event (the Great Tribulation?) can be found at Prophecy.news.

Sound off about this idiocy on our End Medical Tyranny Substack.

Sources for this article include:

• CNBC.com
• NaturalNews.com

The short straw was picked by First Lady Jill Biden this time. It’s her second Covid infection despite being “protected” by two jabs and two boosters. Biden’s 72-year-old wife, whose symptoms were described as mild, last had Covid in August of last year.

“This evening, the First Lady tested positive for COVID-19,” her communications director, Elizabeth Alexander, said in a statement. “She will remain at their home in Rehoboth Beach, Delaware.”

And…. Here it comes.

Why is anyone testing or caring about this anymore?? pic.twitter.com/GC6wklQrui

— Jenna Ellis (@JennaEllisEsq) September 5, 2023

This tells us they’re deploying the latest scariant of Covid-19 for mass infection. Expect every few days for someone “newsworthy” to test positive in their efforts to normalize concern. But it won’t be the usual suspects like the CDC or corporate media who will truly be driving the narrative. It will be their useful idiots living and working among us who are their best tools.

Fear of Covid-19 seems to be an inherent quality. In other words, most who still feared it as late as 2022 will embrace the coming surge as a reason to reengage with their fears. They may not consciously like it, but unconsciously they are drawn to it like moths to a flame.

It’s fair to say that most Americans were concerned in the early days of 2020, especially with published lies about its potential fatality rate. But once more people were infected and the mostly healthy recovered quickly, concerns subsided in some. Fast forward through 2021 and into 2022 and a strong majority of Americans no longer feared the disease.

To subvert this lack of fear, we’re seeing Pandemic Panic Theater 2.0. My astute readers might believe it won’t work, that neither they nor most Americans will fall for it this time. I would argue two points. First, never underestimate your neighbor’s addiction to fear. Second and more importantly, the powers-that-be don’t need a majority to be fearful. They don’t even need a plurality. They simply need enough scared people to falsely justify the need for more lockdowns. If that’s just 5% of the population — and it will be more than that — then they will have the anecdotal terror necessary to pretend like lockdowns are necessary.

Today, we’re hearing a lot of people claiming they will not comply. I am hopeful that this is true and a huge chunk of America will stick to their guns on this one. If most roll over and allow themselves to be chastised into compliance, then I’m not being an alarmist when I say our nation will be lost.

Read or join the conversation about this story on my Substack.

President Trump made the remarks in a video posted on Aug. 30 on Truth Social, saying that his message should serve as a warning to every COVID-19 “tyrant” who not only wants to “take away our freedom” but who would be playing into the hands of those wanting to exploit COVID-19 restrictions to interfere in next year’s election.

“The left-wing lunatics are trying very hard to bring back COVID lockdowns and mandates with all of their sudden fear-mongering about the new variants that are coming,” President Trump said in the video.

Recently, there’s been a torrent of media reports about a new COVID-19 variant circulating, while President Joe Biden said last week that all Americans would likely be advised to get another booster.

In his video message, President Trump said that his political opponents are eager to leverage COVID-19 “hysteria” for political ends.

“They want to restart the COVID hysteria so they can justify more lockdowns, more censorship, more illegal drop boxes, more mail-in ballots, and trillions of dollars in payoffs to their political allies heading into the 2024 election,” the former president said.

He charged that “they rigged the 2020 election and now they’re trying to do the same thing all over again by rigging the most important election in the history of our country, the 2024 election, even if it means trying to bring back COVID.”

President Trump has maintained that he believes he was was robbed of victory in 2020, due in part to last-minute changes to election rules that removed some guardrails for mail-in ballots and, at least in theory, made it easier to cheat.

While the former president lost nearly all of his election-related lawsuits, many were dismissed not on merit but on technicalities like the doctrine of laches, which basically says that a legal challenge was brought too late and prejudiced the defendant.

‘We Will Not Comply’

A number of conservative commentators have pointed to the sharp rise of COVID-19-related media reporting in recent weeks, while pointing to the threat of renewed restrictions for civil liberties—and the upcoming election.

Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk has claimed there’s a plot to push “COVIDian tyranny” and “lock you down again just in time for the election” and facilitate the launch of a “Marxist-type revolution.”

Former member of Congress Ron Paul penned an op-ed on LewRockwell.com saying that the threat supposedly posed by the new COVID-19 variant is being amplified across media platforms “just in time for election season.”

“Why are they coming back around for another round of Covid tyranny?” Mr. Paul wrote. “Fear is a weapon to gain control.”

“Last time around, they generated fear to radically change how America voted. Suddenly, everyone was mailed ballots. How closely were they checked? No one knew and no one dared ask. The people who did ask about the election are now facing jail terms,” Mr. Paul wrote, presumably referring to some Jan. 6 defendants.

“They want us to shut up while they do it again. Will we?” Mr. Paul asked.

In his message, President Trump delivered a forceful response to this question, which has been expressed in one form or another by numerous conservative commentators.

“Don’t even think about it,” President Trump said, addressing his remarks to “every COVID tyrant who wants to take away our freedom.”

“Hear these words: We will not comply!” the former president continued. “We will not shut down our schools, we will not accept your lockdowns, we will not abide by your mask mandates, and we will not tolerate your vaccine mandates.”

The former president then said that if elected president in 2024, he would use every available authority to push back on mask and vaccine mandates, giving as an example cutting federal funding to any college or airline that imposes such mandates.

“They will fail because I will not let it happen,” the former president said.

‘Likely To Be Recommended’

President Trump’s remarks comes as COVID-19 hospitalizations have been on the rise across the country, with three new variants of the disease said to be spreading.

Multiple drug companies, including Pfizer, Novavax, and Moderna, have introduced new vaccines they say will be effective to protect against the COVID-19 variant of interest EG.5, or Eris—although the vaccines do not protect against transmission.

President Biden told reporters in South Lake Tahoe, California, on Aug. 25 that he had asked for more funding for a new COVID vaccine.

“I signed off this morning on a proposal we have to present to the Congress, a request for additional funding for a new vaccine—that is necessary, that works,” President Biden said.

“And tentatively, not decided finally yet, tentatively it is recommended—it is likely to be recommended—that everybody get it, no matter whether they got it before,” he added.

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) officials recently told reporters that the vaccines are expected to become available to the public in mid-September, though they are still pending approval from the Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

An independent CDC advisory committee is scheduled to meet on Sept. 12 to vote on recommended guidelines for eligibility for the new COVID-19 shots.

Nathan Worcester contributed to this report. Article cross-posted from The Epoch Times.

This is where discernment and prayerful reckoning must come into play. The tyranny du jour that’s rising around us is medical in nature as Pandemic Panic Theater 2.0 ramps up, just as many of us have been predicting for a while. The good news is we’re already seeing many patriots and skeptics ringing the alarm bells about the “election variants” of Covid-19 that are magically popping up ahead of 2024. The bad news is the vast majority of “normies” are getting gaslit by corporate media propaganda fearmongering.

Part of me thinks the powers-that-be must have something bigger cooked up. Are they going to simply rely on a rinse-and-repeat version of 2020 knowing the pushback will be much more fierce this time? Am I overestimating this “massive” pushback from the people? It’s easy to complain on social media but harder to apply when real lockdowns, mask mandates, and new “vaccines” and “boosters” hit the shelf.

I struggled with putting my thoughts together for this column because it seems we’re facing the overestimate-vs-underestimate conundrum. If we get as many people as possible prepared to ignore and protest the coming lockdowns, what happens if the calculus changes? For example, what if they roll out a variant that’s actually worthy of concern? Do we risk losing credibility and possibly costing lives by telling people to ignore the lockdowns, only to find out that they’ve unleashed an actual killer coronavirus?

Fear cannot drive us. I can second guess everything and paralyze myself thinking the adversaries are too smart, but that means inaction. Therefore, if I’m going to err then it’ll be on the side of freedom. Could they be planning something bigger than Covid-19 for us? Absolutely. But if we make plans to play it safe then we might as well sign over all of our rights immediately. Therefore, we must move forward with the working theory that they’re just going to try to play us for fools again with gaslighting and propaganda instead of unleashing an actual deadly disease.

In short, I’m not going to overthink it. Liars are going to lie so let’s move forward assuming Pandemic Panic Theater 2.0 will be nothing more than Kabuki.

What does that really mean from a practical perspective? It means we need to get organized at the local level. There isn’t a legitimate way to fight what’s coming on the national level. As for the states, we need to push red state legislators to fight all mandates and we need to assume all blue states will fall in line giddily with renewed medical tyranny. But at the local level, we can make a direct impact on our own lives, the lives of our families, and the communities around us.

Many cities and counties have groups that are (or at least were) already organized to push back against lockdowns. If they’re still active, we need to join them and help to advance them. If they’re inactive, we need to activate them. If you can’t find an appropriate one in your area, consider getting with peers and launching anew. I met one of my sponsors, “Our Gold Guy” Ira Bershatsky, because of his involvement with a group fighting medical tyranny in a Southern California city. They met every Sunday in a park with guest speakers and calls to action. It’s time for such groups to become active again.

It’s also time to talk to friends and family about this. Credibility comes with being right, so telling your “normie” relationships that lockdowns are coming back to establish control factors ahead of the election might cause some of them to roll their eyes today, but they’ll be more inclined to listen to you once it comes to pass. It makes sense to discuss it now so that when it happens we can be a knowledgeable guide to tell the “normies” how to properly respond.

The rise of medical tyranny must be met with far more pushback than we offered in 2020. Fear prevented freedom from winning back then. It cannot be allowed to do the same in 2023 and beyond.

Sound off about this on my Substack.