Paul's Passing Thoughts

“The death of Democrat Americans is necessary collateral damage to achieve the greater good: getting rid of Trump at all cost…Democrat celebrities have spoken openly and often about the insignificance of Republican lives, but we should consider the newly revealed democide of the Democrat Party.”

The Democrat Party has now taken its place in the infamous history of socialist and communist democide. The greatest example is China’s Great Leap Forward between 1958 and 1962 when the economic policy of that socialist movement killed between 18 and 45 million people.

Regarding the present Plaquenil (hydroxychloroquine) controversy concerning the medication’s use to fight the Coronavirus pandemic, the evidence is in, and it is overwhelming. Three parties are guilty of outright murder: doctors who have book knowledge and lack commonsense, the Democrat Party, and doctors who hold to collectivist ideology.  Little space will be used in this post to address doctors who strain at a gnat and swallow a camel (the first party) as they pretty much speak for themselves.

First, we will look at the overwhelming and obvious proof that (as everyone knows) Plaquenil is effective in curing Coronavirus and is also a prophylactic. Fact is, this drug is a weapon that could likely stop this pandemic in the United States dead in its tracks. As Dr. Stephen Smith, founder of The Smith Center for Infectious Diseases and Urban Health, said recently, “I think this is the beginning of the end of the pandemic. I’m very serious.”

Yet, Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases and on Trump’s C-19 team, said the following on Face the Nation last week: “You know, as I’ve said many times, Margarate, the data are really just at best suggestive. There have been cases that show there may be an effect and there are others to show there’s no effect. So I think in terms of science, I don’t think we could definitively say it works.”

That, my friends, is a blatant lie, and I strongly suspect that he knows it.

Now the evidence.

The firsthand testimonies, which are Innumerable and known thanks to the internet and conservative journalism, is where we will begin. I will cite the two most compelling testimonies, actually, stunning testimonies. First, the following excerpt is from USA Today:

A Democratic state representative from Detroit is crediting hydroxychloroquine — and Republican President Donald Trump who touted the drug — for saving her [life] in her battle with the coronavirus.

State Rep. Karen Whitsett, who learned Monday she has tested positive for COVID-19, said she started taking hydroxychloroquine on March 31, prescribed by her doctor, after both she and her husband sought treatment for a range of symptoms on March 18.

“It was less than two hours” before she started to feel relief, said Whitsett, who had experienced shortness of breath, swollen lymph nodes, and what felt like a sinus infection. She is still experiencing headaches, she said.

Whitsett said she was familiar with “the wonders” of hydroxychloroquine from an earlier bout with Lyme disease, but does not believe she would have thought to ask for it, or her doctor would have prescribed it, had Trump not been touting it as a possible treatment for COVID-19.

Trump, at his daily coronavirus briefings, has repeatedly touted the drug in combination with the antibiotic azithromycin, despite criticism from health professionals that it is unproven and potentially dangerous. There have also been complaints that Trump’s remarks have resulted in a shortage of the drug for those people who normally use it for its recommended purposes.

But Whitsett said Trump’s comments helped in her case. “It has a lot to do with the president … bringing it up,” Whitsett said. “He is the only person who has the power to make it a priority.”

Full stop. Come now, let’s employ a little commonsense. When Donald Trump says, “What do you have to lose,” he speaks wisdom that is self-evident to humanity. That’s what commonsense is. Even if there were only a handful of these testimonies, when people are on the precipice of death, they have absolutely nothing to lose. But, in reality, these testimonies are myriad. Folks, in the middle of a life and death crisis, there is something seriously wrong with those who will watch people die over the difference between “anecdotal” evidence and “long-term controlled studies.”

But, it gets better. Marc Siegel, a Fox News medical correspondent, columnist for several news outlets, including the New York Post and Forbes, and associate professor of medicine at NYU Langone Medical Center, stated the following on last night’s Tucker Carlson show: “I want to tell you about a 96 year old man in Florida who said one night, ‘I don’t think I’m going to make it, I feel very weak, the end is coming. I’m coughing, I’m short of breath, I can’t get up from the couch.’ The next day he was on hydroxychloroquine and antibiotics per his cardiologist. He got up the next day; he was fine. This man is my father.”

That’s a stunning testimony from a celebrity doctor trusted by millions. But, hundreds like these two testimonies cited are pouring in daily. Would Siegel share this testimony if he thought it would give false hope? Very unlikely.

Even more compelling is the actual studies on this drug and its use for Coronavirus in particular. Another celebrity doctor who has been leading the charge on this is the heart surgeon Mehmet Oz. Though a controversial doctor according to some, the point here is the studies he is citing, not the consensus of opinions about him. On Fox and Friends 4/6/2020:

By the way, the word “anecdote” is used a lot — that is an incorrect description of where this medication is now. There’s no question it’s not proven to be beneficial in the large clinical trials we expect in America, and certainly the FDA and medical societies would desire. But these have been supported with case studies. I just got off the phone with Didier Raoult, who’s the well-respected French physician who’s done a lot of this work. Thousand series of patients — 1,000 patients in a row he’s treated, and he’s not published yet, he’s going to be published over the next two weeks. But he’s got seven people who have died, they were all older and had other co-morbidities, 20 people have gone to the ICU of that trial.

Now, it’s not a randomized trial, but that’s not anecdotal. The data from China we discussed last week for the first time on Fox & Friends also, pretty evident that it’s a randomized trial. That is the opposite, if I had to create an opposite of an anecdote. So when those words get thrown around and I saw us this morning in some of the papers, it’s an error on the part of journalists.

Doctors know that difference and they say you know what, I’ve got nothing else. I’m going into a battle, I’m going to march with the army with me. I’ve got randomized data and large case studies that support — it’s the best I’ve got and I’ve got, I’m estimating this, but Dr. Raoult, who was born in Africa, thinks there have been a billion prescriptions written for these products, and he’s stunned that there’s so much concern about side effects. Yes you have to screen for side effects; a doctor has to be involved. But all of this panic about how dangerous they suddenly became is surprising him.

Another doctor that Oz interviewed was even more forceful, saying that not using Plaquenil in the current crisis because there are no long-term controlled studies is, “immoral.” It’s truly amazing how the likes of Dr. Fauci think Americans will accept expertism beyond the scope of what’s reasonable, even to a child. Even more amazing is the stoic coldness in which he dismisses the data while thousands of people are dying daily. Something is very wrong with him.

Does Dr. Fauci lack so much commonsense that he sees no connection between human health and economics? Does he really think America can survive a one-year shutdown economically? No, he is not that stupid; he has an agenda.

Understanding Collectivism 

Whether religion or politics, your position is determined by you presuppositions about mankind. Is man able, or unable? Regarding the ability of man, this position acknowledges human weakness and even evil, but touts man’s ability to overcome these things. Belief in human ability is expressed through individualism.

In contrast, collectivism rejects mankind as able. It sees human existence as one, big, hot mess. Here is where you don’t want to get confused: in collectivism, wisdom is defined by knowing that. The wisest among us know that truth cannot be known; man is unable to discern reality.

Hence, the “experts” among us are educated in making the best of it. They are the ones who lead us through the darkness in order to make life the best it can be. This necessarily insists that mankind should give up all of its freedom to those who know that man cannot know reality. Those who refuse to believe this, and are arrogant enough to believe they can know reality, are a threat to all of humanity.

This is why we dare not question the experts. And, the American concept of self-rule is like letting children play with loaded guns. That’s what’s behind gun control: “For crying out loud, we can’t have millions of people carrying guns around! It will be the Wild West all over again and the hospitals will be overwhelmed with accidental shootings and all kinds of gun violence!” So, people should trust the government to protect us and only “trained law enforcement” should carry guns.

This concern among collectivists is genuine, but there is another reason. A well armed public is a huge problem for a collectivist government; a collectivist government (socialism, communism, etc.) cannot exist with a well armed public because it poses problems for tyrannical oppression of the great unwashed. Yes, they would concede, it’s a pity when criminals break into your house at night and you can’t defend yourself, but a worse problem is everyone being armed willy-nilly. Therefore, the few are expendable for the collective good, or the greater good. No, the fact they are surrounded by armed guards is not hypocrisy: they are the experts that the commoners depend on; of course we should protect them. Of course it is necessary for the experts to have a carbon footprint; they need to travel the world over to discuss how to save it from the great unwashed. The problem is the masses producing an unnecessarily large carbon footprint as a result of willy-nilly travel.

Collectivism is not the shepherd that leaves the 99 for the one lost lamb. The one lost lamb is expendable for the greater good of the other 99. Also, with collectivism, the highest moral value is altruism; that is, self sacrifice for the collective or greater good.

FYI, some doctors and nurses are collectivists also. Of course, they all take The Hippocratic Oath to abide by medical ethics, but the question is, does individualism or collectivism drive the ethic?

Vaccines are a great example of this. For whatever reason you like to cite, they are harmful to a small percentage of people. The medical community is very unmotivated to do anything about that. Why? They say it all of the time: “The benefits outweigh the risks.” Indeed, that is true, but this is also clearly saying that the few are expendable for the collective whole.

America is not based on pure individualism; yet, to the degree that it is, it has accomplished more good on earth than any nation before it. God’s ekklesia, not to be confused with the church, which by the way, was actually founded on collectivist ideology, is an example of pure individualism. The group is one body with individual members being part of the body and all contribute to the overall function of the body in some way. In the Bible, this is called the “body of Christ.” If a part of our body is ailing, we nurse it and care for it, we don’t kill it and go on our way. If we lose use of an arm, we don’t have it cut off because it is no longer useful. Why not? Well, because, obviously, it still has some sort of value.

This is the way individualism sees life. Life has value because it is life, not because of its ability to contribute something. But, with that said, individualism recognizes that what people have to contribute is not always obvious and may be hidden under things we take for granted and fail to think about. But regardless, life is sacred.

Be sure of this: “quality of life” is an euphemism for a person’s ability to contribute to the “collective good.” Or to be more crass, one’s ability to contribute to the state. Things like eldercare and “special needs” do not equate with collectivism. The exception is initially, during the transition of a culture from open society to socialism.

Collectivism will also show continual fondness for globalism. Vaccines are wonderful, but those behind a strong push for vaccines, like all healthcare professionals, knowingly or unknowingly, are either driven by collectivism or individualism. It would seem, given our present circumstances, that the argument against globalism is simple and discussion-ending: people in some cultures like to eat bats and house pets. In other cultures, people are romantically involved with other species. These behaviors, and other ill-advised behaviors, create pandemics that can utterly destroy entire nations. That is, unless you have universal vaccination that makes globalism possible. Keep in mind, in the same way that socialism is impossible without a ban on guns, globalism is impossible without a universal vaccination program. Too often, individualists think collectivists like vaccines for the same reasons.

Many are shocked at Dr. Fauci’s lackadaisical attitude towards shutting down the American economy for up to a year. Some Democrat strategists are calling for an eighteen month shutdown. This would forever change America’s standing in the world and wreak havoc on mortality rates in other ways. Fauci does not share Trump’s view that the cure can be worse than the disease. In fact, he seems totally indifferent to shutting down America in order to mitigate new cases to zero—however long it takes.

If Fauci is of the globalist mentality, this makes perfect sense. The significance of a single economy in the globalist scheme of things is relatively insignificant. In addition, Fauci’s criticism of the World Health Organization, even in light of its overt corruption, is always conspicuously missing. Obviously, Fauci has no emotional attachment to American exceptionalism whatsoever. Obviously, America is expendable for whatever he considers to be the collective good, which certainly couldn’t include individual American lives. More precious to him than the thought of Plaquenil saving one life out of fifty times it is tried is his coveted “long-term controlled studies.” If he isn’t a coldblooded collectivist, he at least functions like one.

The Democrat Party is much easier to read. Their only prayer of beating Trump in the November election is to destroy the Trump revolution earmarked by the best economy that America has ever seen.

A cure for Coronavirus means a limited economic shutdown. A limited economic shutdown will not destroy the Trump economy. Problem is, Democrats will also die. But, this you must understand: the death of their own for the better good equates with socialism and the collectivist ideology it is founded on. The death of Democrat Americans is necessary collateral damage to achieve the greater good: getting rid of Trump at all cost.

The cost of health during an economic depression is well known. Shutting down America for eighteen months will result in death rates that would far rival the Coronavirus pandemic. Everyone knows this, everyone. And, everyone knows that would include Democrats. Democrat celebrities have spoken openly and often about the insignificance of Republican lives, but we should consider the newly revealed democide of the Democrat Party.

It’s a socialist lie older than the mountains: the “People’s Republic of China” is a “republic” for the people. No, it’s a people whose value is determined by their ability to contribute to the state, and the people are expendable for every whim of social experiments. Oops, the Great Leap Forward didn’t work out, oh well, better luck next time. Millions of people died, and yet China clings to socialism because the ability of man and self-rule are impossible. That presupposition about mankind is excluded as a possibility. Worse yet, America came along and told everyone else in the world that they have been wrong since the beginning of civilization. The very existance of America is a constant indictment against world history and all of its preceding cultures.

And unfortunately, the Democrats agree with that. That is…

…the Democide Party.

paul