A Marriage Made in Hell

One of the greatest dangers to the future of democracy and cohesive society is the marriage of the political and healthcare systems. This union is as problematic as the previous bond between Church and State, which corrupted both institutions and took civil wars within State and Church to resolve. Jesus told us to “Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.” These are wise words and can be applied equally to bodily ownership and the type of healthcare we choose to have.

Public health inherently restricts a portion of private liberty to advance the wellbeing of the whole. However, such restrictions should entail the least coercive option possible to reduce the risk of the medical world becoming completely hijacked by political power leading to the suppression of dissenting views, and the promotion of the chosen agenda. The most obvious historically absurd example was the criminalization of cannabis; this became glaringly clear to me when dozens of controlled trials demonstrated the medical efficacy of this herb, yet the media and political class could still find Useful Idiots in the medical industry to preach otherwise.

Bodily autonomy is essential to democracy as many esteemed political philosophers and legal scholars would agree, with the common slogan being “my body, my choice”. The most peculiar aspect of the current global pandemic situation is that many who shouted this during abortion debates, now throw this argument away for a virus. They may claim that ‘having an abortion isn’t harming anyone’. However, anyone that accepts we are conscious, energetic entities that manifest bodies (or have a soul connected to the physical body) would obviously argue otherwise.

The problem with mandated medical treatment is also that there are financial incentives involved, potential side-effects, lost livelihood, social division and potential economic collapse. Not to mention recent studies, such as that from the Lancet, which demonstrates no difference in transmission between the un/vaccinated.

One of the finest early writers on this topic was psychiatrist Thomas Szasz who warned us the marriage of medicine and state could lead to a total collapse in trust and efficacy of both. Szasz stated:

“The two greatest enemies of the individual in the modern world are communism and psychiatry. Each wages a relentless war against that which makes a person an individual: communism against the ownership of property, psychiatry against the ownership of the self (mind and body).

Communists criminalize the autonomous use of capital and labor, and harshly punish those who “traffic” in the black market, especially in foreign currencies. Psychiatrists criminalize the autonomous use of the self, and harshly punish those who “traffic” in self-abuse, especially in self-medication and self-destruction.”

Szasz described the odious creep of the state into our bodies as “Pharmacracy”, and argued for the separation of medicine and state, predicting the horrors we see today. Once more, individual liberty is being trampled on by appeal to the greater good of public health, supported by cherry-picked research and physicians more concerned with career advancement than the life of their patients.

In his book “Madness and the Birth of Civilisation” French philosopher Michel Foucault provides another fascinating account of 17th-century European society entering collective psychosis leading to the roundup of large swaths of the adult population under the claim they were mentally ill. Of this period, which he titles the Great Confinement, Foucault writes:

“Once leprosy had gone, and the figure of the leper was no more than a distant memory, these structures still remained. The game of exclusion would be played again, often in these same places, in an oddly similar fashion two or three centuries later.

The role of the leper was to be played by the poor and by the vagrant, by prisoners and by the ‘alienated’, and the sort of salvation at stake for both parties in this game of exclusion is the matter of this study.”

Our memories are short, and Foucault’s book is an interesting portrayal of citizens narking on their neighbours, family members or anyone else they didn’t approve of for engaging in strange behaviour to disappear rather than help them. This led to a sizable amount of the adult population being institutionalised and made to work in forced labour for the state.

Combine the examples mentioned above, with the chilling history of forced medical experiments by fascist regimes in twentieth-century Europe, and the MKULTRA experiments of the second half of the twentieth century, one would assume humanity would be sensitive to this type of menace. Sadly, history is quickly forgotten and here we are again.