abyss horizon – notes 15-01-2021

a harvest of facebook posts today documenting the approach to the abyss horizon

Martin Bassani writes:

Stuart Davies replies:

Damn, sorry about that! I thought I’d been trying my best my whole life to figure out what the fuckers are up to and do my best to stop them, but here I was allowing it anyway!

I notice the technique described above is like the “fact check” technique but “fact check” uses it in reverse. It “debunks” arguments that were not asserted. I read them as a hobby now. I reviewed one yesterday:

As always, the “fact check” is absolute zero quality. Why? The usual reasons:

1. Low quality framing. It asks, and answers, the wrong questions

2. Straw man arguments. It “debunks” claims that either were not asserted, or were asserted with entirely different framing that entirely alters the meaning of the assertion. The “debunk” is misdirected at a phantom unasserted claim.

3. Assumes idiocy. Assumes the reader (and/or the source claimant) is an idiot, has no prior or relevant domain knowledge. Then deploys domain knowledge as “dazzling” “evidence” of credibility, that fortifies — through the implied vacancy of domain knowledge of the source claimant — the straw man argument that “debunks” the phantom argument not asserted by the source claimant.

4. to what matters: the source claim involves the inutility of vaccinating whole populations against a statistically unremarkable pathogen (against which natural immunity is demonstrably working well indeed), along with a basket of “deplorable” relevant questions among which are:

– why get vaccinated, if viral transmission in the population will likely be unaffected by vaccination, due to the fact that the overwhelming majority of those getting vaccinated, would — if exposed naturally to the virus — handle the exposure effectively without vaccination (or have already done so)?

– likewise, for the same reason as above, why wear a mask?

– and other relevant questions, like:

– why submit to gangsters and their extortion schemes?

– why buy into gangsters’ threats even when the threats are formulated as (pseudo)science? Why buy into the narrative that says that viral transmission can be slowed through isolation of all individuals in the world, and with masks, and that drugs must be taken because viruses are moving around? Why submit to any of this?

Here’s another “fact check”:

It “checks” this table:

The “fact check” is another PERFECT example of extremely poor quality “fact checking”.

This one is full of false information, disinformation (the piece regarding PCR testing).

The main part of this “fact check” is arrayed against the source claim’s dismissal of the media narrative of an extraordinary rate of the death in Sweden in 2020. The “fact check” is extremely poor in quality. Why? The usual reasons:

1. Low quality framing. It asks, and answers, the wrong questions

2. Straw man arguments. It “debunks” claims that either were not asserted, or were asserted with entirely different framing that entirely alters the meaning of the assertion. The “debunk” is misdirected at a phantom unasserted claim.

3. Assumes idiocy. Assumes the reader (and/or the source claimant) is an idiot, has no prior or relevant domain knowledge. Then deploys domain knowledge as “dazzling” “evidence” of credibility, that fortifies — through the implied vacancy of domain knowledge of the source claimant — the straw man argument that “debunks” the phantom argument not asserted by the source claimant.

4. to what matters: the “fact check” ignores the substance of the facts presented in the source claim, facts conformant with reality, from which the reader is diverted, by way of an unjustifiably narrow focus on insignificant errors.

The numbers in the “fact checked” table are consistent with similar evaluations of Swedish data that have been seen throughout 2020. The trends and reasonable conclusions have been consistent throughout the entire year.

The total deaths for 2020 are quoted elsewhere now a couple thousand higher than in the “fact checked” table, but that will make no significant difference in the death rate:

2000/10,378,000 is .02% so 0.92 may raise to 0.94 percent (rate of death in the population, for 2020).

That puts 2020 still significantly LESS than 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003,

and as explained many times all year, the slight increase in 2020 versus 2019 is expected because 2019 was Sweden’s lowest all cause mortality rate since 1977, and Sweden has a very high percentage of very elderly population, who had a very light death burden in 2019, which regressed to mean in 2020.

And 2020 still remains near historic low for death rate in Sweden as is well analyzed here:

“Even with Covid-19, Sweden’s absolute mortality rates are at all-time historical lows.”

Complete twitter thread:

All of the statistical analysis in the thread above is ignored in the “fact check”, even though this analysis is widely read, and well known.

In lieu of rigorous analysis, the “fact check” substitutes loose insinuation, vagueness, smearing, shaming, factual blindness, and an inability to differentiate what matters from noise.

The “fact check” in fact, is noise. And pathetic. Truly piss poor quality, which apparently (I’ve seen no exceptions) is always the case with facebook “fact checks”.

In support of its “argument”, the “fact check” even stoops (well, the entire fact check fails to rise even above the gutter) to include a graph of 20 years of total deaths NOT adjusted for population.

Sensationalizing distortion in support of a psychotic narrative. Which, again, ignores the 2020’s regression to the mean after an exceptionally low death burden the year before in 2019, and omits the required adjustment for population which correctly places 2020’s death rate (as percentage of population) well below 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003.

The “fact check” is not factual, and IS shameless deception supporting a criminal narrative promoting straight-up gangsterism on a massive scale.

An extortion scheme dressed up as (pseudo)science.

Hiroyuki Hamada writes:

Quite a few people have already written about the virus situation and its meaning, but John delivers the core essence in an urgent yet objective manner for us. The event needs to be understood in the historical context of relentless attacks by the ruling class against the rest.

An excerpt:

One of the most important aspects of aesthetics, of the study of art at all, is that it teaches the viewer or reader how to see and experience more deeply, with more sensitivity, and this in turn (among other things) leads to the ability to recognize the fraudulent. In other words you come to recognize propaganda. It is almost the cultivating of a sub-clinical intuitive skill, a sense when a narrative or an image seem counterfeit.

Along with this comes the ability to, at least partly, resist marketing campaigns and advertisers’ manipulations. I have always felt the reading of the classics serve as a teflon shield for adverstising.

Art and culture have more profound gifts than just a finely tuned ‘bullshit meter’. But given the events of this last week, and of the entire year, as well, the loss of cultural education keeps coming back to me. The least enrolled post-grad program at U.S. universities is the study of the classics. History is very low, too, for any era. Business management is the most popular. I often have thought that the loss of such studies today has had a genuinely deleterious effect. Certainly most big search engines, if you google post-graduate programs in the classics, will return a variety of links about how such a degree has nearly zero economic reward attached.

This is now about a year into the pandemic and there have still been no debates, no public round-tables and no referendums. Nothing. Just decrees by the government…

Don DeBar writes:

AMNESIAC – n.Person who cannot remember when the civil rights movement was called a Russian plot and civil rights workers were called Russian dupes

From the article:

From the article “Britain’s Office for National Statistics (ONS) reveals that in England and Wales, the overall death rate from all causes in 2020 (531, 829) was only slightly higher than 2019 (530,841) but lower than 2018 (541,589) and 2017 (533, 253). The 988 additional deaths in 2020 represent an increase of 0.1861 per cent over the figure for 2019. Yet the official death toll from COVID-19 for 2020, as registered on January 4, 2021, was 75,024. This is puzzling when the increase in the overall death toll for 2020 over 2019 was so small, but the statistics are all there for the reader to dive in and try to make some sense of them.

According to the World Doctors’ Alliance (WDA), grouping together 61,258 medical health professionals, doctors in in the UK do not even physically have to see the deceased to sign the death certificate. [1] There are no autopsies and, the WDA says, even the staff in care homes can give the virus as the cause of death.

A British journalist, Julia Hartley-Brewer, is now being subjected to public abuse for pointing out (not claiming) that according to the National Health Service’s own statistics, “just 377 healthy people under the age of 60 have died of Covid.” In Australia, noone under the age of 20 has died. Deaths under the age of 60 in Australia are as follows: 20-29, two; 30-39, two; 46-49, two; 50-59, fifteen. What the historian Geoffrey Blainey has called “the tyranny of distance” has worked well for Australia, an island continent surrounded by a cordon sanitaire of water. Perhaps this has been far more effective in keeping the spread of infections down rather than masking, closures, lockdowns and other measures that the state governments have used.

The WDA claims (December 23, 2020) that at no point was Britain’s National Health Service in danger of being overwhelmed in 2020. In fact, while the number of deaths dropped significantly in summer and early autumn, they rose again as winter set in. According to the ONS, by December 18 COVID-19 had been “mentioned” on the death certificates of 82,957 people, with 68,000 dying within 28 days of testing positive for the virus. As the unreliability of the PCR test, resulting in a high number of false positives, has now been widely acknowledged, this connection between positive test results and death is clearly open to questioning.

Again, none of this is to say that the virus has not been a serious health issue, the reductio ad absurdum argument used against critics of the mainstream government/media narrative, only that a sharply focussed approach, protecting the elderly and the medically vulnerable, and letting everyone else get on with their lives as far as possible, would surely have been a far more sane way to handle the outbreak than a panic-inducing response which has wreaked social and economic havoc around the world and enabled governments to crush human rights by using the thuggish methods of the totalitarian police state.”

From Juniper Kozlowski:

“Propaganda must be continuous and lasting– continuous in that it must not leave any gaps, but must fill the citizen’s whole day and all his days; lasting in that it must function over a very long period of time. Propaganda tends to make the individual live in a separate world; he must not have outside points of reference. He must not be allowed a moment of meditation or reflection in which to see himself vis a vis the propagandist, as happens when the propaganda is not continuous. … Instead, successful propaganda will occupy every moment of the individual’s life; through posters and loudspeakers when he is out walking, through radio and newspapers at home, through meetings and movies in the evening. The individual must not be allowed to recover, to collect himself, to remain untouched by propaganda during any relatively long period, for propaganda is not the touch of the magic wand. It is based on slow, constant impregnation. It creates convictions and compliance through imperceptible influences that are effective only by continuous repetition. It must create a complete environment for the individual, one from which he never emerges.”–Jacques Ellul.

image: photo by me, Juniper Kozlowski, taken through the swirled glass windows of an old abandoned church.

From Juniper Kozlowski:

“We were fed up with the way in which everything that came over this new magic box, the radio, was being swallowed…When the radio came, and i suppose now television, anything that came through that new machine was believed.So in a way our broadcast was an assault on the uhh, credibility of that machine, we wanted people to understand that they shouldn’t take any opinion, predigested, and they shouldn’t swallow, everything that came through the tap, whether it was radio or not.”

Orson Welles on War of the Worlds.

I found a disturbing example of public erasure of fundamental knowledge. See end of post here re: Spielberg:

Fundamental scientific knowledge of biology, the premise of War of the Worlds, is targeted for erasure (since 2018)

The difference is only a matter of time.

A Swede said, “Americans are known for believing in conspiracy theories; it’s an American trait.”

That’s a Swedish thing to say.

“Conspiracy theory” is an expression of an awareness, common among Americans, that those who actually hold power — not the faces we see in public, but their bosses, behind the curtain — are not benevolent.

No one, even in Sweden, actually denies conspiracy. Pick up any mainstream newspaper in Sweden, every day, and read story after story of people conspiring.

In the Swedish view however, they’re all conspiring in mutual benevolence, good will toward men, and peace on earth, and so on. Except for lone-wolf criminals, acting alone in their deviant malevolence, or sometimes conspiring with like-minded deviants only to be found out by steadily benevolent (corruption is inconceivable) authorities and their intellectual and charismatic sleuths. Crime-sleuthing (psychopath-hunting) remains a popular Swedish TV and novel genre.

Americans are commonly aware that those conspiring — those who actually hold power behind closed doors, as well as their employees, public officials whose faces are seen in public — are conspiring with mal intent spewed in all directions, projected long and short range, and raining down on all of us.

  • Americans see that they live in a storm of malevolence.
  • Swedes see life in a calm of beneficence.

Institutionalized malevolence does not compute in the Swedish mind. The idea is rejected as the mouth spits out bitter mold. The same bitter mold that is the only food on the American table.

This difference is only a matter of the time, however.

The time at which one eats.

Darius Dephis writes:

…oh, dude, I’ll take Swedish Social Democracy EVERY TIME. The alternative is neoliberal fascist assault and “austerity”, which is what the world experiences if it is under attack by the NATO empire, and now as we see clearly, it experiences WTIHIN it.

That book from 1972 is a fascist assault, a propaganda assault on democracy – “democracy” in the sense of government that governs for the benefit of those governed, at the expense of fascist oligarchy. This (governing for the benefit of those governed) is to be demonized.

I live in Sweden

Darius Dephis:

i enjoyed the historical background. things like the metamorphoses of the aristocracy in to the respectable civil servants . i bet you have a better insight living there now and it is clear from the writing style that the book it is at least a rant against Sweden

I’ll read the book if I can find a copy. Thanks for pointing to it.
I’ve been in Sweden for 2 years and before that I was here a lot since 2010.

I’m an outsider though so can only claim a very fragmented outsider’s understanding.

But it is undeniable that those behind the scenes who would have promoted such books in 1972 are victorious in Sweden. Like the rest of the world, Sweden has been privatized and neoliberalized and “new public managemented” really to a shocking degree, since the PM was assassinated in 1986, and accelerated immediately following Clinton’s bombing of Belgrade.

Some residuals are still intact, like public healthcare and education. But these are targeted; anyone paying attention can see. As an American, growing up swimming in rhetoric that targets, I recognize it when I see it, in Sweden.

Swedes seem unaware generally that when mass media starts a pattern of rhetorical attack, that physical destruction soon follows.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s