Capital’s profitability now depends on ‘lockdowns’, acute social enclosure, and ‘medical’ tyranny

Because capitalism is working towards its own abolition by replacing commodity-producing labour with automated machines,[1] capital’s profitability is increasingly dependent on the monetisation of personal data; low wages; high unemployment; public debt; state purchases; the centralisation of wealth; and — frankly — depopulation.

Whether you believe that ‘covid-19’ broke out as a result of environmental and habitat destruction (a symptom of capitalism’s ever-greater dependence on extractive commodity production);[2] that the infection and death rates have been inflated by sleights of hand[3] to justify ‘lockdowns’ and a profit-motivated vaccine arms race; that the outbreak was leaked, by accident or deliberately (by China, the US, or jointly); or that there is no proof that covid-19 even exists as a novel virus (on the basis that it has apparently never been isolated; see also here, here, here, and here);[4] one thing is undeniable: given the dire state of global economic growth, the timing of the apparent pandemic could not have been more convenient for the ruling class and the needs of capital accumulation.

Doubts about the veracity or severity of covid-19; and concerns about the safety and effectiveness of rushed vaccination programmes that cannot be smugly dismissed as ‘anti-vaxxer’ hysteria have been widely discussed and debated elsewhere.[5] What has not been covered convincingly, at least widely, is an analysis of why the ruling class might have resorted to any conspiracy (or at least such a level of rank opportunism), and why now exactly (with the World Economic Forum speaking of a ‘Great Reset’; and one of its contributors anticipating an entirely rent-based economy whereby “you’ll own nothing and be happy”).

What we tend to hear from those who do believe in a conspiracy is that it is driven by greedy grabs on land, wealth and power. These grabs are certainly happening —Microsoft founder Bill Gates has become the US’s largest owner of farmland; and the UK government is paying small farmers to retire, no doubt so that land concentrates into fewer hands, for example — and greed plays its part. But stopping there does not get to the root of the issue. The root of the issue? The demands of capital accumulation.

Capitalism is a system that needs to keep expanding and monopolising production in order to keep the accumulation of capital going. Accumulation needs to keep going to offset the general rate of profit’s tendency to fall — on average, it trended downwards from an estimated 43% in the 1870s to 17% in the 2000s.

The rate of profit trends downwards (and therefore historically towards zero) because in order to raise the productivity of commodity-producing labour, capital’s exploitation of which is the sole source of profit, the innovation required conversely tends to replace said labour. The more capital-biased the ratio of capital-to-labour becomes, the more difficult it becomes for labour to reproduce and expand total capital yet further — yet the solution is to intensify the contradiction. Put another way, the capitalist produces more, yet less profit is contained per commodity, and so an expansion of commodity sales is needed to offset this contradiction, only to intensify it.

Capitalism as a system therefore suffers from a rising overaccumulation (surplus) of capital that cannot be reinvested profitably in production (alongside which grows a surplus supply of (unemployed) labour). Debt rises to ‘fill the gap’ left by the insufficient amount of surplus value (that capital appropriates from workers and realises through commodity sales — that is, workers keep the amount of working time (the real measure of value, obscured by the wage/money relation) needed to cover their living costs, and the rest of their working time is appropriated by the capitalist).

Wages must be slashed to rewiden thinning profit margins, but the exploitability of labour continues to become increasingly insufficient to meet the ever-rising demands of accumulation. The centralisation of capital therefore becomes increasingly necessary (partly through speculation). The bigger companies buy up smaller companies (preferably ones that have gone bust, therefore on the cheap) and monopolise industry.[6] As a result, small capitalists and middle class people are increasingly pushed down into the ranks of the working class.

For these restructurings to be instigated or accelerated, the system needs a crisis (economic contraction). Recessions — two back-to-back three-monthly periods of productive contraction — strike capitalist economies on average once per decade.

Capitalism has now entered its deepest ever crisis. A decade of savage austerity after the financial crash of 2007–09— whereby governments redirected large portions of public spending into subsidising capital — has proven to be inadequate. Capital required a deeper depression.

Instead of the official 1.7% global contraction (the first since WWII) that followed the last crisis, this time world GDP shrank by 3.6%. The lockdown induced, for example, Britain’s worst recession since 1709 (an economic contraction of around 30%, temporarily taking the size of the economy back to that of 2002, when the population was 59.24 million compared to 2019’s 66.65 million).

Economic growth, which has slowed decade-on-decade for 50 years,[7] was already grinding to a halt — Germany’s economic output contracted by 0.1% in August 2019; Britain’s by 0.2% — before the hardest ever stock market crash in March 2020. Many countries in South America and Sub-Saharan Africa were already in recession.

Even before the financial crash of 2007–09, world debt had reached mountainous heights. It has since continued to hit new highs for so-called ‘peace time’ — the US, UK, Europe and their client proxies, such as Israel and Saudi Arabia, are of course waging endless wars on the Middle East and elsewhere — with the spending on the pandemic (rising subsidies for capital; enforcing lockdowns) reaching world-war-like proportions. According to the Institute of International Finance, ‘developed’ markets’ overall debt jumped to 432% of GDP in the third quarter, from a ratio of about 380% at the end of 2019. Emerging market debt-to-GDP hit nearly 250% in the third quarter, with China reaching 335%. For the year the ratio is expected to reach about 365% of global GDP.

This is not just capitalism’s deepest ever crisis, though — the system is approaching its final breakdown, since the contemporary innovation required to raise the productivity of labour — automation — is now conversely abolishing the source of profit, i.e. capital’s exploitation of commodity-producing labour.

The depth of the crisis of accumulation is such that the centralisation of capital is accelerating at an unprecedented pace. Capital’s dependence on public debt is reaching extreme highs. Monopoly capital has no choice but to make the state its number one customer if it is to remain profitable. This has always been true of weapons manufacturers, for example. Without capitalist states waging wars, weapons manufacturers cannot remain profitable, and so bogus justifications for wars (remember Saddam Hussein’s never-found weapons of mass destruction?) have to be dreamed up (among other reasons, such as plundering raw materials) to retain enough support for the government of the day and capitalism in general from the general population.

Whether covid-19 is real or not, exaggerated or not, the same is increasingly true of ‘Big Pharma’. Some 97% of the funding behind the Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine came from public sources, for example.

The private pharmaceutical industry in the US has become so unprofitable that it has closed the bulk of its research & development facilities, relying instead on publicly-funded state facilities. Big Pharma needed something like a state-mandated mass vaccination programme to remain profitable.

Similarly, public education is being privatised, made dependent on ‘Big Tech’, another disaster for children and their privacy (their data being a treasure trove to sell on to third parties) after a year of denied education and social development.

The pandemic has also been a shot in the arm for the much-maligned plastics industry, with the world going through an extra 130 billion masks and 65 billion gloves a month, much of that ending up in the sea.

Corruption, exploitation, coercion

Corruption has gone into overdrive, of course, with US insurers buying up until-now publicly-owned GP practices and covid-related contracts handed to rich ‘donors’ of political parties without any oversight, due diligence or competition. Conflicts of interest among the UK government’s covid-19 advisors were covered up, although it later emerged chief scientific adviser Sir Patrick Vallance has a £600,000 shareholding in GlaxoSmithKline, which has been contracted for a vaccine.

Under threat of legal action, the UK government released details about NHS covid data deals with Google, Microsoft, Amazon and Faculty, the latter of which is linked to UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s (now unofficial) advisor Dominic Cummings.

The High Court later ruled that Michael Gove acted unlawfully when the government awarded a contract without a tender to the polling company owned by long-term associates of his and Cummings. The ruling was the first in a series of judicial review legal challenges brought by the Good Law Project (GLP) against government covid-19 contracts awarded with no competitive tenders under emergency regulations. Will resignations, fines or prison sentences follow? No chance.

If governments really cared about public health, they would nationalise pharmaceutical companies and general health care, which has been increasingly privatised and rationed over the past 40 years, the reason hospitals are increasingly overwhelmed every flu season. (Incidentally, covid home test kits contribute to the privatisation of health care, since tests are therefore performed gratis (for free) on behalf of capital. Are such samples and associated data sold on to third parties? If they aren’t now, they surely will be in future when companies need to find new ways of re-widening profit margins. In the US, “the FDA’s emergency authorisation process lists no explicit privacy safeguards”. In the UK, track and trace system data has been sold on from the start, leading to a huge rise in spam-style cons.)

If governments really cared about public health, they would not be sending untested and apparently infected patients into care homes (which have been starved of resources and turned into de facto prisons) and covering this up “to protect commercial interests”.

(This smacks of eugenics, as did austerity; as did making ill and disabled people return to work. Isolation itself increases the risk of heart disease, stroke and Alzheimer’s; and is as deadly as obesity or smoking 15 cigarettes a day. Slashing pensions and other expenses on the elderly and disabled means such expenditure can be transferred to subsidising capital. When the US death rate (the age-adjusted share of US Americans dying) rose slightly in 2015 for the first time since 1999, at least 12 corporations stated in annual reports that slips in mortality improvement reduced their pension payouts by a combined $9.7bn.)

If capitalist governments cared about public health, they would not be allowing an “evictions avalanche”. (At least 130,000 households in England were made homeless during the first year even before the government ended a temporary ban on evictions.) They would be taking pollution reduction, which causes one in five deaths (isn’t this a far worse kind of pandemic?), far more seriously, instead of ‘failing’ to wind down subsidies for fossil fuel companies. They would be rapidly reducing extractive production and ramping up investment in nuclear, hemp and mycelium production instead of expanding deforestation and habitat destruction.

If the virus is really so deadly and the vaccines are really so effective, they would be making sure poorer countries (which they make poor in the first place) had access to them. Instead, they are putting off waiving patent rights for as long as possible to keep prices as high as possible for as long as possible, while working out ways to defeat protections and competition from vaccine makers in Russia and China. (Not to mention to generate prejudice against ‘the unvaccinated’, especially of potential migrants, a classic case of (racist) divide and rule tactics.)

Numerous studies have argued that ‘lockdowns’ (read the latest acute stage in the brutal 600-year process of social enclosure, i.e. the privatisation and atomisation of public land and space)[8] are much more harmful to public health than ‘covid-19’ and are not effective at suppressing transmission[9] (when the peaks and troughs of the virus have followed seasonal flu patterns; and flu miraculously disappeared with covid-19 numbers at their peak).

In a ‘people’s inquiry into lockdown’, Karol Sikora, a cancer specialist at the University of Buckingham, warned that delays in cancer diagnosis could result in the loss of between 30,000 and 60,000 lives. He said the requirement to stay at home was likely to have resulted in increases in deaths from “otherwise curable diseases” such as cancer, heart attacks and strokes. Highlighting four key obstacles to patients getting treatment for cancer, he said people delayed seeking help from GPs; primary care services were curtailed; there was a “breakdown” in hospital diagnostics; and there were delays in patients starting their first treatment, which is normally surgery. Clinical psychologist Dr Gary Sidley warned of the consequences for mental health. He suggested that “lockdown loneliness could have been directly responsible for the demise of many elderly people”.

On 6 July the government claimed seven million people “did not come forward” for treatment over the previous 16 months — having in reality been denied through closures and fear — for things like cancer, heart disease and mental health problems. It expects the figure could rise to 13 million.

Despite the claims of social democrats like Owen Jones, lockdowns now suit monopoly capital perfectly. They have been used to depress wages through mass unemployment and furlough schemes (a direct public subsidy to capital) that do not pay full rates; to wipe out swathes of small and medium capital that can be bought up on the cheap by monopoly capital; and to destroy surplus commodity capital that cannot be sold at a profit, including mountains of food (including, quite possibly, through covert cyber-attacks), starving hundreds of millions of people who have become surplus, disposable labour that capital can no longer afford to employ or even feed.

The known number of children in child labour has risen to 160 million worldwide, an increase of 8.4 million in the past four years, with millions more now at risk, reversing the previous downward trend that saw child labour fall by 94 million between 2000 and 2016. Similarly, the sex trade is booming.

Much of the workplace has been moved to the home, saving capital costs on office space; pushing running costs such as electricity and water bills onto workers; and deepening the rate of their exploitation. About 30% of remote workers in a UK survey said they were working more unpaid hours than before lockdown, with 18% reporting at least four additional unpaid hours a week. According to an ADP Research Institute study, employees globally are now working 9.2 hours per week of unpaid overtime on average, up from 7.3 hours in a year. Boris Johnson has said, “We won’t go back to the status quo” and proposals have been made that would change the law to make it impossible for employers to insist on staff attending the workplace unless they can show it is essential.

Confined to the home, or at least unable to wander far from it, we have been made evermore dependent on online shopping. Amazon and co have cashed in while increasing the rate of exploitation of their low-paid and overworked warehouse and courier workers. Workers across at least four different Amazon sites in the UK were told they had to work “compulsory overtime”.

At the same time, general GP, hospital and surgery appointments have nosedived, enabling money usually spent on these public services to be redirected to subsidising capital, or at least easing pressure on tax bases, contributing to a substantial rise in illness, untreated illness and overall deaths.

Disenfranchising the masses — not that we ever had much say on anything beyond voting every few years for privileged ‘representatives’ who break manifesto pledges — and torching their civil rights[10] has never been an easy task (especially today, with a world population of eight billion people). It is much easier, however, if you can convince the majority of people that giving up their civil rights is in their own interests or for the greater good (usually through subtle and not so subtle forms of scaremongering).

People were convinced to go along with World War I (WWI) via xenophobic propaganda and under the impression that it would ‘be over by Christmas’. Four years later, at least 20 million people had been savagely killed in what Harry Patch called “legalised mass slaughter”. Now we are told ‘normality’ can only return by agreeing to lockdowns, rushed vaccination programmes and — quite probably — discriminatory and racist domestic ‘vaccine passports’.[11]

Scientists advising the UK government have admitted that terror tactics have been deployed. The Telegraph reports (14 May, 2021) that, “Scientists on a committee that encouraged the use of fear to control people’s behaviour during the covid-19 pandemic admitted its work was ‘unethical’ and ‘totalitarian’.

“Members of the Scientific Pandemic Influenza Group on Behaviour (SPI-B) (in the UK) expressed regret about the tactics…

“One SPI-B scientist [said]: ‘… There were discussions about fear being needed to encourage compliance, and decisions were made about how to ramp up the fear. The way we have used fear is dystopian. The use of fear has definitely been ethically questionable. It’s been like a weird experiment. Ultimately, it backfired because people became too scared.’ …

“The Government has been accused of feeding the public a non-stop diet of bad news, such as deaths and hospitalisations, without ever putting the figures in context with news of how many people have recovered, or whether daily death tolls are above or below seasonal averages.”

The privately-owned British mass media has accepted £322 million of taxpayers’ money from the government for ‘covid advertising’ until March 2022. The UK government are now the biggest spender of advertising in the UK. The media doesn’t bite the hand that feeds them.

On 17 May 2021, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, as part of his bid to keep up his ‘libertarian’ facade, said that, “I’ve learnt that it’s much easier to take people’s freedoms away than give them back.” A few days earlier, US President Joe Biden said that, “The rule is now simple: get vaccinated or wear a mask until you do”.

On 9 June, David Nabarro, a special envoy from the World Health Organisation, said that vaccines won’t be enough to end the pandemic, and that lifestyles “will have to adapt”, too. Susan Michie, a behavioural scientist advising the government — a long-time member of the de facto social democratic ‘Communist’ Party of Britain — said mask-wearing and social distancing would have to continue “forever, to some extent”.

At exactly the same time, Professor Tim Spector, an epidemiologist at King’s College London said of a ‘new rise’ in the number of positive tests that, “It’s clear that this is an epidemic among the unvaccinated and partially vaccinated.”

How is blaming ‘the unvaccinated’ at the same time as saying that vaccines are not enough to end lockdowns and other anti-social measures remotely compatible?

It just so happened that this ‘new rise’, at a time when the seven-day ‘covid deaths’ average had fallen to a lowly 9, coincided with the number of tests roughly doubling (left).

And again it just so happened on 10 June that the Bank of England’s (BoE) chief economist Andy Haldane warned that a looming threat of inflation meant the BoE faced its biggest policy challenge since ‘Black Wednesday’ in 1992 — when an inflation rate of just 12% led to a collapse in the pound sterling and forced Britain to withdraw from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism.

With restrictions in Britain having been eased (but not fully lifted), the mix of pent-up demand outstripping decimated supply chains threatens inflation much higher than the 2% target (high enough to incentivise lending and spending, since falling prices indicate recession; and stable enough for businesses to plan expenditure). By the end of June, inflation in Britain, hit 2.5%, “far exceeding expectations”, as the Financial Times put it, of 2.1%, and “the third consecutive month of higher than expected inflation”, up from an annual rate of only 0.4% in February. The cost of rice flour was up year-on-year by 26%, canned tomatoes by 23%, and freight transport by 10%. Overall food inflation in Britain is expected to hit 5% in autumn 2021 due to ‘labour shortages’ — when millions of workers have been put on furlough! In the US, the consumer price index jumped by 5.4% year-on-year amid a debate over the risk of runaway prices.

High inflation would usually force central banks to raise interest rates to subdue spending. But such a move risks bursting the biggest financial bubble in world history, since raising rates makes (already record-high) government debt more expensive to repay, potentially triggering a huge panic sell off of government debt, with such funds instead being switched to hard assets, especially precious metals, causing already relatively dwindling tax bases to collapse.

Usually, it actually takes an average 6% cut in the base interest rate to end recessions, but the crisis of capitalism is now so deep that the US and UK rates have already been stuck at zero (below 2% for the first time ever) for most of the past 12 years. Negative rates may be an option, but a limited one — there is only so much cash that can be converted into stocks and bonds (hence the so-called ‘war on cash’).

First we were told in March 2020 that we needed a lockdown for “three weeks to flatten the curve”. Then in December 2020 we were told we needed 15 million vaccinations — enough to have ‘covered everyone in the four most vulnerable groups’ — a figure expected by the end of February 2021. Indeed, it was reached on 14 February and confirmed on 2 May. Then it turned out that the can had to be kicked yet further down the road, to ‘protect the NHS’ again — at a time when only 1% of NHS beds were occupied by covid patients.

The government can use ‘new variants’ from any part of the country or world at a moment’s notice (such as the ‘Kent’ variant or ‘South African’ variant) to justify new/extended/harsher lockdowns. On 22 February, UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson announced a roadmap to lifting lockdown completely on 21 June, but on 17 May a government minister said the chances of that happening had become “close to nil” due to the supposed prevalence of the so-called ‘Indian/Delta and Delta Plus variants’, which then-Health Secretary Matt Hancock blamed on ‘vaccine hesitancy’. On 11 June, government sources said lockdown would be extended for another month. Two days later senior ministers said they had been told that restrictions could actually go on until Spring 2022. Then it was leaked that the government was considering plans to reimpose restrictions for the next five winters.

When on 5 July Johnson eventually announced the lifting of restrictions on 19 July, it was only for most restrictions (care homes residents remained locked up, for one one thing). The Guardian reported: “In a sign the government may reimpose restrictions this autumn, the prime minister warned the public against going ‘de-mob happy’. He said opening up — including the lifting of all limits on sports events and nightclubs — would be safest during the school summer holidays and did not say the changes would be irreversible…. Ministers will hold on to powers to ‘reimpose economic and social restrictions at a local, regional or national level’ if needed to suppress a dangerous new variant, according to a Whitehall document.”

On the same day, Parliament rammed through the third reading of the Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill that enables: police to criminalise anyone using civil disobedience and direct action tactics; a racist crackdown on Gypsy, Roma and Traveller communities (and anyone who wants to live off-grid); an increase in harsh criminal sentencing and an expansion to stop and search powers. On 19 July itself, the government said that it would be bringing in domestic vaccine passports at the start of October for nightclubs and other crowded places. ‘Freedom Day’, indeed. The monopoly-capitalist Nazis did the same thing, i.e. falsely accused the Jews of spreading diseases. That would be too blatant now, so a class of ‘the unvaccinated’ had to be manufactured. (Australia has already told people they should not even stop to talk to each other in the street any more. In the US, a former Obama administration health expert has said “unvaccinated Americans should not be allowed to work or have access to children”.)

Previously, Hancock had said “look what is happening in Bolton hospital where the majority of people in hospital with coronavirus were eligible for the jab but have chosen not yet to have the jab and have ended up in hospital, some of them in intensive care”. He was contradicted by Mohammed Khan, leader of Blackburn with Darwen council, who said six of the (only!) nine coronavirus patients at East Lancashire Hospitals NHS trust had received at least one jab.

There have been up to 20,000 mutations identified, likely impossible for any vaccines to keep up with but justifying, Hancock hinted, new vaccine ‘booster’ jabs every year.

In reality, mutations rarely impact outbreaks dramatically”, according to Grubaugh et al. Even CNN, the media arm of the Democratic Party, initially promoted this position: “The genetic material of the virus is RNA, not DNA like in humans. Unlike with human DNA, when viruses copy their genetic material, it does not proofread its work. Because RNA viruses essentially operate without a spell-check, they often make mistakes. These “mistakes” are mutations, and viruses mutate rapidly compared to other organisms. While this might sound frightening, mistakes during replication usually produce changes that are neutral or even harmful to the newly generated virus. Neutral mutations, which neither improve nor hinder viruses’ survival, may continue to circulate without any noticeable change in the people they infect. Mutations that are harmful to the viruses are less likely to survive and are eliminated through natural selection.”

Early studies indicate that the immune system evolves to fight any coronavirus variants. Nature reports that, “Young children account for only a small percentage of covid-19 infections — a trend that has puzzled scientists. Now, a growing body of evidence suggests why: kids’ immune systems seem better equipped to eliminate SARS-CoV-2 (the virus that allegedly causes the diseases) than are adults.”

Yet apparently children need to be vaccinated. On 20 June 2021, a ‘leading British virologist’, Julian Tang of Leicester University, claimed that under-18s would become “reservoirs” in which new variants of the virus could arise if only adults were vaccinated. Pure Nazi talk.

A day later, the World Health Organisation announced that “children should not be vaccinated for the time being” — news that Facebook censored — after a 13 year-old in the US with no known underlying health conditions died after their second dose of the Pfizer injection.

The same day, the Robert Malone MD, “the original inventor of the mRNA vaccine (and DNA vaccine) core platform technology” called for a halt to the vaccination programme on the basis that they are experimental by definition, breaking the Nuremberg Code established in the wake of the crimes of Nazi Germany.

The UK government is pushing ahead with plans to make vaccination mandatory for nurses and carers. This flagrant coercion — no doubt motivated partly by the chance to drive more nurses off the payroll — again goes against the Nuremburg Code.

The UK government even set-up pop-up vaccination centres at Thorpe Park, an amusement park.

The truth is that the capitalist state’s vaccine programme is motivated primarily by the profit-necessity; and that the financial bubble means the ruling class has no incentive to fully lift lockdown — although it will eventually have no choice but to trigger hyperinflation in order to torch wages and debt and centralise capital yet further, at which point its hopes of sustaining social peace will implode.

The ruling class is therefore attempting to (further) confuse, divide, depress, infantalise and subjugate the masses, since it knows that what it needs to do to keep capital accumulation going is bound to impoverish more and more people and therefore create more and more militant opposition.

The ruling class will go to any lengths — the US has suddenly drummed up mainstream headlines stating that “UFOs do exist[12]— to keep the public in the dark about what is really going on: that it is dispossessing more and more carriages on its real life Snowpiercer train while destroying the habitability of the planet. The ruling class will go to any lengths to justify attacks on (already highly limited) democratic processes, freedom of speech, the right to protest and other civil rights (despite admitting that protests, raves and crowded beaches do not cause infection spikes, since even their own figures link only 0.1% of cases to outdoor transmission).

The collapse of social democracy

The social democratic/‘democratic socialist’ ‘left’ (including many nominal communist organisations) — which represents a privileged layer of the working class, a labour aristocracy — is mostly opposed to banning the right to peaceful protest during ‘the pandemic’ but not the covid-19/lockdown legislation that has effectively already banned that right.

Much of the left supported such legislation on the basis that it would be temporary. How naive. Yet this section of the left keeps demanding that authoritarian right-wing governments impose harder lockdowns, enabling the libertarian and far right to pin the brutality of lockdowns on the left, while effectively supporting the isolation of old and disabled people in care homes.

This is a far cry from Che Guevara treating lepers without masks or gloves. The idea that Karl Marx would have supported lockdowns is laughable. As he once said: “Is not death more desirable than life that is a mere preventive measure against death? Does not life involve also free movement?”

The left’s argument is that harder and therefore supposedly shorter lockdowns in countries with ‘socialist’ or left social democratic governments elsewhere have slowed transmission quicker and enabled reopening sooner. But supporting lockdowns and a fantasy ‘zero covid’ policy in countries ruled by right-wing governments only serves to empower those governments. Did they really think these emergency powers would not be abused?

Furthermore, the countries that apparently achieved ‘zero covid’ with early, hard lockdowns have gone on to report ‘new wavesof infection. In those same countries, ‘immunity debt’, whereby “lockdown is causing an influx of babies with a severe respiratory virus into hospitals”, for example, because of a lack of exposure “to normal levels of viruses and bacteria”, is causing “a surge in infections as normal life resumes”.

While Boris Johnson was supposedly resisting the left’s demands to impose a lockdown, the UK government struck a deal worth £119m with a US advertising company, OMD Group, urging people to ‘Stay Home, Stay Safe’, a full three weeks before lockdown was imposed.

As Oxford epidemiologist and lockdown sceptic Sunetra Gupta has said, “a very large segment of the left are behaving in an entirely individualistic way. They’re just being motivated by their own interests.”

The response from de facto social democratic socialist and communist organisations has been the equivalent of the collapse of the Second International in 1914, when the reformist wing of the Marxist movement betrayed the masses by siding with ‘their own’ states instead of — like the Bolsheviks, who went on to lead the 1917 Russian revolution — opposing WWI. Real communists, who have opposed lockdowns etc, must dig deeper, into the real masses, to build genuine revolutionary communist parties.

Resistance

Cross-class resistance is growing. On 24 April 2021, a diverse protest of hundreds of thousands of people in London, for example, amid similar protests around the world, defied the law by marching against vaccine passports and lockdowns (an event that was largely censored or smeared by the BBC, ITV and Sky).

This was a not a ‘left-wing’ protest — ‘the left’ largely did not show up, dangerously ceding these issues to ‘the (far) right’ — but Marxists are not ‘left wing’, i.e. capitalist reformists. They must take this opportunity and other mass protests that arise ‘spontaneously’ (such as the football fan protests against the European Super League) to win over newly politicised people — along with defections from across the ‘political spectrum’ — to socialism.

As Lenin said: “To imagine that social revolution is conceivable … without revolutionary outbursts by a section of the petit bourgeoisie [small business owners] with all its prejudices [our emphasis], without a movement of the politically non-conscious proletarian and semi-proletarian masses, is to repudiate social revolution.”

The way forward is the united front: critical support for defensive/progressive ‘reforms’ (including defeating regressive legislation in the first place), while retaining the right to criticise allies and stress the absolute need for socialism; and doing so by addressing the leadership of reformists in calls for joint action in order to expose the shortcomings of those leaders and in order to address and win over the reformist rank and file of their organisations.

Unsustainable

Whether you think there is a conspiracy or not, what is undeniable is that capitalism is, one way or another, responsible for what’s happening. This dying system is making life increasingly miserable for almost everyone. As Marx and Engels wrote in in their Economic Manuscripts in1844, “The goal of the capitalist economic system is the unhappiness of society.”

Outbreaks of mass sickness and death are features of collapsing empires because of increasing conflict and scarcity, and the degradation of privatised public services, particularly health care and sanitation, and therefore a degradation in physical and mental human health. (Water sanitation measures alone explain 75% of the decline in infant mortality in the US between 1900 and 1936, and half the total decline in mortality rates.)[13] And the more capitalism continues to destroy the environment and degrade public services, the more likely the possibility of any zoonotic outbreaks (although this could also serve as cover for the destruction of ‘overproduced’ animal stock that has become unprofitable to sell).[14]

The profit motive — or, rather, the profit necessity — does make it difficult to trust capitalist health care.[15] For one thing, there is little profit to be made in preventative or curative health care. (Hence why there has been next to no progress in antibiotics since the 1980s, contributing to the apparently growing threat of antibiotics-resistant infection, along with the drugging up of packed-in-like-sardines cattle, encouraging disease to spread, to fatten up animals, again to maximise profit). Health problems that arise from the social conditions created by capitalism are often solely medicalised, i.e. treated as medical rather than social issues (sedatives to treat depression — which is largely caused by the increasing social enclosure, alienation and hyper-individualist, anti-communal social relations of capitalist society — for example).

In summary: if crises do not arise as a byproduct of capitalist accumulation, as they so often do, then they must be invented (just as the inventions of ideologies and caste systems — vaccinated versus unvaccinated being the latest example — are necessary to justify economic exclusion). The ever-rising demands of capital accumulation make corruption and therefore conspiracy increasingly necessary. As Sun Tzu wrote in The Art of War: “All warfare is based on deception.”

The measures that have been taken to prop up capital can only work for so long, though.[16] As capital becomes more dependent on public debt, so the state becomes more dependent on central bank money printing, debasing fiat currency. It is only a matter of time before worldwide hyperinflation erupts.[17] At that point, the military dictatorships and international digital surveillance systems governments have been putting in place will become naked.

Only global socialism,[18] now becoming an economic necessity for the first time — replacing for-profit commodity-produciton with break-even utility-production; and the rule of capital with the rule of the people — can begin to end this deepening nightmare.

Ted Reese is author of Socialism or Extinction: Climate, Automation and War in the Final Capitalist Breakdown (2019/21) and The End of Capitalism: The Thought of Henryk Grossman (out May 2022).

[1] Over many centuries, manual labour determined the technological basis of society. The technological mode of production, the mode of combining inanimate and human elements, was subjective.

The next stage, paved by the specialisation of implements in manufacture, began when the main working function — control of partial implements — of the ‘living mechanism’, the worker, transferred to the mechanical mechanism, the machine. From human-inanimate, the working mechanism became inanimate-human. The technological mode of production became objective and labour became mechanised. This is then the first industrial revolution.

Finally, the third historical stage in technological development is ushered in by automation. The working mechanism becomes fully technical and the mode of combining man and technology becomes free (and thus humanised) as (exploited) labour (as opposed to unexploited, self-actualising work) is itself automated. This then is the second industrial revolution — and thus GDP, profit and interest rates, along with commodity prices, all trend historically towards zero.

[2] The World Wildlife Fund puts the spread of zoonotic diseases down to “the trade and consumption of high-risk wildlife; deforestation and conversion; expansion of agriculture and unsustainable intensification and animal production”. Monoculture contributes by denying animals the normality of co-evolving with nature, causing harmless microbes to transform into diseases.

The outbreak was initially put down to having originated from bats in a food market in Wuhan, China, even though this has not been proven.

It is possible that China was just the first to report the outbreak — the virus was later said to have been present in the US a month earlier (WSJ.com, 1 December). SARS-CoV-2 (the alleged virus that allegedly causes covid-19) found in sewage wastewater in northern Italy indicates that it may have been in circulation there since December 2019 and in Spain since March 2019.

Some people have pointed out that the Military Games took place in Wuhan in 2019, and that there had been influenza outbreaks near US military bases in July 2019.

In May 2021, US officials began ramping up speculation that covid-19 could have come from a Chinese lab, having earlier ruled out such a possibility. See, for example, “Origin of Covid — Following the Clues,” by Nicolas Wade. Wade, however, also implies that any such leak would have been deadlier than the mortality rate we have seen. It seems likely that the lab leak stories are being deployed to confuse dissident narratives and distract from the lack of proof of covid-19 isolation. (For a detailed rebuke of lab leak theory, see Philippe Lemoine: Did China lie about covid-19? — did SARS-CoV-2 accidentally escape from a lab?)

China, of course, now threatens the US’s near-century-long global economic dominance, with trade wars between the two continually intensifying. Asked in May 2021 if he was “still confident that [the virus] developed naturally”, Dr Anthony Fauci, director of the National Institute of Allergies and Infectious Diseases (NIAID), part of the National Institutes of Health (NIH), said: “No actually. I am not convinced about that, I think we should continue to investigate what went on in China until we continue to find out to the best of our ability what happened.”

Fauci denies accusations that the NIAID has funded gain-of-function research in the Wuhan Institute of Virology. Wade strongly disputes this, alleging that Fauci could only make that denial semantically. (See section 4. The US Role in Funding the Wuhan Institute of Virology). Sam Husseini writes that “far more funding comes from the Pentagon” than the NIH, both going through Peter Daszak’s EcoHealth Alliance (EHA).* Gain-of-function research “creates viruses more dangerous than those that exist in nature… [ostensibly] to get ahead of nature [to] predict and prevent natural ‘spillovers’, the cross-over of viruses from an animal host to people”, says Wade.

Fauci warned against rushing vaccines out ahead of the 2020 US Presidential election and said he did not see the US mandating vaccines. Former incumbunt Donald Trump had cut funding to EHA, according to Husseini. This adds to any suspicion with regards to the timing of the outbreak. (In August 2021, despite the protestations of the British Medical Journal, the Food and Drug Administration said it was working on “full” rather than emergency approval for the vaccines as vaccine take up slowed and “cases” of infection rose. Federal medical officials and business leaders said they agreed that full FDA approval would be helpful in the fight against vaccine hesitancy and would support companies eager to issue vaccine mandates to employees.)

Fauci has been ridiculed for what felt like an attempt at upselling when he said that wearing two masks is “likely” more effective than one. (A comrade tells me that his uncle was told to wear two condoms during the AIDS crisis.)

Great Game India quotes Fauci in 1983 as promoting the “possibility that nonsexual, non-blood-borne transmission of AIDS was possible” and that this “should at least alert us to the possibility that we are truly dealing with AIDS in children”, causing a media panic. GGI continues: “Immunologist Arye Rubinstein had already offered a more plausible explanation for the infant case, which even cursory examination would verify: the disease transmitted from the mother to the baby during pregnancy. As Shilts explains, “Upon investigation, Rubinstein learned that Anthony Fauci had not bothered to read his paper.” The NIH scientist instead relied on second-hand information from another researcher to indulge in open-ended speculation.”

There have long been claims that the AIDS crisis was caused by medicine meant to treat it, azidothymidine (AZT). Two “international studies found an increased risk of HIV-1 acquisition among vaccinated men” (The Lancet, 12 February 2009). It has been argued that non-disposable needles were used to spread AIDS in Africa.

*Of note, Husseini writes: “One noteworthy ‘policy advisor’ to the EcoHealth Alliance is David Franz, former commander of Fort Detrick, the principal US government biowarfare/biodefense facility. Franz was part of UNSCOM which inspected Iraq for alleged bioweapons — what were constantly referred to as WMDs or Weapons of Mass Destruction by the US government and the media… Just this year Franz wrote a piece with former New York Times journalist Judith Miller, whose stories of Iraqi WMDs did much to misinform the US public regarding the case for the 2003 invasion of Iraq... Miller and Franz are long-time associates. Miller co-wrote the book Germs, released amid the 2001 false flag anthrax attacks, which repeatedly quotes Franz. Miller at the time received a hoax letter with a harmless white powder, increasing her prominence. Franz continued hyping the existence of Iraqi WMDs even after the invasion of Iraq. While she was still with the Times, Miller quoted him in a story “US analysts link Iraq labs to germ arms” on May 21, 2003 pushing the theory that Iraq had mobile biological WMD units. (This theory was debunked by the British scientist Dr David Kelly, who would die, apparently by suicide, soon thereafter.)

“Four significant insights emerge from all this. First, although it is called the EcoHealth Alliance, Peter Daszak and his non-profit work closely with the military. Second, the EcoHealth Alliance attempts to conceal these military connections. Third, through militaristic language and analogies Daszak and his colleagues promote what is often referred to as, and even then somewhat euphemistically, an ongoing agenda known as ‘securitization’. In this case it is the securitization of infectious diseases and of global public health. That is, they argue that pandemics constitute a vast and existential threat. They minimize the very real risks associated with their work, and sell it as a billion dollar solution. The fourth insight is that Daszak himself, as the Godfather of the Global Virome Project, stands to benefit from the likely outlay of public funds.”

Reported in the National Academies Press on February 12, 2016, Daszek is quoted as having said: “We need to increase public understanding of the need for medical counter-measures such as a pan-coronavirus vaccine. A key driver is the media, and the economics will follow the hype. We need to use that hype to our advantage, to get to the real issues. Investors will respond if they see profit at the end of the process.”

Daszak was appointed by the Lancet medical journal to head an inquiry into the virus’ origins but later reportedly ‘recused himself’ without explanation. He played a leading role in a similar investigation by the World Health Organisation, dismissed by many as a whitewash.

Dr David Martin believes that this, profit, is the motive for the whole ordeal. Rejecting the lab-leak theory, he told an inquiry that he has exposed a 20-year trail of patent applications concerning the virus responsible for Covid-19 that proves it is neither new nor the result of a jump from animals to humans.

Martin heads M-CAM International, a US company which monitors innovations relevant to financial interests. He says the patents show that a natural virus, harmless to humans, was subjected to numerous laboratory modifications which ‘weaponised’ it, such that it could become the basis of a marketing campaign for tests and vaccines.

Martin says the evidence shows that “we made SARS” and that first SARS event gave rise to a ‘very problematic’ April 2003 patent filing by the US Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) — for the entire SARS gene sequence, and for a series of derivative patents covering means of detection, including the PCR test used to purportedly diagnose cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection. “The reason why that is a problem is that if you both own the patent on the gene itself, and on its detection, you have a cunning advantage to being able to control 100 per cent of the provenance of not only the virus itself, but also its detection. Meaning, you have the entire scientific and message control.”

The CDC’s public relations team sought to justify the application on the grounds that it would enable everyone to be free to research coronavirus. That was a lie, Martin said. The US Patent Office twice rejected the application for the entire SARS sequence, on the grounds that it was already recorded in the public domain, but the CDC started a process to override this rejection. After repeated applications, and paying an appeal fine, they got the patent approved in 2007. They also paid an additional fee to keep the application private. “So every public statement the CDC has made that said this was in the public interest is falsifiable by their own, paid bribe to the Patent Office.”

Furthermore, three days after the CDC’s April 2003 attempt to patent the SARS sequence, Sequoia Pharmaceuticals, a private venture-capital funded company founded in 2002, filed a patent application on antiviral agents, treatment and control of infections by coronavirus. This was approved, and published, before the CDC patent was allowed.

“So the degree to which the information could have been known by any means other than insider information between those parties is zero. It is not physically possible for you to patent a thing that treats a thing that had not been published, because CDC had paid to keep it secret. This is the definition of criminal conspiracy, racketeering and collusion. This is not theory. This is evidence.”

Martin expanded on his testimony in another interview.

[3] See Dr John Lee, “The way ‘covid deaths’ are being counted is a national scandal,” Spectator.co.uk, 28 May 2020 (“Every positive test for covid-19 must be [registered] in a way that it just would not be for flu or most other infections… The vast majority of respiratory deaths in the UK are recorded as bronchopneumonia, pneumonia, old age or a similar designation… If the patient has, say, cancer, motor neurone disease or another serious disease, this will be recorded as the cause of death, even if the final illness was a respiratory infection.” Because the infection rate at the outset of the pandemic was 10-20 times higher than testing could keep up with, “the headline death rate due to this virus is likely to be ten to 20 times lower [than the initially feared 5%; the rate was, as of 29 October, 1.15% in high income countries and 0.23% in low-income countries with younger populations (imperial.ac.uk)], say 0.25–0.5%. That puts the covid-19 mortality rate in the range associated with infections like flu.” [The H1N1 mortality rate was originally feared to be 1–5% but turned out to be 0.02%. BBC, 2 April.) Lee elaborates (30 May): “Very early on in the epidemic, rules surrounding death certification were changed — in ways that make the statistics unreliable. Guidance was issued which tends to reduce, rather than increase, referrals for autopsy [“usually requested by a coroner to ascertain the cause of death… Autopsy studies typically show major discrepancies between actual findings and clinical diagnosis in a quarter to a third of cases… [But] at a time when autopsies could have played a major role in helping us understanding this disease, the Chief Coroner issued guidance [on 26 March] which seemed designed to keep covid-19 cases out of the coronial system: ‘The aim of the system should be that every death from covid-19 which does not in law require referral to the coroner should be dealt with via the [death certification] process.’ And even guidance produced by the Royal College of Pathologists in February stated: ‘In general, if a death is believed to be due to confirmed covid-19 infection, there is unlikely to be any need for a post-mortem examination to be conducted.’]. Normally, two doctors are needed to certify a death, one of whom has been treating the patient or who knows them and has seen them recently. That has changed. For covid-19 only, the certification can be made by a single doctor, and there is no requirement for them to have examined, or even met, the patient. A video-link consultation in the four weeks prior to death is now felt to be sufficient for death to be attributed to covid-19. For deaths in care homes the situation is even more extraordinary. Care home providers, most of whom are not medically trained, may make a statement to the effect that a patient has died of covid-19. In the words of the Office for National Statistics, this ‘may or may not correspond to a medical diagnosis or test result, or be reflected in the death certification’. From 29 March the numbers of ‘covid deaths’ have included all cases where covid-19 was simply mentioned on the death certificate — irrespective of positive testing and whether or not it may have been incidental to, or directly responsible for, death. From 29 April the numbers include the care home cases simply considered likely to be covid-19.” The US, Italy, Germany and Hong Kong also count any death of a patient who has covid-19 as a death caused by covid-19 (BBC, 2 April)).

See also: Iain Davis, UK Column, “Is covid-19 a hoax?, 21 February 2021; and “A deceptive construction — why we must question the covid-19 mortality statistics,” 28 March 2021. (“Based on Corman Drosten et al, the WHO protocols define the short nucleotide sequences which are supposed to specify the genetic fragments used as primers and probes in the SARS-CoV-2 RT-PCR [tests]. Until the recent move towards Lateral Flow Devices, alleged case numbers were almost exclusively based upon these tests. The RT-PCR test was supposed to enable the genetic signature of the virus to be identified in communities around the world. The scientists who criticised the Cormen Drosten paper stated: ‘[Primers and probes] must be specific to the target-gene you want to amplify..for virus diagnostics at least 3 primer pairs must detect 3 viral genes (preferably as far apart as possible in the viral genome) … Although the Corman-Drosten paper describes 3 primers, these primers only cover roughly half of the virus’ genome … Therefore, even if we obtain three positive signals..in a sample, this does not prove the presence of a virus.’ This concept of specificity is not shared by the World Health Organisation. The WHO’s test guidelines for SARS-CoV-2 state: ‘An optimal diagnosis consists of a NAAT [nucleic acid amplification test ] with at least two genome-independent targets of the SARS-CoV-2; however, in areas where transmission is widespread, a simple single-target algorithm can be used … One or more negative results do not necessarily rule out the SARS-CoV-2 infection.’ When a team of Moroccan researchers investigated the epidemiology of Moroccan cases of SARS-CoV-2 they found that just 9% tested positive for three genes, 18% were positive for two and 73% percent for just one. Although, reliant upon the WHO protocols, an unknown number may have been positive for none. The WHO do not require the detection of three or even two viral genes, one is fine. In fact a negative result is still considered a possible indicator of SARS-CoV-2 infection. The repeating of tests is encouraged, presumably until a positive test is returned. Given that Karry Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test, stated that his technology could “find almost anything in anybody,” and that “it doesn’t tell you that you are sick,” repeated testing is likely to provide a positive result eventually. The UK government’s COVID-19 case numbers are actually their claimed number of positive tests. Their testing regime is adapted from the WHO protocols and its guidelines. This alone provides sufficient scientific doubt to question if these numbers are plausible. It is not the only reason.”)

A study published in May 2021 by Stang et. al. stated that: “In light of our findings that more than half of individuals with positive PCR test results are unlikely to have been infectious, RT-PCR test positivity should not be taken as an accurate measure of infectious SARS-CoV-2 incidence. Our results confirm the findings of others that the routine use of ‘positive’ RT-PCR test results as the gold standard for assessing and controlling infectiousness fails to reflect the fact ‘that 50–75% of the time an individual is PCR positive, they are likely to be post-infectious’.”

See also this Freedom of Information request showing obscene numbers of cycles.

In April 2021 the official UK figure was suddenly reduced by some 23%. “The latest figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show that 23% of coronavirus deaths registered are now people who have died ‘with’ the virus rather than ‘from’ an infection,” The Telegraph reports. “This means that, while the person who died will have tested positive for Covid, that was not the primary cause of their death recorded on the death certificate.”

The number in England had already been reduced by more than 5,000 in August 2020 after academics pointed out that in England the tally included anyone who has tested positive for COVID-19 and later died, with no cut-off point between positive test and death. A 28-day cut-off date was introduced, in line with the rest of the UK.

In July 2021, the CDC said it would ditch the PCR tests at the end of the year and switch to a method that “can facilitate continued testing for both influenza and SARS-CoV-2 and can save both time and resources as we head into influenza season”.

Several studies have shown that, “After a year of frightening headlines, widespread concern, and countless retweets that the virus that causes covid-19 may attack the heart more aggressively than any other viral illness, the verdict is in: It doesn’t.”

Cardiac electrophysiologist John Mandrola and cardiologist Andrew Foy say that, “Lax scientific review might also have played a role [in the earlier misreporting]. Two of us (J.M. and A.F.) tried to shed light on this issue. Our first study, conducted with several colleagues, showed that the timeline from receipt to publication of studies was eight times faster during the pandemic than the year before. Of course, speedier publication isn’t a problem in and of itself: normal peer review may simply be too slow. But in our systematic follow-up study comparing top-cited papers during the pandemic with those published before it, Covid-19 related articles were of significantly lower scientific rigor. Scientific publication moved faster during the pandemic, but the quality of the work was poorer.”

Another study in April 2020 by Spanish doctors observed serotonin syndrome in two covid patients, with the doctors suspecting drug interactions of being the cause, rather than of any virus. Serotonin syndrome occurswhen you take medications [our emphasis] that cause high levels of the chemical serotonin to accumulate in your body… Serotonin is … needed for your nerve cells and brain to function. But too much causes signs and symptoms that can range from mild (shivering and diarrhoea) to severe (muscle rigidity, fever and seizures). Severe serotonin syndrome can cause death if not treated.”

[4] See also “The Smoking Gun?”, DrTomGowan.com, 10 June 2021. A peer-reviewed paper titled “Appearances Can be Deceiving — Viral-like Inclusions in Covid-19 Negative Renal Biopsies by Electron Microscopy,” by Clarrisa A. Cassol, et al., (citation Kidney360 1:824–828, 2020) examined the electron-micrograph pictures allegedly representing SARS-CoV-2 (the respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, which allegedly leads to covid-19 the disease), rather than normal ‘structures’ within a cell, particularly sick cells. The paper says: “We have observed morphologically indistinguishable inclusions within podocytes and tubular epithelial cells both in patients negative for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) as well as in renal biopsies from the pre-covid-19 era.”

Cowan: “In other words, the researchers saw these same structures in people with no evidence of covid and in samples they took before covid even happened, before the virus was said to even exist.”

The paper also points out that, “The potential for confusion of coronavirus particles with normal cellular components [particularly in sick cells] was in fact highlighted in a detailed ultrastructural study by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) of SARS-CoV responsible for the 2003 SARS outbreak.”

See footnote 13 for an analysis of the ‘germ vs terrain theory’ debate.

[5] See, for example: “MRNA vaccines — a new era in vaccinology”, Pardi et. al., April 2018 (“Extracellular naked RNA has been shown to increase the permeability of tightly packed endothelial cells and may thus contribute to oedema. Another study showed that extracellular RNA promoted blood coagulation and pathological thrombus formation”); “Will covid-19 vaccines save lives? Current trials aren’t designed to tell us”, British Medical Journal, 22 October 2020; “Vaccine makers claim covid shots Are ‘95% effective’ — but what does that mean?”, The Defender, 5 May 2021. (“When one does the math, the Pfizer clinical trial numbers showed: ‘The risk reduction in absolute terms [was] only 0.7%, from an already very low risk of 0.74% [in the placebo group] to a minimal risk of 0.04% [in the vaccine group].’ (Dividing 0.7 — the difference between the two groups — by 0.74 is the mathematical calculation that produced the touted ‘95% effective’ number). Although the eight versus 162 PCR-confirmed COVID cases in the Pfizer trial may sound like a big difference to the casual reader, Peter Doshi [in the British Medical Journal] subsequently alerted the public to the fact that Pfizer skewed its analysis by excluding more than 3,400 individuals with non-PCR-confirmed symptoms of COVID — individuals split almost evenly across the vaccine and placebo groups. Factoring in both the suspected and confirmed cases, Doshi noted, would drop the 95% relative risk figure down to 19%.”); “Informed consent disclosure to vaccine trial subjects of risk of covid‐19 vaccines worsening clinical disease”, International Journal of Clinical Practice, 28 October; “Unlicensed vaccine manufacturers are immune from some, but not all, civil liability”, Full Fact, 4 September; “Victims of swine flu jab to get £60m payout”, TheTimes.co.uk, 2 March 2014; “Important advice issued over AstraZeneca symptoms,” Birmingham Live, 7 May 2021; “Shocker: Why is this substance in the Moderna COVID vaccine?”, Jon Rappoport, 19 May 2021; “Guillain-Barre syndrome following the first dose of the chimpanzee adenovirus-vectored COVID-19 vaccine, ChAdOx1”, National Library of Medicine, 22 April 2021; “CDC studying reports of heart inflammation in young Covid vaccine recipients,” The Guardian, 23 May 2021; “Covid-19 vaccines: In the rush for regulatory approval, do we need more data?”, BMJ, 18 May 2021 (“An approval based on 6 months of data would represent one of the fastest for a novel vaccine in FDA history. Among the 6 ‘first in disease’ vaccines approved by the FDA since 2006, pre-licensure pivotal trials were a median of 23 months… How the FDA will weigh the loss of blinding and placebo controlled follow-up is unclear, but just months ago the agency said these trial properties were vital.”); “Vaccine researcher admits ‘big mistake,’ says spike protein is dangerous ‘toxin’”, LifeSiteNews, 31 May 2021 (“New research shows that the coronavirus spike protein from covid-19 vaccination unexpectedly enters the bloodstream, which is a plausible explanation for thousands of reported side-effects from blood clots and heart disease to brain damage and reproductive issues, a Canadian cancer vaccine researcher said”); “Vaccines watchdog ‘closely monitoring’ reports of period problems after Covid jab,” Independent.co.uk, 20 June; “‘Huge red flag’: medical researchers bury data showing 82% miscarriage rate in mRNA ‘vaccinated’ women,” Goodly Lawful Society, 30 June 2021. “Doctors fear COVID-19 vaccines are messing with mammograms,” LA Times, 12 March 2021. (“Radiologists have long known that a recent dose of vaccine for shingles, tetanus or flu can cause lymph nodes to appear slightly swollen. But the sudden appearance of so many swollen lymph nodes, in so many women, came as a shock. In many cases, so was the size of the swelling. ‘They seemed to be more prominent,’ said Dr. Constance Lehman, chief of breast imaging at Massachusetts General Hospital in Boston. ‘We had seen mildly enlarged nodes with prior vaccinations but not to this degree.’”); “Banned paper: Doctors’ risk-versus-benefit assessment of Covid jabs,” UK Column, 11 May 2021, Doctors for Covid Ethics.

According to Doctors for Covid Ethics, tests on short-term vaccine efficacy (i.e. of their safety and effectiveness) were based on very small sample sizes over very short periods; while medium-term efficacy will not be known until 2023.

An alleged cache of email exchanges between EU officials and the European Medicines Agency showed the drug regulator was uncomfortable about fast-tracking approval for the Pfizer and Moderna jabs (Le Monde, 18 January).

Studies associating the vaccines with nasty side effects have started to emerge, regarding, for example, skin reactions (see also here, here and here); inflammation of the cavernous sinus; rhabdomyolysis (muscle breakdown/death); acute visual impairment; dizziness/hearing loss, liver injury; neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder (chronic disorder of the brain and spinal cord dominated by inflammation of the optic nerve (optic neuritis) and inflammation of the spinal cord (myelitis).

In July 2021 it was reported that 47% of all positive covid cases in Britain were made up of people who were double vaccinated. Other reports said people were ill in hospital with covid-19 despite having been double vaccinated. (See also.)

Statistics from a number of countries as of July 2021 show that the vaccines “do not reduce covid cases, hospitalisations or deaths”.

Accumulation demands a faster turnover and circulation of capital during economic crises. The pressure on workers from management to ignore health and safety regulations therefore tends to intensify. Vaccine production is not exempt from this reality. According to ProPublica, “As pharma companies underwrite three-fourths of the FDA’s budget for scientific reviews, the agency is increasingly fast-tracking expensive drugs with significant side effects and unproven health benefits. Once widely assailed for moving slowly, today the FDA reviews and approves drugs faster than any other regulatory agency in the world. Between 2011 and 2015, the FDA reviewed new drug applications more than 60 days faster on average than did the European Medicines Agency,” indicating that the US’s accumulation crisis is relatively worse than the EU’s: whereas the former has long had a trade deficit, the latter has had a trade surplus.”

When BBC Panorama exposed the cross-contamination of samples in a covid testing lab being ignored (thereby inflating positive test results), you had to wonder if workers on low-paid temporary contracts had been threatened with the sack if they reported cross-contamination.

It is difficult to trust ‘vaccines’ when they have not been granted full approval and have only been allowed on the market under an emergency authorisation; especially when they are being made by companies responsible, among other things, for the opioid crisis.

Johnson & Johnson (a company wealthier than New Zealand or Hungary) knew for decades that asbestos lurked in its Baby Powder. Indeed, the rollout of J&J and AstraZeneca vaccines were suspended due to “mutant spike proteins” that cross the blood-brain barrier, causing “rare” blood clots, although many people have argued that the media focused on this to push the Pfizer and Moderna jabs. (The argument that “all medicines can have negative side effects” falls flat because you have not been ordered to take those medicines by the state upon threat of becoming a non-person; plus people mostly accept the risk of side effects because they are already ill.)

Pfizer has paid out numerous huge settlements over alleged defective products and been accused of selling products causing kidney problems, breast cancer, strokes, blood clots, heart attacks, birth defects, and severe bleeding (not to mention its unauthorised trials in Nigeria which ‘led to the deaths’ of 11 children; or its $2.3bn fine for illegally promoting off-label drugs). Pfizer has been accused of bullying Latin American governments during negotiations to acquire its covid-19 vaccine, and the company has asked some countries to put up sovereign assets, such as embassy buildings and military bases, as a guarantee against the cost of any future legal case.

It is hard not to be sceptical about the vaccines, when the the messenger RNA (mRNA) ones had been rejected again and again before 2021.

Delivered via a nanoparticles made up of lipids, or fats, mRNA is a “relatively cheap and easy to make genetic technology” that aims to direct protein production in cells. “Several major pharmaceutical companies have tried and abandoned the idea, struggling to get mRNA into cells without triggering nasty side effects,” Damian Garde reported in 2017. “Moderna could not make its therapy work, former employees and collaborators said. The safe dose was too weak, and repeat injections of a dose strong enough to be effective had troubling effects on the liver in animal studies... Dose too little, and you don’t get enough enzyme to affect the disease; dose too much, and the drug is too toxic for patients.”

Such nanoparticles have become a major cause for concern. According to Wang et. al.: “Studies have shown that numerous types of NPs are able to pass certain biological barriers and exert toxic effects on crucial organs, such as the brain, liver, and kidney. NPs can pass through the blood–testis barrier, placental barrier, and epithelial barrier, which protect reproductive tissues, and then accumulate in reproductive organs.”

Of a new technology that was said to make mRNA safer, a former unnamed employee told Garde: “[The technology] would have to be a miraculous, Hail Mary sort of save for them to get to where they need to be on their timelines.”

Garde says that, “Moderna has about $1.3 billion in cash on hand... But with plans to spend more than $300 million a year investing in its technology, it will need to raise more money eventually. The most logical step would be to go public, and last year Moderna reorganized its business to prepare for an initial public offering. But at its current valuation, Moderna’s IPO would be the biggest in biotech history, leaving some investors scratching their heads as to how the company’s vaccine-heavy pipeline could justify such a number… The failure in its first and most advanced therapy casts doubt on Moderna’s other goals for the rare disease space. It calls into question Moderna’s valuation, pegged at $4.7 billion by Pitchbook. The company has raised nearly $2 billion in cash from investors and partners. But it has done so by promising a revolutionary technology safe enough to deliver repeated doses of mRNA. The drugs it is pushing along now, by contrast, are more modest, relying on single administrations of mRNA. Beyond the four vaccines, it has one early-stage clinical trial targeting cardiac disease, launched just last month by partner AstraZeneca. The treatment involves a one-time dose and doesn’t use the tricky nanoparticle casing. Vaccines are not nearly as lucrative as the rare disease space that Moderna hoped to dominate. The market is also much more crowded.”

Stat News reports that on May 18 2020, “Moderna issued a press release trumpeting ‘positive interim clinical data’. The firm said its vaccine had generated neutralizing antibodies in the first eight volunteers in the early-phase study, a tiny sample. But Moderna didn’t provide any backup data, making it hard to assess how encouraging the results were. Nonetheless, Moderna’s share price rose 20% that day. Some top Moderna executives also drew criticism for selling shares worth millions. In addition, some critics have said the US government has given Moderna a sweetheart deal by bankrolling the costs for developing the vaccine and pledging to buy at least 100 million doses, all for $2.48 billion. That works out to roughly $25 a dose, which Moderna acknowledges includes a profit.”

According to TrialSite (28 May 2021), Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) documents revealed that “pre-clinical studies show the active part of the [Pfizer] vaccine (mRNA-lipid nanoparticles), which produce the spike protein, spreads throughout the body and is then concentrated in various organs, including the ovaries and spleen. TrialSite has also learned via regulatory documents that apparently Pfizer did not follow industry-standard quality management practices during preclinical toxicology studies during vaccines, as key studies did not meet good laboratory practice.” Embedded nanoparticles would not be a new phenomenon: microplastics and toxic chemicals — sourced from fossil fuels and mines — used as preservatives and and plasticisers in everyday products are now thought to be largely responsible for plummeting sperm counts, widely polluted breast milk, liver damage, cancer and the modern phenomena of autoimmune diseases. Researchers have said that such chemicals may hinder the effectiveness of the vaccines. “At this stage we don’t know if it will impact a corona vaccination, but it’s a risk,” said Philippe Grandjean, an adjunct professor of environmental health at the Harvard School of Public Health. “We would have to cross our fingers and hope for the best.”

Pfizer and Moderna both failed to respond to the BMJ about serious covid vaccine safety concerns.

Vaccines have also been linked to the massive rise of autoimmune disorders over the past 40 years, although the overwhelming primary factor is almost universally agreed to be the toxic chemicals — sourced from fossil fuels and metal mines, the extraction of which capitalist production is dependent due to their labour-intensity and non-renewability/finiteness — used to preserve and plasticise everyday products. As Dr Michael Mosley writes: “None of the characters in Jane Austen’s 19th century novels never complains about hay fever or having a food intolerance. Charles Dickens never suggested that Oliver Twist or any of the artful dodgers suffered from eczema. Allergic diseases are a modern plague.” (The Clever Guts Diet, Short Books, 2017, p. 92.)

If something triggers the immune system to ‘over-react’, the immune system can mistake friend for foe and begin to attack the very tissues it was designed to protect. This is called pathogenic priming. Children may be particularly susceptible since their immune systems are very active while they are growing.

In September 1993, the Institute of Medicine released a report entitled Adverse Events Associated With Childhood Vaccines: Evidence Bearing on Causality. “The report examined putative serious adverse consequences associated with administration of diphtheria and tetanus toxoids; measles, mumps, and measles-mumps-rubella vaccines; oral polio vaccine and inactivated polio vaccine; hepatitis B vaccines; and Haemophilus influenzae type b (Hib) vaccines. The committee spent 18 months reviewing all available scientific and medical data, from individual case reports (published and unpublished) to controlled clinical trials. The committee found that the evidence favored the rejection of a causal relation between diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and encephalopathy, infantile spasms, and sudden infant death syndrome, and between conjugate Hib vaccines and susceptibility to Hib disease. The committee found that the evidence favored acceptance of a causal relation between diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and Guillain-Barré syndrome and brachial neuritis, between measles vaccine and anaphylaxis, between oral polio vaccine and Guillain-Barré syndrome, and between unconjugated Hib vaccine and susceptibility to Hib disease. The committee found that the evidence established causality between diphtheria and tetanus toxoids and anaphylaxis, between measles vaccine and death from measles vaccine — strain viral infection, between measlesmumps-rubella vaccine and thrombocytopenia and anaphylaxis, between oral polio vaccine and poliomyelitis and death from polio vaccine — strain viral infection, and between hepatitis B vaccine and anaphylaxis.”

It is hard not to be sceptical about the vaccines, even for ‘pro-vaxxers’, especially when they are being so aggressively marketed to young, white-collar workers and their children, i.e. the lowest risk demographic for an apparent virus with an infection survival rate of 99.77%, rising to 99.95% for under-70s — the media having in March 2020 pushed the ‘higher than previously thought’ death rate of 3.4%, at a time when other estimates of between 0.1 and 0.5% were being ignored (see page 4) — according to this Stanford University/WHO meta-analysis, which says that, “If one could sample equally from all locations globally, the median infection fatality rate might even be substantially lower” since the fatality rate is lower among the younger populations of Africa and Asia.

Hooman Noorchashm MD, PhD, a physician-scientist, has said that, “It is a rigid medical ethical principle that when a medical treatment or procedure is offered to persons who stand to gain little to no benefit, only harm can be done. The truth is that the vast majority of the millions of Americans who’ve had natural covid-19 infections, and especially those with serological evidence of immunity, stand to gain little to no benefit from added vaccination. When these persons are vaccinated indiscriminately, they are only afforded the possibility of harm — not benefit. It is an immunological principle that vaccinating a person who is recently or concurrently infected can reactivate, or exacerbate, a harmful inflammatory response to the virus. This is not a theoretical concern. In fact, it is the reason why the Israelis are not vaccinating persons with a known history of covid-19 infection.”

Between December 14, 2020 and April 23, 2021 the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System reported that adverse reactions to covid-19 vaccines, including Moderna and Pfizer’s, hit 3,544 deaths and 12,619 serious injuries, an unprecedented high for any vaccination programme in the US. In comparison, there are 20 to 30 deaths reported every year to VAERS related to the flu shot. Previous studies, including one from Harvard University, estimate that only 1-10% of all vaccine-related deaths get reported to VAERS.

According to Dr. Peter McCullough: “A typical new drug at about five deaths, unexplained deaths, we get a black-box warning, your listeners would see it on TV, saying it may cause death. And then at about 50 deaths it’s pulled off the market.” Swine flu vaccines in 1976 were pulled after 500 cases of paralysis and 25 deaths. “On 8 March the CDC announced on their website with very little fanfare, that they had reviewed about 1,600 deaths with unnamed FDA doctors and they indicated not a single death was related to the vaccine. I think that was concerning in the academic community. I have chaired and participated in dozens of data safety monitoring boards and sat on those committees and I can tell you that this type of work would have taken many months to review all the labs, the death certificates and all the circumstances of an event. It is impossible for unnamed regulatory doctors without any experience with covid-19 to opine that none of the deaths were related to the vaccine. I think this was effectively a scrubbing, like we’ve seen elsewhere. There is a Trusted News Initiative, which is very important for Americans to understand, this was announced 10 Dec., and this is a coalition of all the major media and government stakeholders in vaccination, where they are not going to allow any negative information about vaccines to get into the popular media because they’re concerned about vaccine hesitancy, that if Americans got any type of fair, balanced coverage on safety events then they simply would not come forward and get the vaccine. A lot of Americans don’t understand how tight these stakeholders are. Keep in mind the NIH [National Institutes of Health] is a co-owner of the Moderna patent, so they have a vested financial interest in keeping these vaccines going.”

One testifying biologist has claimed that “there is credible reason to believe” that the vaccines could lead to “impaired fertility”. Dr Michael Yeadon, a former Pfizer employee, has claimed, believing that this may be motivated by the perception/ideology of overpopulation: “I know enough about biotechnology to know that you can easily create, shall we say, pathogens, which don’t look like they’re related to what you’ve done. And what’s even more horrifying is you can separate them in time, so an injection which will later make you ill or kill you can be separated by design in time from that event. So you might die a year later of liver cancer or something and you wouldn’t connect that. And if you can imagine making a smorgasbord of different pathogens so not everybody is going to die of the same thing, you literally could do away with big slices of the population if you want. And we could all be running around like headless chickens. This is an attempt at global depopulation.”

Stephanie Seneff, a senior research scientist at MIT, has published a paper that concluded that “there are several mechanisms by which these vaccines could lead to severe disease, including autoimmune disease, neurodegenerative diseases, vascular disorders (hemorrhaging and blood clots) and possibly reproductive issues”.

Dr David Martin says: “We are injecting a spike protein RNA sequence, which is a computer simulation of a sequence which has been known and patented for years. It’s not derived from nature… We are now sitting in a world where we have hundreds of millions of people who are being injected with a pathogen-stimulating computer sequence which is being sold under what the Patent Office, the medical profession, and the FDA (Food and Drug Administration) in its own clinical standards would not suggest is a vaccine. But by using the term, we are now subjecting hundreds of millions of people to what was known by 2005 to be a biological weapon.

“The [idea] this is somehow prophylactic or preventative flies in the face of 100% of the evidence, because the evidence makes it abundantly clear that there has been no effort by any pharmaceutical company to combat the virus. This is about getting people injected with the known-to-be harmful spike protein.”

The reason for doing that, he argues, is to get people “addicted” to a pan-coronavirus vaccine. There had been a decade-long, pan-influenza vaccine mandate, he says, “desperately, desperately, desperately promoted by governments around the world. They failed. And they decided if influenza doesn’t deliver on the public promise of getting everybody to get an injection, let’s change the pathogen. You need to create the illusion of a demand, and there is nothing right now that does a better job of creating the illusion of demand than the urgency of an event you have manufactured.”

The addiction theory would follow the logic of the opioid crisis, which has seen pharma companies bribe doctors to massively overprescribe opium and destroyed particularly white communities with high unemployment; and the ‘crack epidemic’, when the secret services allegedly flooded black communities with high unemployment with crack cocaine.

Whether you believe these claims or think that they are themselves part of a psychological operation, there is no doubt that the ruling class has access to more sophisticated and subtle forms of killing than anything Nazi Germany ever had (and Nazi Germany, which was partially funded by sections of US and British capital, managed to keep its extermination camps secret from the majority of the population for a long time, including, of course, from many of those it was sending away).

In an article discussing the development of supposed ‘self-spreading vaccines’, The Bulletin of Atomic Scientists claims that:

“The principal security concern is that of dual-use. In essence, this means that the same research that is used to develop self-spreading vaccines to prevent disease, could also be used to deliberately cause harm. You could, for instance, engineer triggers into a virus that cause immune system failures in infected people or animals, a bit like HIV does naturally. Or you could create triggers in a virus that cause a harmful autoimmune response, where the body starts attacking its own healthy cells and tissues.

While researchers may intend to make self-spreading vaccines, others could repurpose their science and develop biological weapons. Such a self-spreading weapon may prove uncontrollable and irreversible.

We don’t have to dig very deep for a historical example of weaponized biology. As the apartheid-era South African biowarfare program shows, social, political, and scientific pressures can lead to the misuse of biological innovation.

Codenamed Project Coast, South Africa’s program was primarily focused on covert assassination weapons for use against individuals deemed a threat to the racist apartheid government. In addition to producing contraptions to inject poisons, Project Coast researchers developed techniques to lace sugar cubes with salmonella and cigarettes with Bacillus anthracis.

While there have been many biowarfare programs, including several that were far more elaborate and sophisticated, the South African program is particularly relevant in thinking through malicious uses of self-spreading vaccines. One of Project Coast’s research projects aimed at developing a human anti-fertility vaccine.

The idea took hold during a time of widespread concern over worldwide population explosion. Schalk Van Rensburg, who oversaw fertility-related work at a Project Coast laboratory, told South Africa’s post-apartheid Truth and Reconciliation Commission, a forum for examining the sordid history of the era and laying the foundation for future peace and tolerance, that he thought the project was in line with the World Health Organization’s attempts to curb rising global birth rates. He believed it could bring his lab international acclaim and funding. According to Van Rensburg, Wouter Basson, the director of the biowarfare program, said the military needed an anti-fertility vaccine so that female soldiers would not fall pregnant… [and] that the real intention behind the project was to selectively administer the contraceptive in secret to unwitting Black South African women.

In the end, the anti-fertility vaccine was not produced before Project Coast was officially closed down in 1995, 12 years after it was initiated. An early version was tested in baboons, but never in humans. South Africa isn’t the only country to try and forcibly sterilize parts of its population. European countries, including Sweden and Switzerland, sterilized members of the Roma minority in the early half of the 20th century and some, like Slovakia, continued even beyond that…”

The idea of a ‘self-spreading vaccine’ could itself be part of a psychological operation designed to frighten people.

Other things must be taken into account of our overall analysis. Allegations have long been made that violent criminals have been brainwashed — by inducing extremely dissociative states of the mind, using pain, trauma, fear, drugs and hypnosis — into committing serial murders in order to scare the public into staying inside, thereby weakening protest movements in periods of economic crises and creating a public clamour for greater police powers, also used to suppress protest movements.

Such a possibility opens up questions about how the ruling class uses mass media, including repetitive music and onscreen visuals to manipulate the minds of the masses, in a very material way (as well as through propaganda, disinformation, censorship (including by omission), trivialisation and dumbing down (also including also by omission). Given that severe trauma can cause the anterior cingulate circuit (which is responsible for motivation) to malfunction — which can result in ‘giving up on life’, i.e. psychogenic death — one wonders how far exposure to extreme violence in the media might contribute towards political apathy (as well as manufacturing fascist ideology.)

Barbara Sahakian, a professor of clinical neuropsychology at the University of Cambridge, has been working in partnership with Fudan University researchers to assess the effects of social isolation and loneliness on people’s brains during the pandemic. She says that the impacts, across multiple regions of the brain, are “profound”.

“We’ve seen changes in volume in the brain’s temporal, frontal, occipital and subcortical regions, the amygdala, and the hippocampus in people who are socially isolated,” says Sahakian. Volume loss in any or all of these areas could be seriously detrimental to the processes we rely on to engage with others and the world around us. It seems likely that a lack of diverse scenery and activity contributes to this and the build up of plaque on the brain that causes dementia.

Meanwhile, more than half of all children who turn 10 this year will reach their milestone birthday without being able to read a simple sentence, according to a new analysis of UN data, rising by 11.5 million during 2020–21 “as a direct result of the impact on education” during lockdown.

When all this is taken into account with the news that scientists have apparently developed ways to implant artificial memories in mice, it seems clear that the ruling class is waging an all-out assault on human consciousness: they may be aiming to build something like the world depicted in Steven Spielberg’s Ready Player One or even, perhaps further down the road — it at least cannot be ruled out The Matrix, when humanity is unknowingly trapped inside a simulated reality which intelligent machines have created to distract them while using their bodies as an energy source. (Scientists have also claimed that magnetic fields can remotely control brain cells in Mice.)

Marx shows that the capitalist class is continually fighting to push the wage “towards zero”. This indeed raises the prospect of the ruling capitalist class needing a new system of slavery once ‘necessary labour time’ has been abolished — the point when socialism becomes economic necessity — if they are not to be overthrown by socialism. (‘Necessary labour time’ is the amount of time workers labour to cover their living costs, which continually declines as capitalism ages, as commodities become cheaper to make — increasingly maximising ‘surplus labour time’, the time capitalists appropriate from workers, ever closer to 24 hours a day. Obviously, though, there is a limit to even this, meaning socialism would remain an economic necessity.)

Given that data is now worth more than oil, the process is already arguably well underway, with data extracted from our phones and computers potentially around the clock. (Consider that data requires very little labour to produce, and it becomes clear why privacy had to be abolished, providing the biggest motive for those who believe 9/11 was ‘an inside job’, the event having been unquestionably used as a pretext to justify the The Patriot Act, which allows federal law enforcement agencies to delay giving notice when they conduct secret searches of Americans’ homes and offices — a fundamental change to Fourth Amendment privacy protections and search warrants.

As an example of the lengths the US has gone to against its enemies in the past, in socialist East Germany it would poison cattle and cigarettes.

In 2002, it was revealed that in Britain,

“the Ministry of Defence turned large parts of the country into a giant laboratory to conduct a series of secret germ warfare tests on the public. A government report just released provides for the first time a comprehensive official history of Britain’s biological weapons trials between 1940 and 1979.

Many of these tests involved releasing potentially dangerous chemicals and micro-organisms over vast swaths of the population without the public being told.

While details of some secret trials have emerged in recent years, the 60-page report reveals new information about more than 100 covert experiments.

The report reveals that military personnel were briefed to tell any ‘inquisitive inquirer’ the trials were part of research projects into weather and air pollution.

The tests, carried out by government scientists at Porton Down, were designed to help the MoD assess Britain’s vulnerability if the Russians were to have released clouds of deadly germs over the country.

In most cases, the trials did not use biological weapons but alternatives which scientists believed would mimic germ warfare and which the MoD claimed were harmless. But families in certain areas of the country who have children with birth defects are demanding a public inquiry.”

Knowing all this, it is impossible to believe governments are concerned with protecting public health, especially when the most vulnerable people are being thrown out of hospitals and into care homes, seeding any virus among the most vulnerable, while care homes are being starved of resources. A study published in June 2021 found that some 58% of those who died from ‘covid-19’ in England were disabled people. Whether the deaths were caused by ‘covid-19’ or state-induced neglect, or something even more sinister, we cannot know while autopsies are being suspended, etc.

There have even been claims that Midazolam, a painkiller and sedative used to ease respiratory difficulties, have been used to turn “end-of-life care into euthanasia” after prescriptions doubled. Retired neurologist Professor Patrick Pullicino claims that an official flow-chart intended to help health workers decide if people sick with covid-19 were suitable for intensive care wrongly consigned those deemed too frail to end-of-life care. That meant, he suggested, that some were not taken to hospital even though they could have been helped by doing so. “To me this flow-chart encouraged use of end-of-life sedation with midazolam — effectively resulting in euthanasia pathways.” Eileen Chubb, of the charity Compassion in Care, said a number of care-home workers had told her sedatives were used too freely during the pandemic, adding that some staff were under the ‘definite impression’ that very sick care-home residents should not be sent to hospital.

A Care Quality Commission report has found, meanwhile, that, reports the BMJ, “equality and human rights laws were flouted when ‘inappropriate’ advance non-resuscitation decisions were taken during the covid-19 pandemic” after accusations that “blanket ‘do not attempt cardiopulmonary resuscitation’ (DNACPR) decisions were imposed on some groups, such as people in care homes, and that some people with DNACPR decisions in their records were unaware of the fact”. In one case, a carer said an on-call doctor had told care home staff that any resident who caught covid-19 would have a DNACPR order put in place. Another witness said some care homes and learning disability services were told by GPs to place blanket orders on everyone in their care. The CQC said there were also examples of routine care not being provided in homes, such as an ambulance or doctor not being called, because of a DNACPR order that was in place.

[6] The Myth of Capitalism: Monopolies and the Death of Competition (2018) by Jonathan Tepper and Denise Hearn found that: four corporations control 90% of American beer; four airlines completely dominate airline traffic, often enjoying complete local monopolies in their regional ‘hubs’; five banks control half of US banking assets; in many states, the top two insurance companies have 80–90% market share between them; 75% of US households can only access one monopoly provider for high-speed internet; four companies control the entire US beef market; three companies control both 70% of the global pesticide market and 80% of the US corn-seed market; Google’s share of internet search traffic is 90%; and so on. “The scale of mergers is so extreme,” write the idealist right-libertarian authors, “that you would almost think American capitalists were trying to prove Karl Marx right.” Wiley, New York, 2018, p. xv-10.

[7] Average GDP growth rates in what the World Bank defines as ‘high income countries’ are already closing in on zero, having fallen every decade apart from the last one for the past half century: from 5.59% in the 1960s, to 4.15% in the 1970s; 2.93% in the 1980s; 2.35% in the 1990s; and 1.78% in the 2000s. The figure rose slightly to 2.1% in the 2010s, but this minor reprieve, based on murderous austerity measures and record levels of debt, has already proven to be unsustainable. My calculation. Source: WorldBank.org data: GDP growth (annual %) — High income.

[8] After the Black Plague, a labour shortage put workers in a stronger bargaining position, encouraging worker militancy to the point that the movement abolished serfdom. The ‘golden age of the European proletariat’ of 1350–1500 followed, while aristocrats plotted a reversal of a prolonged disaccumulation of capital. Enclosure (along with colonialism) was the answer — brutally driving peasants off common land and into towns and cities, where they would have to pay rent to private landlords (n.b. mortgages are still a form of rent).

This process didn’t stop with the privatisation of common land and other public assets but with the ongoing atomisation of public space. Instead of the efficiency of public transport, the inefficiency of splitting everyone up into private cars, for example. This has now been taken to the absurd logical endpoint of the very anti-social ‘social distancing’. Now there is justification even for public communal urinals to be be abolished (not that many public toilets remain open), since it’s more profitable to manufacture individual urinals and increase the number of flushes exponentially (increasing the demand for energy, etc) at a time when energy efficiency is supposed to be of primary importance in terms of slowing down and reversing existential global heating. By embracing capital’s logic of acute social atomisation, gyms that have closed off half their equipment under the guise of ‘social distancing’, for example, have effectively doubled their rates.

One suspects the same logic is being applied to the consumption of football as a ‘product’. The abolition of spectator standing was very unpopular with working class football fans, but the Heysel and Hillsborough atrocities enabled the gentrification of professional football, with all-seater stadiums increasing demand per square foot, thereby raising ticket prices, at a time when Rupert Murdoch (Sky Sports) wanted to privatise TV viewership. Now — with the likes of Real Madrid and Barcelona shouldering $1billion debts — billionaire owners see online subscription as a the next logical step in the atomisation of the fanbase, raising the intake per fan per view. Presumably they aim to make stadium attendances even more corporate, perhaps even exclusively aimed at international jet-setters, driving up the ticket price per seat. With this in mind, the storming of Wembley stadium by a minority of fans at the Euro 2021 final (in the era of electronic turnstyles!), along with a few other suspect events (such as the supposed laser pen incident in the Denmark goalkeeper’s eyes), begins to look like a psychological operation. UEFA reacted by considering punishing England by making the team play behind closed doors. No doubt vaccine passports will be seen as a way to split movements protesting against billionaire owners and the proposed European Super League.

Meanwhile, the racist abuse of black footballers on Twitter and Instagram is likely a psychological operation to create a public clamour for more anti-privacy laws. Twitter could easily write algorithms to filter out racist replies, but, with the help of bots and, presumably, paid agents, it does the opposite, making sure racist replies are seen the most. Corporations do not care about anti-racism — they are enabling the continued abuse and traumatisation of black people with this stunt — they care about creating and monetising personal data. Indeed, corporate anti-racism seems to be having its intended effect, with polling among US adults reportedly indicating race relations hitting a 20-year low.

‘Social’ media itself — how can it be ‘social’ when it is privately owned — represents the extreme atomisation of traditional media.

[9] Most transmission of infections are said to take place in homes and especially hospitals and care homes. Borders can be closed for migrants, holidays and business trips but not essential imports/exports, so so-called ‘Zero covid’ policies, if taken literally, are surely not possible.

See: Bendavid et al, European Journal of Clinical Investigation (“there is no evidence that more restrictive non-pharmaceutical interventions (‘lockdowns’) contributed substantially to bending the curve of new cases in England, France, Germany, Iran, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, or the United States in early 2020”; Chaudry et al, The Lancet (“government actions such as border closures, full lockdowns, and a high rate of covid-19 testing were not associated with statistically significant reductions in the number of critical cases or overall mortality”); Kuhbandner et al, University of Regensburg (“official data from Germany’s RKI agency suggest strongly that the spread of the coronavirus receded autonomously, before any interventions become effective”); Wood, University of Edinburgh (“the decline in infections in England… began before full lockdown… [S]uch a scenario would be consistent with… Sweden, which began its decline in fatal infections shortly after the UK, but did so on the basis of measures well short of full lockdown”); Homburg and Kuhbandner, datascienceassn.org (“Flaxman et al allege that non-pharmaceutical interventions imposed by 11 European countries saved millions of lives. We show that their methods involve circular reasoning.”); Rice, British Medical Journal (“the addition of interventions restricting younger people might actually increase the total number of deaths from covid-19”); Cohen and Lipsitch, HHS Public Access (“interventions that reduce but do not eliminate exposure can paradoxically increase the number of cases of severe disease by shifting the burden of infection toward older individuals”); Woolf et al, JAMA (“restrictions imposed by the pandemic (e.g. stay-at-home orders) could claim lives indirectly through delayed care for acute emergencies, exacerbations of chronic diseases, and psychological distress (e.g. drug overdoses). In 14 states, more than 50% of excess deaths were attributed to underlying causes other than covid-19”); Karáth, BMJ, “(Belarus’s President… [who has recently fended off a US-backed coup] refused to impose a lockdown, close schools, or cancel mass events… Yet the country’s death rate is among the lowest in Europe”); Thomas et al, Biosecurity and Bioterrorism (“the negative consequences… are so extreme… they should be eliminated from serious consideration”); Letizia et al, New England Journal of Medicine; De Larochelambert, Frontiers in Public Health; Gibson, New Zealand Economic Papers.)

One study has reported that “myopia in children ages 6 to 13 increased by up to three times in 2020, from the period between 2015 and 2019. On average, children were more shortsighted by -0.3 diopters. The authors cited their results as the first evidence that home confinement during covid and reduced outdoor activity is associated with worsening eyesight.”

Many studies have also challenged mask mandates. A 2009 study said that, “Face mask use in health care workers has not been demonstrated to provide benefit in terms of cold symptoms or getting colds. Of the 8 symptoms recorded daily, subjects in the mask group were significantly more likely to experience headache.” In 2015 and 2018, the Ontario Nurses Association successfully challenged hospital mandatory mask policies, on the basis that “there was ‘scant evidence’ that forcing nurses to use masks reduced the transmission of influenza to patients”. A 2021 study claims that extended mask wearing caused “psychological and physical deterioration”. The Lancet in 2021 claimed that, “We did not find any evidence of decreased risk of transmission in individuals who reported mask use.” Even the CDC found that, “daily case and death growth rates before implementation of mask mandates were not statistically different from the reference period”. And the FDA states that (April 2021), “While a surgical mask may be effective in blocking splashes and large-particle droplets, a face mask, by design, does not filter or block very small particles in the air that may be transmitted by coughs, sneezes, or certain medical procedures.” Mask-wearing is particularly detrimental for children in early years literacy learning.

Professor Michael Braungart, director at the Hamburg Environmental Institute has said that mask wearers risk breathing in carcinogens, allergens and tiny synthetic microfibres by wearing both textile and nonwoven surgical masks for long periods of time. Another leading industry textile chemist, Dr. Dieter Sedlak, claims to have found elevated concentrations of hazardous fluorocarbons, formaldehyde and other potentially carcinogenic substances on surgical face masks.

The WHO itself has warned against overusing alcohol-based hand sanitising gel for fear of giving rise to ‘superbugs’ that learn how to resist the product. Andrew Kemp, head of Scientific Advisory Board on the British Institute of Cleaning Science, said it has not yet been proven that alcohol-based hand sanitising gels could kill the virus that causes Covid-19 on skin. “Even if [hand gels] did kill 99.9 per cent of all bacteria, there can be more than a million bacteria on your hands at any one time, leaving 10,000 alive after sanitisation,” he said. “These will be in a residue of sugar and protein. Recent research shows the surviving bugs which are not killed by alcohol gels are themselves highly dangerous pathogens and may increase in numbers.”

Another study from 1997 says that “more diverse social networks were associated with greater resistance to upper respiratory illness”.

With enough state support, people with symptoms would be incentivised to self-isolate. Low sick pay has forced low-paid workers to continue working after being told to stay home (“£13 a day isn’t enough — isolating workers need proper sick pay”, TUC.co.uk, 27 August). As a result, black and minority ethnic people, overrepresented in the NHS and low-paid work, have been disproportionately affected both by infections of whatever it is going round (Manchester.ac.uk, 12 January) and the punitive measures enforcing lockdown, with a sharp rise in ‘stop and search’, which went up by 40% (“Coronavirus: Disproportionate number of BAME people fined”, BBC, 3 June). (They have also disproportionately lost more jobs, according to the TUC (FT, 20 January). In the US, mortgage failures are highest in predominantly black counties (Black Knight Inc); and black-owned small businesses have seen their business activity fall three times more than white counterparts (-41% vs -17%; -32% for Hispanic; -26% Asian) (National Bureau of Economic Research)). UK Health Secretary Matt Hancock claimed one in three people with covid-19 are asymptomatic (the British Medical Journal (BMJ) says it’s 80%, 2 April) and labelled them a “silent danger”. A BMJ editorial (21 December) reported that a city-wide prevalence study of almost 10 million people in Wuhan found “no evidence” of asymptomatic transmission and said rapid testing of asymptomatic people was a waste of scarce resources. Fauci said in January 2020 that asymptomatic transmission “never drives outbreaks” only to change his mind five months later, contradicting the WHO.

The Tory government, which blames the public for not following lockdown rules when the infection rate goes up, can now justify lockdowns any time it feels any kind of political threat. As Linda Bauld, a professor at the University of Edinburgh, has said, Downing Street’s “blame game” consists of reproaching young people and threatening to impose larger fines. Prime Minister Boris Johnson complained about people “brazenly defying” restrictions when a very high 90% of the public have followed them (BMJ.com, 7 January). Yet he defended his unelected chief aide Dominic Cummings, who drove to a beauty spot on his wife’s birthday to “test his eyes” (ChronicleLive.co.uk, 25 May) and then 260 miles to his parents, supposedly to seek childcare when his wife had covid-19, on a day that happened to coincide with the death of his uncle, Lord Justice Laws. People reportedly started to follow guidelines less strictly as a result (Independent.co.uk, 3 June), which was perhaps the intended outcome.

The Tory party is badly divided on the issue of lockdown, since some sections of capital are doing well out of it at the expense of others, resulting in inconsistent rules (“Independent shops hit out at high street chains trading during lockdown”, TheGuardian.com, 7 November). Despite having a pandemic down as one of the biggest threats to national security, in the past few years the government slashed spending on stockpiles of protective equipment for NHS staff (BBC, 28 April 2020).

Incidentally, the Soviet Union once defeated a smallpox epidemic without resorting to a nationwide lockdown. See “How the USSR defeated a smallpox epidemic in a matter of 19 days”.

The social impact of lockdowns on human relationships is extremely worrying given the share of men under 30 who aren’t having sex tripled in the 12 years following the financial crash. In France, births were down year-on-year by 13% in January 2021. For France, a country that has traditionally had the highest fertility rate in the 27-member EU, it marked the biggest fall in births since the abrupt end of the baby boom in the 1970s. Births had also fallen 7% in the previous month compared with the same period a year earlier, leaving the total number of babies born in France last year, 735,000, at the lowest level since the end of the second world war. China’s population fell in 2020 for the first time since 1961. (All this makes one suspect that the Matt Hancock affair that saw him removed as Health Secretary may have been a stunt to both encourage extreme prudishness and promote the benefits of anti-privacy laws.)

Toxic chemicals sourced from mines and fossil fuels for general capitalist production have caused not only the massive rise in autoimmune disorders but also sperm counts to decline markedly. A new peer-reviewed study (13 May 2021) in the Environmental Science and Technology journal that checked US American women’s breast milk for PFAS contamination detected the toxic chemical in all 50 samples tested, and at levels nearly 2,000 times higher than the level some public health advocates advise is safe for drinking water. “The study shows that PFAS contamination of breast milk is likely universal in the US, and that these harmful chemicals are contaminating what should be nature’s perfect food,” said Erika Schreder, a co-author and science director with Toxic Free Future. PFAS, or per and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are a class of about 9,000 compounds that are used to make products like food packaging, clothing and carpeting water and stain resistant. They are called “forever chemicals” because they do not naturally break down and have been found to accumulate in humans. They are linked to cancer, birth defects, liver disease, thyroid disease, plummeting sperm counts and a range of other serious health problems. See also: “The bowls at Chipotle and Sweetgreen are supposed to be compostable. They contain cancer-linked ‘forever chemicals’”, TheCounter,org, 5 August 2019); and “Glyphosate, pathways to modern diseases II: Celiac sprue and gluten intolerancev”, National Library of Medicine, 12 February 2009 (“we propose that glyphosate, the active ingredient in the herbicide, Roundup®, is the most important causal factor in this epidemic [of Celiac disease, and, more generally, gluten intolerance]”.)

[10] Civics Monitor said that 87% of the global population now lives in countries that are ‘closed’, ‘repressed’ or ‘obstructed’, up 4% on a year earlier. “The use of detention as the main tactic to restrict protests only shows the hypocrisy of governments using covid-19 as a pretence to crack down on protests, [as] the virus is more likely to spread in confined spaces like prisons.” According to Hellmaier et al, “Due to the pandemic and state restrictions on the freedom of assembly, mass mobilization declined to its lowest level in over a decade.”

[11] Clearly one of the motivations for introducing a vaccine passport is to stem the freedom of movement at a time when labour is relatively low demand. QZ reports that, “Millions of fully vaccinated people in India and Africa could face challenges traveling to Europe under the EU’s new vaccine passport scheme, scheduled to take effect on 1 July. That’s despite the fact that they’ll have taken a vaccine that, on the face of it, is already authorized in the EU, as well as by the UK and the World Health Organization.

“The problem? The EU is making a distinction between one brand of the AstraZeneca jab, named Vaxzevria, and its identical, but Indian-made version Covishield. The latter, manufactured under license by India’s Serum Institute, is not one of the vaccines listed for the EU’s new digital travel pass.”

Scepticism of vaccines is higher outside of north America and Europe, perhaps partly because of younger and therefore healthier populations, but mainly due to centuries of ongoing medical abuse at the hands of colonialism.

During the US occupation of the Philippines, Rockefeller Foundation president George Vincent was quite frank in saying, “Dispensaries and physicians have of late been peacefully penetrating areas of the Philippine Islands and demonstrating the fact that for purposes of placating primitive and suspicious peoples medicine has some advantages over machine guns.”

A UK parliamentary committee found that “routine healthcare in some countries has ground to a halt, and people fear starvation and unemployment more than they do the pandemic. Covid-19, and its countermeasures, have increased rates of gender-based violence and child marriage.” (Labour adopted a policy of cancelling ‘third world debt’ ‘owed’ to Britain, later rejected by new leader, Keir Starmer.) These counter-measures have been largely influenced by Microsoft tycoon Bill Gates, the second richest man on Earth (and now the US’s number one owner of farms). The Gates Foundation (worth $51bn) has shareholdings in several pharmaceutical giants. “The foundation appears to see the Global South as both a dumping ground for drugs deemed too unsafe for the developed world and a testing ground for drugs not yet determined to be safe enough for the developed world,” according to The Grayzone. Oxford’s Clinical Infectious Diseases Periodical has contended that “the only cause of polio is likely to be the vaccine”. Many others have come to similar conclusions about the vaccines Gates promotes. See also: “The Gates Foundation and the vaccine business”, by Jacob Levich.

As the second largest contributor to the World Health Organisation (WHO), after the US, the WHO (which gets 80% of its funding privately) “doesn’t decide how these funds are spent — the foundation does”. The Gates Foundation has also donated millions of dollars to mainstream media outlets and Gates even starred in a docu-series on Netflix about how to stop a pandemic a few weeks before covid-19 hit the US. In 2017 Gates started buying up oxygen tank supplies (Borgen, 9 November) — and now there is a global shortage, since monopolies need artificial scarcity to sell products at profitable prices.

Such a shortage was being reported at the end of April 2021 as part of a concerted media campaign to sell vaccines to India. According to Jo Nash, writing for Left Lockdown Sceptics: “The media are presenting cases and deaths in whole numbers that sound horrendous until you convert them to percentages of India’s huge population of 1.4 billion people. The current daily death rate in India of 2,600 is equivalent to 126 deaths per day in the UK, way below our peak rate and closer to what we are experiencing now… more people die of diarrhoea every day in India and have done for years… India has the most toxic air in the world which often leads to the city having to close down due to the widespread effects on respiratory health … respiratory diseases, including COPD, TB, and respiratory tract infections like bronchitis leading to pneumonia, are always among the top ten killers in India… Finally, the Indian government’s focus on vaccine procurement risks diverting resources from tackling urgent public health issues including access to clean water, sanitation, clean air, and treatments for other communicable diseases. An article in the BMJ reported on disrupted access to TB vaccinations due to lockdowns, with TB known to cause around 1.4 million deaths in the country annually… My contacts report that vaccine take-up among the working classes and minority groups has been low due to widespread mistrust of government-funded vaccination camps. In the context of successive governments’ neglect of other longstanding public health problems that disproportionately affect India’s working class, the rolling news coverage are perceived as attempts to coerce vaccination compliance... Vaccination is now being promoted over cheap early treatments that were previously widely available, and while vaccine take-up has increased, so have deaths concordantly, as displayed in the graphic from John Hopkins University. While correlation does not equal causation, most people I have spoken to do not believe this is merely a coincidence [and this was during India’s summer, not flu season]. Given the widespread availability of the data online, and anecdotal reports of adverse reactions and deaths, suspicions of the vaccination campaign remain.” In The Australian, the former assistant secretary-general of the United Nations, Professor Ramesh Thakuras, pointed out: “As of now India’s covid mortality rate is 140 per million people. This compares to 401 for the world average, 1,762 for the US, and 1,869 for the UK. It puts India 119th in the world on this, the single most important statistic for comparison purposes.”

The residents of a village in the Saurikh area of Uttar Pradesh’s Kannuj have alleged that electricity connections of their houses were cut off after they refused to take covid vaccine jabs. Elsewhere, Punjab’s provincial government unveiled plans to disable the SIM cards of people who decline to get jabbed.

In the 1970s, the Indian government awarded villagers transistor radios in exchange for undergoing sterilisation. “[Sanjay Gandhi’s government] combined a state of emergency, eugenics, sterilisation passports, and radio news propaganda in the same fell swoop. Sound familiar? India was and remains the elite’s testing ground,” writes a Dr TCP. “The WHO established a Special Program of Research in human reproduction (HRP) in 1972 just three years prior to Gandhi’s eugenics spree. The WHO/HRP convened in Geneva, 1992 to discuss fertility regulating vaccines. Amongst the research was that of Professor G P Talwar, of the National Institute of Immunology, New Delhi. When the WHO’s early 1990s Nicaraguan, Mexican, Philippine and Tanzanian tetanus vaccine campaigns were mired in eugenics controversy, its supporters hit back. Regarding that controversy, I was saddened to hear of the untimely death allegedly, coincidentally and conveniently from coronavirus, of Kenyan Dr. Stephen Karanja. This came only days after a shocking interview where he spoke of the ignored success of safe pharmaceutical alternatives to the coerced COVID-19 gene therapy.”

Similarly, it has been alleged that vaccines were used to depopulate the Aboriginal inhabitants of Australia in the 1970s.

Returning to Gates: in January, Microsoft filed a patent to allow the company to ‘digitally revive’ deceased loved ones as online chatbots, using the individual’s “images, voice data, social media posts, and electronic messages” in a sick bid to profit off and prolong people’s grief and loneliness.

The end of privacy is another byproduct of the economic crisis: personal data had to be commodified to create a new source of profit; but because data requires so little labour to produce, masses of it have to be made for it to be profitable, hence the complete invasion of privacy by ‘big tech’, which is effectively merging with ‘big pharma’ and private health care.

Data rights organisations have warned that patients lack a clear understanding of how information about their health, employment, contact or location details may be used if it is collected by private entities during the Covid-19 vaccine drive. Some advocates have already expressed concerns that the information could be used for marketing, targeted advertising or de-identified and sold into the multibillion-dollar health data industry.

The Telegraph reports that, “Millions of Britons had their movements ‘unwittingly tracked’ using their mobile phones to see if vaccinated people moved about more after their jabs. Silkie Carlo, a spokesman for Big Brother Watch, said: ‘No one expects that by going to get a vaccine they will be tracked and monitored by their own Government. This is deeply chilling and could be extremely damaging to public trust in medical confidentiality. Between looming Covid passports and vaccine phone surveillance, this Government is turning Britain into a Big Brother state under the cover of Covid. This should be a wake up call to us all.’”

The Pentagon is now developing a “subdermal implant, now in late-stage testing… a tissue-like gel engineered to continuously test your blood [for covid — does this not indicate pessimism in the effectiveness of the vaccines?]… It’s a sensor… you put it underneath your skin and what that tells you is that there are chemical reactions going on inside the body and that signal means you are going to have symptoms tomorrow.” The implications of something like this for privacy and surveillance are plainly dire. See also “A military-funded biosensor could be the future of pandemic detection”, Defense One, 3 March 2020.

[12] On the ‘evidence’ suddenly released by the US military that “UFOs exist”, made at the same time as the release for the promo for The Tomorrow War about an alien invasion (don’t forget that the Central Intelligence Agency controls Hollywood), a comrade speculates:

“The ruling class really is going to concoct an alien invasion scare by the 2030s, calling it now. If the Internet of Things does turn out as advanced as they promise, they could even generate ‘alien sightings’ in real time across the world all at once — you’d only need about a dozen sightings per country to make huge headlines. If primitive Christianity could impose the idea of an imaginary realm on millions of people 2,000 years ago, then our synchronised scientific age could pull it off no problem. Destroy one city then claim aliens were responsible, and everyone will be on board for the Big One. The most publicised opposition will be religious types claiming it’s the rapture or they’re friendly visitors here to teach us peace, easily dismissed by the media and still within the paradigm of accepting their presence as real. Can see it now — me going ‘Do you know there’s already 30,000 nuclear weapons in the world? Most of them American and pointed at every other country?’ and just being answered ‘aliens though’.”

In the light of its collapsing system, perhaps the ruling class would be mad not to try such a stunt.

As I show in my book, capitalism is certainly veering towards a world war, since the economic crisis is intensifying competition over profit, assets and resources; and the destruction of surplus capital allows breathing space for new accumulation.

[13] Quoted in Hickel, J., Less is More, Windmill Books, 2021, p. 174.

The Marxist movement is badly in need of an honest debate on the controversial topic of ‘germ theory’ vs ‘terrain theory’, although the likelihood is that it is something we will not be able to interrogate on the necessary scale until capitalism has been abolished. See:

The belief that viruses are pathogenic invaders is crumbling: New study says ‘exosomes’ can’t be distinguished from viruses,” DrTomCowan.com. (“The main proponents of the germ theory, including the Frenchman Louis Pasteur and the German Robert Koch, ardently believed that all the bacteria in living organisms, including human beings, were invaders from the outside. In other words, from our skin inward, we were sterile, except if we had been invaded by a pathogen. Today, 150 years later, this idea seems laughably incorrect and naïve. Almost everyone now knows that trillions of bacteria live in and on every surface of our bodies. Some people have even attempted to demonstrate that most of our genetic material is bacterial rather than human in origin.* We now have conclusive evidence that these trillions of bacteria living in us help digest our food, synthesize crucial nutrients, participate in detoxification functions, help regulate and control our emotions and, in some ways, participate in every normal human function. The early proponents of the germ theory were not only completely inaccurate in their conclusions about the role of bacteria in the human organism, but, more important, they established a framework that postulated that human beings were somehow separate from nature. This insidious and unscientific conclusion, which continues to the present time, has caused grave harm to all living systems. In the case of viruses, a similar shift is just beginning to happen in the scientific community. The old paradigm about viruses is that we are essentially ‘virus-free’ in our healthy, natural state, and the only viruses that are inside us must be pathogens that came from the outside. This belief was, of course, never proven; it was just stated as dogma, and it dovetailed nicely with the narrative of ‘nature is out to get us’… To date, a reliable method that can actually guarantee a complete separation between a supposedly exogenous pathogenic virus and an endogenous extracellular vesicle does not exist.”)

(*According to Sender et al, if you were to count up all the cells that constitute your body, you’d find that more of them belong to other lifeforms than belong to ‘you’ as such. “Revised estimates for the number of human and bacteria cells in the body,” PLoS Biology 14(8). As the British philosopher of science John Dupré has put it, “These findings make it hard to claim that a creature is self-sufficient, or even that you can mark out where it ends and another one begins.” Thus the capitalist myth around The Individual is blown away.)

Capitalist ideology, invented to discredit indigenous and peasant notions of animism — that all of nature is animated and alive — made out that man was somehow separate from nature in order to justify the non-reciprocal plunder of the earth for accumulation. Capital’s mechanistic ideology labelled nature, including human bodies, as merely productive machinery. Its dualistic ideology — reflecting the dualistic character of capitalist production, i.e. commodities are both exchange-values and use-values (whereas communism produces solely use-values); the division of producer and consumer — either pitted sentient humans, the thinking subject (“I think, therefore I am”), against the lifeless objects of nature, to be possessed; or framed nature as a ‘beast to be tamed’. It also pits ‘the civilised’ against ‘the savage’, justifying colonialism. Germ theory fits with dualistic ideology and its ‘one cause, one cure’ dogma fits with the monopolistic thinking dictated by monopoly capital. Even now that modern DNA sequencing has exploded that the old germ theory myth, showing that microbes are not agents of disease but the collectivistic driver of all life on Earth, arguably a new ‘good’ versus ‘bad’ bacteria dualism has been formulated to continue justifying bourgeois science.

See also: “The Misconception Called ‘Virus’” by Dr. Stefan Lanka.

(Lanka won a landmark case in 2017 which went all the way to the German Supreme Court. The highest court of the land agreed with Lanka that measles was not caused by a virus, and that there was in fact no such thing as a measles virus… Lanka writes:

“All claims about viruses as pathogens are wrong and are based on easily recognisable, understandable and verifiable misinterpretations … All scientists who think they are working with viruses in laboratories are actually working with typical particles of specific dying tissues or cells which were prepared in a special way. They believe that those tissues and cells are dying because they were infected by a virus. In reality, the infected cells and tissues were dying because they were starved and poisoned… The infection theories were only established as a global dogma through the concrete policies and eugenics of the Third Reich. Before 1933, scientists dared to contradict this theory; after 1933, these critical scientists were silenced.’”)

It seems quite possible that germ theory has long been used to justify the (over)prescription of medication that is harmful to human health, such as anti-biotics. See:

Casting the dye: the first antibiotics,” mcdreeamiemusings.com, 15 January 2020.

Infection-quashing antibiotics damage the body’s cells, too,” Boston.com, 3 July 2013.

“Antibiotics, cancer risk and oncologic treatment efficacy: a practical review of the literature,” ecancer.org.

As Dr Michael Mosley has written, “Like animals in the wild, many species in our gut are in decline and have been for decades. It’s partly because we eat such a narrow range of foods, which means our gut bacteria also have to live on a restricted diet. Of the 250,000 known edible plant species, we use less than 200. 75% of the world’s food comes from just 12 plants and five animal species [due to monopoly capitalist monoculture]. Another reason for the decline is the widespread use of antibiotics, not only to treat us but to help the animals we eat put on weight [to maximise profits; red meat is otherwise good for your health in moderate quantities]. Finally, there are emulsifiers. These are chemicals that are added to processed foods to extend their shelf life. They’ve been shown to reduce microbial richness, and may directly contribute to colitis and diabetes.” (The Clever Guts Diet, Short Books, London, 2017, p. 66.)

Lack of biodiversity in the gut brings about an imbalance that allows one set of bacteria to become dominant, upsetting the harmony of the gut, causing, for example, certain unhealthy cravings by reducing hormones that quell hunger, contributing to the obesity crisis (which is also associated with air and plastic pollution, along with the cheap, processed salt and sugar diets that capitalism has hardwired into us). Hunter-gatherer tribes in Tanzania have been found to have a much higher biodiversity of species in their gut. Mosley recommends eating a wider variety of plants and fermented produce, keeping windows open as much as possible, spending more time in outdoorsy settings, and getting green-fingered. With this in mind, mask mandates and social distancing will surely accelerate the decline of biodiversity in the gut and therefore the weakening of our immune systems. The UK government has rejected advice from scientists who say perspex screens being used to separate people in offices etc are doing more harm than good since such screens disrupt airflow and ventilation, allowing any virus to flourish. That the UK government is reportedly preparing to keep social distancing and mask mandates in place for the next five winters should be seen as a ruling class attack on the human immune system.

In opposition to germ theory, terrain or cellular theory focuses on the terrain of human cells. It does not necessarily argue that germs do not exist but that ‘the terrain’ must first be deficient or toxic/sick in order for infection to manifest. This theory seems more plausible and two-sided compared to (a one-sided) germ theory from a Marxist perspective, which utilises a ‘dialectical’, i.e. bidirectional/interactive science, going back and forth between the abstract and the concrete, the particular and the general, in a method of induction, deduction and successive approximation, whereby elements are excluded and reintroduced in a method of isolation.

Seemingly backing terrain theory up are the latest studies, as noted above, that show air pollution causing at least one in five deaths; and toxic chemicals from general production based on fossil fuel and metal mining causing the rise of autoimmune disorders over the past 40 years. The damage air and toxic/plastic pollution does to human cells makes them vulnerable to imbalances of bacteria that promote further deterioration.

Cowan’s argument that modern science is actually starting to move away from germ theory potentially tallies with other developments in science in late-monopoly capitalism that are beginning to look more and more ‘pre-socialist’ (i.e. dialectical, holistic, systematic, but still ‘pre’ since it is being used to build the internet of things, in order to advance the productivity of labour and the circulation of capital). As Hickel writes:

“Science today is beginning to catch up [albeit, as far as Hickel is concerned, with animism, a worldview hardly incompatible with Marxism]. Biologists are discovering that humans are not standalone individuals, but composed largely of microorganisms on which we depend for functions as basic as digestion. Psychiatrists are learning that spending time around plants is essential to people’s mental health, and indeed that certain plants can heal humans from complex psychological traumas. Ecologists are learning that trees, far from being inanimate, communicate with each other and even share food and medicine through invisible mycelial networks in the soil. Quantum physicists are teaching us that individual particles that appear to be distinct are inextricably entangled with others, even across vast distances. And Earth-systems scientists are finding evidence that the planet itself operates like a living superorganism.” Op cit, p. 33.

Hickel adds: “Humans have two sets of DNA — one contained in the nucleus of each of our cells, and the other in the mitochondria, an ‘organelle’ that lives within the cell itself. Biologists believe that this second set, the mitochondrial DNA, is derived from bacteria that were engulfed by our cells at some point in the evolutionary past. Today these little organelles play an absolutely essential role in human life: they convert food into energy that our bodies can use. This is mind-bending: that our most basic metabolic functions, and even the genetic codes that constitute the very core of who we are, depend on other beings.

“The implications of this are profound. A team of scientists associated with the Interdisciplinary Microbiome Project at Oxford University have suggested that discoveries related to bacteria may revolutionise not only our science but our ontology too: ‘Our ability to map previously invisible forms of microbial life in and around us is forcing us to rethink the biological constitution of the world, and the position of humans vis-a-vis other forms of life.’”

These scientific advances reflect the fact that the economic-technological base of society is becoming socialist, backing the political-legal superstructure of capitalist society into a corner and making it increasingly oppressive and reactionary as it tries to fend off the advances of its own creation.

With all this in mind, it seems highly plausible that the events of 2020 have been erected as an attempt by the ruling class to roll back the progress that has been made in scientific thought. This makes total sense from the perspective of history: every ruling class in history has ended up rejecting all manner of progressive trends, scientific or otherwise, when it finally threatens its power. It is forced to fight back to cling to power, ‘bites off more than it can chew’ — since the enemy it itself has spawned has grown more abundant — and is then, through violent struggle, finally overthrown.

Today, the relatively dwindling capitalist class is outnumbered by billions of the proletarians it exploits, meaning it faces much greater obstacles to holding onto power than ever before. Its intensifying attacks on billions of people will force billions of people to fight back just to survive.

NB: Marxists sometimes mistakenly dismiss scientific findings from scientists who represent small/medium capital on the basis that they must be inherently motivated by right-wing ideology. Even if they are, we should not forget that ‘small/medium’ capital is more flexible than monopoly capital: i.e. it is less capital-intensive and therefore enjoys more scope for experimentation and innovation. The larger capital gets, the more expensive it becomes to sustain — the costs of running a multi/transnational company are increasingly enormous. The innovations monopoly capital seems to make usually come from the state (the military); or small/medium capital that it later absorbs.

[14] Venessa Beeley writes for UK Column (22 April): “Neil Ferguson is acting director of the Vaccine Impact Modelling Consortium (VIMC), which is based at Imperial College in London…

The professor who derailed Johnson’s semblance of ‘herd immunity’ strategy is no stranger to controversy and is described as having a “patchy” record of modelling pandemics by one of his academic peers, Professor Michael Thrusfield of Edinburgh University, an expert in animal diseases.

Ferguson was instrumental in the modelling of the British Government’s response to Foot and Mouth Disease (FMD) in 2001, which Thrusfield describes as “not fit for purpose” (2006) and “seriously flawed” (2012)…

An estimated twelve million animals were slaughtered as a result of Ferguson’s 2001 initiative. The farming community was devastated by suicides and bankruptcies that irretrievably altered the landscape of British agriculture — forcing healthy smallholdings into agri-corporate mergers and empowering the EU central governance in the agricultural sector.

Insight: Slaughtered on Suspicion, a documentary made by UK Column in 2015, provides a shocking insight into the suffering precipitated by Ferguson’s model and the “new normal” imposed upon Britain’s farming community. The following is a statement made by one of the contributors to the programme:

12,000,000 animals [Meat & Livestock Commission statistic] were slaughtered but that did not include lambs at foot, aborted lambs, calves or piglets. Further, tens of thousands of chickens were slaughtered in the early months — on welfare grounds, apparently. 88% of all animals slaughtered had not contracted FMD [source: Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs].

Great Orton airfield was used to slaughter sheep under the “voluntary” cull: that was anything but voluntary, and farmers not participating were ruthlessly threatened. There was only one mild case of FMD recorded from the thousands of blood tests done at Great Orton [source: DEFRA].

There was a travelator that ran from the slaughter tent at Great Orton to the graves. This ran 16 hours a day, transporting “dead” young lambs. Slaughtermen working there told me that many of the lambs were buried alive.

The man that advised Blair during this fiasco was, as many will know, Prof. Ferguson of Imperial College. He was [reportedly] sacked by DEFRA late on during the epidemic, but the damage had been done. Prof Ferguson was awarded an OBE in 2002 for his work during FMD 2001.”

In 2002, Ferguson predicted that up to 50,000 people would die from variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease, better known as “mad cow disease”, increasing to 150,000 if the epidemic expanded to include sheep. The reality is: “Since 1990, 178 people in the United Kingdom have died from vCJD, according to the National CJD Research & Surveillance Unit at the University of Edinburgh.” (2017)

In 2005, Ferguson claimed that up to 200 million people would be killed by bird-flu or H5N1. By early 2006, the WHO had only linked 78 deaths to the virus, out of 147 reported cases.

In 2009, Ferguson and his team at Imperial College advised the government that swine flu or H1N1 would probably kill 65,000 people in the UK. In the end, swine flu claimed the lives of 457 people in the UK.

Now, in 2020, Ferguson and Imperial College have released a report which claims that half a million Britons and 2.2 million Americans may be killed by covid-19. The report has still not been peer-reviewed; despite this and Ferguson’s glaring record of mathematical sensationalism, the British Government has adopted the devastating socio-economic lockdown that Ferguson has proposed.”

[15] The difficulty in trusting for-profit health care is further compounded by bogus talk of an ‘overpopulation’ crisis. The environmental/climate crisis is driven not by overpopulation or overconsumption but by capitalism’s dependence on fossil fuels and metal mining production, since its dependence on labour exploitation makes it dependent on the labour-intensity of extraction. Fossil fuel in particular, since it disappears into thin air and has to be dug up anew by exploited labour (whereas renewables based on metals and minerals potentially don’t until they’ve been worn out; although there is little profit in building things to last or waiting until things are worn out). Most of the things we need can be produced with mycelium, hemp and other fibrous plants, but these do not involve much exploitation of labour or labour intensity, so only attract very limited levels of investment. See “Socialism or extinction is a fact, not just a slogan”.

Talk of ‘overpopulation’ due to high unemployment played a role in ‘justifying’ — as far as capitalists were concerned — WWI/II and The Holocaust. Unemployment is a feature of capitalism because capital becomes surplus (unprofitable to reinvest), thereby producing ‘surplus labour’ — workers who capital can no longer afford to employ. Capital does favour a loose (surplus) labour market, since the threat of unemployment, with an abundance of potential replacements, can be used to compel employed workers to accept lower wages and poorer conditions. However, the greater the surplus labour, the greater the expenditure on benefits that eats into tax bases and therefore profit margins. Such are the terrible contradictions of capitalism. Because socialism produces for utility instead of profit, it can sustain full employment.

One study estimates that Earth can cope with at least 92 billion humans. We are actually facing an underpopulation crisis, since the replacement rate is falling, meaning, for one thing, that there are not enough young people to support the ageing population.

An overaccumulation of capital also manifests in an overproduction of commodities that cannot be sold; that then have to either be destroyed or sold on the cheap. Again, the pharmaceutical industry is not exempt from this problem.

[16] “As the virus spread, central banks injected $9 trillion into economies worldwide, aiming to keep the world economy afloat. Much of that stimulus has gone into financial markets, and from there into the net worth of the ultra-rich,” the Financial Times reports. “The total wealth of billionaires worldwide rose by $5tn to $13tn in 12 months, the most dramatic surge ever registered on the annual billionaire list compiled by Forbes magazine.” The wealth of US billionaires as a share of US GDP doubled from 10 to 20% in a decade, but from 15% to 20% in 2020 alone, according to the report. In Sweden, “which many progressives still mischaracterise as a social democratic utopia, in the past 5 years the population of billionaires has risen from 26 to 41, 10 of them popping up just last year, when their wealth leapt up as a share of GDP from 20% to near 30%… Not only did China’s billionaire population explosion dwarf all others in 2020, but together they added nearly $1tn to their collective fortunes, which nearly doubled as a share of GDP to 15%.”

While the Communist Party of China claims to be ‘building socialism’ ‘via a capitalist road’, Chinese capital seems to be gaining in strength, via a massive increase in exploitation and theft, if indeed it had not already wrested control after the death of Mao. One must certainly recognise that the ‘economic liberalisation’ and regression in China back towards capitalism was certainly a manifestation of China’s isolation and need to trade in the context of the US having monopolised raw materials in the rest of south-east Asia. Today, China has the same problems as the main capitalist superpowers, if not yet quite to the same degree: namely, a massive debt crisis and increasingly low interest rates, a manifestation of a huge overaccumulation of capital.

China is surely not only capitalist now but imperialist. It is encouraging socialist Cuba, which has already begun to allow privatised elements into its economy, to follow its model. No doubt China influenced Cuba’s decision to lockdown, resulting in an 75% fall in tourism, a vital source of income for the island nation. Raul Castro is locked in a battle with de facto social democrats in the party who want to follow China.

[17] Several other Marxists have also argued that capitalism is now entering its final crisis, including John Smith, Ernst Wolff, and Florian Opitz, who directed the film System Error.

Other intellectuals have, too. In his 2019 lecture “How to enjoy the end of the world”, Sid Smith argues convincingly that doubling the size of the economy, as tends to happen every 20 years under capitalism, would finish off Earth’s atmosphere — but also that the economy is now so large that the cost of doubling it, based on the expense of a diminishing energy return on investment (EROI) makes that impossible. “The collapse has already begun,” he says. That this is happening at exactly the same time that capitalism is exhausting its primary fuel supply, human labour, can be no coincidence, but is remarkably humbling nonetheless.

An MIT analysis in 1972 predicted society would collapse due to the exhaustion of economic growth this century and a recent review by a KPMG analyst has set the date at no later than 2040.

[18] We stress global, since socialism isolated and under attack by capitalist superpowers, as in the case of the Soviet Union, is forced to build up its military defences at the expense of its civilian economy. It also has to trade with capitalist companies (where it can circumvent blockades and sanctions), undermining the ability to plan production, since fluctuating foreign prices cannot be fully anticipated. This incentivises the build up of foreign currency — upon which the Soviet Union eventually became too dependent — (including via black markets), meaning money cannot be replaced with a voucher system pegged to labour time (vouchers are cancelled once spent, preventing the concentration of wealth into fewer hands). The level of technology at the time also contributed to the Soviet Union’s ‘command and control’ style of planning production, which under-emphasised the finer details, but this problem no longer exists thanks to today’s computing power and digital stock coding.

Once world socialism (the lower stage of communism) is achieved, as automation and 3-D printing, etc, become increasingly diffuse and ‘localised’ — increasingly ending the divide between producer and consumer that first came into existence with the surplus produce of the agricultural revolution around 12,000 years ago (before which there was no state, war, race or gender) — bringing about abundant material wealth for all, the state will become increasingly irrelevant and wither away, creating a kind of ‘global commune’ and the higher stage of communism, i.e. a classless society (including the de facto abolition of the political-economic categories of gender, race and nationality).

Ted Reese is a Marxist economist and author of Socialism or Extinction (self-published) and The End of Capitalism: The Thought of Henryk Grossman (Zer0 Books)