Author: Crowhill Report

… we need a better approach. There comes a time when you have to realize that lecturing and hectoring and wagging fingers just isn’t cutting it.

Yesterday I listened to an interview with an environmentalist who (to her credit) finally came to the realization that environmentalists have been preaching the same message for years (cut your carbon footprint, use less, change your lifestyle, suffer), and that another strategy might be better. She’s now an advocate for nuclear power.

That seems sensible to me. If people aren’t responding to your cries and pleas and moral harangues, maybe it’s time to try something different.

It’s like when the patient won’t quit smoking, and the doctor says “can you at least smoke filtered cigarettes?”

A lot of people have questions and worries about the vaccines. The people in charge don’t seem interested in addressing those concerns. They just want to pressure people into compliance.

“We’re the experts. We know best. Do as you’re told, peasant.”

That strategy isn’t working, and I pray it will never work.

The vaccine skeptics have lots of reasons to be skeptical, and underlying all of them is the idea that the public health authorities have not been honest with them. Which is true.

So why not have it all out?

It’s too much to ask Sleepy Joe to do anything sensible, but why doesn’t whoever is in charge organize a debate? Pick a Saturday and devote the entire day to airing out the arguments. Present all the views, and the responses.

There may have to be a limit on “all the views,” since some of them are crazy. But the important thing — which some people don’t want to admit — is that a lot of the vaccine worries and concerns are not crazy. Intelligent, credentialed, sensible people have concerns. And when those concerns are ignored, or, worse, suppressed, it only feeds the idea that people are lying to you.

So let them have their say, and then let other people respond.

I know the woke left hates the idea of giving someone they disagree with “a platform,” but they’re morons. If a position is right, it should withstand open inquiry.

Last night I listened to Brendan O’Neill interview Nick Carter on the Covid situation in Australia.

The Aussies are really serious about controlling the virus — although not quite as serious as the Kiwis, who have gone stark raving mad.

What shocked me most was not the strict Covid rules, and how they’re being enforced (even using the army!). That was bad, but even worse was Mr. Carter’s attitude that yeah, ha ha, all these horrible things are happening right now, and our freedoms and civil liberties are disappearing (see, e.g., woman arrested for anti-lockdown post on Facebook), but “our strong liberal institutions won’t allow this to go too far.”

They’ve already gone too far, and once people seize powers, they rarely give them up. Precedents are being set. And recall Jonathan Swift’s definition of precedent: something done illegally before that can be done legally now.

In England, people are telling the government where they’re going to facilitate contact tracing.

That’s simultaneously a great idea and terrifying. We should be using technology to help control the spread of the virus, but freedom and privacy are always afterthoughts with these people.

“Oh, if you’re concerned then we’ll make it opt in. And by the way, what do you have to hide?”

Our allies are asking us to extend the date for withdrawal from Afghanistan. But the Taliban says no. So Biden says no.

I saw this headline — Biden Calls on Companies to Mandate COVID-19 Vaccination — and wondered if he’d do that if the demographics were different.

As a general rule, political conservatives are more likely to be suspicious of the Covid vaccine than liberals. If it was the other way around, would Democrats be pushing for vaccines? I don’t think so.

This is interesting. Australian Truck Drivers Vow To Block Every Major Highway In Radical Anti-Lockdown Strike