4.2 From a love of death to premature death

This is nothing short of the assassination of human life. Such a vision, to quote Erich Fromm,[1] can only be the outcome of “severe mental sickness”, one which he called “the syndrome of decay”, or “love of death”, and “which can be said to be the essence of true evil”, at the “root of the most vicious destructiveness and inhumanity”. It is one of the “gravest forms” of pathological addiction to money for its own sake, beyond any threshold making it redundant: for first and foremost the totally dehumanized are these addicts, much more than any of their victims. Every effort then has to be made to destroy life, both human and non-human. For life becomes unendurable, like light for those too long in the dark. And as in other forms of insanity every waking thought is focused to an abnormal degree on how to bring about destruction. Hence the most unthinkable forms of coercion and of “the manipulation of the human tendency to trust and accept representations at face value”[2] have been devised and applied. Since 2010, the Behavioural Insight Team has grown “a global social purpose company with offices around the world”.[3] The latest one was opened in Paris on 27 October 2020. In the UK, the Nudge Unit, as it is called, is at present “working closely with the Department of Health and Social Care”.[4] Elsewhere, similar teams, which “have proliferated across the globe” are equally active.[5]

Whether with their help or not, the masterminding of the illusion of problem inducing panic, or in the more subtle language of Bridgespan’s website, “a new field”,[6] to bring about the planned solution presented as unique and logical is a well-tried method of manipulation. This we saw was the case with the development of the synthesis of ammonia by creating the groundless fear of unsustainable population growth. This was also the case regarding Rockefeller’s Polio vaccine campaign. In these two instances, the solution proposed in effect caused the problem, which could then be claimed as evidence of its existence. Today, an elaborate variant of Rockefeller’s method is at work. Building on the fear of contagious epidemics generated over the centuries, and fueling this fear through multiple means, the policies applied are of a nature to provide the excess morbidity and mortality that can then be said to be due to covid-19, but in the present case, unlike polio, there is no Covid-19 in the first place. Indeed it is liable to trigger multiple physical and mental illnesses, and not just from measures inducing an inhuman unhealthy lifestyle. Fear alone, known to be “a risk for our health and well-being”[7] both directly and indirectly, is being fuelled severally: “Threats of death” from a supposed virus, “[t]hreats of endless … isolation” if the population does not behave and comply with the measures, “vague threats” of a fearful future of incessant pandemics, of a “new normal”, threats of financial and livelihood loss. Whether or not the fear is justified is beside the point since it is the perception that matters. Fear can trigger behaviour harmful to our survival, especially the mother of all fears, the fear of death, which as already remarked, paradoxically is all the greater, the greater alienation from life is.

This is precisely what is happening now. The extraordinary daily ritual chanting of the number of deaths from an illusory virus whose detection has so far evaded us, together with measures aiming to isolate, has induced a fear of all fellow human beings, including kith and kin, or at least the conviction that we need to keep away from each other for the common good, to save the vulnerable, to save ourselves. Hence, out of fear for ourselves or others, the majority are participating in worsening the health of everyone, and therefore in bringing about their demise, including possibly their own, yet oblivious they are doing so. The very instinct which makes a human stretch out his hand to someone falling is being eroded both metaphorically and literally. Those in need of help are left unattended, including by those whose vocation is to care, in particular medical staff. Fear is leading all too many to hospitals, misdiagnosed with covid-19 by the logical nonsense of tests, a positive outcome to which is used as the definition of the disease, and thus of possibly receiving a wrong treatment. For a treatment protocol elaborated for a non-identified disease is questionable. The same holds for vaccines, which fear is also making all too many seek.

The elderly are too afraid to meet children and grandchildren, while the younger generations are afraid to cause the death of their elders. Consequently, the elderly are left in utter loneliness, the young bereft of their loving presence. This alone is a recipe for ensuring health issues.

Current policies, by playing on fear, have contributed to bring about compliance. It is known[8] that inducing illness “weakens mental and physical abilities to resist”, that isolation, alone or in a group within a “barren environment” where “movement is “restricted”, where man is cut off from all the usual activities that have been part and parcel of his life from time immemorial, “the victim becomes dependent on him [the torturer] as the sole source of support”, that a circle of threats and of “occasional unpredictable brief respites” from some of the measures, or “promises” of the return of some but not all liberties, of “[r]ewards for partial compliance” or “favours”, such as the limited right to go on summer holidays, but with restrictions, together with the “enforcement of minute rules” such as incessant hand-washing “develops habit of compliance”, that omnipotence over the fate of an individual, the control of not just his present but also of his future, “suggests futility of resistance”, that “demeaning punishments”, “insults and taunts”, or “denial of privacy” as surveillance becomes more pervasive through track-and-trace methods, as ordinary citizens merely trying to live a human life are fined or arrested, their homes broken into if need be, even verbally abused both by the police and other victims, who as a result of such psychological harassment identify with their torturers, or try to propitiate them, and thus “sustain” themselves to various degrees by their “hatred” of fellow victims on whom they have shifted the responsibility for their suffering, that “mysterious changes of behaviour”, sometimes harsh, sometimes infantilizing, sometimes enticing, “cultivate anxiety & despair”, that the illogical discourse and actions such as the variability of the distance in “social distancing” and of the quarantine period according to countries – even neighbouring ones – implying a virus has the human capacity to change its behaviour as it crosses border, depletes the capacity to reason and distinguish between truth and untruth.

Credibility for the illogicality and untruthfulness is provided by medical doctors and professors of science and other subjects – people with many letters after their name – who are the mouthpiece of the decisions taken, and whose work provide the alibi needed to hide the real intent.

Regarding science, it has been a while now since it became transformed into dogma, giving birth to a new creed, a set of tenets which claim to be science, yet do not display its characteristics, in particular which do not rest on reproduced and reproducible observation-based reasoning. They must therefore be taken on faith. According to Richard Horton, the editor-in-chief of the prestigious Lancet, much of the scientific literature, perhaps half, may simply be untrue. Afflicted by studies with small sample sizes, tiny effects, invalid exploratory analyses, and flagrant conflicts of interest, together with an obsession for pursuing fashionable trends of dubious importance, science has taken a turn towards darkness.[9] It is difficult enough for the scientifically literate to distinguish science from the creed, let alone for the uninitiated who are kept in awe and told it all is beyond their understanding, only a matter of experts, obscuring any connection they may have to vested interests. Language we saw has long been used to deflect attention and to dupe, notably by discrediting rational critics as believers in conspiracies, but it is especially the case concerning the edicts of this creed. They are shrouded in the mysticism of mathematics, the latter having replaced Latin as the language of the Cognoscente. By “using technical jargon”, the simple is made to look complicated, the absence of solid foundations for a theory is obscured, and attention is diverted from the basic questions.[10]

Certainly if researchers, journalists, doctors, nurses, teachers, policemen, priests, office workers, simple citizens are participating in this process of destruction, deliberately or unconsciously, it is to some extent due to the fear of reprisal, to the fear of proving different from their social and professional sphere. It is easier to “comply …. than to risk the consequences of questioning the purpose or legitimacy of the information.”[11] Nonetheless, alienation from life, loss of identity, reification, were already major issues, which the individual is little aware of suffering from, and thus was all the more a ready victim of this level of psychological maltreatment. The extent to which an individual is participating reveals the extent to which he has been infected by “the syndrome of decay”, the extent to which his mental and physical immune system is already impaired and unable to fight his own dehumanization – pollution, medical drugs and vaccines, likely playing a role in the impairment of thinking capacities and survival instincts.

The majority reaction has now made clear the full implications of a reified homo consumens, which homo sapiens has become: reification means loss of wisdom, of any sense of what wisdom is, nor any desire for wisdom. A thing cannot think, has no sense of life, nor of death.

Hence, a machine-made virtual world has come to be perceived as reality. This to some extent also explains the ready acceptance of the fiction of a pandemic: our sense perception tells us there are no droves of corpses, nor of people falling severely ill, but there are on the television or computer screen. The extent of the confusion between virtuality and reality has been revealed by the acceptance and even more so the all too frequent enthusiasm or absence of any realisation of the ills of a virtualized life, of virtualized choir or orchestral practice, each isolated in his own room, of virtualized parties, each getting drunk alone in his own home, of virtualized funerals that have turned death into a distant show.

We have all too readily forgotten that emotions cannot be transmitted via a computer screen, that real life encounters are beyond analysis, reactions are influenced by innumerable indescribable factors. These critically influence political and professional decisions. Crises have been defused in the last extremity because of some unfathomable and unlikely human connection forming between world leaders. At a time when we are able to destroy our species by simply pressing a button, physical meetings are more than vital. As for the arts, it is a continuous reactive exchange beyond the visual, beyond the verbal, between performers and audience; similarly with teachers and students, doctors and patients.

It is not possible for online interactions to remedy the reduction of families to their smallest unit, which is not just putting pressure on their cohesion, but breaking the continuance of millennia old human cultures and traditions transmitted generations to generations.

The entire human fabric is being torn. Ever since time immemorial when Man became “conscious of his own self”, he has equally been “conscious of a mysterious spirit of unity which found through him in his society”, the “subtle medium of relationship between individuals, which is not for any utilitarian purpose”.[12] It is mirrored by human history, which by and large is the record of the expansion of mankind’s consciousness from the individual to the family, to the tribe, to the village, and so on – a consciousness very different from globalization. The latter ideal, like narrow parochialism with its rejection of others and its focus on differences, leads not to a collective consciousness where the individual gains in dignity and significance within a diversity of cultures but to a uniformity where he loses his identity, and whose ultimate outcome is the death of the collective, perforce of the individual. If we ignore or harm this primeval consciousness through enforced isolation and fear, if we ignore or harm our humanness, if we continue to confuse death with life, if we remain silent to our own assassination, the consequences for us may well be severe, if not fatal. We cannot alter the principles underlying life, but can make ourselves incompatible with them, and therefore precipitate our end.

Now, it may be that isolating measures are giving the illusion to behavioural insight teams that scientific methods can be applied to the human sphere, for it amounts to an attempt to transform the the world into a laboratory and populations into guinea pigs, where interfering variables – noise – can be controlled. It is however well known that even the simplest ideal physical model is ridden with unpredictability. Hence even were humanity, even were life, nothing but a machine, it is of a complexity, and thus unpredictability, beyond comprehension, all the more so of unthinking reified humans. And if life, and thus humans are more than a meaningless mechanism then any attempt to destroy that which is indestructible by man is bound to fail.

  1. Fromm, E. 1964. The Heart of Man: His Genius for Good and Evil. New York: Harper Collins. p. 57
  2. https://fidelitylaw.org/journals/volume-xxii/section-iii/
  3. See 2.
  4. https://www.instituteforgovernment.org.uk/explainers/nudge-unit
  5. https://www.bi.team/international-approaches-to-applying-behavioural-insights-europe-and-the-americas/
  6. https://www.bridgespan.org/insights/blog/transformative-scale/when-building-a-field-means-a-new-organization
  7. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5241909/
  8. https://www.amnesty.org/download/Documents/204000/act400011973eng.pdf
  9. Horton, R. 2015. “Offline: What is medicine’s 5 stigma?”. The Lancet 385 (9976): 1380.
  10. Ray T. and U. Ray 2020. On Science: Concepts, Cultures, and Limits. London: Routledge.
  11. https://fidelitylaw.org/journals/volume-xxii/section-iii/
  12. Tagore, R. 1931. The Religion of Man: The Hibbert Lectures for 1930. New York: Macmillan. p. 141