Former President Ronald Reagan famously said that the nine most terrifying words in the English language are “I’m from the Government, and I’m here to help”. His point was that Government “help” often leads to worse outcomes for its supposed beneficiaries. Not only have many governments been incredibly inefficient in achieving claimed objectives of helping citizens, but they have often proved to be malicious in intent: the “help” offered has been a cover to stay in power.
Liberal democracies have a limited repertoire of state-sanctioned carrots and sticks, and none of these allow governments to easily trample citizens’ rights enshrined in law such as habeas corpus or the right to trial in a court of law. There are certain norms that apply to government action in modern liberal democracies, and these cannot easily be over-ridden. We call these norms civilised.
Nonetheless, we have witnessed in our lifetimes a new mode of practical politics observed by the great essayist H. L. Mencken. He said, in so many words, that our governments manufacture imaginary hobgoblins – creatures of the mind that can be mischievous, frightening and even dangerous – and then wait for citizens to clamour for safety.
The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary
In serving those needs for safety, governments are more likely to get re-elected. Government by hysteria in other words, where fear and alarm are cultivated, then weaponised, for political ends.
Yet exploiting hysteria to govern, with dramatic displays of outrage or emotion, is not without challenges. Hobgoblins cannot bamboozle everyone all the time. Fear and alarm wear out, and truth matters in justifying policies that impact the livelihoods of people.
The Climate Hobgoblins
Climate hobgoblins have been long in the making. Maurice Strong, a Canadian environmentalist and principal architect of the 1972 Stockholm conference – the first global summit to make the environment the central issue – proclaimed that “If we don’t change, our species will not survive. … Frankly, we may get to the point where the only way of saving the world will be for industrial civilisation to collapse.” For mere hobgoblins, this was big stuff. These ones endangered mankind itself.
The threatening features of this genre of hobgoblins went through several permutations. It started with Paul Ehrlich’s famine and war through over-population and the Club of Rome’s prediction of inevitable resource scarcity. It then morphed into global cooling during the 1970s, before finally settling for global warming (now called ‘climate change’) due to effects of greenhouse gases. The focus is on the trace gas carbon dioxide mainly emitted by humans combusting fuels for industry, cooking, heating, cooling and transport.
The story is that the CO2 hobgoblins are the control knob of climate and, by extension, our cataclysmic future, a theory spread via the panic of a Swedish school drop-out who deleted her predictive tweet about the end of the world by 2023. Along with the Swede Greta Thunberg (now a campaigner for Palestinian rights) are the assorted ‘climate scientists’ who have conjured up the climate hobgoblins with their global warming ‘hockey stick’ charts and their pseudoscientific climate models duly adopted by the UN’s IPCC.
Lionel Shriver captures the climate hobgoblins’ mischievousness well:
They take temperature readings at Heathrow airport. They refuse to cite less distressing satellite readings. They attribute single weather events to climate change without supporting data. They play on the fact that up close, all natural disasters seem like the worst ever. They suppress good news, such as the recovery of the Great Barrier Reef and the fact that hurricanes have not grown more frequent – only reporting the ’hottest July on record’ without noting when the ‘record’ goes back only to 1940.
The work of the climate hobgoblins has stoked up the climate hysteria which is amplified by the mass media on almost daily basis. The deluge of catastrophic predictions regarding climate change and its consequences has reached everyone on the planet. One has only to cite the frequent hyperbolic pronouncements by UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who never tires of reminding his global audience of the “climate emergency”: it is “a code red for humanity. The alarm bells are deafening, and the evidence is irrefutable”; the “era of global boiling has arrived”, and so on ad nauseam.
John Clauser, a 2022 Nobel prize laureate in physics, finds climate alarmism “a dangerous corruption of science that threatens the world’s economy and the well-being of billions of people”. He continues:
Misguided climate science has metastasized into massive shock-journalistic pseudoscience. In turn, the pseudoscience has become a scapegoat for a wide variety of other unrelated ills. It has been promoted and extended by similarly misguided business marketing agents, politicians, journalists, agencies and environmentalists.
The COVID-19 Hobgoblins
If the climate hobgoblins were long in the making, the Covid variety were anything but. The first reports of COVID-19 emerged in late December 2019, when an outbreak of an unidentified form of pneumonia was reported in Wuhan, China. The World Health Organisation (WHO) and the US Centres for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) began reporting on the outbreak in January 2020 with individual cases reported in Thailand and elsewhere.
By March 2020, the World Health Organisation (WHO) had declared COVID-19 a global health emergency and named the virus “severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2”. It was also in March that WHO officially declared the COVID-19 outbreak a pandemic. In the early stages of the spread in infection, countries around the world took different approaches to manage COVID-19 and reduce the spread of the virus. Most countries adopted more or less strict lockdowns (encompassing stay-at-home orders, curfews, quarantines, cordons sanitaires and similar societal restrictions) with the significant exception of Sweden which undertook limited targeted measures such as protecting the elderly and the infirm. Strict lockdowns were precluded by insufficient state capacity in the poorer countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America.
The British Prime Minister Boris Johnson spoke of common sense, ‘herd immunity’ and protecting the vulnerable. He initially rejected banning mass gatherings or imposing social distancing rules. Then, an unpublished alarmist March 16th report by Professor Neil Ferguson of Imperial College London warned of 510,000 deaths in the country if the country did not immediately adopt a suppression strategy. On March 23rd, the UK Government reversed course and imposed one of Europe’s strictest lockdowns. For the US, the professor had predicted 2.2 million deaths absent similar government controls, and there too, Ferguson’s fearful predictions of mass deaths helped move the US federal government into lockdown mode.
Unlike climate change models that predict outcomes over a period of decades, however, it takes only days and weeks for epidemiological model forecasts to be falsified by data. Furthermore, by including all extreme weather (whether heavy snowfalls or heatwaves, droughts or floods) as results of an all-encompassing ‘climate change’, nothing could be disproven.
But the COVID-19 hobgoblins could not provide cover for Professor Ferguson’s hysterical conjectures. Thus, by March 25th, Ferguson’s predicted half a million fatalities in the UK was adjusted downward to “unlikely to exceed 20,000”, a reduction by a factor of 25. This drastic reduction could not be credibly explained by UK’s lockdown measures which had been imposed only two days previously, before any such measures could possibly have had enough time to work.
The Corruption of Science
While the climate and COVID-19 hobgoblins may be of different genres, they share much in common. They share striking parallels in the corruption of science, with the use of models whether they be of a bogus global warming hockey-stick or runaway epidemiological fatality predictions. This inordinate dependence on speculative, not-fit-for-purpose models betray the lack of transparency and groupthink, which involves the suppression of sceptics who question the imaginary hobgoblins.
A recent victim of the groupthink censorship is the highly eminent public health specialist Dr Jay Bhattacharya who co-authored the Great Barrington Declaration which criticised the wholesale adoption of rigid lockdowns in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Nominated by President Trump as the next head of the National Institutes of Health, he has undergone four years of censorship, blacklisting and vilification. Dr John Clauser, who disputes the ‘climate crisis’ narrative, was similarly cancelled. He was disinvited by the IMF from a talk he was supposed to deliver and was subject to hit pieces in the mainstream media.
In the early days of the COVID-19 lockdown in the UK, former Supreme Court Justice Jonathan Sumption denounced the country’s “hysterical slide into a police state. … An irrational overreaction driven by fear”. He went on to masterfully describe the role of hysteria in politics:
The real problem is that when human societies lose their freedom, it’s not usually because tyrants have taken it away. It’s usually because people willingly surrender their freedom in return for protection against some external threat. And the threat is usually a real threat but usually exaggerated. That’s what I fear we are seeing now. The pressure on politicians has come from the public. They want action. They don’t pause to ask whether the action will work. They don’t ask themselves whether the cost will be worth paying. They want action anyway. And anyone who has studied history will recognise here the classic symptoms of collective hysteria. Hysteria is infectious. We are working ourselves up into a lather in which we exaggerate the threat and stop asking ourselves whether the cure may be worse than the disease.
Hobgoblins Fade, People Wake Up
Much as people want protection from imaginary hobgoblins and their perceived threats, when governments turn tyrannical and pursue policies which cost far more than they benefit, people eventually undergo a process of disillusionment with a yearning for meaningful change. Regimes in power in turn double down on hysteria and panic-driven policies to keep the hobgoblins at bay. This causes even further impoverishment and alienation among larger sections of the population.
Rather than allocating resources and efforts towards protecting the vulnerable from COVID-19 while allowing the rest of the population to carry on with their livelihoods with individuals taking responsibility for safe socialising, most governments imposed top-down, economy-crushing lockdowns followed by mandates and exhortations to wear masks and take vaccinations and endless booster shots. And rather than mitigating real environmental threats such as ensuring water reservoirs are filled and forests are managed to safeguard against fires in California for example, the climate change establishment advocates further ‘decarbonisation’ (read deindustrialisation) to save us from extreme scenarios of global warming.
The triumphant return of Donald Trump as the 47th president of the US was the culmination of that process of disillusionment. The hobgoblins of COVID-19 and climate no longer seemed to hold sway. Rather, more people than not preferred to believe in, and vote for, a leader that dismissed the ‘climate crisis’ as a hoax and who was willing to give succour to those that refused COVID-19 vaccinations despite being threatened with the loss of jobs and ordinary freedoms.
On the first day of his administration, President Donald Trump signed a series of executive orders which promise to end hysteria over fearful narratives. In the areas of energy, environment and the so-called ‘climate crisis’, President Trump has instructed his administration to withdraw from the Paris Climate Accord, reopen Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas exploration, temporarily withdraw all areas on the Outer Continental Shelf from offshore wind leasing, review the federal Government’s leasing and permitting practices for wind projects, declare a national energy emergency, stop radical environmentalism by “putting people over fish” to provide water to southern California; and put ‘America First’ in international environmental agreements.
With respect to issues related to COVID-19 and public health, the most consequential move Mr. Trump made in his election campaign was to unite forces with Robert F. Kennedy Jr. who initially ran as an independent, and to nominate him as his next Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services. On his first day, he issued an executive order to withdraw from the World Health Organisation. He also promised to “reinstate any service members who were unjustly expelled from our military for objecting to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate with full back pay”.
At his 1933 Presidential Inauguration, Franklin D. Roosevelt asserted his firm belief that “the only thing we have to fear is… fear itself”. Imaginary hobgoblins, threatening as they are, do fade away as people realise the truth.
Dr. Tilak K. Doshi is an economist, a former contributor to Forbes, and a member of the CO2 Coalition.
To join in with the discussion please make a donation to The Daily Sceptic.
Profanity and abuse will be removed and may lead to a permanent ban.
Privileged King Lectures Us On Climate
latest leaflet to print at home and deliver to neighbours or forward to politicians, media, friends online.
“Are we ruled by midwits?”
A lacking in basic maths skills is one thing. An ignorance of history, geography, economics is another. We educate our people poorly, then expect them to be wise when they get elected.
Does the majority of the population need to calculate probabilities on a regular basis? If not, it’s not a surprise the majority might get this wrong if asked unprepared. Same goes for any “simple” question that requires knowledge that may have lapsed.
What is important is the actions they would take to make an informed decision with the data presented to them.
Yet many incapable of calculation will offer contrary opinions on others’ informed opinions.
Absolutely.
I got the false negative one wrong first, but I understood the explanation when I read it, and I’d totally forgotten what ‘mode’ meant.
Although I’ve never taken a formal IQ test, based on online quizzes, my educational history and achievements, profession etc., I estimate it at 130-135.
Cummings is hardly a mid-wit, nor is Nassim Taleb – but both are catastrophically wrong on lockdowns and the “vaccines”. They are both supreme narcissists however.
It’s fairly irrelevant whether MPs are brilliant or crass when you have a civil service that openly blocks policy. Skills in root-and-branch civil service reform are the first priority at this stage.
Smart, worldly Ministers would put the Civil Servants in their place but only with the backing of their PM.
although it is clear the education system has been failing for decades, there are better candidates available than the ones selected to contest elections.
m They are rejected because they refuse to ape their Party leadership.
Does Hugo Keith not understand what QALY means or has he inserted a false description into the proceedings to make the PM’s information seem irrelevant to a casual observer who may not know the term? Given the way the inquiry is progressing and the skillset of the KC, it would not be a surprise.
I think he knows very well what QALY means, that’s why he doesn’t want to go there. As soon as you start thinking in terms of QALYS, the case for lockdowns ought to be utterly demolished. I say ought to but sadly when I argued this with people I know, they more or less called me a eugenicist. Society can only function decently by accepting that people die and that there may be some postponable deaths but the cost (financial or otherwise) of postponing them is too high – this general consensus went out of the window during covid.
There was a sudden mass-amnesia where people forgot how they had managed to get by in life before 2020.
and the government disinterest in their health and wellbeing up until that point.
Subtle diversion of lay public attention to “quality of life,” when QUALYs are essentially about how many years of life are lost. Sunak says more lives were lost by lockdown than saved, and KC waves his hands away from that vital fact in the direction of “quality of life” like a conjuror.
It sounds similar to the way that, during the panic, “lives” were trumpeted over “the economy,” as if the two were not completely interconnected. This is even more blatantly misleading. Look out in the future discussions for the press referring to “QUALY” as a measure of quality of life, and saying that one life saved is worth a bit of inconvenience.
I argue that each and every one of us lost QALYs to some extend. Some more so than others.
I remember a paper a while ago that tried to quantify QALYs lost due to Covid restrictions.
https://www.thelancet.com/pdfs/journals/eclinm/PIIS2589-5370(22)00035-9.pdf
True. But not measurable, except statistically, until we snuff it.
Oooh how crass. Surely you mean ‘pass away’?
I really dislike the weasel term ‘pass away’. As far as I’m concerned ‘die’ is a neutral term which describes what every living thing will do eventually. The only questions being ‘when’ and ‘how unpleasantly’?
My preferred black humour term for ‘dead’ is ‘on the wrong side of the grass’.
And the likely increase in deaths by alternative routes, due to lack of service & extended waiting lists for a range of other diseases. It’s entirely possible to demonstrate that the concept of “lockdown” had a negative effect, just based on QALY using the original definition of the term. No surprise that the barrister steered clear of it.
Notice also that Rishi was, more subtly, playing games. The cost benefit analysis done later, he says, shows that lockdowns caused more harm than good. This conveniently distracts from the fact that his government failed to do a cost-benefit analysis at any stage, which would have shown the same thing.
Mr Keith cuts off Mr Sunak with:
Why not? It’s evidence being presented by the PM of the United Kingdom.
Even if it was just a slip of the forked tongue to refer to QALY as ‘Quality Life Assurance models’. Why should you expect precision in language from a KC?
Oh.
The ‘false description’ is too obviously an embarrassment for it to have been made to just deflect attention.
He is absolutely clueless about what QALY means.
Which is a real shocker, as the whole point of a real lockdown inquiry would be to make just that assessment.
Everything else is just noise and foregone conclusions.
“Heather Mills blames ‘litany of lies’ as vegan empire collapses”
Sure. So the meat industry is gaslighting us by selling sausages made of pork..?
Yeah, nothing to do with extraordinary levels of industrial ultraprocessing, dubious taste & flavour, exorbitant cost, bl**dy awful product spelling (‘beeph’ – ‘fsh’ – ‘chkn’ – ‘cheezly’, etc). smug eco-warrior marketing, ingredient lists longer than a bottle of self-tanning lotion (titanium dioxide-coloured ‘fsh’ steaks – really?)…
I mentioned this yesterday
“Heather Mills blames ‘corporate greed’ as vegan food company collapses”
Cobblers!
It’s that nobody wants the f#@king bland chaff!”
A good article explaining why antizionism is antisemitism. **WARNING** Definitely triggering to Jew-haters.
”Imagine a group of people who work to destroy Italy because, they claim, Italy’s origins are illegitimate. Imagine further that these people maintain that of all the countries in the world, only Italy doesn’t deserve to exist. Then imagine that these people vigorously deny that they are anti-Italian. Would you believe them?
Now substitute “Israel” for “Italy,” and you’ll understand the dishonesty and absurdity of the argument that one can be anti-Zionist — that is, against the existence of a Jewish state — but not be anti-Jew.
Yet, that is precisely what anti-Zionists say. They say that Israel’s existence is illegitimate. They don’t say this about any other country in the world, no matter how bloody its origins. And then they get offended when they’re accused of being anti-Jew.
How can they make this argument?
First, they change the topic. They say it’s unfair to charge those who merely “criticize” Israel with being antisemitic. No one says criticism of Israel is antisemitic. But anti-Zionism isn’t criticism of Israel. Anti-Zionism is opposition to Israel’s existence.
Zionism is the name of the movement for the return of the Jews to their historic homeland. Over the past 3,000 years, there were only two independent states located in what is called Israel. Both were Jewish states, and invaders destroyed both. No Arab or Muslim or any other sovereign country ever existed in that land, which was given the name “Palestine” by the Romans so as to remove all memory of the Jewish state they destroyed in the year 70.
If the Palestinians would stop killing Israelis, Israel would have no problem with a “two-state solution.” But Palestinians have rejected offers to have their own state on four separate occasions since 1947. That is the only reason they don’t have their own state.
And why have they always rejected having a Palestinian state? Because the only state they would accept is one that eradicates Israel. They have therefore been solely dedicated to destroying the Jewish state, not in having their own state alongside Israel.”
https://pjmedia.com/dennis-prager/2023/12/12/yes-anti-zionism-is-antisemitism-n4924670
( Awaits inevitable pile-on from all the antisemites…3,2,1 GO!! )
Speaking of Jew-haters, look how triggered this Polish antisemite MP is. What normal person behaves this way? Prat!
”Antisemitic Polish MP Grzegorz Braun uses a fire extinguisher to extinguish the candles on a Hanukkah Menorah as MP’s gathered to celebrate the Jewish holiday.”
https://twitter.com/OliLondonTV/status/1734625026974925289
Perhaps post what Hamas has been doing since 7th October to inform people of their continued campaign? 7th October is looking increasingly like an anomaly.
What happened in 70AD seems a bit of a stretch and leaves the conversation open to what other groups were doing back in the day. That may not help your argument.
Dr Pierre Kory has published three of the vids from Andrew Bridgen’s parliamentary debate on 4th December (Kory, Martin, Malone), more to follow. (Dr Malone already published his on Substack, Dr Yeadon’s is available on the HART Substack).
https://pierrekorymedicalmusings.com/p/uk-parliament-testimony-videos-from?utm_source=profile&utm_medium=reader2
At this time of deliberately propagandised polarisation, great reminder from James Corbett on the Gell-Mann Amnesia Effect – don’t believe everything you read in the MSM…
https://corbettreport.substack.com/p/the-gell-mann-amnesia-effect
Some kooky people on here this morning, downvoting a reminder of the Gell-Mann effect. Either they are media shills, or they’re not expert enough in anything to have noticed it themselves.
No worries Jon – its my fan club, not the content of the posts!
Their beloved ultra-processed vegan food products, with more than 100 ingredients, must be affecting their brains, muddling their thinking.
Thank you, that’s the most interesting article I have read for some time. Most of my friends are avid consumers of the MSM in all its modes. I’m not. It’s good to know why we don’t see eye to eye on any of the burning issues that we are confronted with continually, from Brexit to Ukraine.
Another magnum opus by Dr Jessica Rose on the frameshifting issue in the jab (creation of foreign ‘junk’ proteins in the body with unknown (but likely damaging) effects). Some of the comments are additionally informative. Plus one cross-posted from Anandamide on the same issue. Coincidence and c*ckup my a*se.
https://jessicar.substack.com/p/that-substack-about-n1-methylpseudouridines
https://anandamide.substack.com/p/frameshiting-slippery-sequence :
So in summary, this Frameshifting risk was known in 2021 and it was censored at the journals and on Twitter. Smoke screen papers like Kim et al appeared so some researches could get some Fauci biscuits. After billions of shots we can now see the warts through the lens of the next patent that will fix the crap forced into our kids.
And once again the goal posts begin to shift.
It stays in the arm.
Oops it doesn’t, but it doesn’t matter
It’s gone in 48hrs
Oops is still here months later, but it doesn’t matter
There is no DNA!!!
Ok there is a little, but it doesn’t matter
There is no SV40!!!
Oops there is, but it’s safe and effective
It stops transmission
Oops, it doesn’t but it makes it not so bad.
It’s good for the immunocompromised and those at risk
Oops that was never a clinical trial endpoint but its still safe and effective.
Badly controlled protein production -> amyloid protein. Amyloidosis is heap nasty disease.
Yup. Remember reading Dr Rose’s first paper on this at least a year ago, if not longer. Felt physically sick just at the thought of it.
The DailyscepticabouteverythingbutIsrael and its Jerusalem Times-like commentators surely won’t like John Mearsheimer’s take on it. Good.
https://mearsheimer.substack.com/p/death-and-destruction-in-gaza
Come now JayBee, you know Mearsheimer’s nothing more than a Hamas shill, don’t you? Him, Scott Ritter, Alastair Crooke, Max Blumenthal, Larry Johnstone, Lawrence Wilkerson, etc etc etc – the whole bally lot of them. /sarc. Let’s have some balance here – link to those jolly children singing that lovely song. Warms the cockles.
https://twitter.com/intifada/status/1726345295515058255?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1726334346431479989%7Ctwgr%5Edeb9d35650e06054d914c2cc9df3a64cf931a6bc%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Felectronicintifada.net%2Fblogs%2Fali-abunimah%2Fwatch-israeli-children-sing-we-will-annihilate-everyone-gaza
That must be Palestinian children being taught to hate Israelis for no reason except their religion then surely?
Thorough piece and obituary on Z’s political career and events since 2014.
Too many truth bombs for IanRons&co:
https://gordonhahn.com/2023/12/11/sad-clown-with-the-circus-closed-down-zelenskiys-demise/
https://www.conservativewoman.co.uk/why-squander-200million-on-a-foregone-conclusion/
A short but worthwhile dissection of the Hallett pantomime.