Apparently some lockdown zealots want retribution from skeptics
Mainstream outlets are having a field day with the release of a new book criticizing COVID skeptics and proponents of herd immunity.
Most of my articles remain free to allow for open access to the information provided. However, given that Substack is the main way I am supporting myself (for the time being) I release occasional posts for paid members to encourage support. Please consider becoming a paid member or supporting me through my ko-fi in order to help support the work that I put out. Note that ko-fi donations do not provide access to paywalled content on Substack.
However, if you wish to unsubscribe from being a paid member please note that Substack has an autorenewal policy, and so please be aware if your autorenew is coming up in case you would like to unsubscribe beforehand so as not to be charged.
Also, the annual fee for my Substack has been reduced to $30 for those who were concerned about the cost.
Accountability has been a widely used word over the past few years, in that many people want accountability for the havoc that came with the COVID pandemic through erroneous mandates, forced closures of business, and mandating of vaccines and isolation.
As of now, many of the heavy hitters such as Fauci or Walensky, who were also staunch proponents of these draconian measures, have faded from the public eye, likely scuttling away to whatever pharmaceutical company or public health institution seeks them out in the coming future.
None of these people who have led to the destruction of millions of lives have been held accountable, and as time goes on it’s likely that they may never be.
In contrast, things haven’t died down for a select few zealots. There are a select few, as noted last week, who seem to want to cling onto the age of COVID with masking and vaccination.
From the perspective of these zealots, it’s not their heroes Walensky, Fauci, Pfizer, or Moderna that should be held accountable, but rather those who dared to speak out against any of the mandates, appearing to still hold onto the belief that SARS-COV2 could have been a controlled virus if people locked down harder and isolated further.
These ideas seem to be resurging with the coming of a new book titled We Want Them Infected, written by New York, NY neurologist/psychiatrist Dr. Jonathan Howard.
The book appears to criticize those who were in favor of herd immunity and pushed against many of the lockdown measures in favor of reopening the country.
The name, in particular, appears to be derived from internal emails written by Dr. Paul Alexander and leaked to Politico, with a 2020 article appearing to use this phrase:
The actual context of this phrase can be seen below, and is included in one of the links provided by Politico:
Like with everything, it appears this phrase was taken out of context to infer something more sinister, as Alexander notes that this argument was based on evidence of very low mortality rates among young people and thus doesn’t seem to warrant locking them down and leaving them immunologically naïve.
Alexander doesn’t appear to be the only one noted in the book. I haven’t read it for myself, but articles appear to note that people such as Scott Atlas and signers of The Great Barrington Declaration were also referenced within the book, so there seems to be many figures included who dared to deviate from the status quo of lockdowns.
Now, what’s interesting is not necessarily the book, but really the response to the book.
As I said above, outlets appear to be latching onto the release of this book to push further narratives, including ones of retribution.
Keep reading with a 7-day free trial
Subscribe to Modern Discontent to keep reading this post and get 7 days of free access to the full post archives.