All this has been said by Covid mandate critics online, but it is interesting to observe that the same points are now appearing in scholarly journals. David Bell in a recent edition of the American Journal of Economics and Sociology, puts the case that Covid pandemic preparedness laid the road to the creation of international fascism! As he says in a key paragraph: “The COVID-19 response, intended for a virus that overwhelmingly targeted the elderly, ignored norms of epidemic management and human rights to institute a regime of suppression, censorship, and coercion reminiscent of the power systems and governance that were previously condemned. Without pausing to examine the costs, the public health industry is developing international instruments and processes that will entrench these destructive practices in international law. Public health, presented as a series of health emergencies, is being used once again to facilitate a fascist approach to societal management.” This drive to technocratic control will be pushed to the final level if the World Health Organization pandemic treaty becomes international law, next year. Health decisions will be taken away from the nation state and power given to this globalist New World Order entity. It is one of he most important globalist strategies to defeat, for otherwise we may all be vaccinated at gun point with the latest genetic toxins of Big Pharma.

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ajes.12531

Pandemic preparedness and the road to international fascism

David Bell     American Journal of Economics and Sociology 30 July 2023

https://doi.org/10.1111/ajes.12531

Abstract

The World Health Organization's broad definition of health embraces physical, mental and social well-being. Expressed in its 1946 constitution alongside concepts of community participation and national sovereignty, it reflected an understanding of a world emerging from centuries of colonialist oppression and the public health industry's shameful facilitation of fascism. Health policy would be people-centered, closely tied to human rights and self-determination. The COVID-19 response has demonstrated how these ideals have been undone. Decades of increasing funding within public-private partnerships have corroded the basis of global public health. The COVID-19 response, intended for a virus that overwhelmingly targeted the elderly, ignored norms of epidemic management and human rights to institute a regime of suppression, censorship, and coercion reminiscent of the power systems and governance that were previously condemned. Without pausing to examine the costs, the public health industry is developing international instruments and processes that will entrench these destructive practices in international law. Public health, presented as a series of health emergencies, is being used once again to facilitate a fascist approach to societal management. The beneficiaries will be the corporations and investors whom the COVID-19 response served well. Human rights and individual freedom, as under previous fascist regimes, will lose. The public health industry must urgently awaken to the changing world in which it works, if it is to adopt a role in saving public health rather than contributing to its degradation.

CONCLUSION: A DISRUPTED FUTURE The drive of fascism in the 1930s was heavily supported by the health professions. While this was most obvious in Germany, where doctors were over- represented in the Nazi party and the SS, the eugenics  and  technocracy  movements  of  North  America  had  aspects  in  common  with  fascism  and operated in the mainstream of public health (Allen, 2011; Corbett, 2017; Haque et al., 2012). The fascist thinking behind such movements relies heavily on the concept of combining corporate and political authority as defined by Mussolini, with the welfare of the masses being placed in the hands of political tyrants and closely allied corporatists. They were characterized by the identification and vilification of minorities, by intense propaganda backed by heavy censorship, and by the use of health professions to enforce aspects of population control, including management of dissenters and those considered of less worth. While the COVID- 19 response gave hints of how aspects of this could return, the pandemic preparedness  and  response  (PPR)  agenda  appears  designed  to  lock  this  in  for  the  long  term.  Against a background of easing of restrictions on killing fellow humans through euthanasia legislation in Western countries, we have had three years of restrictions on travel and public gatherings, censorship in media and public discourse, and open vilification of minorities on the basis of choice of medical status (Government of the Netherlands, 2022; Health Canada, 2021). The PPR agenda aims for more funding than any other international public health program. Rather than  being  a  subject  of  discussion  within  the  democratic  structures  of  individual  countries,  it  is  being  negotiated  by  poorly  accountable  international  bodies  such  as  the  WHO,  the  G20  and  World Bank, in concert with private bodies, such as the World Economic Forum, that, in turn, have  heavy  direct  involvement  from  the  pharmaceutical  and  software  companies  that  stand  to  gain  financially  from  mass  vaccination,  surveillance,  and  social  credit  programs  (WEF, 2022; WHO, 2022f, 2022g, 2022h; World Bank, 2022c). While the scale is broader than the nationalist fascism of 80 years ago, the similarities in the structure and the corporate- authoritarian model for decision- making have clear echoes. If  the  agenda  of  pandemic  threat  and  response  continues  along  the  lines  established  by  the  COVID-  19  response,  we  are  likely  to  see  Western  societies  transfer  decisions  on  such  issues  from  open,  transparent,  democratic  processes  to  privately  controlled  bodies.  The  promotion  of  fear  and  active  use  of  behavioral  psychology  in  the  COVID-  19  response  was  successful  in  achieving  broad  public acceptance of, or at least acquiescence to, the removal of what had been considered fundamental rights (Dodsworth, 2021). Pandemics are a rare event but the PPR agenda is being successfully promoted on the demonstrably false premise that they are becoming more frequent and have increasing  severity  (Bell, 2022b; WHO, 2019).  The  public's  acquiescence  to  increasing  and  institutionalizing of restrictions seems likely, as the German public acquiesced to similar measures in the 1930s. An underlying fear of death, fed by a false but very broadly supported narrative, worked in the |    11PANDEMICS AND FASCISM1930s, worked from 2020 to 2022, and seems likely to work again. Keeping “us” safe in the context of a threat that causes individuals to feel powerless is a difficult paradigm to oppose. Previously, fascist regimes were overthrown through warfare with external powers. In this new incarnation,  the  private  and  international  institutions  involved  work  above  or  outside  of  national  sovereignty  and  appear  to  have  broad  support  among  the  higher  levels  of  national  governments.  There is no external power that can march across the border and overthrow the dictator. While it is unclear how non-Western populations such as those of Africa will react, with their widely differing societal experience of colonialism and direct oppression, the way out for Western societies, with their reliance  on  democratic  institutions  that  appear  to  be  captured  by  the  broader  agenda,  is  unclear.  Mass acquiescence to COVID- 19 response measures suggests that the ability or desire of citizens in Western societies to defend basic human rights and norms is low. There has also been an increase in the ability of those in control to silently censor websites that might have activated stronger public dissent. Incompetence within this leadership may be necessary to bring this episode to an end or a loss  of  the  apparent  consensus  that  this  leadership  currently  exhibits.  Either  way,  it  is  hard  to  see  democratically based Western society persisting in its current form. We should be thinking through alternative structures that undermine the influence of fear on populations and that expose the lies of  propagandists,  while  laying  bare  the  fascism  they  espouse.  If  most  continue  to  acquiesce,  they  should at least be clear on what they are acquiescing to.”