Simon Elmer

“If the mainspring of popular government in peacetime is virtue, the mainspring of popular government during a revolution is both virtue and terror; virtue, without which terror is fatal; terror, without which virtue is powerless. Terror is nothing but swift, severe, inflexible justice; it is therefore an emanation of virtue. It is less a principle in itself than a consequence of the general principle of democracy, applied to our nation’s most pressing needs.”
Maximilien Robespierre, On the Principles of Political Morality, 1794

The past three years have exposed the structural flaw in Western democracy with more disastrous consequences for its populations than at any time in recent history.

It’s generally known that democracy, from the Ancient Greek dēmokratia, means ‘rule by the people’; but it is perhaps less widely known that the fifth-century city-state of Athens on which the West modelled its democracy was a slave-owning society in which only adult males and hereditary citizens comprising maybe 10-15 per cent of the population had the right to vote.

The universal suffrage we have in the UK today was only attained through centuries of political struggle, and is predicated, at least in principle, on an equally universal education. One of the arguments against extending rights of suffrage that were originally restricted to landowners, then to property owners, then to heads of households, then to men over twenty-one, then to propertied women over thirty, and only eventually made a universal right, was that according equal votes to individuals with vastly unequal levels of education, influence and understanding of policy was politically suicidal.

The counter argument, which eventually won out, is that those who, because of their wealth or education or age or gender, had the right to vote, were unlikely to do so against their interests, making their political franchise a guarantee of political hegemony.

The eventual concession to universal suffrage, however, gave those who grudgingly conceded it ample time to turn this threat to their advantage, and make the vastly expanded electorate the object of demographically targeted political strategies. It was from this necessity, and from the opportunity it afforded, that the modern mass media were born.

A century later, universal suffrage has produced not the Platonic ideal of a universally educated, socially conscientious and politically informed demos but, to the contrary, a people governed by virtue and terror. It is not only in the interests of a Government and its beneficiaries to keep the electorate both ignorant and stupid; it is necessary in order to maintain its grip on power — and not only a sitting Government but every political party that hopes to form one.

This hardly needs to be argued, as the evidence of the erasure of our politics, which every year descends to new lows of populism, is denied only by those who strut on its stages, script its tragedies and direct their endings from behind the scenes.

For the same reason, universal education, which has always served to indoctrinate citizens into the dominant ideology, has been transformed into more or less explicit propaganda for the changing values and pressing needs of Western capitalism far beyond how we vote. Globalism, multiculturalism, political correctness, identity politics, environmental fundamentalism, the orthodoxies of woke and now the dogma and cultic practices of biosecurity are all products of the neoliberalisation of our education, media and culture industries.

The result of this ideological co-ordination of every sector of our society is that the most educated demographic in human history, the middle classes of the West, is now the most easily manipulated populace in history. A century and more of universal suffrage and education has created not ‘rule by the people’ but a demos in thrall to the ever-expanding technologies of biopower.

The systemic exploitation of this flaw in our democracy means that our lives are now effectively ruled by the most gullible, the most afraid, the most obedient and the most compliant members of our society, on the grounds that they constitute a democratic consensus. It is not by chance that every crisis manufactured to justify removing our freedoms is turned into a ‘health’ crisis.

Just as our human rights, discarded on the justification of the health and safety of the ‘people’, have become the means by which our lives have been taken into the protective custody of the state, so too our democracy has become the means by which the institutions and processes of democratic oversight and accountability have been dismantled and replaced by the rule of a global technocracy implementing a totalitarian system of governance.

How this was done, by whom, for whose benefit and to what ends is the subject of the articles collected in these two volumes. Originally appearing between April 2020 and October 2021, these articles are a record of how, with the collaboration of a terrorised and virtuous public, a threat to public health that never existed was turned into a ‘crisis’, and on the justification of combatting it the ‘vaccination’ programme was implemented, laying the foundations for the UK biosecurity state of today.

Collected in two volumes, Virtue and Terror and The New Normal, their publication marks the third anniversary since the ‘pandemic’ was officially declared by the World Health Organization in March 2020. But they also serve a more immediate purpose.

As the evidence of the immense and increasing damage of both lockdown and the UK ‘vaccination’ programme has become too overwhelming for all but the COVID faithful to ignore, those who called loudest for their enforcement — politicians, journalists and doctors — have claimed not only that they did not know what the consequences would be but that nobody else knew either, and have made plaintive appeals for an ‘amnesty’ between the financially ruined, psychologically traumatised, ‘vaccine’ injured and bereaved and those responsible for their suffering and loss. I’m happy to say that these appeals have been almost universally rejected and denounced for what they are: denials of culpability by cowards and criminals.

The data and analysis contained in these articles are a reminder and historical record that those who took the time to look knew almost from the start that the coronavirus ‘crisis’ had been manufactured, that closing down the economy for two years would impoverish millions and enrich a few, that printing hundreds of billions of pounds in quantitative easing to save it from collapse would lead to rampant inflation, that withdrawing medical diagnosis, care and treatment for 68.8 million people for two years would cause the deaths of tens of thousands of UK citizens, and that injecting 170 million doses of experimental gene therapies into a terrorised public would kill thousands, injure millions, and go on to have still unknown consequences for the health and lives of the British people.

It is a convention of the House of Commons that Members of Parliament can (and do) lie through their teeth to their honourable friends but cannot accuse another MP of doing the same, and the UK media and publishing industry obediently follows this gentleman’s agreement; but if we are to expose and oppose the Great Lie we have been living since March 2020, we’ll have to overthrow more entrenched conventions than this. We can start by calling a lie a ‘lie’ when we hear or read one. To claim ignorance of the consequences of these medieval health ‘measures’ is a lie, and the articles collected in these volumes, like many others written by other independent researchers, are the proof of that lie.

I am neither a medical doctor nor an actuary, yet anyone who had the courage to analyse the impact of lockdown on both the economy and medical services of the UK and other countries, or what should have been the ample safety signals about the dangers and risks of these injections, and of the complete absence of medical, scientific or rational basis to either, knew that this was a lie.

If the guilty are now protesting their ignorance, they are doing so to absolve themselves of responsibility for what they collaborated in doing or enabling, to deny culpability for the damage and deaths, and to avoid retribution from a public coming to the realisation that we have been the object of a campaign of impoverishment and — by the UN’s definition — genocide being waged against us by the UK state and its global partners, and in which large portions of the population continue to be complicit.

These two volumes hold the perpetrators of these crimes them to account.

The truth is not merely a statement of fact — that, for example, this chair is made of wood, or that all men are mortal. The truth is always stated in the face of the attempt and threat of powerful forces to silence it and those who dare to speak it. Totalitarianism is not only the agreement but the dogmatic insistence of the vast majority of the population of a society and all those in positions of power that what is clearly, evidently and demonstrably false is true.

When a mother insists that the child she persuaded or allowed to be injected wasn’t killed by the experimental gene therapy that was injected into it a few hours earlier she is, understandably, trying to deny her complicity in the naivety and stupidity that led her to agree to allow someone to expose her child to such a risk. But she is also silencing what is impossible for her, at that moment, to entertain as a possibility: that the National Health Service she has been raised to regard as a secular Church, the pharmaceutical industry and her Government not only don’t care about whether her child and everybody else she knows lives or dies, but may even be intentionally trying to kill them.

Between this realisation and denial of the reality of everything she knows, has seen, learned and experienced in her life, it is the latter that she and the vast majority of people in this country as in others have chosen to believe; or if not to believe themselves then to insist others believe, even on pain of being silenced, fined, imprisoned and worse for not believing. It is on this mutual agreement to insist on the truth of a lie that nobody believes that a totalitarian society is made. This describes, precisely, the society we are living in now.

Everything — every last thing without exception — that we’ve been told about the ‘pandemic’ over the last three years has been a lie. Nothing we have been told is true. Whether we did or do choose to believe it is not a question of opinion, or what we grandly call ‘our’ politics, or even of our trust in authority.

Those in authority in our society, as in every other across the world and throughout history, didn’t get there by telling the truth: they got there by lying — among other and worse things. If we chose to believe them — and as a ‘people’ the British did so in overwhelming numbers — it was because we were scared, and our fear made us stupid, it made us compliant, it made us weak, it made us turn to the liars in authority and ask them to tell us what to do — worse, to demand that they tell us what to do, and not only us but everybody else too.

No-one who wanted to could not have failed to realise, very early on, that we were being lied to.

There were and are no grey areas between what was and wasn’t true. The truth was and still is there for anyone who wants to find it. The lies were and are easier to listen to, for they are everywhere, in every mouth, across every screen, loud and stupid and unbelievable except by an act of will — not to truth but to believe easy lies.

But the difficult truth is that only cowards believed them, that only cowards can possibly choose to continue to believe them after three years of unrelenting and universal lying. It is on this collective cowardice, and on the acceptance and repetition of lies to the point that they are now accepted and enforced by the authorities as truth, even when secretly scarcely anyone still believes them, that the New Normal has been constructed.

And the unpleasant truth is that this tells us something about where we are, in the UK, as a society and perhaps, in the West, as a civilisation, as well as about the terrible place we are heading.

The accusation of ‘conspiracy theorist’ by which anyone opposing or even questioning Government policy continues, still, to be dismissed by our representatives in Parliament, slandered in mainstream and social media, and now criminalised by our Government, judiciary and police forces, is the dark seed of our postmodernity come to fruition. Where modernity understood the truth to be concealed beneath the surface reality of things and sought to excavate it from beneath the lies of the powerful, postmodernity views reality itself as constituted by those surfaces, beneath which there is only the abyss of competing opinions, whose will to power produces a truth that is therefore always contingent, always a product of power, regardless of any purchase that truth may have on the world.

Not only truth, therefore, but reality itself now is up for grabs.

A man in a dress is now a woman if those with the legislative power to punish us for denying it say he is.

Gene therapies that do nothing to stop transmission of the virus but instead destroy the human immune system can be injected into the population of the globe as a ‘vaccine’ if governments accord themselves the power to lock us in our homes until enough of us comply.

A global pandemic which leaves little or no trace on the overall mortality of the populations infected is the excuse for removing our human rights and freedoms under a permanent State of Emergency and dismantling our democracies for a constitutional dictatorship if there are enough police to enforce it and the media machinery to make people believe it.

The imminence of an environmental catastrophe for which there is little and contested evidence is the justification for the revolution into the new totalitarianism of global governance if the financial institutions, international corporations and national governments that form it want it to happen. And they do.

Totalitarianism is a dictatorship in which everyone is complicit, in which everyone collaborates, because everyone believes the reality for whose consensus they lost the struggle. The outcome of our struggle is still not decided — not yet, not quite — but on its triumph or defeat will depend the fate of the West, and perhaps even of humankind.

When I look back on the last three years and the memories that most capture its insanity and obscenities, I recall the elderly residents of Porlock, a village on the North Coast of Somerset I visited on the first summer of lockdown, shuffling through the sweltering streets with their terrified faces covered not only with masks but with plastic visors. Or of the dozens of virtuous members of the public who, in pubs, shops, supermarkets or on country walks, have screamed at me for not keeping my distance or wearing a mask.

And, most horrifying of all, the recorded videos, too numerous to recall, of men and women, young and old, shaking uncontrollably, too weak to walk or even stand, lying in hospital beds, their skin covered in rashes, some with their limbs amputated, their eyes blank and staring, coming to terms with what they’ve done.

But the memory that haunts me most is only tangentially connected to the effects of lockdown restrictions or the experimental gene therapies. Recently, I saw a small child, no more than a year old, sitting in a pram in the entrance to a supermarket. Admittedly, there was little for him to look at beside the wall-to-wall adverts with which we are surrounded in the city today, but even these were withdrawn from his attention.

For the child’s mother had placed in front of his face a screen, in size an infant’s equivalent to the laptop on which I write these words, but across which a parade of brightly-coloured, digitally-generated images that bore no relation to the world flashed before his transfixed gaze. I don’t know if this is typical of the practices of child-raising in the UK today, and whether this machine is the latest digital upgrade to what we in the UK call ‘dummies’ and in the US they call ‘pacifiers’; but it was clearly doing the latter and producing the former.

Not once, as I stood there watching this new model of the human being being made, did this infant look up at the world around him, or appear to make any distinction between that world and the virtual one into whose navigation and eventual mergence he was being subliminally trained. These are minds that can learn languages and skills in months that would take adults years of study and training; and it’s to the digital, virtual and augmented world over which the enemies of humanity have complete control that our children are being raised, not the material, real and natural world from which they want to ban us, in order to possess and control its resources.

It is not by chance that the target and primary object of the trans-human programmes, technologies, ideology and agenda of the Global Biosecurity State is our children, whom they are doing their best to take away from the protection of their parents and families and into the control of the state.

Only a generation raised by their iPhones into a childhood of austerity and national decline, educated by social media into the orthodoxies of identity politics and woke ideology, and which graduated to masks, lockdown and medical mandates, could possibly view the image of the future being created for them by the World Economic Forum as something desirable. Only a generation terrorised by an endless succession of civilisation-ending crises could swap their freedoms, their rights, their agency and their humanity for the promise of an all-encompassing ‘safety’.

The dystopian horror of that future is our greatest weapon in the fight to stop it becoming a reality. It is up to us, who are guilty of handing our children’s education over to globalists, propagandists, ideologues, fanatics and preachers of the apocalypse, to convince them of the falseness of their fears, and that the only end of the world they are facing is that being built on their belief in those fears and obedience to those who have fabricated them. To this end, we need to paint a different image of the future they might one day inhabit if together we defeat the threats we face today.

Not since the First Industrial Revolution have there been more profound and far-reaching changes to our world. Not since the Second World War has there been a greater threat to the freedoms of the people of the world. The battle is engaged. For the sake of the future in which all children will live out their lives either in some degree of freedom or in a totalitarian system the like of which has never been seen before, we need to win it.

The articles collected in these two volumes are for the unafraid, for those trying to find their courage, for those searching for the truth, for those who want to expose the lies to others, and for those looking for a way to fight back.

Finally, there is a positive, hopeful, even happy reason to publish these articles in book form. Unlike an electronic text, a book is an object that enters and moves about in the real world. The author never knows where it will go, who will pick it up and read it, and what effect it may have.

No one can monitor what you read in it or punish you for doing so. No one can tell you it’s misinformation or censor the words or thoughts of which they don’t approve. No one can suspend your bank account for what you learn in its pages.

The printed word can’t be deleted online, altered to fit woke ideology or fact-checked by corporate liars. Not the least joy of publishing these books independently is that no editor has meddled with them. Every word is as I wrote it, and both volumes are available uncensored by a publisher or the information technology companies handed the authority to adjudicate over our freedom of thought and expression.

It’s an inevitability, however, that sometime in the near future the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change or some other fundamentalist organisation will declare that, since books are made from carbon dioxide-absorbing trees, they are ‘killing the planet’, and reading them, therefore, is a crime.

The spectacle of the virtuous burning books will return — this I prophesy!

Indeed, it has already returned in the Ukraine, where books by Russian authors are pulped and turned into egg cartons and toilet paper.

But while the last days of freedom remain to us, books are freedom.

Simon Elmer is the author of two new volumes of articles on the UK biosecurity state, Virtue and Terror and The New Normal, which are available in hardback, paperback and as an ebook. Please click on these links for the contents page, introduction and purchase options. On 11 March, to mark the third anniversary since the declaration of the ‘pandemic’, he will be holding a book launch at the Star & Garter, 62 Poland Street, W1F 7NX, upstairs in the William Blake room from 6-8pm. Entry is free, with book signings, a reading and Q&A.


kofi subscribe button subscribestar button OffGBitCoin200 OffGLiberapay200

For direct-transfer bank details click here.




TrufflEat Olio Evo 300x207 1

Leave a Reply