May 2020Daily Stirrer news and comment articles for September 2020
Westminster faces rising discontent over restrictions as it weighs up even tougher lockdown to slow second wave of virus
In the face of a public backlash over continuing restrictions on social activity "to stop the spread of Coronavirus" when everybody knows the vast majority of people are in no danger from the disease and in fact more are now dying due to the effects of lockdown than the virus, the government is now considering even tougher restrictions on social activity among emergency plans to respond to the alarming spread of the second wave. Measures being considered, according to a report leaked to The Times newspaper, includeda two-week shutdown of all pubs, bars and restaurants, as well as indefinite bans on inter-household socializing indoors. Meanwhile, workplaces such as shops, factories and offices would remain open. Whately neither confirmed nor denied the reports in the Times, noting that “we were looking at what we might be able to do.”
The plans have been condemed as unscientific, not backed by credible evidence and indicative of a governmnt committed to authoritarianism. Suorces within the government claim Boris Johnson is facing a rebellion from MPs and rank and file members of the party, with the Labour opposition almost invisible throughout the crisis and recently elected leader Kier Starmer, (we're not saying the man is a plank but if you drove a wooden stake through his chest he'd thing he'd had a heart transplant,) consistently calling for tougher lockdown measures and further economically damaging restrictions on business activity.
Opposition to the government’s introduction of local lockdowns and the reintroduction of social-distancing rules is growing throughoput the country. On Saturday (26 September), thousands of protestors gathered in Trafalgar Square for a ‘We Do Not Consent’ rally, which saw 16 arrested following scuffles with police. The heavy handed policing of the peaceful, lawful protest was in marked contrast to the kid gloves treatmengt haded out to ">Black Lives Matter protests when instead of arresting people for loting and vandalism, half the Metropolitian Police Force got down on their knees and offered to suck black cock.
The government is reportedly considering the introduction of tighter social restrictions in England, as the hyping of the non existent the second wave of infections intensifies, a junior minister has admitted. The whole second wave thing is a fraud of course, the PCR test being used to test increasing numbers of people has been exposed as not - fit - for- purpose as it returns 50% false positive. With that flaw, the more people that are tested, the more positives there will inevitably be.
Speaking on Sky News, Junior Health Minister Helen Whately responded to questions concerning a ‘total social lockdown’ which had been reported in the Times earlier on Monday morning. The ‘social lockdown’ was reportedly presented to the cabinet’s Covid strategy committee last week.
The minister told a questioner “this is the moment when we have an opportunity – we have a choice for the country – to get this back under control.” (which is bollocks, lockdown has failed before, what logic is there in assuming it will succeed now?) Whately also said the government did not want to introduce further restrictions but would be keeping an eye on Covid spread rates across the UK and would act accordingly. The UK has seen a substantial rise in cases over the last fortnight, with 5,693 new cases reported on Sunday; many of the most affected areas are already in a localised lockdown.
Study says UK lockdown linked to thousands of excess deaths
We predicted back in March that lockdowns aimed at halting the spread of coronavirus would only delay the progress of the pandemic rather than eradicating the virus and would likely cause as many early deaths from other causes as it would prevent from COVID - 19. We were called crazy conspiracy theorists and worse of course but once again we are being proved right.
A new study published this weeken reveals government figures now suggest 75,000 excess deaths due to lockdows this years are projected. This means that even as our incompetent, spineless government contemplates taking the advice of lientists and imposing furter restrictions on movenem, more people are dying as a result of lockdown measures that have died from Coronavirus, even if we take the fraudulent figures for COVID deaths at face valuer. Thousands of Britons who suffer heart attacks and strokes are dying at home instead of seeking medical treatment,
Quariantine orders and self isolation advice prompted many people suffering from serious medical conditions to defer seeking medival advice and avoid hospitals, which sensationalised repoprting suggested were overwhemed with coronavirus cases (this unfortunately was fake news, hospitals were half empty,) according to the study’s findings, which were published in the Heart medical journal and first reported by the Daily Mail. The paper noted that deaths from heart disease in private homes surged by 35 percent from March to July, resulting in 2,279 more fatalities than the average over the past six years. However, heart and stroke deaths in hospitals dropped by around 1,400 during the same period, suggesting that some who chose to stay at home would have died anyway. The researchers calculated that in total, 2,085 excess deaths in England and Wales could be linked to heart attack and stroke sufferers who declined or were not able to seek medical assisstance. This means that between March 2 and June 30, every day 17 people died needlessly from heart attacks.
The findings support government figures which underline the disastrous side-effects of the UK’s anti-coronavirus policies.It should be remembered that a study published by the British Medical Journal in May 2020 found that only one-third of excess deaths seen in England and Wales can be linked to coronavirus.RELATED POSTS:
Defund the dons: why we need a new approach to higher education
If universities wish to be political, then they are legitimate objects of political struggle
Back in 1999, Tony Blair, chanting the mantra of "education, education, education, pledge that the Labour government would work towards getting 50% of the young people into university, thus enabling the Britain economy to tap into “the genius of the many” and build a society ready for the oncoming technological revolution, what Blail called 2The Knowledge Economy." Higher education grants for the academically gifted would be replaced by low interest "student loans" to be repaid when, after graduating, the new, university educated masses achieved a certain leval of income.
Last year the government revealed that Blair's target had been met. With the expandsion of higher education has been completed, or as this publication has said before the conversion of higher education to a for profit industry is finished, it is tiome to assess the results and ask whether it has been successful and Blair's dream of The Knowledge Economy is fulfilled. And the answer is that the experiment has turned out not quite as it was supposed to. In fact it has been a disaster, too many graduates with degrees in soft subjects like social science or philosophy, politics and economics, are working as call centre clerks, waiters and waitresses, burger flippers or care office cleaners, (not to mention care workers which is a valuable occu[ation but surely does not require a university degree. The whole thing was a colossal mistake, the question now is how do we go about undoing it.
Let’s start with the money. While the average returns to a degree are positive – British graduates see an increase in net lifetime earnings of about 20% compared to similar non-graduates – they do not tell the full story. Between fees, taxes, interest on loans and lost earnings from three years spent on a combination of drinking, shagging, protesting about things they do not understand, and occasionally attending a lecture for a lark, many undergraduates see a negative return on their degree compared to those who serve modern apprenticeships or train for trades such as plumbing, car medchanics, construction work and so on. While these people forge ahead in the early years, with many vocational occupations with limited career progression opportunities such as nursing and teaching and the police force now being degree entry, many graduates now see their incomes flatlining in the same way as a tradesman.
Students who don’t benefit from their studies pop up everywhere, but a quick look at average outcomes suggest that they’re likely to be concentrated in certain categories. If you look at the income differential of a graduate and a person in a trade,, philosophy, English, and sociology all fall well below the average for a plumber, mechanic, or electrician. It is probably not a coincidence that students working towards degrees in philosophy, English, and sociology are among the most fanatical supporters of socialism.
We have an overproduction of credentials. The bell curve of talent is the same as it ever was, if not shifted down slightly. This is not immediately apparent from the grades graduates receive, with uplifts being given for a poor family background, minority status, personal trauma or disability. If you expand higher education significantly, from the best of the best to the slightly better than middling, you lower the quality of the average student. We would expect the numbers of graduates with lower second degrees to swell. Instead, the proportion of students awarded firsts doubled from 2006 to 2018, while the share getting a 2:2 or below fell 40%.
Universities' budgets, alocated by central government, are based on performance, both the number of degrees awarded and the level of degree are taken into account. It doesn’t take a Nobel prize winning economist therefore to spot the the incentives for universities to soften their standard (if fact as Nobel proze winning economists tend to be absolutely ignorant of how to run a business they'd probable be the last to see the problem.) University income is a function of fees and student numbers. Charging lower fees signals lower quality education. Competition on institutional reputation is already fierce. Marking a little less harshly, though? That can be done. So performance goes up as access widens; academic standards are lowered to accommodate the new average.
The case for defunding the academic community is not just that the sector sells its students short, piling debt onto them as they pursue the illusion of guaranteed career success and higher income. It’s that academia is fundamentally failing to fulfil its mission. The role of Universities is to educate the most academically able of nation’s youth, not everybody is suited to the academic environment however. This does not mean they are stupid, there are different kinds of intelligence and successin formal education is just one of them. It is monstrously unfair to simply abandon those who, though highly intelligent, are not good at passing exams.
However, what universities do not have a mandate for is politicising higher education by upholding and promoting the values of a small elite rather than those of the civilisation and cultures that produced them – a civilisation which many university managements are at pains to emphasise their desire to dismantle. We have recently seen our leading universities involed in attacks on the right to free speech, attempts to rewrite history, prsecution of pupils and staff members who dissent from the 'woke' orthodoxy of the neofascist left and expressing support for organisations whose stated aimes involve destroying capitalism and marginalising white people in white majority nations.
The traditional philosophy of higher education is to allow free enquiry to thrive, producing academics who will pursue the truth without fear of reprisals. What has happened in practice is that state intervention has been rejected but managements have ceded control of research, admissions, extra curricular activities, and the obligation to maintain political impartiality to extremist organisations, while expecting their continued existence to be funded by the taxpayer.
There is no obligation on the taxpayers to accept this. If universities wish to be political, then they are legitimate objects of political struggle. Academia’s status as funded largely without ideological strings attached is not an immutable feature of the world. If we don’t want universities to become the subject of back-and-forth battles between left and right governments then the cleanest way forward is to remove them from the government’s sphere of influence.RELATED POSTS:
Who Should Make Decision About Childrens' Welfare, Parents Or Authoritarian Left Wing Schoolteachers?
We like stories about bureaucrats abusing their authority and about schoolteachers (especiall head teachers) letting their inner fascist out of the closet. So a story than combines both, like this tale of a South Yorkshire primary school head who banned packed lunches because out of concern for 'her' children's welfare she wanted them to have no alternative to the nutrition free slop served by the school kitchen.
Poor white pupils put off school by multicultural timetable
Education, should it be about learning to read, write, spell and calculate? Or should it be about feminism, gay rights, black history and 'gender awareness' whatever that is? For many years we have had multiculturalism and politically correct thinking rammed doiwn pupils throats but noe a study by a local education department suggests this obsession with politicallly corret diversity is responsible for the failure of white working class pupils.
Education, Education, Education And To Hell With The Kids
Teaching used to be a vocation and education a high minded calling for those who wished to prepare young minds for adult life by making the process of learning, in the classroom, by discovery and through osmosis, an exciting and fulfilling lifelong process
The Degree Factory: The Decline Of University Education
The decline of university education in parallel with dumbing down of the general population is contributing to the economic and social problems of the industriaised democracies. But why have standars been allowed to slip so far and can the trend in university education towards theraputic and politically correct courses be reversed?
Facebook censors conservatives and refuses to ban left-wing extremist groups from using their platform to destabilize the countryfrom Natural News
Facebook has vowed to crack down on any attempts by organizations to use their website to interfere with the presidential election. While this has resulted in them taking down the Facebook pages of several anarchist extremist news organizations such as It’s Going Down and CrimethInc., it has so far refused to take action against many other controversial radical leftist pages, like Adbusters and Rose City Antifa.
Rose City Antifa, a Portland-based Antifa organization that was formed in 2007, claims that their goal is to defend Portland against fascism. However, they have a solid reputation for political violence even against regular conservatives. Several Rose City Antifa members have even been accused of beating up Andy Ngo, potentially giving the independent conservative journalist brain damage.
Adbusters a group based out of Canada, is responsible for helping to kick start the Occupy Wall Street riots in 2011. They are currently busy trying to meddle in the elections by organizing a “siege” of the White House, set to begin on Sep. 17 and end after election day.
Despite this, in an interview Zuckerberg said that the platform was actively trying to stamp out violent organizations from their website. “We’re trying to make sure that we do our part to make sure that none of this is organized on Facebook,” he said.
And yet, when presented with an extensive report on the violence perpetrated by Rose City Antifa and other left-wing extremist organizations like it, Facebook has still refused to take action.MORE ON FACEBOOK'S HYPOCRISY AND BLTANT BIAS