Op-Ed by Krishna Chandrasekaran
Over this past week the states of Texas and Mississippi have finally decided to do away with most originally imposed restrictions done in the name of COVID-19; mainly, the mandatory orders to wear masks, practice social distancing, close down public businesses and commercial venues, and limit capacity(both indoor and outdoor). While these measures, as well as any re-opening and end to lockdowns, are steps in the right direction, it is far too early to celebrate.
Let’s start with Texas by unpacking governor Greg Abbott’s recently issued executive order. Not only does the order contain erroneous statements, it also isn’t permanent, as the very last sentence of the executive order (EO) states “This executive order may be amended by proclamation of the governor”, which means that there’s no guarantee that the end of the lockdowns is permanent, or perhaps anything near it.
One of the erroneous statements in Abbott’s EO is that COVID-19 poses an imminent threat of disaster for all counties in the State of Texas. Assuming governor Abbott himself writes these orders, rather than some overpaid lobbyist as in the case of far too many congressional bills, does he not understand the definition of imminent? COVID-19 does not immediately kill upon infection i.e. imminent. In most deaths FROM, not with, COVID-19, death happens long after initial infection, not imminently, as Abbott states. This is especially compounded by the fact that only 6% of deaths recorded by the CDC had COVID as the sole cause of death. Furthermore, as Dutch head of the WHO Dr. Maria van Kerkhove stated, asymptomatic spread is very rare, ergo not imminent. As found by the Swiss Research Institute, 80% of those who tested positive for COVID-19 were asymptomatic, and therefore not contagious.
Governor Abbott’s EO also states that new COVID cases have declined due to millions of vaccinations while also claiming that social distancing and face coverings are safe practices. Based on the wording, it doesn’t seem that Governor Abbott understands either the flaws and unreliability in the PCR testing to measure COVID cases, or the negligible efficacy of masks and social distancing, let alone the violations of liberty resulting from those orders.
Like Abbott, governor Tate Reeves of Mississippi also doesn’t express knowledge of the truth regarding many critical aspects. Like Abbott, Reeves attributes declining cases in Mississippi as the main reason why he is “lifting” restrictions. It wouldn’t even be accurate to say that Reeves is removing all restrictions. For one, capacity restrictions will remain in place, as indoor spaces and K-12 schools will still not be allowed to exceed 50% capacity. While Reeves won’t enforce masks, he still encourages Mississippi residents to wear them, something he wouldn’t do if he understood the negligible efficacy of masks.
Furthermore, both Reeves and Abbott praise the vaccine as the messiah, and show no awareness of or appreciation for the grave dangers of these vaccines, especially considering that these “vaccines” that the politicians and media are promoting are not really vaccines. If Texas and Mississippi both make the COVID-19 “vaccine” mandatory, then the two states would still be tyrannical, and fail to respect fundamental liberty. Perhaps the least reassuring about Reeves’ new EO, it is set to expire on March 31st.
That leads to the most important question: what guarantee is there that these restrictions won’t return? The reality is, none. Especially as both Abbott and Reeves believe that the PCR testing produces reliable COVID case data, the media could very easily continue peddling their yellow journalism style fake news narratives like “Texas re-opened and now has millions of new COVID cases and deaths” or “Governor Abbott has blood on his hands for defying Fauci’s lockdown advice”. Have Abbott and Reeves truly learned to resist succumbing to the intense media pressure to impose lockdowns? Only time will tell, but I’m forecasting that they haven’t, and that in due time, lockdowns will resume in both Mississippi and Texas, regardless of whether it takes a month, or several. As Ethan Huff states
Not to be a Debbie Downer, but it is almost an expectation that this return to semi-normalcy in Texas will be short-lived. The writing is already on the wall with mainstream media pundits already ramping up the fear-mongering about new “strains” and “mutations” of the so-called “virus” beginning to spread.
What Abbott and all other state governors need to do is not just end the restrictions but also prohibit them. This includes mask mandates, which are nothing more than the practicing of medicine without a license.
Even if Reeves and Abbott lift restrictions, there is no guarantee that counties, cities, and other local levels of government within Texas and Mississippi will lift the restrictions. In fact, many cities in both Texas and Mississippi are still keeping the mask mandate intact, nullifying whatever good comes out of Abbott’s and Reeves’ recent EOs.
Just like in Mexico and Brazil, where presidents Obrador and Bolsonaro have not imposed lockdowns, cities and other local governmental entities in those countries have, running contrary to the directives by the heads of state, and thereby nullifying whatever good Obrador and Bolsonaro tried to do. Even when he was still in the White House, Donald Trump was against lockdowns, but that still didn’t stop all state governors, except Kristi Noem of South Dakota, from imposing lockdowns. Until the governors and all local politicians lift restrictions and cease their abuses of power, liberty won’t resume.
Perhaps most importantly, neither Abbott nor Reeves have admitted the errors of their ways in imposing the original lockdown orders. Both continue to excuse them as “necessary” to prevent the spread of COVID-19, which is neither possible nor necessary, as the disease hasn’t proven to be deadlier than the seasonal flu, disappearing counts for the latter notwithstanding.
Ultimately, the people who advocated for these lockdowns and believed the false narrative of their efficacy or temporary nature must learn the errors of their advocacy. If a large percentage of people continues to believe lockdowns are necessary and effective, in addition to chastising Reeves and Abbott for at least moving in the right direction, it seems unlikely that the end of lockdowns will ever be permanent. Therefore, while these moves by Abbott and Reeves are to be welcomed, they shouldn’t be celebrated, as there is much work to be done before liberty truly prevails, and lockdown tyranny PERMANENTLY ends.
Source: Liberty Forecast Blog
Provide, Protect and Profit from what’s coming! Get a free issue of Counter Markets today.