There is an issue with the cache - please click CTRL + F5 to refresh fully and display correctly. Thank you!

UK General Election

Created on: 2024-07-02

Modified on: 2026-02-09

For those in the UK, and those looking in, we obviously have to choose our next leader on Thursday. It feels much like choosing whether to be dropped into a pit full of scorpions, or a pit full of vipers. Which is the least worst?

Someone wisely said, judge people by their actions, not their words. This is doubly true for politicians. So let's look at their actions over the last term.

Two primary questions that this election is being fought over are the economy, and the state of the NHS. The elephant in the room is the response to covid, which shaped both of these. It is clear that the NHS backlog and the struggling economy are both consequential to two years of lockdowns.

On mainstream channels, our country's response to covid is seldom challenged, because the establishment media was largely behind the lockdowns, and almost entirely behind the "vaccines" (with just a whimper of criticism recently), and all major parties took or advocated for essentially the same course of action, the only difference being in the timing or severity they advocated for. Therefore it is in none of their interests to be critical of those policies.

Even as covid slides into the rear view mirror, there have been more recent pandemic flutters, and could well be yet more in the next five years. Therefore, if we want to keep our freedoms during this time, we must consider how each party behaved during covid, and is likely to behave in future.

The narrative for the pandemic has been ripped apart in the alternative, but not establishment media, for four and a half years. Here's a quick review for the informed, and for newcomers:

The masks didn't work , and created new risks . Leading advisors initially advised against mask-wearing , but pivoted based on no new scientific evidence, suspiciously while behavioural science groups recognized the value in "the signal they create" - i.e. the fear and conformity they generated; similarly the WHO Director General made revealing comments that "the mask has come to represent solidarity. . . . By wearing a mask, you’re sending a powerful message to those around you that we are all in this together." Thus the nonsensical mask rules were clearly politicized, leading to sometimes violent clashes between the self-appointed mask-gestapo and somewhat more informed mask-refuseniks.

A medic demonstrating in 2020 the uselessness of masks by drawing breath from a vape, donning a mask, and breathing out.
The lockdowns which caused such prolonged misery, loss of basic liberty, and collateral harm were similarly unsupported by science, and contrary to plans for epidemics set in advance of covid. Sweden kept its economy and schools open, had mostly voluntary measures, and essentially no lockdown, yet despite predictions, came out favourably. Similarly, a comparison of US states with vs. without 2021 Winter lockdowns shows little difference between the two.

Death Rates in U.S. states. Winter lockdown in blue, no winter lockdown in red.
During all of this, MPs from all major parties were found to have breached the masking and lockdown rules or to have found ways around them , even as they preached them.
Many covid deaths were contributed to by bad policies, including, for example, over 500 DNR notices placed on UK patients without their or their families' consent.
Effective treatments for covid were actively suppressed, for example hydroxychloroquine (HCQ), which had significant scientific support, especially in combination with other medicines. Later studies showed the reverse. Finally a meta-study was made to resolve the controversy, and found against HCQ. But this turned out to be fake! Even Horton, editor of the Lancet, commented: "This is a shocking example of research misconduct in the middle of a global health emergency." The study was withdrawn, but the smear campaign had been successful.

While Trump's endorsement of HCQ affected none of the science, thereafter the political left became incapable of objectively viewing the science thereof, and any reference to HCQ in discussions with most left wingers quickly devolved to accusations of political bias, which were ironically true in their case..
Ivermectin (IVM) got similar treatment. The most bizarre thing was that the "horse-dewormer" slur was ever taken seriously, when all drugs are tested on animals; many, like IVM, are used on both humans and animals; and, er, do you drink milk? Well, are you a cow? Again, the issue became politicized, the left wing rejecting it in spite of massive evidence in its favour. Covid could have been solved in the Spring of 2020, but the suppression of effective cures including IVM and HCQ prolonged the nightmare, and contributed to countless deaths. In a rational world this would be considered genocide.
Further, dangerous drugs were used prior to the rollout of the vaccines. Remdesivir was pushed as the interim therapeutic. In business terms, it was perfect: still under patent, 1000 times the price of HCQ / IVM, only suited to late stage treatment and hospital administration, and therefore presenting no competition to the coming vaccines. Unfortunately, it was highly toxic. From a previous trial of its use versus Ebola, "Within 28 days, subjects taking remdesivir had lethal side effects including multiple organ failure, acute kidney failure, septic shock, and hypotension, and 54% of the remdesivir group died . . . ." Its high toxicity earned it the colloquial name among medics: "Run, death is near," and many doctors speculate about how many "covid" deaths were in reality remdesivir casualties.
The genetic vaccines have been an epic failure. No science ever supported them preventing transmission of the virus, for which reason alone no coercion or compulsion to use them could ever have been justified. Additionally, their benefits are somewhat dubious, and their harms have been a global catastrophe. These harms have been shown clearly on the USA's VAERS system, life insurance data, ONS data, and more. Steve Kirsch has produced volumes of articles analyzing data on covid vaccine harms from the USA, UK, and NZ, at least. The evidence of vaccine harms is abundant and everywhere, except the establishment media.
Despite huge and justified distrust of the vaccines, carers were compelled to take vaccines or lose their jobs. Next up were all front-line NHS workers, but at this point the NHS100K group sprung up and planned a mass protest against this. Tellingly close to NHS100K's planned mass protest, the government backed down, lifting all remaining domestic covid restrictions slightly ahead of plans. At this time, the government was beleaguered by many scandals, and had little credibility left, but the timing does suggest that NHS100K delivered the final blow to covid restrictions.

That's a brief, far from exhaustive summary of what went wrong during covid.

But here we are in 2024, having to choose our next prime minister. Even if we can somehow forget the covid debacle, the after-effects on the NHS, our nations' health, and our economy are still with us.

While the Tories presided over this debacle, what about Sunak? He claims to have flown back to England in Dec. 2021 to advocate against another lockdown. He brought in the furlough scheme (a policy lobbied for by the FSB). On the other hand, when then Tory MP Andrew Bridgen spoke out against the vaccines, Sunak was swift to defenestrate him, on spurious grounds, on 12th April 2023. Furthermore, when challenged by vaccine injured John Watt - an official witness for the covid inquiry - on GBNews, Sunak claimed (effected?) ignorance and avoided the issue.

The Tories, like the other parties, use the excuse that they're not scientists, and rely on advisors. But hundreds of thousands of "citizen scientists" in the UK were able to join the dots and work out what a catastrophe had happened, so what is the politicians' excuse? For all of the above reasons, I do not trust the Tories, nor Rishi Sunak.

What about Labour? The Tories are responsible for the policies they enacted, but it seems they were largely Labour policies, waved through by a reluctant PM (surrounded by panicked Tories like Cummings and Hancock, both of whom flagrantly broke the rules). It is right that the Tories get a drubbing for all of this, but who will the beneficiaries be? Labour? Who pushed for even more of the same? That is a perverse outcome. And I can assure you, Labour were given all of the information they needed to work out that theirs was the wrong course of action. There are a few voices in the main political parties who spoke against the response to covid, but very few, and marginalized.

And a slight anecdote for you. During the lockdowns I attended some meetings of anti-lockdown protestors. At one such gathering, there were maybe twenty of us in a park, some of whom were preparing signs to take onto roadsides to seek support from drivers. As this was going on, there was a Labour member (MP? Councillor?) at the park enjoying a little photo opportunity. One of her group saw our group, and the signs, and came over for a high level discussion of immunology. She came over and started saying, quite venomously: "You anti-vaxxers, you're disgusting, you're sick, you're vile," etc. Her prejudice and hate were quite palpable. I tried to engage her with facts, but after spitting her venom at us, she turned tail and sauntered off. I shouted after her: "Your retreat is noted."

You might object that she was just one person in the Labour party, probably a rank-and-file, and not necessarily representative thereof. Well, in our group there was a guy who had formerly been involved in the Labour party, but had quit during the pandemic as he was pressured out for not towing the party line on vaccines, and lockdowns. There was another guy who'd formerly been involved with Socialist Worker, decades ago, but these decent old-school left-wingers found themselves politically homeless in modern Britain. And more recently, there's this:

image of Labour poster, with photo of Rishi Sunak and the line 'See you next Thursday'.

"C" what they did? They called Sunak a c*nt. How crass, vapid, and appealing to the basest instincts, and coming not from some random member in a park, but proudly supported by Alistair Campbell. If you've ever felt frustrated at the incapacity of today's left-wing diehards to follow a logical argument without retreating into name-calling, now you know where it's coming from, and what to expect for the next electoral term if predictions are borne out on Thursday.

What about Reform? This is difficult, because they're the only mainstream party that seems to offer some hope to the health freedom movement. In 2021 they were in favour of the vaccines, and drugs like remdesivir, and in a video on 28th Jan 2021, Richard Tice spoke in favour of compulsory vaccination of care-workers - big mistakes. Thinking Coalition has commented on this and other issues, and concluded they're a "Trojan horse".

My view? 28th Jan 2021 was early in the vaccine rollout. It's disappointing they favoured compulsory vaccination for carers, and that they bought so many bad ideas, and it is frustrating to those of us who are immersed in the subject of health, and knew enough in 2020 to foresee the disaster of the coming vaccine rollout. I'm sure people had tried to tell Reform what was really happening too. But the fact is, few politicians at the time understood this, and Reform also spoke against prolonged lockdowns, and in favour of alternatives like ivermectin, and were opposed to vaccine passports at least as early as April 2021, when we were still living under covid restrictions, and vax passports were very much on the table.

Reform Broadcast, 28 Apr 2021

So they might not be ideal, but they may be the best we can realistically hope for.

As to the smaller parties, I looked into the SDP as they have a candidate in my area. Outside of covid, they seem to be a left wing counterpart to Reform, that is, economically left wing, socially conservative. I did a little searching, but found no statements from them about covid or vaccines. There was nothing in their manifesto about these issues, so I contacted them, primarily to ask what was their response to covid / in what direction would they pressure a government in the event of a similar event in future. After my second email I got a non-answer, so their position on these issues is a complete unknown. Given that this was the biggest issue in the last term of Parliament, this isn't inspiring.

That's about all the info I have for the health freedom vote. If you can figure out who we should vote for, let us know!

- Antony

Join mailing list

Notes

: Franklin, Covid is the forgotten issue of the UK election, UnHerd, 28 Jun 2024

: Banoun, mRNA: Vaccine or Gene Therapy? The Safety Regulatory Issues, Int J Mol Sci, 22 Jun 2023

: Knapton, Covid vaccines may have helped fuel rise in excess deaths, Telegraph, 5 Jun 2024

: Jones, Danish Mask Study: Masks Do Not Protect From Coronavirus, Daily Sceptic.org, 11 Nov 2020

: Jefferson et al., Physical interventions to interrupt or reduce the spread of respiratory viruses, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 30 Jan 2023. Quote: "Wearing [medical] masks in the community probably makes little or no difference to the outcome of influenza-like illness (ILI)/COVID-19 like illness compared to not wearing masks. . . . Harms were rarely measured and poorly reported."

: Strom, Cochrane Review the latest scientific institution ruined by COVID ideology, Hot Air.com, 28 Aug 2023

: Blaylock, Face Masks Pose Serious Risks To The Healthy, Technocracy.News, 11 May 2020

: Mask Whistleblowers Tell All, Highwire.com, 9 Oct 2020

: Sullivan, Coronavirus: Chief medical officer tells public not to wear masks, Independent, 4 Mar 2020. Quote from Prof. Witty: "In terms of wearing a mask, our advice is clear: that wearing a mask if you don’t have an infection reduces the risk almost not at all. So we do not advise that."

: March 2020: Dr. Anthony Fauci talks with Dr Jon LaPook about Covid-19, clip on YouTube.com, 8 Mar 2020. Quote from Fauci: "Right now people in the United States should not be walking around with masks. . . . When you're in the middle of an outbreak, wearing a mask might make people feel a little bit better, and it might even block a droplet, but it's not providing the perfect protection that people think that it is, and often there are unintended consequences, people keep fiddling with the mask and they keep touching their face." / Interviewer: "And can you get some sort of schmutz sort of staying inside there?" / Fauci: "Of course, of course . . . ."

: Dodsworth, A State of Fear, 2021, p111

: General's opening remarks at the media briefing on COVID-19, WHO, 3 Aug 2020

: Carl, Sweden Did *Better* Than Its Neighbours, Daily Sceptic.org, 4 Jan 2023

: Jones, If Lockdowns are Needed, Why Did More People Die in U.S. States Which Locked Down Than Those Which Did Not?, Daily Sceptic.org (then Lockdown Sceptics), 18 Apr 2021

: Haslett, Timeline: all the lockdown breaches by politicians and government employees so far, New Statesman.com, 8 Dec 2021

: Coronavirus: Labour MP quits role after lockdown breach, BBC, 31 May 2020

: Jones, “Hold a Drink at All Times”: Humza Yousaf Told by Top Medical Adviser How to Get Round Face Mask Laws, Daily Sceptic.org, 23 Jan 2024

: Covid: Masks mandatory for everyone in the Commons - except MPs, BBC, 27 Oct 2021

: Covid-19: Concern over 'do not resuscitate' decisions during pandemic, BBC, 18 Mar 2021

: Hydroxychloroquine: Deadly Drug or Unrecognized Saviour?, Healing Truths.org, 30 Jul 2021

: Kory, The War on Ivermectin, The Medicine that Saved Millions and Could Have Ended the Pandemic, 2023

: Kennedy, The Real Anthony Fauci, Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health, 2021, p63-70