In search of the obvious

 "Do you not know that we are to judge angels? How much more, then, matters pertaining to this life". 1 Corinthians 6:3.

It's always refreshing when you come across something that makes a series of observations which "click", purely because it resounds with common sense.

Matthew Crawford's current 'Unheard' piece on health and the cost of currently being defined as "healthy" provided just such a moment.

Beginning with the absurdity of making his daughter don a mask to run around an open field for soccer practice, he notes how seeking to do the 'genuinely rational thing' can often currently entail breaking the rules, and that this usually comes at the cost of being deemed anti-social (perhaps even threatening). This brings to the fore the thorny issue that, in most of these miss-matched circumstances, there is no figure or body you can reasonably appeal to in order to make your reasoned case - there's just 'the ruling' and those complying with it (woe betide you if things 'develop' to the point that "persons" do arrive to enforce this).

So, the choices are that you conform, or you do not participate - those are the only actual options, and given this is so, the majority choose to "do" what's been set, however ridiculous the action may be (if sober reasoning was to be employed).

Some eighteen months plus into all of this, it's now clear that another problem has often become endemic - the "requirements" are so widespread, so commonplace, they have simply become habitual. Once again, compliance is therefore assumed.

This is where things become... interesting.

There may, by now, be very clear arguments to press that some or all of the actions imposed are actually without merit - that they are being implemented as a result of "advice" from Government 'nudge' think-tanks (which have been employed in this crisis all along), so what is being undertaken is to foster a particular, "disturbed" response from the general population in order to 'encourage' a very directed reaction to the trouble. Social restrictions and medical requirements become eagerly embraced and questioning of such is vehemently discouraged as outrageous.

Fear becomes the "vaccine"  which counters individual concern. Humiliation commonly trumps those who attempt to cross the 'normative' forms of the moment - and it equally levels all those who conform to the imposition of control.

The impoverishing of us all is clear. What was defined as essential for impacting upon the crisis now pervades a manner of oversight, a 'definition' of what should determine our inter-actions as humans that derives from a philosophy which defines such eccentricities as perfectly acceptable (imposing whatever authorities deem it 'reasonable' for us to do).

The "administrative state", empowered directly by national leadership, "gersumps" constitutions, state or county legislators, and human rights."Laws" are, in effect, imposed without the normal procedures to form, amend and frame them. It is a supplanting of the power structure that has shaped the modern world since its first introduction under the Saxon Kings.

Now, 'expert' cells of technocrats provide key data directly to exclusive leaders so action is immediate and undisturbed by notions like democracy. Only when the deed is already complete are 'lesser' bodies informed, and then only partially.

The notion behind this is not derived from a policy to merely provide necessary medical treatment - it is intent on a journey to transform society via means far too impatient to conform to necessary convention. Therein lies the difference between power and and authority.

In the modern 'Psych supermarket', the 'impulse' buys are the ones continually placed at our eye level. Easily run-trough the social 'check-out', we are expected to make the dash for such "goodies". The UK Government has a working group (in residence since 2009) to ensure we do just that, and this is echoed in bodies including the UN, the EU and the W H O. It is estimated that some 400 such bodies of this nature are now employed by Governments and influential corporations (social media) across the world.

The consequences, notes Crawford in his piece, are evident - outlandish "medical" necessities become the moral norm.

When such methods become tied to a particular political will, then what was once deemed as imperative in a free society - the rights of the individual - become archaic, or, perhaps, anarchistic. Most certainly, they are deemed an 'impediment' to the new (unrestrained) "progress".

"Liberation" becomes 'true' only if it conformed to such means and ends - the old can be neglected, indeed dismissed, because what has been 'bestowed' is defined as so much better - it will always do you good, so must always be employed, without questions.

When first referring to the 'small' trouble of the virus early in 2020, the 'leader' of the country quickly spoke of how we would be seen as 'supermen' before it - donning a swift solution so we could move along with 'weightier' concerns. The garb of our day is branded with the manner of 'visor' outlined above - a mirage of external industry devoid of any real care or cure for our abyss-like troubles which clearly cries out our need for a far better remedy.

The superficial surrounds us.

Now, by deliberate policy, such 'guides' or impedes all instruments of power.

The 'den of vipers' must be undone.

The 'curating' of information must end.

Our questions, our quest, our union to what is imperative, must be full and true.

This alone is the vitality that sustains genuine public health.

This is the nature of truth, which makes us profoundly free.