4 min read

We can not let the most frightened be the decision-makers.

How far should we go to protect ourselves from a disease that is harmless to most people? Photo: Pixabay

Document.no - By: Erling Marthinsen - January 26, 2022, 11:56

The pandemic has revealed to all of us that security hysteria trumps everything else. This may be due to an ideology that we must take into account the most feared among us, and that we have leaders with an insatiable need to have their backs free.

This is what Kristian Gundersen writes in a statement on NRK. Gundersen is a professor of physiology at UiO.

He gives an imaginary example:

For example, the teaching at all schools in Oslo in the autumn of 2011 was interrupted in the middle of the day and the students were sent home because 4 out of 94,000 sold fire extinguishers (0.004 per cent) in Europe of a certain type had been blown out within 6 months. Incidentally, without anyone being injured.

This is what the authorities have thought from 12 March 2020 until today. We recognize this way of thinking from modern HSE regimes.

All conceivable and unimaginable risks must be evaluated in writing, and enormous resources are used for documentation.

Like when a professor fell down the stairs at UiO and died, the first accident of its kind in 200 years. Then it was discussed in all seriousness whether to draw up rules to stay in the railing.

This is also the case on the oil platforms.

Should we require a helmet when sledding? Should we ban tree climbing in kindergarten? Should we really order life jackets when rowing on a small lake?

Gundersen is skeptical.

During the epidemic, a similar unrestrained precautionary approach has emerged, especially in the Norwegian Directorate of Health. Not to mention all kinds of web groupings.

In other countries, it is almost forbidden for children to climb, play freely and explore the world. If it is not forbidden, then the parents provide the overprotection. Such parents are called " helicopter parents ".

This creates children who are not able to assess risk, think for themselves and take responsibility. The result is weak people who cry out for social justice if not everything goes their way when they grow up.

Everything that goes wrong is someone else's fault.

Our authorities have acted as helicopter parents for an entire population. The result is that large sections of the general public have behaved like hysterical children, terrified of a disease with 0.12 percent mortality from infection (before omicron).

Those over 80 had a 96 percent chance of surviving. The median age of covid-associated death is approximately the same as the life expectancy in Norway (83 years).

Safety is the new shut up, so Mark Steyn and gang.
Take the vaccine, or you'll kill Grandma, said social media.

Measures were probably needed. But the all-encompassing, life-changing measures? They seem like violent overkill.

Gundersen points to something significant:

It is an ideological opposition to natural immunity, which was what stopped epidemics before we got vaccines.

I myself think that this opposition is based on the fact that our so-called leaders can not take credit for natural immunity. One cannot give the welfare state and caring politicians the credit for an epidemic that burns out naturally.

Gundersen quotes Lord Sumption, who already in May 2020 said it like this: "There is more to life than the avoidance of death".

Life is a drink with friends. Life is a crowded football match or a live concert. Life is a family celebration with children and grandchildren.

Life is companionship, an arm around one’s back, laughter or tears shared at less than two metres. These things are not just optional extras. They are life itself.

They are fundamental to our humanity, to our existence as social beings. Of course death is permanent, whereas joy may be temporarily suspended. But the force of that point depends on how temporary it really is.

Debate editor Solveig G. Sandelson in Stavanger Aftenblad has similar thoughts.

From the night until Wednesday 26 January, quarantine is over for most of us. At first I was childishly happy by that message. And then I got pretty upset. For it is not the intention that one should be happy and grateful that the state allows healthy kids to be outside.

Have I become so ill dependent on the state in my day to day life? And are there really good reasons why the state should take every day from people longer?

The combination of a welfare state, an overgrown bureaucracy, reduced freedom, media that carry out intimidation propaganda, and large sections of the population who had not yet understood that the state is not to be trusted:

Therefore, we got a mass psychosis.

This is about to change. The measures seem increasingly meaningless to an increasing proportion of the population.

The vaccines do not work. If they had worked, the measures would have been abolished long ago.

Mutations are not life-threatening. Omikron is not a threat, but a solution.

Then came the power crisis, which shattered the illusions. Then the Taliban came to visit.

Read also: Open letter to the Norwegian government: Regarding the Taliban

Confidence drops. The authorities lose their grip. They become transparent.

Let us go, now! We will take back the freedom, without their permission, which we strictly do not need if we are many enough.

The scariest among us


Copy & Paste the link above for Yandex translation to Norwegian.

WHO and WHAT is behind it all ? : >

The bottom line is for the people to regain their original, moral principles, which have intentionally been watered out over the past generations by our press, TV, and other media owned by the Illuminati/Bilderberger Group, corrupting our morals by making misbehavior acceptable to our society. Only in this way shall we conquer this oncoming wave of evil.




All articles contained in Human-Synthesis are freely available and collected from the Internet. The interpretation of the contents is left to the readers and do not necessarily represent the views of the Administrator. Disclaimer: The contents of this article are of sole responsibility of the author(s). Human-Synthesis will not be responsible for any inaccurate or incorrect statement in this article. Human-Synthesis grants permission to cross-post original Human-Synthesis articles on community internet sites as long as the text & title are not modified