At the level of public discussion, the question of vaccine passports for internal use has been a roller-coaster of rumours and about-turns, not only in the UK but across the world. Their necessity was trumpeted almost as early as the first COVID cases, and their similarity to (and potential evolution into) Internal Passports in the Soviet tradition was soon noted by opponents.
In Britain we voted Identity Cards down a decade or more ago, despite fear from global terrorism, and since then, through Edward Snowden and others, Internet privacy has become a major concern. But such passports seem to remain on the government agendas anyway. In France the gloves are now off, since the promise that they could never happen there have been turned by M. Macron into six month prison sentences for failing to produce them. In Germany they’re still off the agenda, but the money is on them arriving soon anyway.
In Britain they have been definitely off the table, according to government ministers, then possibly on the table, then piloted (whilst simultaneously being announced as off the table). The message has changed so many times that their arrival, like the next catastrophic lockdown, has now become a foregone conclusion. “The mock executions are unbearable – just shoot me and get it over with.”
All this would look like our government thrashing around with half-baked ideas, as it has with testing and tracing and a dozen other things, except that governments around the world are playing exactly the same games over COVID passports. Come to think of it, to varying degrees the same is true of all the other policies, so that to many it rather looks as if the decision-making consists of seeing what most of the big boys are doing and copying, whilst making scientific-sounding noises to sound intelligent. In other words this would be “Groupthink,” or incompetence at the global level.
Whether the shilly-shallying has been because governments don’t know what to do and whose advice to take, or because constant confusion makes eminently good sense according to behavioural psychology is a matter for debate. Whether politics by behavioural psychology differs in any significant way from the propaganda of a totalitarian state is also unclear. In both, the desirable outcome is decided by the ruling cabal’s wisdom, and the task of the organs of state, from SPI-B to the press and even the professional bodies, is to bring the lumpenproletariat into line.
On the Psyops model, it doesn’t matter if a good proportion of the public is unconvinced, or even all of the public, as long as there is not actual rebellion. Propaganda is interested only in behaviour, to which belief may or may not contribute – that is why it is labelled as “behavioural” psychology. It is sufficient for people to believe that most other people swallow the message for it to work. The demoralisation of the wise by their impotence is a feature, not a bug.
But a number of things in this ongoing situation, beyond the obvious abusive duplicity of the government, encourage an explanation even closer to the conspiracy end of the spectrum of belief. It is not only the well-publicised role of the plethora of behaviour manipulation teams apparently at the disposal of the Government that encourages suspicion. Could it plausibly be that police harassment of token citizens at mass protests, and the reporting blackout of anything except arrests, are not parts of the same coordinated messaging campaign? Neither chance nor stupidity produce order ? it takes planning.
But there is more. When 2020 was the year that the Chinese Communist Party finally imposed their social credit system on citizens, suspicious souls must be forgiven for thinking that governments that have followed China’s lead on lockdowns may have further imitation in mind.
Even more concerning was the staging of the ID2020 conference last year. This group seemed to be just another trendy utopian club, pushing for the “basic human right” of universal digital identity since 2016, long before SARS-CoV-2 appeared. We are all, I am sure, aware of the clamour of the poor across the globe for … a universally traceable digital identity. It’s just what the oppressed need. It is every illegal immigrant’s dream.
Things look a little more troubling when one discovers that their “partners” include Microsoft (personal information syphoners extraordinaire), The Rockefeller Foundation (so deeply implicated in plans to reshape the world for decades) and GAVI (the vaccine alliance funded by Big Pharma, the Gates Foundation, WHO and governments like our own). The last is the very channel through which the world had worked to rush COVID vaccines into production. One has to wonder, at least, whether they might have a vested interest in pushing vaccine passports to sell their products.
That was last year, however. Maybe utopian dreams have been superceded by a more sober reality of governments forced to provide basic controls during a pandemic. It pays, if one supposes that to be true, to visit ID2020’s website now:
“In Febrary 2020, ID 2020 launched the Good Health Pass Collaborative, an open, inclusive cross-sector initiative to create a blueprint for interoperable digital health pass systems that will help restore global travel and restart the global economy.”
That rather gives the impression that ID2020 is the organisation working on these passports on behalf of the governments who have so often said, long after February, that they are not working on them at all. This impression is reinforced when they state:
“Digital identity is being defined now – and we [my italics] need to get it right.”
What they say it needs to be right for is not just health security, but “political, economic and social opportunity.” In health that seems so far to be all about closing off and exclusion from such opportunities, just as it does in China. It is about granting strictly limited freedoms that are actually God-given – doesn’t that sound familiar on July 19th?
The Good Health Pass Initiative has its own website too, with its own list of corporate partners including… well, apparently every corporation in the world with an expensive logo, or which might get tickets to the Davos conference on the Great Reset. The concrete project to make our travel and social interactions dependent on vaccinations and tests mandated by others is being engineered by a consortium of the most rich and powerful people on earth. But at least it is only about travel, ostensibly…
Or maybe not. It was indeed initiated by ID2020, the FAQs say. They were not boasting. So which is more likely: that all these global organisations and governments will sort out a temporary solution to spreading COVID, with the help of ID2020, and then stop, or that Microsoft, GAVI, the Rockefeller Foundation and the rest will use their leverage to ensure that it is only a stage along the way to their already published universal ambitions?
Most of all, is the process that is already in full swing, and hidden in plain view, compatible with the shall-we-shan’t-we messages we have been fed throughout the pandemic by our Government? The people we elected are making plans that will affect all of us forever, and they involve internationally illegal components like coerced treatment. But they are not informing us about them openly and honestly. I seem to remember there is a word for that.