The current “crisis” is undoubtedly multiform, even if some people in power attempt to hide it. Not only sanitary but civilizationally we shall not be feared by this word. The alleged superiority of the “record carriers” (scientists) has failed in our eyes, but we are still under hypnosis. It has to imply that we should no longer allow ourselves to be inferior under the pedantic pretext that their implanted science could tell us something more.
The Ferguson and Co, who frightened Macron, Johnson, Pelosi/Obama, were mistaken about the lethal gravity of this virus, which, all in all, tends to join those who annually “killed” between 200.000 à 500.000 people worldwide.
Same applies for the supposedly catastrophic future of “climate change” (whereas it is a pleonasm the climate is constantly changing as the late Marcel Leroux reminded us); other holders of “learned” tablets are ecstatic about the same frightening, exciting curves (even imploring for some a Covid crisis per year) as demonstrated day after day by the very competent members of the climate realists; especially when they indicate to the insane sums of money spent for these “green” energies (the anti-bushist and anti-trumpist Michaël Moore is forced to admit it in his latest film).
The “Simulators” react as some “Terminators” manipulated by the global business to perfect their hyperrealism model as Jean baudrillard mentioned many times: to make the planet a cube with multiple removable faces, and this more by obligatory summoning than by the simple desire for each of us to live in another place, on a different planet than our own. These (false) technos imagine themselves on an editing mixing table where human sounds and images would be mixed and the mixture would be shaken and then spread out or confined according to the pressure of the political-media brushes declined in mutually exclusive and hostile audiences.
When are we going to wake up from this multiform hypnosis that is making us more and more inferior?
However, “the” problem is not so much free trade or “the” state per se as their destructive manipulation by deep and often secret forces that monopolize them. Health care is mostly private in South Korea, and yet it has dealt with the situation better than Italy, France and the UK, even their taxes are much higher (Korea pays much more for its health care system in return); Germany competes with several social security funds, which has not prevented it from having many more intensive care beds…
Some countries like the USA also pay much more for their health care than French country for instance but are also much less taxed… And the poorest have Medicare. We have hardly heard (as usual) that sick people have been left on the pavement…
Africa, which has massively adopted the Didier Raoult Protocol (with four elements: test, isolation, hydroxychloroquine and antibiotic) is doing much better than Europe and USA if it were not for all the corruption and statist affairism that is throwing millions of its children into South-South and then South-North emigration (which usually is not said by demographers). Hyper-bureaucratized countries with such a “heavy” public service, at least on the surface, have sought to make inadequate savings (medical beds, maternity hospitals, police, taxes, courts, prisons, universities…) not so much to open the door to “competition”, as the political and trade union bureaucracies say, but instead to the monopoly of the “rascals and cronies.” We can see how the Raoult protocol, concerning drugs as a treatment, was omitted because more expensive products were in sight (although they gave inferior results without being denounced daily by triumphant “papers”…).The very “nasty” AXA offers, for instance, social insurance much cheaper than several countries have, why not benefit from it? It is up to the Political democratic System to ensure that the interests of its most modest policyholders are protected, by providing, for example, that they are well represented in its bodies.
In general, the co-management system must be generalized everywhere (including digital voting), and municipal and regional council meetings must be filmed permanently. Generally speaking, the co-management system must be generalized everywhere (digital voting too), municipal and regional council meetings must always be videotaped, there must be a direct and representative multi-purpose system, there must be a more general end to this official system of elitist/people, labor/capital conflict, while unofficial connivance exists to maintain trade union and political bureaucracies to the detriment of employees and citizens; which does not mean that the trade union and political function should be subordinated to this co-management as was the case in totalitarianism countries; the conflict is permanent between us, humans, and therefore the counter-powers are very necessary; this is the real debate unfortunately little understood by our tablet scientists, including “materialists” who are just a variation from those last ones.
There is so much to be done, at least if we want to get away from ready-made thoughts, leave behind the security blinkers for a while, and accept to read the real reports that stall the bureaucratic cupboards. Basically, it would be less a question of reducing “public spending” or “the perimeter of the State” than of working in horizontal and vertical synergy to curb in the long term the excessive swelling of large cities that are turning into Gotham City, then transforming themselves into Babel megacities, to the detriment of the entire cultural and genuine social roots upstream; which does not mean that we should “confine” each other…
Do we want really live each other only by screen interaction inside an aseptic city? Do we want cut off the head of all alterity effacing for instance, the real difference between sex genres cultures, all those kinds of kinds of stuff which are building the hyperrealism way as which was described by Jean Baudrillard?
The current crisis has clearly shown that the frenzy and fancy life of the big cities are reduced to nothing when the techno people on the assembly table of global command demand that the “mixture” (i.e., us) goes back into the consumerism social tube (and they do (!) which is delirious…)
What do we really want? Sovereignty and not inferiority? The “real thing”? So be it! Should not we rather series the above questions, identify their issues instead of those eternal “it’s because of”? As if suppressing the “Kapital” or bureaucratizing it would promulgate a brighter tomorrow (and a free shave and pancakes every morning). How is it that doctors can’t deliver the medicines of their choice? Is it because of “liberalism”? Come on! Who are we making fun of?…(Of us, the water carriers) How is it that many doctoral students in climate physics adopt GIERC’s theses alone, without a critical spirit, under the pretext that the debate would be “closed”, which is anti-scientific by its very essence, especially since the current crisis has shown the vanity of over-modelling?
Why is it that many doctoral students in the social sciences adopt Michel Foucault’s theses alone, which assume that individuals are dominated by “codes” and that it is therefore not systematically their fault if they commit various abuses (including these ransacked churches) when the notion of “extenuating circumstances” says what it means: it is not automatic; except that it has been misled by a judicial system considering that the real victim would be “only” the collateral damage at the bottom of this so-called “illegibility” of the “codes”, especially when the aggressor is a foreigner and therefore “dominated” by “essence”; say this to all the raped: your executioner did not have the right decoder… And if he is a foreigner, suffered but still finds “somewhere” to enjoy as the Germans women had suffer the 31 TH December few years ago….
How is it that in the economic and social sciences the partisans of anti-capitalism remain these (naked) kings always showing the (big) company in itself as a hell? Certainly some universities resist or go to the opposite excess by over-mathematizing economic science… However, the logical calculation of optimizations cannot fail to integrate their rational consequences that Politics must take care of (it was the Baudrillard’s dream by the way): thus can one relocate such and such a company when the global negative effects are greater than its relative positive effects? But, in this case, it would be necessary to study why the costs are so high and lower elsewhere while the wage share, median, is not so immense… In short, it would be necessary to make “political, psychological economy” and not only “economic and social sciences” supplant Politics when it is central in decision making in the corruption of monopolization, affairism…
We still walk on our heads, with our shoulders tucked in, despite our efforts to put the debate of politics back on its feet. The difference between existentialism, situationism, postmodernism and now neomodernism is not to consider “we” (People…) are outside the “System” but inside; and we have not only to reform or at opposite to scramble all interactions and alterity with suicide squads to “save the Planet” (without us) but revolutionize permanently our local and global institutions because “we are wearth it” but not in the way as said the hyperrealism slogan…Which way?… Good question it seems. Anyhow not in the inferiority path for sure…
Dr. (HDR) Lucien Samir Oulahbib
Writer, lecturer, sociologist, political scientist author of numerous scientific papers and books on French nihilism and neo-leninism, radical islamism, anti-americanism and antisemitism. He spent many years working together with French thinker Jean Baudrillard.