My Weekly Economist newsletter, under the heading “A special edition on this year’s notable lives” had a list of all obituaries published this year by the Economist. The one above caught my eyes as I found it deeply offensive on many levels.
First the human right claim, then the fact that it was printed in The Ecommunist, all in the light of the pharma-fascism that we are subjected to ending in the indignation about my total lack of any rights under the ‘socialized’ health care system of Canada. Our most basic rights are trampled in the name of health care…….., yes, the thing that Gino Strada believed to be a human right. Let’s take a closer look at these ‘rights’.
What are rights? What are human rights? What are individual rights? What’s the difference?
What exactly did Gino Strada have in mind when he said that health care is a human right?
He couldn’t possibly mean the enslavement of some to provide their labour to others without compensation? …Or did he? What the left calls ‘human rights’ are usually privileges. The right to health care, housing, a decent wage, a clean environment, nutritious food, abortion or a sex-change operation on demand does not mean that your rights to acquire them should not be impeded, but the right to demand that others provide them to you. Properly understood, a right is ALWAYS negative. The proper term for a positive right is privilege (from Latin privus lex = private law) or entitlement.
The point of it all is an Orwellian slight of hand: if we start calling privileges ‘human rights’, then through the magic of bullspeak they turn from a bad thing into a good thing. From immoral to virtuous.
I have no doubt that Gino Strada was a wonderful person, doing far more than most to help those in need. But he was wrong calling health care a right. He did so with the hope that it will help him to get more resources for the good he was doing and wanted to do more of. The right he was actually asking for is the right to control other people’s resources. I do not doubt his good intentions, I just don’t like to call the call for robbery a call for human rights.
I especially dislike the talk about health care being a human right on the pages of the magazine which, for the past two years, was the foremost advocate of medical fascism. In the course of the past two years, The Economist proved to be one of the most fervent advocates of health care authoritarianism with articles like “Why America needs vaccine mandates” stating clearly that “…in democracies public health sometimes requires some coercion.” They had no problem arguing for the blanket denial of our most basic human right, the right to make decisions about our own bodies. The Economist is unashamedly Globalist, with all the authoritarianism that comes with it. It is only concerned with ‘human rights’ when that means its exact opposite. Your only right in a pandemic is to obey.
There is nothing special about my lack of ‘human rights’ in this pandemic. When it comes to my health care, I did not have much to begin with. I live in Canada, the bastillion of socialized health care, where 75% of the people are “proud of their health-care system.” It is the single payer, single tier totalitarian system that is the dream of the American left.
I do not use the term totalitarian lightly. Mussolini’s definition of totalitarianism is “Everything within the state, nothing outside the state, nothing against the state”. Just replace the word ‘state’ with ‘health-care’ and you have a perfect definition of Canadian Health Care Totalitarianism.
Doctors are not allowed to offer medical services outside the system and therefore I cannot find any.
The system decides what is and what is not ‘health-care’. Even within the system they decide what they will or will not cover. Pulling my teeth is not covered, but cutting off my penis would be. Whatever is covered, I have no right to get outside the system no matter how much I need it or willing to pay for it.
I have no right to decide what I need. A qualified health care professional must decide for me.
If I think, for example, that a coronary-arterial-calcification (CAC) test would be the best to gage my heart disease risks, I have to ask my family physician to ask for a referral to a cardiologist who can decide whether to order it for me. If he decides that I should just take statins instead, I am out of luck. There is NOTHING I can do. I cannot get it done on my own. If he orders it for me, I just have to wait for it.
Because what I have lots and lots of right to do in the FREE Canadian health care system is waiting. In a report published just today, the Fraser Institute provides the latest figures. Wait times for a consultation with a specialist plus the wait time for the actual procedure is four and a half months to a year.
That, again, if the specialist finds it necessary.
The tyranny of Free
A couple of months ago, my drug pusher (cardiologist) dropped me. I clearly don’t look good on his statistics. I want to feel good, just not on the particular substance he is pushing. His suppliers are keeping a close watch on how well he is pushing their products. Statins are the second most profitable drugs right after anti depressants, so of course they do.
The problem is that statins have side effects and they do not provide ANY actual benefits. Long term studies found that they do not add a single month to overall life expectancy. They may provide some benefits by decreasing heart attack risks but only at the cost of harmful side effects that cancel the benefits you would expect. When I told my cardiologist that I do not want statins, he offered me a new and novel treatment that is really wonderful because I only have to take an injection once a week. I looked into it to find that it works on the same principles as statins, the side effects are even worse and it costs multiples of the cost of statins. But at least I don’t have to worry about that. It’s FREE!!
When I told the pusher thanks but no, thanks, he just dropped me.
In this “FREE” system I have no freedom at all. I have exactly as much right as the cattle in a herd.
Every decision about my health care is in the hands of others and if I do not want to accept their decisions, I am completely powerless. My existence is just an excuse, a justification for the existence of the system. I don’t pay for it, therefore I’m the product.
Paying for the tests or procedures I deem necessary is apparently NOT a human right. Buying the medication that I think can cure me (Ivermectin) is NOT a human right. Saying no to an injection that can seriously harm me is apparently NOT a human right. Taking financial responsibility for my own health care is NOT a human right.
Only advocating socialized health care and the total, uncritical submission to it is.