Dr. Robert Malone, a hero and shining light, is going deep into the philosophical weeds lately. This work is important and needs to be done. As the last couple of years proves, ideas matter.
Ideas can kill you, or save your life.
In the epic motion picture, V for Vendetta, this quote comes to mind:
We are told to remember the idea, not the man, because a man can fail. He can be caught, he can be killed and forgotten, but 400 years later, an idea can still change the world.
The Great Reset is an idea, but we can ask if it is right or good, and we can ask if it is an inherently-dishonest idea — something evil.
When checking to see if something is good or evil, you compare it against a moral standard. There are three-and-a-half moral standards you could use: one based on feelings, one based on rules, one based on reality, and a “fourth” not based on anything:
“Davos Man” is an unprincipled opportunist
The COVID billionaires operate based on the first ethic: Subjectivism. Using that ethic, you can determine if an action is “right” based on whether you feel like doing it.
Because COVID billionaires and World Economic Forum elites “feel like” dominating the world — enriching themselves while making the rest of us grow poor — they think that that is the right way for them to live.
But because complete moral subjectivism, which takes your personal feelings as if they are “God”, lacks justification and is even somewhat offputting, actual subjectivists hide their agenda behind a make-shift “ethic” called utilitarianism.
Utilitarianism then makes them look “scientific” when they chase after their own personal and petty desires.
Deontologists only have half of the answer
If feelings aren’t the ultimate arbiter of what is true and good in the world, another possible source of good or value would be “rules.” Rules are principles and are therefore stable and could serve as good guides.
However, when rules are not fully based on the life form they are applied to, even they can miss the mark. Excessive rule-following was one of the “sins” expounded in the New Testament, specifically in relation to pharisees who elevated rules above human life.
Natural Law/Virtue Ethics
This leaves us with a third option to base the value or goodness to be found out of the relationship of a life form to its environment. If what you are is what determines what is good for you, then morality will be discovered as that code of behavior that allows you to thrive.
When natural law gets applied to humans, virtue ethics results.
Because humans require the ability to think, things which harm free thought are inherently wrong. Even things which harm discussion — where thoughts are traded back and forth in a marketplace of ideas — are inherently wrong.
Censorship — the prevention of discussion — is then inherently wrong. This is because of the central importance of ideas to human life.
For those with a criminal mindset though, shutting down discussion can allow for more injustice, or more evil, to occur than would otherwise be possible. When trying to get away with crimes against humanity, the last thing you want is to be put under the microscope.
Relation to politics
Free markets are the single way to take good ideas and make them fruitful. But criminals don’t like free markets. Tyrants would rather have predictable control, even if it multiplies the squalor in the world.
For this reason, tyrants foment and then get behind social movements like socialism, fascism, environmentalism, and even populism in general — where populism is merely a concise name for social metaphysics (a social subjectivism where Gallup polls “create” reality).
The proper way to conduct yourself is to let reality speak for itself though. And reality says that mankind requires free thought and even free action (to implement the good ideas).