In his book The Global Warming Hypothesis is an Unproven Hypothesis, Dr. Nakamura explains why the data foundation underpinning global warming science is “untrustworthy” and cannot be relied on:
“Global mean temperatures before 1980 are based on untrustworthy data,” writes Nakamura.
“Before full planet surface observation by satellite began in 1980, only a small part of the Earth had been observed for temperatures with only a certain amount of accuracy and frequency. Across the globe, only North America and Western Europe have trustworthy temperature data dating back to the 19th century.”
From 1990 to 2014, Nakamura worked on cloud dynamics and forces mixing atmospheric and ocean flows on medium to planetary scales. His bases were MIT (for a Doctor of Science in meteorology), Georgia Institute of Technology, Goddard Space Flight Center, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Duke and Hawaii Universities and the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology.
“Global mean temperatures before 1980 are based on untrustworthy data,” writes Nakamura.
“Before full planet surface observation by satellite began in 1980, only a small part of the Earth had been observed for temperatures with only a certain amount of accuracy and frequency. Across the globe, only North America and Western Europe have trustworthy temperature data dating back to the 19th century.”
From 1990 to 2014, Nakamura worked on cloud dynamics and forces mixing atmospheric and ocean flows on medium to planetary scales. His bases were MIT (for a Doctor of Science in meteorology), Georgia Institute of Technology, Goddard Space Flight Center, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Duke and Hawaii Universities and the Japan Agency for Marine-Earth Science and Technology.
I just read that during the week ending April 21, 2023, the number of deaths registered in England is 22.9 percent higher than the five-year average.
These numbers keep coming out, and our wise experts keep pretending they aren’t there.
You may have heard of Ed Dowd, author of Cause Unknown, who’s been breaking down the data. When asked about what pieces of data are the most compelling, he offers these:
Two data sets. The Society of Actuaries, which are group life policies at the elite, elite corporations across the U.S., Fortune 500 mid-sized. Their excess mortality in 2021 was 40%. The general U.S. population was 32%. Typically, this group is much healthier than the general U.S. population. The Society of Actuaries has shown that in prior studies. It’s in my book, it’s QR coded.
And they said that in any given year, group life policyholders die at one third the mortality rate of the general U.S. population. So that inverted in 2021 and continues to this day. I blame the vaccines and mandates.
The second piece of data: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics disability data. The disability numbers are around 29 to 30 million for the prior five years going into 2021. Then they exploded in February from about 29 to 30 to 33.2 million. That was a three standard deviation event, which in geek-speak happens 0.03% of the time.
Of those 3.2 million people that were added, 1.7 million are employed. When you look at the disability rate increases, employed went up 31%, the general U.S. population went up 9%. And what’s even worse is, those not in the labor force — people who could work and are willing to work — their disability rate only went up 4%. Those are the people who got fired for not taking the jab or refused to take the jab and quit.
Typically speaking, the employed of the country, by the very nature of going to work, aren’t as disabled as the general U.S. population. And this has never happened in the history of our country. Those two pieces of data are, for me, a mic drop. That’s what I presented to Senator Ron Johnson in December. And that’s it. That’s all we need to know. We’re done here.
In other words, why would the disability trends be so divergent, and especially in the wrong direction? The working population is generally healthier than the non-working, and yet we had this massive reversal of that normal situation. Given how many people working were required to get the jab, and that plenty of the non-working didn’t get it, and disability among the working exploded but it didn’t among the non-working, is it all right with the police if we at least consider that the jab could have had something to do with it?
To people who say “correlation doesn’t equal causation,” Dowd replies: “So did the virus mutate in ’21 and ’22 to only affect younger-aged working people but somehow avoids those who are not employed? Unless we have a new virus that knows you’re working, there’s no explanation for it.”
(Please don’t write to me saying you don’t believe in viruses, because that’s not the point here.)
I personally believe there is deep skepticism about the shots across the political spectrum, even if Democrats are afraid to express it. That’s one reason the RFK, Jr., candidacy is welcome: he is showing them that it’s all right to say these things, just as Ron Paul showed Republicans that it was all right to oppose ridiculous wars.
This is a draconian measure aimed at taking away national sovereignty - and individual freedom
Dr. Joseph Mercola has compiled the current situation with regard to “the new international pandemic treaty proposed by the World Health Organization — what it is and the impact it will have on democracy and freedom across the world — and the proposed amendments to the WHO’s international health regulations (IHR).”
The text continues (the rest of the post is copied from here):
“The COVID event has revealed that it was about more than just public health and the political, economic and societal aspects of the response are of far greater significance than the virus itself. There remains a continued drive toward the transformation of our societies in ways that threaten democracy and our existing ways of life.”
The WHO’s pandemic treaty and the IHR amendments are two of the strategies that are driving us “toward transformation of society that threaten democracy and our existing ways of life.” Both are aimed at achieving the same thing, namely centralizing power over nations with the WHO.
The WHO Is Wholly Compromised
As noted by Bell, the WHO is no longer what it used to be. For starters, private interests now wield immense power over the organization. Bill Gates is the largest funder of the WHO when you add together the donations from the Gates Foundation and his other organizations, such as GAVI the Vaccine Alliance.The WHO is very much an organization that does whatever its funders tell it to do. ~ Dr. David Bell
Another major change is that most of the funding is “specified,” meaning it’s earmarked for specific programs. The WHO cannot allocate those funds wherever they’re needed most. This too massively influences what the WHO does and how it does it. As noted by Bell, “The WHO is very much an organization that does whatever its funders tell it to do.”
As just mentioned, Gates wields the greatest financial influence, and he never seems to fund anything that he can’t profit from at the backend. For example, he funds a “green revolution” in Africa that promotes genetically engineered (GE) crops because he’s invested in the companies that supply GMO seeds. The end result is greater famine and poverty, but Gates laughs all the way to the bank.
He also funds vaccination campaigns for the very vaccines he’s invested in. It’s not about charity or doing good for the world. He simply creates markets for his investments.
Bell points out that the COVID lockdown strategy clearly did not come from the WHO itself, but rather from some outside source. How do we know this? Because its pandemic guidelines up until the COVID outbreak called for isolating infected patients only, for seven to 10 days.
Then, when COVID came about, that guidance was completely turned on its head, and the entire world, sick and healthy alike, were told to self-isolate for weeks and months at a time. Someone made the WHO issue this irrational and unscientific recommendation.
As a result of lockdowns, several of the WHO’s supposed goals for global health and well-being, especially for children, suffered dramatic setbacks, yet they didn’t seem to care.
On top of that, the WHO pushed for mass vaccination of populations they clearly knew had extremely low risk for COVID — children and young adults in terms of age groups, and Africa in terms of geographic location. Not surprisingly, Gates vaccine-related organizations (GAVI and CEPI) led that charge.
COVID Countermeasures Had Nothing to Do With Health Care
Bell also highlights how idiotic the vaccination narrative was. “With a fast-moving pandemic, no one is safe unless everyone is safe.” That motto was reiterated everywhere to promote the COVID jab, yet it’s completely irrational, because people who recover from the infection have natural immunity.
They are extremely safe, regardless of others’ vulnerability. We don’t need the whole world to be immune. We just need to meet the threshold for herd immunity and the vulnerable are automatically protected by those with natural immunity.
“What this is telling you is that the people running this are not interested in evidence, in truth, or even in being logical,” Bell says. “They’re interested in sound bytes, and this has nothing to do with health care. Nothing.”
If not about health, what was the pandemic response about? In short, it was about money, and more specifically, wealth transfer. Forty new billionaires were created while some 200,000 small businesses were destroyed in the U.S. in 2020 alone.5 Vaccine makers also made hundreds of billions of dollars on “vaccines” that provided virtually no protection while killing an unprecedented number of working age adults and decimating birth rates.
‘The Greatest Show on Earth’
Bell goes on to review how the pandemic industry is putting on “the greatest show on earth.” According to the pandemic industry, pandemics are becoming more frequent. This is false, Bell says.
They also claim there’s “increasing interaction between humans and wildlife or livestock,” the insinuation being that lethal viruses regularly jump species. This notion, Bell says, is just “plain silly.”
Still, these are the narratives they’re going with to create a feedback loop of surveillance for variants, declaration of potential risk, followed by lockdowns and restrictions, followed by mass vaccinating populations to “end” the pandemic restrictions, followed by more surveillance and so on. The funding for this scheme comes primarily from taxpayers, while the profits go to corporations and their investors.
Two Instruments to Seize Control
As explained by Bell, the two primary instruments that will turn the WHO into a central health police are the IHR amendments and the WHO’s pandemic treaty.6 The IHR amendments (which have force under international law) will provide “teeth” to the WHO’s goal of increased control over health emergencies, while the treaty will provide financing, governance and supply networks.
IHR Amendments Destroy National and Individual Sovereignty
The IHR amendments,7 as currently drafted:
Treaty Will Expand WHO’s Power Beyond Pandemics
Meanwhile, the pandemic treaty will:
• Set up an international supply network overseen by the WHO.
• Fund the WHO’s health emergency structures and processes by requiring at least 5% of national health budgets to be dedicated to health emergencies.
• Set up a governing body under the auspice of the WHO to oversee the entire health emergency process.
• Expand scope of the WHO’s power by emphasizing the “One Health”8,9 agenda, which recognizes that a very broad range of aspects of life and the environment can impact health and therefore fall under the “potential” to cause harm. This is how the WHO will be able to declare climate change as a health emergency and subsequently require climate lockdowns, for example.
The graphic10 below illustrates how the WHO’s scope of control is expanded under the One Health agenda to cover vast aspects of everyday life. Under the new treaty, the WHO will have unilateral power to make decisions about any of these areas, and its dictates will supersede and overrule any and all local, state and federal laws.
Interestingly, the term “One Health,” which was formally adopted by the WHO and the G20 health ministers in 2017, was first coined by the executive vice president of the EcoHealth Alliance, the same firm that appears to have had a hand in the creation of SARS-CoV-2, William Karesh, DVM, in a 2003 article on Ebola.11
Taxpayers Fund Their Own Exploitation
As noted by Bell, it’s not just the WHO that is pushing this agenda. It’s financed and promoted by a long list of organizations, including the United Nations, the European Union, the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, GAVI, the Wellcome Trust, UNICEF, CEPI, the World Economic Forum (WEF) and the World Bank.
But while these entities are officially funding the pandemic industry, what’s really happening is they’re “using taxes to fund wealthy people to exploit poor populations elsewhere,” Bell says. We’re also funding our own exploitation and demise. It’s not just the poor that will suffer under a globalist totalitarian regime, but everyone who is not part of the globalists’ top echelon.
Taxpayers are providing the money while private profiteers are deciding how that money is spent, and it’s being spent in ways that will benefit themselves. So, it’s a private-public “partnership” where the public is being robbed and all the benefits go to the private sector.
Current Timeline
As it currently stands, the IHR amendments will be voted on in the World Health Assembly (WHA) in May 2024, about a year from now. They only need a majority vote to pass. If that vote happens as planned, then the 10-month deadline for member states to reject the amendments will expire in March 2025, and the amendments will come into force in May 2025. If a member state opts out, then the current 2005 IHR version will apply to that state.
The WHO pandemic treaty will also be voted on by the WHA in May 2024. It requires a two-thirds majority vote to pass, and 30 member countries to ratify it. Thirty days after ratification, the treaty will take force for the countries that signed it.
The globalists don’t want to wait three years, however, so in the meantime, they’re working on a third avenue, which involves the creation of a “medical countermeasures platform for pandemics” under the WHO. And this platform will be implemented by September 2023. Many aspects of this platform will then simply morph right into the IHR amendments and the treaty.
“We need to understand that this whole thing is based on complete nonsense,” Bell says. “But it’s working.”
The Endgame, and How to Stop It
In an April 16, 2023, Substack article,12 Jessica Rose, a postdoctoral researcher in biology, tries to make sense of the last three years. Starting at the end, she believes the endgame is the “conversion of the majority of human beings into workers … like ants.”
To get there, the globalists must dehumanize us, systematically chip away at the human spirit, render us infertile and destroy all notions of bodily autonomy and national sovereignty. And, like Bell says, the plan has worked quite well so far. But cracks are beginning to show. More and more people are starting to put the puzzle pieces together, as Rose attempts to do in her article.
The COVID pandemic was the set-up, Rose suggests. It was geared to “test compliance levels” and set the scene for the next act, which was to normalize all things abnormal. The trans movement, which completely overwhelmed the social consciousness in a single year, is a continuation and expansion of that “normalization of the abnormal” phase.
It’s also a major component of the agenda to dehumanize and sterilize the population. After all, trans youth — which are also among the most brainwashed individuals in society right now — are the future of humanity. A brand-new report by legal experts backed by the United Nations is also seeking to normalize pedophilia,13 which would further dehumanize and de-spirit our youth for generations to come.
Adding insult to injury, the report was published March 8, 2023, “in recognition” of International Women’s Day. Never mind the fact that young girls and women are the primary victims of this sick mindset.
The “manmade climate change” hysteria and subsequent war on carbon is another fabricated “emergency” that is unhinged from science and reality. And, like the global COVID response, the UN’s Sustainable Development goals are perfectly tailored to enable the endgame. Under these goals, human freedom, human health and quality of life are sacrificed to “protect the environment and save the planet.”
As Rose notes, if the WHO pandemic treaty goes through, we can expect to be locked down indefinitely under the guise of “some climate catastrophe, likely linked to some ‘deadly pathogen’ passed to humans via some insect vector like mosquitoes.”
By then, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) will also be in place, which will enable the unelected totalitarian regime to enforce whatever restrictions the WHO and its funders dream up, be it related to the food you’re allowed to eat based on your carbon footprint, the drugs you’re forced to take, what causes you’re allowed to fund, what businesses you’re allowed to buy from, when and how far you’re allowed to travel or anything else.
“A practical way I can think of to stop the endgame from being realized is to stop the CBDC,” Rose writes. “Use cash. Insist upon it. Do not give business to stores that only use cashless systems. Supply equals demand, so demand the use of CASH. Use bitcoin. It’s the antithesis of CBDCs.”
Other Strategies to Reclaim Our Freedoms
At the end of his video, Bell also reviews some of the possible ways in which we can respond to the threats to our national sovereignty and personal freedom, and the challenges involved.
Reform the WHO — The question is how? Can it be reformed?
Exit and defund the WHO — Drawbacks of this strategy include the fact that countries that exit the WHO lose direct influence over its direction, and the pandemic industry will still exist and exert immense influence worldwide.
Ignore the amendments and the treaty — Few countries will be able to afford this, as noncooperative member states will be sanctioned by the rest. Malfeasant rulers will also still be enabled.
Educate the populace and politicians and “encourage noncompliance with stupidity” — This is “a hard road,” Bell says, “but [it] gives the people a voice.”
Educating the populace, politicians in particular, may ultimately be the best approach. As noted by Bell in an April 2, 2023, article in The Daily Sceptic:14
“The international community can benefit from coordination over public health. But that is not what CA+ [the pandemic treaty] proposes. This is a draconian measure aimed at taking away national sovereignty.
It gives vast powers to a single organization with troubling funding arrangements and a track record for causing terrible damage. Legislators should reject these proposals, refuse to send taxpayer money to the WHO and reject the notion of public health by dictate.”
Remember back in 2020 when Sweden was the bad boy of the Covid world? Placed firmly on the naughty step by the WHO, the EU and many national leaders, the Swedes bravely, or stubbornly, ploughed their own furrow. However, by the end of 2020, with the excess death rate in Sweden at 758 per million compared to the minuscule or negative rates in the ‘pin-up’ Nordic countries of Finland, Denmark and Norway (each of which followed WHO and EU orthodoxy) Sweden, and their Chief Epidemiologist, Anders Tegnell, were firmly on the defensive.
How times change! Here we are in 2023, the pandemic rapidly disappearing in the rear-view mirror. But what’s this? The excess date rate in 2022 in both Finland and Norway was higher than Sweden’s in 2020. How can that be, isn’t the pandemic over?
Writes Tom Woods in his latest newsletter (my emphases):
I’ve been reading an article in the Telegraph (U.K.), called “Lockdown’s cancer bomb may soon be worse than Covid itself.”
You will recall that people did try to warn about this, only to be ridiculed or ignored.
Professor Karol Sikora, who has spent over 40 years in Britain’s National Health Service, describes the situation as very grim. “I can honestly say that the situation is more depressing than it has ever been,” he says. “I’m appalled by the spin and sheer refusal to accept how dire the situation is. Meaningless word salad, created by highly paid PR managers, is spouted out at the taxpayer’s expense simply to protect reputations rather than benefit patients.”
He explains that dealing with stage one cancer is much easier to handle and absorbs far fewer resources than stage three and four cancers. But because of the lockdowns, the “entire system is now clogged up with more advanced conditions, not just cancer, missed over the pandemic, leading to more delays and more suffering.”
This clogging, he adds, is “all a desperately predictable outcome to a pandemic response guided by opinion polling and incompetent modelling. The big unspoken truth in British politics is that an almost two-year long lockdown experiment was the greatest policy mistake in my lifetime.”
[I’ll add at this point: The polled opinions were crucially formed by media ventilating the “incompetent modelling” as the gospel truth, not distinguishing between dying “with” and “of” or “from” Covid, not questioning the validity of the PCR tests and suppressing any good news around the issue, such as alternative treatments that were working. And by people who did know better remaining silent. (PwG)]
This is reason #739 why we can’t just throw up our hands, say mistakes were made, and move on.
At the documentary screening last week that I’d been mentioning in this newsletter for some time, I met someone who said that her family, when she would mention one of the many outrageous lockdown crimes, responds with, “You’re still on this?”
The number of unflattering press stories has been growing since the bivalents flopped last Fall.
[…]
It’s been a serious shift, the likes of which I’m not sure has unfolded in any other country. To give you a taste of it, I’ve assembled a representative selection of stories from the last eight weeks or so, in roughly reverse chronological order.
[You can read them on the page linked above.]
The trend is so dominant that it colours all other reporting on Covid and the vaccines. It’s hard to miss the subtle anxiety at work in pieces like this one from the Vienna-based Standard, asking whether we’ll have to vaccinate ourselves against Corona every year from here on out, or the not-so-veiled notes of hope in ZDF reporting on successful Phase 1 trials of the German nasal vaccine. What’s the big deal about regular vaccination and why should we care about new live attenuated vaccines, if the mRNA jabs were God’s gift to man?
[Links in above paragraph are on the original page linked above].
There are clear, encouraging patterns here. The reporting originally surrounded lawsuits brought against the vaccine manufacturers, but has steadily assumed a more general focus. Regional and local papers are carrying a big share of these stories, with major state media playing a supporting role. The publications most popular with German biens pensants, meanwhile, like Süddeutsche Zeitung and Die Zeit and even Frankfurter Allgemeine, are pointedly underrepresented. This is a trend driven from the bottom up by popular interest, and in that it is the opposite of much Covid reporting since 2020.
Of course, these stories have always been out there, but until the last few months, enthusiasm for the vaccines was sufficient to suppress them. As with all pandemic policies, mass vaccination exhibits qualities of inertia. Obsession steadily grew through the summer months of 2021, as the jab failed to eradicate Covid, and achieved a frenzied peak around December 2021. There was nothing to do about the insane mania and its manifold irrationality back then, and the steady disenchantment with these products will prove just as inexorable.
A reminder of the utterly preposterous predictions from the past
Net Zero Watch has issued a newsletter regarding “Earth Day”, the original one having been 22nd April 1970, which interestingly was the 100th anniversary of Lenin’s birthday.
Forty-five years ago today, the Left celebrated their first Earth Day. Nothing has come of it. But they still celebrate it. They take their anniversaries seriously.
Nevertheless, in an editorial in TIME magazine, two New York professors urge “religious observance for the planet and its self-appointed watchkeepers under the headline: The Case For Making Earth Day a Religious Holiday.“, as Breitbart writes about this piece.
From predicting ecological collapse and the end of civilisation to warnings that the world is running out of oil, all environmental doomsday predictions of the first Earth Day in 1970 have turned out to be flat out wrong.
More than three decades before Greta Thunberg was born — the Swedish environmental activist on climate change — more than 20 million Americans participated in the first Earth Day on April 22, 1970.
Considering the current doomsday predictions scaremonger activists are verbalising about global warming that will result in the demise of civilisation within the next decade, many of those unscientific 1970 predictions are being reincarnated on today’s social and news media outlets.
Many of the same are being regurgitated today, but the best prediction from the first earth day five decades ago, yes 50 years ago, was that the “the pending ice age as earth had been cooling since 1950 and that the temperature would be 11 degrees cooler by the year 2000”.
The 1970’s were a lousy decade. Embarrassing movies and dreadful music reflected the national doomsday mood following an unpopular war, endless political scandals, and a faltering economy.
The first Earth Day was celebrated in 1970 — okay, “celebrated” doesn’t capture the funereal tone of the event. The events (organized in part by then hippie and now convicted murderer Ira Einhorn) predicted death, destruction and disease unless we did exactly as progressives commanded.data.
Behold the coming apocalypse as predicted on and around Earth Day, 1970:
1. “Civilization will end within 15 or 30 years unless immediate action is taken against problems facing mankind.” — Harvard biologist George Wald
2. “We are in an environmental crisis which threatens the survival of this nation, and of the world as a suitable place of human habitation.” — Washington University biologist Barry Commoner
3. “Man must stop pollution and conserve his resources, not merely to enhance existence but to save the race from intolerable deterioration and possible extinction.” — New York Times editorial
4. “Population will inevitably and completely outstrip whatever small increases in food supplies we make. The death rate will increase until at least 100-200 million people per year will be starving to death during the next ten years.” — Stanford University biologist Paul Ehrlich
5. “Most of the people who are going to die in the greatest cataclysm in the history of man have already been born… [By 1975] some experts feel that food shortages will have escalated the present level of world hunger and starvation into famines of unbelievable proportions. Other experts, more optimistic, think the ultimate food-population collision will not occur until the decade of the 1980s.” — Paul Ehrlich
6. “It is already too late to avoid mass starvation,” — Denis Hayes, Chief organizer for Earth Day
7. “Demographers agree almost unanimously on the following grim timetable: by 1975 widespread famines will begin in India; these will spread by 1990 to include all of India, Pakistan, China and the Near East, Africa. By the year 2000, or conceivably sooner, South and Central America will exist under famine conditions…. By the year 2000, thirty years from now, the entire world, with the exception of Western Europe, North America, and Australia, will be in famine.” — North Texas State University professor Peter Gunter
8. “In a decade, urban dwellers will have to wear gas masks to survive air pollution… by 1985 air pollution will have reduced the amount of sunlight reaching earth by one half.” — Life magazine
9. “At the present rate of nitrogen buildup, it’s only a matter of time before light will be filtered out of the atmosphere and none of our land will be usable.” — Ecologist Kenneth Watt
10. “Air pollution…is certainly going to take hundreds of thousands of lives in the next few years alone.” — Paul Ehrlich
11. “By the year 2000, if present trends continue, we will be using up crude oil at such a rate… that there won’t be any more crude oil. You’ll drive up to the pump and say, ‘Fill ‘er up, buddy,’ and he’ll say, ‘I am very sorry, there isn’t any.’” — Ecologist Kenneth Watt
12. “[One] theory assumes that the earth’s cloud cover will continue to thicken as more dust, fumes, and water vapor are belched into the atmosphere by industrial smokestacks and jet planes. Screened from the sun’s heat, the planet will cool, the water vapor will fall and freeze, and a new Ice Age will be born.” — Newsweek magazine
13. “The world has been chilling sharply for about twenty years. If present trends continue, the world will be about four degrees colder for the global mean temperature in 1990, but eleven degrees colder in the year 2000. This is about twice what it would take to put us into an ice age.” — Kenneth Watt
History seems to repeat itself as there will be a disproportionately influential group of doomsters predicting that the future–and the present–never looked so bleak. I guess we’ll need to critique the 2020 doomsday predictions in the year 2050 and see if they were any better than those from the first Earth Day 50 years ago.
Donates $300 million to the prestigious university
Writes Tom Woods in his newsletter of 11/04/2023:
As a Harvard alum, I’m on the university’s mailing list. Here’s an excerpt from an email we all received yesterday:
Today, we are delighted to announce that Ken Griffin AB ’89 has made an unrestricted gift of $300 million to the Faculty of Arts and Sciences….
In recognition of Ken’s commitment to our mission, Harvard will rename its Graduate School of Arts and Sciences (GSAS) in his honor. For the past 150 years, GSAS has nurtured and expanded the ambitions of students who have changed the world through their vast and varied scholarly pursuits. Now, the Harvard Kenneth C. Griffin Graduate School of Arts and Sciences will do the same.
Now here’s an interesting fact about ol’ Ken Griffin: he’s a backer of Ron DeSantis for president.
Try to get inside the brain of someone like that.
He wants a GOP president, and not just any GOP president: specifically one who ostentatiously resisted the public health establishment, and much of the political establishment.
And at the same time, he gives $300 million to that very establishment.
Maybe — maybe — there was a time when we might have thought: Harvard has its problems, but it is still a world-class institution full of smart people doing important work.
That time is long over, if indeed it ever existed.
Imagine having $300 million to throw around, looking at the state of America, and thinking: the best place for this money is in academia, and particularly in an institution that has been at war with people like me for as long as I can remember.
One thing we can credit the left for: they’re not politically stupid. They know what they want, and they devote their time and resources to getting it.
The right, by contrast, has been full of people like Ken Griffin: they don’t have the guts to withstand being hated, so they delude themselves into thinking that if they just ingratiate themselves with the establishment by doing X or Y, maybe they can yet be liked.
Dear reader, if you have $300 million and are tempted to — of all things! — donate it to Harvard blankety-blank University, please write to me first and I’ll help devise a strategy to use that money more wisely — like lining animal cages with it.
