Michael,

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. I can see how meaningful this period is for you, and I agree that major civic disruptions deserve reflection. That’s why I’m cautious about how quickly protest can be elevated to myth, especially when the historical parallels being drawn are so dramatic.

Regarding the crowd size, I’m not doubting it was a significant turnout. It clearly was. But estimating numbers at protests is notoriously slippery, and while 150,000 is often cited, I’ve yet to see it verified by any independent source. For comparison, the Iraq War protest in Sydney drew around 250,000, and the Vietnam Moratoriums also pulled huge numbers. Those movements didn’t just make noise, they left a mark on policy and public memory in a way few others have.

Your comparison to the 300 Spartans makes more sense now that you’ve clarified it’s symbolic. I get the appeal - standing up to overwhelming force has a timeless pull - but I think we need to be careful not to let the metaphor overtake the moment. Leonidas’ men knowingly sacrificed themselves to hold off an invading army. The Melbourne protesters were opposing pandemic restrictions, however harsh they felt them to be. One can question those restrictions without turning defiance into heroism on the scale of Thermopylae.

You also suggest that leaders “lost their heads in drunken power” and that “anyone numerate with a modest IQ” should’ve known lockdowns were unnecessary. But at the time, COVID was novel, its transmission rapid, its death toll high, and its long-term effects uncertain. Most countries, left and right alike, took strong action - not out of authoritarian zeal but caution. Even Sweden has since admitted it underestimated the risks.

As for Brett Sutton’s recent comments, they reflect learning in hindsight, not villainy. If anything, they show the kind of accountability we should want in public officials.

I agree this era will be scrutinised by future generations. But whether these protests are remembered as brave or fringe will depend on how honestly we represent their claims, scale, and outcomes. If history matters, accuracy must matter just as much.

Hi John Daysh,
Sorry for the tardy response. I’ve been travelling through Central Africa on a work trip. Though I did want to respond to your latest remarks. Like you, I am concerned that historical matters be presented accurately.

I can appreciate that these events were complex, and so lend themselves to multiple interpretations and perspectives. But truth in history has its way of making itself plain. Someone earlier in this discussion got in trouble for quoting Ben Franklin a little out of context. Nevertheless, I’m willing to turn to Winston Churchill who gave us this definition of truth:

‘Truth is incontrovertible. Panic may resent it. Ignorance may deride it. Malice may distort it. But there it is.’

Your last post put forward certain overall contentions which I don’t think can remain unchallenged. Firstly, you said that for COVID, the ‘death toll was high’, and secondly, that the governmental response was ‘cautious’. For those two propositions, I think nothing could be further from the truth.

I have previously asserted that COVID as a phenomenon was an overreaction propelled by errant propaganda. And I would contend that at its essence, that’s all it was and nothing more.

---

In 2008 I was living in Northern Cameroon. During that time the region underwent a period of paranoia, where people were suspected of using sorcery to affect what was called ‘penis stealing’. ‘Penis stealing’ was the widespread belief that there existed people using sorcery with malintent, who through means of body contact or touch, could steal someone else’s penis; either physically or in some other more mystical sense, could take away another person’s sexuality and render them sterile.

What the sorcerer stood to gain from this is totally mysterious. If you think this is difficult to understand, you would not be alone. Every aspect of this nonsense is totally inexplicable or mysterious. But that was part of the mystique. It was a fear of the unknown, growing into a rampant, widespread paranoia. ...

Whatever you might say about the realities, the fear was real. People were summarily killed in the street after being accused of touching someone with malintent. Others were jailed by civil courts after being accused. It was a little reminiscent of the Salem witch trials in Massachusetts, which was also a period of localised hysteria, but reached into all levels of society.

People of our region were afraid of touch or human contact, particularly with strangers. People were not shaking hands in the market. As with the Salem witch trials, this period of hysteria in Northern Cameroon lasted about a year until the unease eventually fizzled out and life went back to normal.

When the COVID paranoia surfaced in 2020, I had a sense of déja vu. I’ve experienced this before. It felt quite similar. Rampant fear of the unknown, and people afraid to touch one other. Irrational behaviour, widespread paranoia, reaching all levels of society. The major difference was that this was not localised, but quite international. But also in 2020 with COVID, you could sense how the fear was real and overwhelming. People were not thinking straight. Fight or flight reactions had taken over. I figured that like these other examples mentioned, it would also take about a year for people’s minds to settle down enough for them to think logically and reasonably again. In that sense I was wrong. It took longer than a year. It took more like two years before people slowly realised that they had been jumping at shadows. It was like people were all hypnotised at once, but then slowly woke up one at a time. Then again, many still haven’t really come to terms what actually went down.

It dawned on me the extent to which superstition was not limited only to the far reaches of Africa, but could potentially occur anywhere: whether it’s among those of the Sahel of Cameroon, or the puritans of New England (which produced both the civil thought of Yale and Harvard, and the panic of Salem) or even us right here, right now.

In saying, ‘anyone numerate with a modest IQ’ should have been able to see that our governmental COVID response was an overreaction, I was not meaning to be insulting. And I don’t claim for myself anything more than average IQ. But the inability of intelligent people to think calmly without being overwhelmed was understandable, given the media avalanche warning of impending calamity was so slick and crafted. For media and politicians alike, bad news sells, and it all funneled into a perfect storm.

But for any ordinary person viewing matters with calmness, the cracks in the narrative allowed the light to shine through. The inconsistencies were glaring. The British parliamentarians, those making the rules, revealed to be regularly evening partying at Westminster. Really?

Masks. The politicians flipped several times about their efficacy. But in the end that dirty cloth on the back seat prevailed and was made compulsory, the thin line separating life and death. Really?

In December 2021, I attended some of the 24/7 protest vigils on the steps of Parliament in Melbourne. For a photo of any COVID protest, you will never see a policeman not wearing a mask, 100%. Yet at 12am midnight on Parliament steps, I noticed that 100% of police on duty were not wearing masks. They had asked their Seargent for the night off. At midnight, there are no press photographers, so more relaxed rules apply. I could give countless examples of masks serving a publicity role with regards to the pandemic, helping spreading the fear. But deep down, the authorities knew they served no practical health purpose. But impressions were everything.

Parliamentary members of the Libertarian Party repeatedly requested the government to table their scientific justification relied upon to restrict liberties and enforce compulsory mask-wearing. Such justification was a necessary legal requirement. Yet the Victorian government never tabled any such evidence. They could not, for the reason that such scientific evidence does not exist. Try it. Look for any scientific paper suggesting a benefit to widespread mask-wearing to combat respiratory illness, anywhere in the world. Such a paper does not exist.

People have asked me, what was the impact of COVID in Africa. I would say it’s impact was a non-event. Why? Because people mostly don’t have televisions. It’s the same reason why the Amish in America weren’t affected. They are harder to influence by media. They have other problems to worry about, bigger fish to fry

Ordinary people using ordinary logic were slowly able to see through the avalanche of media hype. Just look around you, to the left or the right. Were people collapsing in the street? Do you know of people within your immediate circles who have suffered from this illness enough to justify these endless restrictions and impositions?

So what of the actual numbers? Many supposedly died of COVID. But people die of respiratory illness every year, especially the old and frail. So how was this year any different? News Flash! It wasn’t. The figures for respiratory illness deaths within the COVID years fell between what could be expected as normal variation for colds and flu and similar. I would go as far as to say that, with a comparable level of surprise and comparable media campaign, the 2020-21 COVID-19 ‘pandemic’ could have been programmed to have happened in any year, the figures were that unremarkable.

Has science suffered because of this? No. I would say faith in our scientific, governmental, and media institutions has taken a hit. But true science is based on testing evidence. I once saw a copy of the booklet, the ‘Victorian Health Management Plan for Pandemic Influenza,’ ratified by then Health Minister Jenny Mikakos in October 2019. It was based on tested scientific principles built up over decades, and contained no mention of masks or any compulsory lockdowns.

Unfortunately, when panic set in, this sensible document was thrown in the bin, and a radical Chinese-style lockdown model was enforced. Most jurisdictions around the world followed suit, except for a few, such as Sweden, which had a similar planned response booklet to ours. This is why no-lockdown Sweden faired the best of all OECD countries with regard to excess deaths for 2020-21

"‘anyone numerate with a modest IQ’ should have been able to see that our governmental COVID response was an overreaction" Hindsight is a wonderful thing, almost as good as foresight. I have an IQ of 130+ measured by the European standard, but at the time of the Covid pandemic I believed the governments of Australia acted in the best interests of the people, still do. The response was not perfect, mistakes were made, again with hindsight, but Australia got through it, and we have moved on.

Some might think Jonas Salk was an evil communist for developing the polio vaccine, but it has saved millions of lives, evil communist or not!