Left Against Lockdown NY
Left Against Lockdown NY
As Albany lawmakers seemingly allow us the right to peaceably assemble this spring, they only permit it under the condition that we accept forced medical procedures of dubious benefit. As residents of New York State who believe in social justice and an open society, we firmly stand against coercive SARS-Cov-2 testing, and against a Covid vaccine mandate for any New Yorker. We demand that state officials oppose these measures which only expand medical apartheid.
The Covid vaccines have not passed full FDA approval: They are experiments released through Emergency Use Authorization (EUA)—the same “approval” given to chloroquine. Janet Woodcock, Joe Biden's choice for FDA director, stated that "An EUA is not an FDA approval in any shape or form." Mandates would mean forced medical experimentation and a violation of the Nuremberg Code that all progressive societies have sworn to uphold. The code states that experiments may not proceed under any conditions of “deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion.” (This includes psychological coercion.)
The Covid tests are also not fully approved, and are acknowledged by both the FDA and the World Health Organization to have reliability problems. Educators are now being suspended without pay for declining PCR tests that often generate false positives. With few exceptions, these City of New York-administrated tests do not protect the subjects’ DNA samples from genetic commodification by the for-profit laboratories which handle them.
If the state is not providing free quality healthcare and decent affordable housing one year into a pandemic, then it has no claim to care about the public health. The fact that such material concessions are not being made is just one indication that this New Normal is not about protecting the vulnerable and oppressed; instead it only serves the corporate state and the rising biosecurity–industrial complex,
Health care decisions are to be made between patients and their doctors. The state has no place intervening in the health care decisions of adults. What works to keep one person healthy may very well make another person sick.
Given the past coordinated public health deceptions about the harmlessness of sugars in relation to chronic illness (a decades-long “Sugar Conspiracy” as The Guardian has called it), and the exaggeration of the swine flu epidemic by the WHO in 2009 (apparently at the behest of vaccine-manufacturers), we cannot afford to assume the integrity and infallibility of the healthcare establishment.
The much-evoked “precautionary principle” was designed to be applied to untested technology, not to normal and healthy human activity like gathering together and freely circulating through society. The true precautionary principle, and the ethic of “first do no harm”, must be reasserted against these experimental medical mandates. "First do no harm" must also be applied against the experimental intervention of widespread lockdown which is costing the lives of hundreds of thousands Americans, a disproportionate number of them Black and Brown.
A soft lockdown is still a lockdown, and any restriction of the Bill of Rights must be an absolute last resort. The burden of proof is on the establishment, not the people.