Recently, a colleague commented: “I am still truly angry about what happened to me and my family because of our refusal to take the vaccine in this country [Canada]. I never believed Nazi Germany was possible again until covid. And now I KNOW it is possible and likely WILL happen again…only next time the gloves will be off, and there will be nowhere to hide.”
He’s correct in each of his points.
First, there can be no question that the COVID scam was used to create tyranny in globalist countries. Although the other countries overreacted, there is mixed evidence as to whether their leaders sought tyranny or whether they were just trying to exercise caution by copying the policies imposed in the globalist countries. Therefore, the level of actual force by governments varied.
Second, the globalist First World countries introduced a joint programme that was akin to the Nazi effort beginning with Kristallnacht, and there can be little doubt that this was intentional – a campaign to manufacture irrational fear and demand obedience far beyond what might have been necessary for a mere virus.
Third, whether the globalists intend to revisit COVID with a further viral “emergency” or not, that’s not really the point. COVID was a highly successful dry run into tyranny. Whether the next emergency is to be justified by a virus, warfare, or economic collapse, is immaterial. The implementation of globalism requires tyranny to succeed, and the clock is ticking on the next excuse for a lockdown.
Not surprising, then, that those who recognise that a further, more all-encompassing tyranny is on the way are likely to ask, “Where do I go? Will I be caught out, no matter where I am? If so, why not just stay where I am?”
Now that the dust has settled on the COVID scam, the answer to this quandary may be found by looking back on how COVID played out in a variety of locations around the globe. Was the outcome uniform? Or did it vary? And if the latter, was this significant enough that I owe it to my family to relocate before the next wave of tyranny is on our doorstep?”
Having tracked the behaviour in dozens of countries during and following COVID, my first observation is that there were unquestionably layers of tyranny. It became clear over time that there was a coordinated push in the First World globalist countries (the US, UK, EU, Canada, Australia, Japan, and New Zealand) – a verifiable effort to impose uniform restrictions, with uniform rhetoric by the media to back up the oppression.
This was less so in other countries. Those closest to the globalist countries tended to mimic their policies without seeming to do so with zeal. There was a mood of “We don’t understand any of this, but we want to be safe. Tell us what to do.”
Those who are the least attached to the globalist countries, either through trade or culture, tended to deviate even more from globalist diktat, in some cases defying it.
In this regard, it became clear that each country that was not fully invested in the globalist cabal tended to react in keeping with their respective cultures.
The US was, predictably, the spearhead for globalist mandates. Self-absorbed crusaders came out in force, as they do over every issue, making the US one of the worst places to be. Not only were people pressured to get each vaccination, regardless of a lack of evidence of effectiveness. Shaming of those who were unvaccinated peaked in the US, with a campaign that emphasized a Gestapo-like “Pandemic of the Unvaccinated.”
We saw something similar in the closest allies of the US – the other countries listed above.
However, the further out we ventured from the globalist centre, the more each nation reacted in accordance with its natural culture rather than with globalist diktat.
In Thailand, an orderly programme was created that most people complied with, yet there was a minimal push for greater controls. This was not surprising, as in Thailand, most people take up what the government puts in place, and the rest are on their own. There’s nothing in the limited national budget to pursue them. Thailand was, therefore, a good country to simply not take part in the imported hysteria.
Similarly, in Uruguay, most people observe a high degree of compliance with their minimally-corrupt government. Most people, therefore, went along with vaccinations, and Uruguay was one of the most highly vaxxed countries in the Americas. But Uruguayans have a strong distaste for meddling in the private affairs of others. Therefore, even with a high level of vaxxing, very few people would have the bad manners to question their neighbours as to whether they’d been jabbed, so Uruguay became a good country to live – to fly under the vaccine radar, unvaccinated.
Not ideal, but I’d settle for that.
In the Cayman Islands, people have always expected newcomers to come in with a good bill of health or stay away, but they will vote out any politicians who dictate to Caymanians. As a result, Cayman’s government shut down tourism for a year, but no politician dared to suggest a vaccine mandate for locals for fear of losing office. (The expats were the only people attempting to shame those who didn’t get vaxxed.)
Again, not ideal, but workable.
In Mexico, the populace has a long history of distrust of authority and is inclined to defy the central government at the drop of a hat. Consequently, the Mexican Government allowed its people access to all vaccines and traditional treatments, such as Ivermectin and hydroxychloroquine, but made no edicts about their use. There were no mandates of any kind and, in fact, no testing required, even for travelers in and out of the country.
Mexico ended up being the freest country in the Americas regarding COVID.
COVID was a dry run for globalism. Those who managed to avoid the vax dodged a bullet, but, like my colleague in the opening paragraph, they were left with the understanding that, while the COVID scare may be over, the intent of globalists to impose tyranny is not. COVID was merely a dry run – a Kristallnacht that’s the first installment in a plan for all-encompassing tyranny.
As troubling as this realisation is, we can benefit from it by understanding that while the tentacles of globalism do seek to dominate all corners of the globe, they’re less effective than they’d like to be. The world at large does not perform uniformly to the globalist edict.
It matters little whether we see another manufactured viral emergency or whether the next globalist attempt at dominance is justified by unnecessary warfare or by a now-overdue First World economic collapse. The COVID scam has revealed that the worst place to be in a crisis is right at the centre of the storm – the First World.
Interestingly, Uruguay sat out two world wars and the Great Depression almost totally unaffected – they simply didn’t participate, and the country bypassed all three crises. In the colonialist period, attempts were made to colonise nearly every country in southeast Asia, yet Thailand was passed by. As such, to this day, Thais tend to ignore the edicts of the West more than any other Asian nation. Good to know.
There’s no perfect place in the world, but there are locations where the odds of being victimised by the latest Hitler, Robespierre, Idi Amin, etc., are considerably less.
Regardless of the comfort of the familiarity of our birth country, if it’s a First World country, we’re located in the centre of the storm that’s now underway.
If we establish a bolt-hole in another country, our environment will surely change. There may be no Starbucks. There may be no baseball game to watch. But there’s the likelihood that we can provide ourselves and our families with a greater possibility of a continued quality of life than by remaining in a location where a significant decline in freedoms is a near-certainty.
Reprinted with permission from International Man.