We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.

Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]

Samizdata quote of the day

The vaccine doesn’t protect you from the virus, the vaccine protects you from the government.

Roué le Jour

32 comments to Samizdata quote of the day

  • Flubber

    Only for a couple of months then the bastards come back.

  • Snorri Godhi

    Does it?

  • bobby b

    “Does it?”

    Well, like indulgences, they may not work, but it’s that hope for which people buy them.

  • Shlomo Maistre

    I think this is one of the best SQOTDs ever.

  • APL

    The vaccine doesn’t protect you from the virus, the vaccine protects you from the government.

    So long as you comply with every pettifogging imposition of the government, you’re protected from the government.

    Phah! That’s no sort of protection.

  • Johnathan Pearce


  • Paul Marks

    As I have already pointed out several times, the injections do NOT protect you from the government – the demands continue, in many countries, even for people who have had three (or more) injections.

    Complying will NOT protect you from government edicts in many countries.

  • Paul Marks

    As for the virus – there is some evidence that the injections do indeed make the virus less severe (although we do not know how many people may get severe damage from the injections – so a balance of risk is very hard to calculate).

    So the first part of the statement (which implies that the injections are no good against the virus) is not true – and the second part of the statement (that the injections protect you from the government) is also not true.

    As for my own view – whilst it is unclear what the balance of risk is for people like myself (old, fat and with compromised lungs), it does seem to be the case that the balance of risk for healthy young people is negative – i.e. that they should avoid the injections.

  • Paul Marks

    One should also, of course, keep up Vitamin D levels (every day) and seek EARLY TREATMENT from a qualified medical doctor with experience of treating Covid 19, as soon as one starts to show signs of the illness.

    The approach pushed in many Western countries since early 2020 of “stay home WITHOUT TREATMENT till you get very sick and have to be taken to hospital” has cost a vast number of lives. Many people do indeed get better on their own – but many people do not get better on their own and need EARLY TREATMENT.

    The campaign of smearing Early Treatment has been utterly despicable – this smear campaign has cost a vast number of human lives.

  • Roué le Jour

    For the kind words, thanks. I would say in my defense that I simply found a more resonant phrasing of a sentiment already expressed by others.

    Paul, poetic license? Hyperbole for effect? I do not think the vaccine is worthless, nor would I advise against it. I would, however, characterize it as of limited benefit to a limited number of people for a limited period of time. Vaccination does protect against loss of livelihood, which seems to me to be the major benefit. I find this threat to be the most chilling as it was used to great effect in the Soviet Union.

  • Rudolph Hucker

    Matt Ridley on TalkRadio:

    Scientists fear that if they determine the #OriginOfCovid was a lab leak, it’s going to fuel sentiments they don’t like.
    That seems to me a very dangerous tactic for science to use.


  • Paul Marks

    Rouw le Jour – good point.

    Dismissing people for not getting the injections is an evil thing to do – and yet the government (which demanded that everyone go out into the street and “clap for the NHS”) is planning to dismiss many thousands of health workers for not getting the injections. So if Mr Biden – as the Supreme Court has ruled that he CAN impose a “vaccine mandate” on any institution that accepts Federal money. Only places that refuse all Federal money (hard to survive without it – with TAXES being what they are) are safe – well safe for the moment.

  • John B

    ‘The vaccine doesn’t protect you from the virus, the vaccine protects you from the government.’

    I would say rather it establishes an addict/pusher relationship where you go to government for another fix when the effects of the previous one starts to wear off.

  • Rudolph Hucker

    Re a “vaccine mandate” – breaking news:

    The US Supreme Court has blocked the OSHA attempt to make vaccinnation mandatory in all US companies with more than 100 employees.

    The U.S. Supreme Court blocked the Biden administration’s vaccine mandate demanding private companies require the COVID-19 shot on Thursday, saving 84 million workers from what some justices dubbed an “unconstitutional” overreach of power by the federal government. Biden first directed the Occupational Safety and Health Administration to create a rule forcing private businesses with 100 or more employees to get the jab in September 2021. It wasn’t until November of 2021 that OSHA finally posted the mandate in the form of an Emergency Temporary Standard. After various lawsuits and even a stay issued by the Fifth Circuit, the mandate was still scheduled to go into effect on Jan. 10. Three days after the ETS was implemented, however, the highest court in the land ruled that the federal government had no right to mandate the shot for the private industry.



  • Paul Marks

    Yes Rudolph Hucker – but the Supreme Court has allowed a “vaccine mandate” on anything the Federal government funds.

    And, in these days of unlimited government, that is a lot of people.

  • Paul Marks

    Yes John B – accepting the injections as a condition of, highly limited, “freedom”, allows the government to keep coming back with new demands (say the much talked about “Climate Lockdowns”).

    After all, the principle has already been established.

  • APL

    Paul Marks: “there is some evidence that the injections do indeed make the virus less severe”

    Suppose that’s true. Although Pfizer CEO, ( originally worked in the veterinarian sector, which might explain why he is driving humans through the ‘sheep dip’ ) Albert Bourla, says “two-dose vaccine does not provide robust protection against [Omicron] infection and its ability to prevent hospitalization has also declined.”

    So you need three doses, ….. and a booster dose. You might as well camp outside Pfizer HQ, at this rate.

    But suppose that ‘there is some evidence that the injections do indeed make the virus less severe‘, shouldn’t that evidence have been made avaliable before they were released into general distribution?

    Finding out that it might be effective, a little bit, after two thirds of the population has been ‘injected’, isn’t the conventional way to do this sort of thing. Then, maybe this is ‘the new normal’.

    Again, people should go out and read Robert F. Kennedy’s book(let) “The Real Anthony Fauci: Bill Gates, Big Pharma, and the Global War on Democracy and Public Health” it’s only three quid on Kindle, but it’s an eye opener.

  • ComputerLabRat

    Yes Rudolph Hucker – but the Supreme Court has allowed a “vaccine mandate” on anything the Federal government funds.

    Is that true? I thought the USSC only looked at 2 instances – the OSHA/private businesses >100 employees (6-3 against), and health care workers in certain circumstances (5-4 for).

    As far as I know, the “federal contractor” mandate (how they were getting everyone whose employer got federal money) was not up for review by the US Supreme Court. In fact, I think that one is being fought in lower courts as a lawsuit, since several states have new laws against mandates, and state public universities were being put under the fed contractor umbrella, regardless if your paycheck came from a federal grant, or whether from cleaning the university buildings.

  • Penseivat

    I understand that American insurance companies are refusing to pay out death benefits for those who have died from reactions to the vaccine on the grounds that they voluntarily received an untested and unauthorised chemical, and are classing the deaths as suicide, something not covered in the policies. I wonder if this has been brought to the attention of those government numpties recommending everyone be vaccinated? If not, why not?

  • Shlomo Maistre


    I understand that American insurance companies are refusing to pay out death benefits for those who have died from reactions to the vaccine on the grounds that they voluntarily received an untested and unauthorised chemical, and are classing the deaths as suicide, something not covered in the policies

    I searched a bit online for this. Unable to find anything solid. Do you have a source for this claim?

  • Andrew Douglas

    I’ve been struggling with this since you wrote it. The elegance of the epithet disguises its essential untruth. Very little protects against Government when the institutions that safeguard the individual against the over mighty are corrupted, as they so clearly are in the US and the UK (most of the rest of the world never really had such such protections).

  • Paul Marks

    APL – no I have not had the “booster” and I never touched any of the American vaccines at any time.

    In my case (a fat old man with compromised lungs) I was convinced by my local doctor that the risks (the very real risks) of the British AZ injections were less than the risks to me of Covid 19. Therefore I had the two injections of this in the summer.

    However, there is has been no contact at all from local medical practice since then – it is as if they had dropped off the face of the Earth. All I have got is letters and telephone calls from the national NHS (people who have never examined me and know nothing of my medical condition) demanding I accept “the vaccine” and they will not even tell me which vaccine they wish to give me.

    In these circumstances I have politely declined. I believe that as it is now more than six months since my AZ injections I am now considered one of the evil “unvaccinated” – so be it.

  • Paul Marks

    The totalitarian impulses of government go back long before the Covid “vaccines” and will not be stopped by taking these injections.

    For example, in 2005 (when Barack Obama was just another Marxist activist in Chicago, the only American city to be mentioned in the song “The Red Flag”, and Joseph Biden was just another bribe taking Senator) Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans – it was not a particularly strong hurricane (and had naught to do with “Global Warming” – “Climate Change”), but it came in at exactly the wrong angle for the (rather old) flood defences – I remember seeing a television documentary (I think it was a “Horizon” episode) that warned, years before, that this could happen.

    In any case, normally people would have used their fire arms to defend themselves and their property from looters, and those whose homes were flooded would have fled in land (if need by rescued by boats and helicopters – from charitable groups and from the layers of government).

    But in this case armed troops came in (National Guard under the command of the Democrat State Governor of Louisiana) and a Federal Government Agency called “FEMA” (the United States was so much better off when these alphabet agencies did not exist) arrived.

    The troops went about confiscating firearms (which they had no Constitutional authority to do), and they and “FEMA” forbad people fleeing in land – instead dumping them in a Football stadium, where they had to live in their own excrement (lack of toilets) and were prayed upon by savage gangs of rapists and murderers.

    It was such events that “radicalised” the people that went on to create such organisations as the “Oath Keepers” (sadly later infiltrated by the institutionally corrupt FBI).

    It was clear even in 2005 that even with a Republican President (George Walker Bush) the government, local, State and Federal, was out of control.

    And, before then, there had been such events as the Waco massacre and the Ruby Ridge atrocity, both under the Clinton Administration. None of the murderers was ever punished.

    As Perry often says – the state is not your friend. And NO – having the injections will NOT protect you from the government.

  • Paul Marks

    “The man at Ruby Ridge was illegally selling saw off shotguns”.

    Because a GOVERNMENT AGENT convinced him to do so. And how does his alleged firearms offence justify murdering his wife and child?

    “There were claims of sexual abuse at Waco” – so this justified spraying the area with bullets, and sending in armoured vehicles and then pretending that the large number of people who were shot or BURNED ALIVE “committed suicide”?

  • Paul Marks

    There is no Constitutional justification for the FBI or the ATF – there should be no Federal Government “police power” outside the “not exceeding ten miles square” of Washington D.C. and military bases (which are given by the States to the Federal government – see Article One, Section Eight of the Constitution of the United States).

    Essentially the modern American government behaves as if the entire United States (millions of square miles and hundred of millions of people) were the “not exceeding ten miles square” Washington D.C. or was “Forts, Magazines, Arsenals, dock-Yards, or other needful buildings” given or sold to the Federal Government by the States for military bases.

    The FBI, the ATF and-so-on must be politely informed that they have no jurisdiction outside Washington D.C. or a military base.

    If these Federal police agencies continue to try and exercise unconstitutional jurisdiction then State Governors should call out the State militia to remove the FBI, ATF (and so on) by force. This is in no way “secession” – it is just making sure that their is no Federal usurpation of the “police power”.

    It is sneaky how these Federal agencies have snuck in – for example in the 1920s the FBI did not carry firearms and always made it clear that they were guests of local police “we are just here to help”.

    From the 1970s onwards the FBI had a paramilitary wing – the infamous “black helicopters” (which are actually dark blue) and so on.

    The “police power” belongs to the States – NOT to the Federal Government, other than in Washington D.C. and in military bases.

  • Paul Marks

    The locally elected county sheriff, deputising volunteers to help (if need be) is the bedrock of liberty.

    And Mr Biden has hated locally elected country sheriffs for a very long time – the idea that Mr Biden used to be a moderate is mistaken.

    The aim is to put the “police power” in the hands of the Federal Government – which is unconstitutional, it is despotism.

    A federal official may advice a local sheriff (“that man is a spy – please arrest them”), but the police power must NOT be in the hands of the Federal Government – other than in Washington D.C. and in Federal government buildings (military bases).

  • Paul Marks

    The Biden/Harris regime are offering people 50 thousand Dollar bonus payments to join the army.

    They are doing that because so many patriots are being purged from the army – or are resigning from it in disgust with the unconstitutional regime. The Biden/Harris regime want soldiers who will obey ANY ORDER – regardless of how illegal and unconstitutional that order is. You get that sort of person by offering 50 thousand Dollar bonus payments.

    “But if I have the vaccine they will leave me alone” – NO THEY WILL NOT, the injections will NOT “protect you from the government”.

  • llamas

    Note the subtle re-framing of the vaccines, from ‘vital, life-saving medicines that everyone must be forced to take!’ to ‘useful additional protection against disease, but limited in durability’. This reframing will continue, exactly as predicted in the past on these pages, and as required to create the best possible messaging for the mid-terms. Look forward to the vaccines being positioned as ‘necessary, but temporary measures’ followed by ‘the Trump vaccines were barely-effective and potentially-dangerous’, shortly to be followed by ‘the wonderful Biden vaccines will prevent and cure COVID!’ You read it here first.



  • bobby b

    “I understand that American insurance companies are refusing to pay out death benefits for those who have died from reactions to the vaccine . . . “

    One French company has tried this approach in one specific case, but it would really go nowhere here given American legal precedent in all of the states.

    The American Council of Life Insurers apparently heard this rumor and replied quickly:

    “A social media post appears to be behind the spread of entirely false information, suggesting a COVID-19 vaccine could be a factor a life insurer considers in the claims-paying process.

    “The fact is that life insurers do not consider whether or not a policyholder has received a COVID vaccine when deciding whether to pay a claim.

    “Life insurance policy contracts are very clear on how policies work, and what cause, if any, might lead to the denial of a benefit. A vaccine for COVID-19 is not one of them.

    “Policyholders should rest assured that nothing has changed in the claims-paying process as a result of COVID-19 vaccinations.”


    (I have to admit that I found the line about how “life insurance policy contracts are very clear on how policies work” to be . . . somewhat humorous.)

  • APL

    Talking about being protected from the government

    I’ve taken to occassionally reviewing my comments on Samizdata to see how they’ve stood up in light of subsequent events. Anyway, one such turns out to have been completely wrong, and I own it. January 28, 2021 a sometime commentator by the name of ‘Raymond’ linked to Craig Murray a retired civil servant’s website. Wherein was a description of alleged corruption in Scotish administration. At the time, I said, ‘no one will go to jail’, turns out I was wrong, Craig Murray is in jail.

    I have no idea if Craig Murray has been vaccinated.

  • Paul Marks

    My apologies – Mr Obama was already a Senator in 2005. I had forgotten that John Kerry had pushed him at the Convention of 2004.

    In 2004 John Kerry (who had worked, as a “Fellow Traveller” rather than a formal Marxist, for the Marxists at the Paris “Peace” conference in the 1970s – there was a time when a soldier giving “Aid and Comfort” to the enemy was considered a bad thing in the United States, but by the 1970s it was considered normal by the corrupted establishment) was the Senator with the most leftist voting record. But when Barack Obama (a long time Marxist activist – indeed both his parents were, he was a “Red Diaper Baby”) became a United States Senator he took the most leftist voting record from John Kerry.

    It was President Obama, and those around him, who managed to break the back of what was left of Freedom of Speech in American education – by his skilful “interpretation” of Title Nine of the 1964 Civil Rights Act – essentially “reading in” Herbert Marcuse’s teaching that Freedom of Speech was evil “Repressive Tolerance” which “harmed” “marginalised groups” – and, thus, was against what is now called “Diversity and Inclusion” or “Equity”.

    It is often forgotten that as recently as 2008 there was still something like Freedom of Speech in universities. Its destruction (and not just in the United States – as other countries followed the lead of the Obama Administration) was a major achievement – from the Frankfurt School Marxist point of view.