PS DK: Well, there’s your city worker who’s somebody’s brother-in-law and who has a connected union. Your standard-issue 85 IQ Negro is not in that situation. Nor is your average white guy. Perhaps by some ideal standard of republican governance such things shouldn’t happen, but by the standards of American big-city government, it’s normal. New York and Chicago set the standards. Milton Rakove’s two books on the Daley Machine in Chicago give a pretty good idea of how it works: “Don’t Make No Waves Don’t Back No Losers” and “We Don’t Want Nobody Nobody Sent”.

PS MBlanc46 - what are low IQ people doing in modern societies? - work? Earning quite well? Like 300 Grand /year?

https://www.foxnews.com/us/some-nyc-sanitation-workers-see-salaries-approach-300000-due-to-staffing-issues

Its FOX news, ok... But is it wrong?

PS Hail: Thanks for that. As I said, I don’t often read much Ann Coulter. But I’m always happy to see someone cross over, or only even approach, our side of the Great Divide.

PS AE: The AA question becomes interesting from an HBD point of view. American blacks have an average IQ of about 85. The percentage above 130 is minuscule. Therefore, most of them simply don’t have the intellectual horsepower to function in a modern, technological economy. Most of them aren’t equipped for anything but manual labor. What does modern technological economy do? Everything it can to eliminate manual labor. That’s a recipe for social conflict. What’s a sensible response to that potential social conflict? Create some make-work manual labor for the 85 group and some paper shuffling jobs for the 100+ group. That’s AA. But not for Lefty moralizing reasons, but for practical reasons of reducing the burglaries, mugging, armed robberies, gang killings, riots, and the cost to the taxpayers of incarceration. However, it looks to me as if the USA is on the verge of coming apart, and the Dindu problem will be on the other side of the partition.

PS

CORRECTION:

"A surprising fact about 2010s-era Ann Coulter is how many times she has ATTACKED/CRITICIZED US-Israel relations in some way..."

PS

RE: MBlanc46 and Moderator

A surprising fact about 2010s-era Ann Coulter is how many times she has US-Israel relations in some way, or even the Jews as a group / as an actor within US politics, and fairly direct attacks on US political sycophancy towards Israel. These things are virtually unheard of in US mainstream discourse, of course. She is too rich, successful, and influential in her way to care.

To me this signals she cut loose from her late-1990s and 2000s-era persona, when she was pretty much as Mr. Blanc described, a Republican rah-rah, war-hawk, Clinton-hating, cheerleader and "attack dog." That Ann Coulter would not have touched the third rail that is Israel etc.

If you aren't familiar with this aspect of 2010s and 2020s-era Coulter, just search for "Ann Coulter anti-Semitism" or the like. There are lots of things, consistent since at least 2015, which the old Ann Coulter never would have said/written/done.

PS

RE: Moderator and Dieter Kief,

Thank you for the reasoned replies.

I agree that a great number of the leading Pro-Panic people "work more in the service, creative (whether useful or useless BS like your DiAngelo's) jobs, in academia, and in government," and that "they didn't have so much that ruined their lives during this PanicFest" and that "most of them were going to get paid either way."

"I think the lefties had less to lose from this PanicFest."

You're right. But if presented with this scenario in 2019, we'd have to assume that at least some of our friends on the Left were socially conscious of the damage done andhad conscience pangs about crushing people, spiking deaths-of-despair, homicides, etc, and the uncountable social damage, the birth-rate crash, all for essentially no reason.

Why did so few break ranks? What mechanism kept them in line?

We had, what, maybe ten US state governors who to some extent embraced the Sweden model, and all were Republican, none Democrats. Not one Democrat defector? Why?

Specifically because the "laptop class" (as someone famously put it) was so much better off to ride the Corona-Panic, they had the luxury of fanning the Corona-Panic's flames. It allowed at least some of them to act out in a mega-scale adolescent way, fueled and magnified by the Internet, and indulgence in the full thrill of Corona-Panic, entering the plot of all those zombie and killer-virus movies they'd seen. In a way rather like Trump Derangement Syndrome of the late 2010s, but applied to a flu virus (at first, and later to a flu virus + the "flu deniers" + "anti-vaxxers" and all, in other words, the bad people). Runaway status signaling, expecting someone responsible would rein it in when it got out of hand. But then no one did rein it it.

People get carried away and events can fast overtake reality, and people tend to go in over-exuberant directions during war-panics (as the Corona-Panic more-or-less was, for our time). No one expected a few measly declarations of war in summer 1914 to amount to much, just a quick few weeks and a quick few marches and brief skirmishes and it'd be over.

PS: Mr. Blanc, I know that Ann Coulter started out that way. GOP! GOP! They could invade the world, and act like democrats, but that beats the Democrats doing that, was my take on the way she thought long ago. However, when you say "The key words are “Republican Party”. She’s looking for the best of the Republican presidential candidates, as you say. As she’s in the final analysis a Republican, I doubt she’ll ever cross the river to the Dissident Right.", I'm not completely sure now. There don't seem to be any decent Libertarians running anymore, but I really believe she'd have voted for Ron Paul on the "L" ticket if he'd run on it in '12 or '20 ('20 after she'd had enough of Trump). Of course, Ron Paul is a tad too old now.

I have disagreed with hardly anything Miss Coulter's written over the last 10 years. The two things I recall were something about "the pot" and then her non-disavowal of AA. I'm not sure she has promoted it lately, but she is like Steve Sailer, in that she still thinks great-great-grandchildren of slaves should get forced advantages over other people who, well, they don't own slaves now and never did!

PS My critique of Ms Coulter is that anyone with even a modicum of political nous understood what Mitt Romney was and what Donald Trump was. I’ve never been a big follower of her work, so I don’t have a lot of data on which to form a conclusion, but it was my impression that she was a member of the attack wing of Republican Party journalism. The key words are “Republican Party”. She’s looking for the best of the Republican presidential candidates, as you say. As she’s in the final analysis a Republican, I doubt she’ll ever cross the river to the Dissident Right. No matter how low the Republicans sink, she’ll be looking for the least low of them. Regarding Trump, I will admit that I had some hope that he actually believed some of the things that Steven Bannon told him to say, and that he might actually act on some of them. But I was aware that he was a hustler and a reality television personality, and that nothing that he did would have been surprising.

PS: Yes, Dieter, I was pretty sure I'd read of this before. Mr. Hail has written so much about the people on both sides of this panic divide, so I probably am repeating something he did write last year. This view conflicts with his speculation here that Big Blue panickers have an anti-panic side ready to bust out. Maybe we are talking about different people, say, the real elites vs. just the lefty academic-type classes.

However, I think the real elites are mostly very down with this Totalitarianism or even more so. Not only do they like telling people what to do and feeling smarter than the average Joe, but they are in a position to have the low-level panickers hang on their every bit of advise off the TV or internet. Dr. Fauci seems to have been this type.

PS - Mod. - The point you make about the class structure of the Covid-lockdown is made time and time again not only by Mr. Hail, if I remember right, but also by Martin Kulldorff of the Great Barrington Declaration - and - this is no surprise, because he does cooperate with Martin Kulldorff, by Ron DeSantis too.

Dr. Scott Atlas - one of president Trump's Covid advisers, says, he convinced Governor DeSantis, to go the Swedish way and stop the covid lockdown in Florida. - See his book A Plague Upon Our House - about his time in the White House.

PS Alarmist - Maxim Lott explained the vaccine/dead people phenomenon, that mislead so many, best:

"The statistic is true, but extremely misleading when presented that way, because it misses that about 95% of elderly people are vaccinated in the UK. If the vaccine were totally ineffective, we should expect about 95% of people dying to be vaccinated.

So the 70% stat shows the vaccine is WORKING.

How well? Let’s do the math.

If 95% of elderly people are vaccinated, then only 5% are unvaccinated.

That 5%, roughly, makes up about 30% of the deaths. Meaning they are 6 times as likely to die. That points to an 86% (6/7) effectiveness rate of vaccines, which incidentally IS RIGHT IN LINE with what the clinical studies show.

The US data shows the same thing, except with unvaccinated people being 11 times more likely to die.

This is really strong evidence that vaccines work as advertised, yet it’s billed as the opposite."


Here is Maxim Lotts well written and insightful article again:


https://maximumtruth.substack.com/p/deep-dive-covid-myths?utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web&utm_source=twitter

PS: Mr. Hail, regarding your psycho-analysis of the Big-Blue Pro-Panic, secretly perhaps anti-Panic players: I don't know.

I tend to see the higher-up, more influential, lefty Panickers in this way: These people work more in the service, creative (whether useful or useless BS like your DiAngelo's) jobs, in academia, and in government. They didn't have so much that ruined their lives during this PanicFest. Firstly, most of them were going to get paid either way. Working from home? Sure. Nobody in virtual class, even, or Social Security office closed down? Excuse my language, but "Fuck you, pay me."

The lower classes with real jobs or those in small business had to sit around and lose money (other than the unemployment bucks). Their ballgame were called off, the bars and restaurants were closed. The higher class crowd (usually more left-wing) thought (still think during this vax time) that they know more and can "handle the danger" of this virus at their private maskless parties and fancier restaurants that are open for the in crowd.

They think the others, those peons, are plain stupid and must be taught that there are these germs, see, and you need to wash your hands correctly and wear your mask over your nose and mouth correctly, per Dr. Fauci. Dr. Fauci approved of what they did, though it may have changed from week to week.

In other words, I think the lefties had less to lose from this PanicFest. That more Totalitarianism was introduced was a plus for them, as they believe in it. (Of course, they can handle a virus, so they are not subject to ALL of that...)

Just my thoughts. Thanks for the great comments, everyone on here!

PS: Mr. Hail, on Trump vs. DeSantis: Women like a powerful straight-talking guy. Donald Trump started out speaking straight about immigration, saying things others were afraid to. However, he was such a bullshitter most of the time, talking tough, then giving in on all of it, saying we need to stop these people from invading, but "they're good people!", and just never following through or keeping his word. As far as I have read of him, DeSantis talks tough and uses whatever power he has to back up those words. I can see why Ann Coulter like Gov. DeSantis.

Hell, I like the DeSantis type too, and I try to be like that in whatever dealings I do. Just small stuff like "OK, you won't take cash, you can keep this crap. See ya'." at the counter because I don't want a cashless society, or going into the store with no face mask when everyone else is wearing the is a start. Keeping my word is important to me.

Another difference between them is that Ron DeSantis is using the Federalism card as much as he can. Donald Trump was in the middle of the Federal Gov't, just surrounded by the Big-Gov crowd, and I don't think he realized that he had more power than just getting people out to rallies and bullshitting - talking round in circles. He needed a real trusted consigliere such as the Godfather had who knew how to wield power in the midst of all those Big Gov people.

Your paragraph in your next comment about Trump vs Fauci is what I'm talking about. No, not everything is legal, but you just keeping pouring it on - put the other side on the defensive. Let them spend time with their lawyers. O/T, but Trump should have had ONE trusted lawyer to handle all the "Russia Collusion!" bullshit, to leave him his time. Let that guy take care of all questions and all subpoenas whatever.. "I will answer no questions about Russia. Talk to my lawyer about this. I'm here to talk about a border barrier, for the price of 1/2 a day of Congress' spending over the year. If you don't want to talk about that, you can leave."

Early on, I thought Trump was going to do what I think would be a brilliant move: If the press people were antagonistic, kick them out of the room! "OK, I have invited the eminently fair Glenn Reynolds, expert on immigration Mr. Peter Brimelow, Ann Coulter, etc., etc,, as the journalists to report the White House news to the public. The rest of you can GTFO find some other work to do." What were they gonna do? People want the news - they'd have to go to those sources, directly or indirectly.

PS: Mr. Blanc, I give Miss Coulter a break on Romney, as she only supported him hard in the primary due to her belief that he would be good on immigration. He cucked out completely on that during the general election, and then she'd had enough. (I suppose she still wanted that lesser of 2 evils. I pulled the "L" lever as usual.)

I'm not sure what you don't like about her stance on Trump. She tried to support him, with misgivings here and there, until he had let us down on almost everything, including the most important, existential issue, immigration. She pretty much let him have it in her columns after that. I enjoyed every minute of my reading of those ones. No, it wasn't all his fault he couldn't get it all done, but first thing, you don't hire employees who are going to work against you!

This leads to what I want to write to Peter Ike. Yes, there was lots of pressure. You don't want to be "the President that killed MILLIONS(!) out of negligence", even though it simply is not the President's job, Constitutionally to even worry about an infectious disease. Leaving that aside, I understand his showing lots of concern in the beginning. He did well in using the Panic to (try to) cut immigration. Yeah, the press was going to blame everything on him, no matter what he did - let more people in, cut off the air traffic.

President Trump could have been the guy in the next "Profiles in Courage", though, if he understood that Americans were tired of the LOCKDOWN Totalitarianism by the summer of '20. Again, he had this guy working for him (or that he took as the expert), Anthony Fauci, that he should have just disowned, if he couldn't oust him, and get someone else with other less Panic-inducing views as his "new expert".

No, he was no scientist, but he'd have to have known after a while that there were so-called experts on both sides of the issue. He should have hired the guys he agreed with.

I do agree with you that there's no way he knew enough about these vaccines to understand they were dangerous and maybe part of a nefarious plan. He felt very proud of himself to have pushed the research and production of the vaccines along. I guess he was used and abused on that one.

PS

A hypothesis that formed in my mind while reading and considering the contents in this thread, and thinking back to they critical-period(s) of the Corona-Panic. (With apologies for length; consider this a draft of a future post along with other content in this thread.)

HYPOTHESIS: Did (a whole lot of) Big Blue power players secretly want Trump to crack down, confront and crush the Panic, and end essentially by force all the irresponsible Panic-pushing, much of which they themselves were doing? Maybe not all along, but after a point.

In other words, how much of the Corona-Panic itself was a form of mass-scale adolescent-style acting out, a search or discipline and structure imposed from above?

A lot has been said about the Corona-Panic as "delusion," or as (that oft-used word) a form of "hysteria." Others like to paint it as a power-grab. None of these lines is really wrong, but this idea of mass-scale adolescent acting out may be underexplored. It doesn't quite fit smoothly into either the Corona-as-hysteria or Corona-as-power-grab theories.

When a teenager "rebels" against mother or father or both, he or she usually doesn't really want to break with the parents, but is doing it perhaps for attention, and in many cases with the secret hope of discipline. This is thought to be a psychological motivation for a lot of teenage boys, especially.

There are two forms of this: (a) CONSCIOUSLY wanting Trump to crush the Panic which they themselves were propping up, and (b) UNCONSCIOUSLY wanting the same.

The more I think about it, the more I suspect it's got to be true, in at least some cases. At least *some* Big Blue powerbrokers, agenda-setters, and those-who-should-know-better who indulged in Pro-Panic demagogic behavior...they probably (essentially-)consciously wanted a stern authoritarian father figure to come in and say, "Enough! No more Corona-Panic. I'm shutting you down. Cry all you want, it's over."

Many more probably wanted it unconsciously.

Subtracting those two groups, it leaves us with a hardened, embittered, true-blue (so to speak), totally committed Pro-Panic ideological core. That core was heavily composed of people with mental health problems, severe anxiety disorders, hypochondria, delusions, and the like, all of those things amplified by the digitization of discourse. They were complemented also by the increasing(?) number of "Doomers" among us who really wanted a virus-apocalypse to be true for their own reasons.

Lots of layers around that inner core. The outer layers were/are those kept in line by groupthink, peer pressure, and pure cowardice (and, with low- and even many mid-info types, by simple disinfo/misinfo; you know, the usual that came/comes with Pro-Panic discourse, often shifting by the week and always finding plenty of "suckers" to prey on). In the outer layers we may find many cases of the type I mean, those who wanted a stern autocrat to come in and shut down the Panic party.

To put the idea in firm alternative-reality terms back in 2020:

A strong and sustained Trump crackdown against pushers of Corona-Panic in 2020, starting maybe with the firing Fauci and his backers, and even putting Fauci on a giant politicized trial, bending the law if necessary to get the trial going; regardless of outcome, dethrone Fauci and put him on the defensive, with risk of prison. (They did it to DJT's people.) A strong and sustained campaign from above against the Pro-Panic side's lockdowns, mandates, school closures, unnecessarily-risky vaccines and all the endless disruptions, all of it, with no compromise with the lockdownist Panickers, and if possible lawfaring the most dangerous of the Panic-fanatics, like Evil Doctor Eric Fingle-Dingle, under some dusty national-security clause, ala the Palmer Raids of a century ago.

A Trump crackdown like this would get the Pro-Panic leaders out of the trap they'd all fallen into. It was a trap created by their own demagoguery, by their own semi-apocalyptic Panic rhetoric. Much of it runaway virtue-signaling (in the form of "Do Something!!"-ism), which created a weird social dilemma (I don't think the old RAND game-theorists ever ran a "flu-virus demagogue's dilemma" game).

Say a Big-Blue leader some time in late spring 2020, summer 2020, fall 2020, or winter 2020-21, wanted to shift to the Anti-Panic side, in word and deed. Wanted to fully confront and disempower the Panic in his jurisdiction. Wanted to suffocate the life out of the Corona-Panic monster, first slashing off its tentacles one by one, then slaying it, then crushing the dead beast's bones and burying them a mile deep in the ground and salting the earth above.

Let's assume the existence of a hardline Anti-Panic leader like this, a true Anti-Panicker at heart who was also a loyal Democrat, in a Blue area, stuck in the local political-machine, and who could no more leave the party and that whole milieu than a typically decent man could cut ties with his family and become a mountain-hermit.

Call him Mr Anti-Panic Big Blue Man. Could he have done it, shut down the Panic on his own?

I don't think so. The only thing Mr Anti-Panic Big Blue Man could've done is to be secretly happy that a bad-guy took the political-hit so he didn't have to. Which means Mr Anti-Panic Big Blue Man might have hated The Orange Man, but would have been happy when Orange Man took the heat for him. Instead the Orange Man balked, took major missteps, buck-passed, and we all sunk into a years-long CoronaPanic-induced nightmare.

PS

On Trump vs DeSantis and Ann Coulter

It's no secret that Ann Coulter, former early and hardline Trump backer (June 2015 to circa late 2018), became an early and enthusiastic DeSantis backer during and specifically because of the Corona-Panic (starting about mid-2020). This left her politically homeless for some of late 2018, all of 2019, and much of 2020, often turning to vituperative attacks on DJT. The attacks were often "not wrong," but in tone she had turned entirely negative, more negative than her already-caustic norm.

Governor DeSantis showed how a strong and firm line could defeat the Pro-Panic coalition, and perhaps could have been so on national-scale, if Trump hadn't been asleep at the switch (IMO) (PeterIke presents a more sympathetic view of why Trump failed). In the end, it would have been Big-Blue-Power vs. Trump, but it was that anyway, for all kinds of reasons associated with, overlapping with, and independent of, the Corona-Panic.

PS

Good points, PeterIke.

Judged on rhetoric: pre-election-2020 Trump gets mixed marks but better than average.

Judged on actions: Trump gets far poorer marks.

In a word, typical of his entire presidency.

Assign the blame as one wants, but that was the outcome of that three years and nine months --- Jan 20 2017 to early Nov 2020, when the election dispute overtook events. Recall the experimental vaccine was announced right during the height of the election dispute, early in the week after the election. Trump, who assuredly does have a demagogue's instinct, decided to brag about how he created the vaccine, typical of his often-bumbling response. To brag about the vaccine was to concede important moral heights to the Pro-Panic people. His instinct failed him there in many ways.

PS

Sorry ... link here

https://www.destatis.de/EN/Press/2021/12/PE21_563_12.html

PS

OK, Dieter, look at the graph at the bottom half of this and tell me what’s going on the last three months, if the vaxxes aren’t starting to kill people.

What I really love is the European press telling us the 238% increase in footballers keeling over on the pitches with cardiac problems is because they had COVID and it’s definitely not the !Vaxxes.

PS

Trump didn't do well with Covid, for sure. But the political pressure he was under was enormous. And the guy's not a friggin' epidemiologist. What did he know? He was getting bombarded with "millions will die!" nonsense, so he had to do something. What if he did nothing and millions DID die? Political suicide and personal failure, which he hates.

In any case, most of what was done in America was done at the state levels by idiot Governors (and continues to this day). And you could see all along that Trump was fighting the conventional wisdom is his mind -- as per his promotion of HCQ for instance. But he never went full steam ahead with pushback.

And then the whole vaccine fiasco. Trump loves taking credit for Operation Screw Us All, or whatever it was called. And in fact, the only lever Trump had to pull with the vax was clearing the way politically for the vaccines, which he did. How was he to know they would be junk?

For me, his biggest failure is not what he did at the time -- the pressure was incredible -- but that he's still on the pro-vaccine side. He should have come out by now and said, "I trusted the pharma companies, but what they've put out is garbage. They lied."

Well that's not happening.

PS Ms Coulter trying to recover her reputation after Romney and Trump? Hail: You’re about right on the pro-Panic chronology, but I don’t think that the anti-Panic side ever had a chance. The pro-Panic forces comprised every powerful institution in the Western world.

PS The first person to be diagnosed with Omicron in San Diego was a person who had both shots of the vaccine and the booster shot.

In the same news item reporting this fact was a final note urging people to get vaccinated.

It did not, of course, say WHY people should get vaccinated.

PS

https://orwell2024.substack.com/p/age-adjusted-all-cause-mortality?r=zp558&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web

"High Quality Analysis of Excess Deaths" (Michael Levitt about this Blogpost by Orwell2024 - Biggest Surprise: Covid-Vaccinations Did NOT Influence Excess Deaths in Europe AT ALL!

Quote from Orwell2024's post: "The observed excess mortality in Austria and Netherlands, is entirely dominated by mortality in the elderly age bins. Those are 95 % vaccinated. The same vaccination level is also the case in Sweden, Spain and France. The vaccine doesn’t reduce nor increase mortality. It isn’t the underlying root cause. The most likely hypothesis has been discussed above: lockdowns or random seasonal effects."

PS
I agree mostly Mr. Hail.

No panic in Switzerland too I'd add, by and large. Kindergarten and many (not all) Schools open, businesses open, economy slowing down a bit in 2020, but - with the exception of tourism and shows/ life concerts, not much harm done. The economy is right on track 2021 already. Everything 's fine. A few minor quibbles over ICUs being under constant stress etc. - - - whether masks should be worn on public transport - such things. No vaccine mandates, and pressure on the non-vaccinated, which does not amount to much. - If things were like that in Germany, it would have been a lot better.- Not least for small businesses and restaurants.

PS

I remember thinking at the time, “If AIDS is so communicable, why can’t mosquitoes spread it.” And yet, they didn’t.

AIDS was used to make it OK to be gay. COVID19 is being used to make it OK to be a slave.

PS: Thank you for the great run-down on the timetable and Miss Coulter, Mr. Hail. You should put some more posts, such as an expansion up on your site, because your commenting system - Wordpress', that is - is a little, OK, a lot better. (I appreciate it very much here, of course.)

To me, I realized not necessarily how far the Totalitarians were going to go yet, but at least how stupid this thing was getting, at the time the kids were sent home from school in mid-March. Don't get me wrong, the absence from school for children around the country was a silver lining, IMO, but that's when I saw that those "in charge" were going way, way overboard with this.

PS

"That column, How Do We Flatten The Curve On Panic? (March 25, 2020), is so amazingly far ahead of the curve of the general anti-panic crowd"

I think the key period in the formation of the Corona Anti-Panic side was March 10-20. There was a lot of flux ongoing all throughout 2020 even from early January when it was all conspiracy-theory barely above UFO-abduction-level chatter about a mystery killer virus deep in the Chinese interior, but I think the Anti-Panic side emerged into a form basically now recognizable in March 10-20, reacting to events and to the Pro-Panic side's increasingly erratic and unbalanced behaviors.

I would tentatively propose the key period in the Pro-Panic side, and its global coup-d'etat-like success, as Feb 25 to March 15.

The Pro-Panic side was first mover, took the initiative, and hasn't looked back. Whatever dates one prefers, we all have to agree that the Pro-Panic side's critical period predates the Anti-Panic side's critical period.

To restate:

-- Anti-Panic key formative period: March 10 to March 20.

-- Pro-Panic key breakthrough period: Feb 25 to March 15.

(These are just my ideas/impressions/memories, not based on any particular data.)

The overlap there is: March 10-15. That, then, might be be the critical week of the entire Corona-Panic, now wrapping up its Year Two.

We might conclude that without vigorous and hard-line Anti-Panic moves in these fateful days of March 10-15, we were (as it turned out) doomed. Doomed to a brutal, years-long regime complete with recession, inflation, riots, a fertility crash, and major social disruptions and spikes in deaths of despair and an unnecessarily risky vaccine, arbitrary lockdowns, suspended constitutions, masks, and a weird virus cult hovering over us (the Corona-Damocles effect; you're always worried when the virus-fanatics will shut down again and crush you). By the time the sun rose on March 16, the Corona-fanatics and Corona-cabalists, backed up by millions of Corona-cultists they'd helped create, ran the show. The Anti-Panic side fought hard for small gains in coming months and years, but could have won with better leadership (especially in the USA) in a few weeks of March 2020, especially (perhaps) March 10-15.

If Trump (whom Coulter turned against hard in 2018) had used everything in his power to fight the Corona-Panic in those fateful days, the whole world might have been saved. Would Europe continue wacko-lockdowns and all the rest if the senior security partner put pressure on them to open up and led by example by refusing lockdowns and mandates and masks?

Alas, with the distance of time, we have to admit that DJT was a mediocre president in many important ways. His biggest failure of all may be acquiescence to the Corona-terrorists and his handover of power to Corona-Ayatollah Fauci and his gang.

Back to the Anti-Panic timeline in early 2020. March 17 was the publication day of that highly influential article by Dr Ioannidis slamming the Panic, trying hard to stem the tide, but in retrospect probably already too late, for the Pro-Panic side had become too powerful and they had a huge auxiliary of Corona-cult believers who'd been radicalized by the media.

March 25 (the anti-Panic article by Ann Coulter) was already past the point at which the Pro-Panic side had the clear upper hand. It was a period of lockdowns, even in Florida. Germany had embraced full Lockdownism and abandoned its one-time goal of resisting lockdowns, after the UK folded, leaving only Sweden as a fully committed Anti-Panic regime in the Western European bloc.

The Pro-Panic side had the high ground basically everywhere by March 25. They had full control of the agenda-setting apparatus. And this is where I think Ann Coulter fits in. Her strength has always been as an outside agitator, or positioning herself as an outside agitator even when she was much more of an insider (before about the mid-2010s by which time she emerged as, frankly, a thinly veiled ethnonationalist). The beaten and shaken Anti-Panic forces, still partly in a consolidation process, were already outsiders by March 25, already in need of a leader, and were already being marginalized. No more natural a candidate for the task than Ann Coulter.

I note in closing this comment that while Ann Coulter is to be commended for both her early, steady, and (often) loudly Anti-Panic stance, she has NOT been consistently hard-line, often leaning towards conceding Pro-Panic side positions at least at first.

In some of the early weeks of the Corona-Panic social phenomenon, she herself (as she later confessed) had fallen into believing it all, but at some point in March (the exact date would be interesting to trace) she largely snapped out of it ***for specifically political reasons***, after she realized a political coup d'etat had occurred that fateful month (March 2020), and that these people weren't going to readily hand back power, because it's not what they do. She framed it as Left-Right, which is the language she understands. I don't know if it makes sense to frame Fauci and the Corona-terror regime as "Left," but that's another avenue and this comment is already too long. In any case, in Coulter's case it was her own long-honed political instincts which brought her to the warm and sunny climes of the Anti-Panic side.