Questioning the Concept of Herd Immunity

https://off-guardian.org/2021/07/05/new-normal-newspeak-1-herd-immunity/

For the purposes of this exposé I agree with the article. (above)

But on a deeper note I hold that the concept of immunity at the body level and as a herd or collective state is a language reversal in terms of life perceived and believed as attack.

Now I know that at the body level a predator can be kept out or guarded against by defences and so I don't argue that bodies cannot be broken or suffer injury. Immunity is not applicable to the body level but has antecedents in Law - such as diplomatic immunity from prosecution etc.

But the supposition of invisible microbes as attackers, first bacterial as revealed in microscopy and cultured study - which turn out to be our life support system and not attackers after all. But then as invisible nanoparticles that are assigned living agency as a matter of 'normalcy' and likewise flagged as enemy threat by which to rally in defences that at least cost us deep in the purse but as 'normal' undermine our life support system.

Generally doing the attack that the virus was purported to cause and thus the treatments are evidenced as the proof of the virus mutating, the disease progressing and the 'immune system' weakening.

But this is all backwards even if it is 'normal' to believe.

Misidentifying cause in the effects leads to attacking or suppressing the body function as if it is attacking a 'you' that is an artefact of  the belief through which you perceive.

The immune system is your life support or more simply your life, even more simply You - but not as you are 'normally' conditioned to think of yourself in image and thought or modelling.

Toxic shocks are where a conflict or trauma is held in the body as an encapsulation, masking over or dissociation of the psychic from fears that cannot be resolved and released, to take on forms of limitation or compensation relative to a past that has in a sense stamped on the mind such as to reiterate a presentation or strategy of defence against reliving the conflict, and so set in terms external to the masking mind, in the body and in the world of relations.

This applies no less to us as a species in terms of being shaped in our development of thought and culture by the conflicts and shocks of a Past set in narratives that re-run, are re-triggered or re-enacted in variations of the themes through solutions or developments that temporarily seem to work, only to breakdown to a rest of the problem in a new set of clothes or presentation of symptoms.

Velikovsky called this 'Mankind in Amnesia' and researched across disciplines on the premise that we are still under ancient trauma which relates to experience prior to the mind of historical accounts, as the so called mythological age in terms of oral traditions and archetypes that formed language and culture as symbolic representation of actual experience of shock and awe that are not in our modern world that has largely existed in a relative stability under which cultural development established a scientific basis for empirical verification of otherwise idealised or subjective theory and supposition that was predicated in and reactive to unconscious conflicts. 

So we see the same archetypal patterns running as human meaning-structures even when the forms change, such that the bias of Science against psychism becomes a 'jealous god syndrome' to reiterate the think it hates in the very structure of its thought, perceptions, strategies and identification.

Psychic distortions operate a false basis for evaluating Reality and become the insane and futile attack on reality perceived as threat to our model, our idol and our invested image or face. But our true psychic connection is an individual expression of life within a world of conditions for the support of life unfolding or evolving out of its own experience and expression, as a symbiosis of diverse elements that have their own fulfillments and functions within a greater whole that is prior to and potential for expression within the whole of which we all partake.

The chaotic past that seems to leave us fragmented and driven to play apart and in conflict is well represented by Humpty.

Humpty Dumpty sat on a wall,

Humpty Dumpty had a great fall.

All the king’s horses and all the king’s men

Couldn’t put Humpty together again.

Regardless where this actually originated, it contains the epitome of a belief in broken peace, broken love or connection, guidance and support, and broken trust or power of heart and mind as one. Separation Trauma.

The king represents an organised attempt to restore the Golden Age as the primary function and drive of a sense of lack and inadequacy relative to a world set in fear and threat.

It also represents the corruption of a sovereign trust for upholding a realm to a systemic sacrifice of normalised futility as a food or energy source for vacuous self-gratifications that reiterate a passing pleasure association by which to play out roles of self-vindication or vengeance relative to un underlying sense of lack, grievance and deprivation.

As getting mechanisms, appetites are fed in place of a true fulfilment, and so addictive patterns are socially normalised and then systemically structured as incentivised compliance in ways that only show up when choosing to live from joy rather than from a mask of getting, such as to be socially excluded as the example by which the tightness of the mask is brought to awareness as a 'conflict state' to be evaded or filtered out.

Such is the collective sacrifice to a systemic conflict-evasion or masking in psychic distortion, that a herd mentality operates as social context for expectations of support or conflict relative to thought, word and deed, which also opens to predatory strategies such as driving the herd to a cliff edge or trap by which to extract assets, consolidate control and assume power by coercion and captivity of the trapped.

Group dynamics is then characterised by sacrifice of individual contributions to a compliance to group 'reality' as tuned into from a sense of psychic and perhaps physical survival as social inclusion. But a real relationship is the free gift of presence to other living beings and to that which supports life and is our life in a larger sense.

Regaining presence from a conflict shock rather than recycling the conflict, is a matter of where we willingly identify or receive and accept identity from. The established pattern of habit-conditioning runs as if alive and free within the rules and parameters of its masking conditioning, as the attempted solution to be made safe within overwhelming or inescapable conflict. This runs as a survival urge set against fear, that can be triggered a and re-triggered by any experience of actual presence or real relational intimacy of being, such as to re-assert limits, rules, demands and masking filters against love seen as treacherous and weak in a 'real world' of fear and threat.

And so love has to be stamped out by substitution of a mask of virtue that offers compensations and mitigations of pain of loss in socially masked acceptance or respectability.

But contextual to all of what I sketched out above and all of what we individually and collectively experience, love is what we are, and cannot stamp itself out even if symbols of love should war on symbols of hate.

No concept or meaning of betrayal, rejection or abandonment could come into a mind but that love is lost or somehow becomes hate.

This fear and associated guilt as the cause of such evil, runs very deeply beneath multiple and complex defences, that distance from love as salvation from full awareness as damnation or annihilation. For we hold conviction that we are unworthy of whole embrace and value, as well as that if we came into such a holiness or sanctity of life in others we would spoil or betray it. Such is a mind set in fear against a greater need for being that cannot be eradicated but only denied, such as to then drive a perverted love of substitutions for life truly lived, shared and unfolded as experience of worth.

But WHO told you you were naked? said the Lord.

This question is a gift within our being for the release of false and conflicting ideas that mask over a sense of lack-driven identity that runs as a self reinforcing cycle until recognised and released. That we can model reality at all, is a creative imagination. That we can mistake our own image for reality itself is the capacity to become trapped by our own reaction, to define our being in terms of a particular experience set as irrevocable or locked down meaning, to which  and through which all else is filtered - unless and until we question our ‘reality’.

That love is here is as simple as our willingness to extend it or let it in.

That we are share a life that is communication and relationship can be lived backwards in denial or accepted as freedom to be that which we are.

Individuality is a unique expression within a whole. Not a split off ‘freedom’ from relational responsibility to our own being. Substitutions mask as reality while they pass of as real. Discernment of true need is always an individual willingness of acceptance and can never be forced externally. But awareness of false can be reflected by not accepting it as true currency or presence.

I also wrote on herd immunity at: