{"id":281689,"date":"2024-02-12T09:35:33","date_gmt":"2024-02-12T09:35:33","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=281689"},"modified":"2024-02-14T08:48:22","modified_gmt":"2024-02-14T08:48:22","slug":"this-week-in-the-new-normal-83","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=281689","title":{"rendered":"This Week in the New Normal #83"},"content":{"rendered":"

Off-Guardian \u2013 Feb 11, 2024<\/strong><\/h1>\n
Our successor to This Week in the Guardian<\/em>, This Week in the New Normal<\/a><\/em> is our weekly chart of the progress of autocracy, authoritarianism and economic restructuring around the world.<\/h5>\n
As usual, since there was no edition last week, we\u2019re technically covering two<\/em> weeks in the new normal today<\/h5>\n

1. Are you ready for \u201cheat-related deaths\u201d to spike?<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Last week Sky News reported the last scary climate change numbers: \u201c10,000 people a year could die as a result of heatwaves\u201d<\/a><\/em><\/p>\n

Now, for the sake of argument, let\u2019s pretend those numbers aren\u2019t just made up.<\/p>\n

Firstly, let\u2019s go into \u201cearly 2020\u201d mode for some perspective: 10,000 people is not that many compared to the ~650,000 people<\/a> that die in the UK each year.<\/p>\n

Secondly, let\u2019s reasonably assume that as more people die of \u201cheat\u201d, fewer people will die of cold. Since thousands of people are supposedly killed by cold weather per winter, increased \u201cheat-related\u201d deaths could have almost no impact on overall mortality at all.<\/p>\n

There, I\u2019ve done my Devil\u2019s Advocate due diligence, and we have established that \u2013 even if they are real \u2013 those numbers are not scary.<\/p>\n

But, of course, they\u2019re not<\/em> real. The weasel-worded article establishes that if nothing else, using phrases like \u201ccould<\/em> die as a result\u201d and \u201cheat-related<\/em> deaths\u201d.<\/p>\n

Just as \u201cCovid deaths\u201d were ridiculously defined as \u201cdeath from any cause within 28 days of a positive test\u201d<\/em>, \u201cheat-related\u201d deaths will simply be \u201cdeaths from any cause during a heat wave\u201d<\/em>. Soon after that they\u2019ll probably start adding \u201cclimate change\u201d to death certificates.<\/p>\n

I\u2019m not joking, they\u2019ve actually suggested this already<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Don\u2019t worry though, Anti-Establishment Elon is here with a solution: A carbon tax.<\/p>\n

2. New Days are the New Days<\/strong><\/h3>\n

This is a weird one. The Hawaii Supreme Court published a pro-gun control decision this week which used a quote from The Wire to make its argument<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\u201cThe thing about the old days, they the old days,\u201d the unanimous Hawaii Supreme Court ruling issued Wednesday said, borrowing a quote from season four, episode three of the HBO series to express that the culture from the founding of the country shouldn\u2019t dictate contemporary life.<\/p>\n

Now, I don\u2019t want to get into the gun control issue again, or indeed why \u2013 in the current climate \u2013 governments would be trying so hard to disarm their civilian population. A different issue for a different article.<\/p>\n

I also don\u2019t want to repeat the argument that attacking the 2nd Amendment is about attacking the Constitution as a whole, as demonstrated by quotes like this:<\/p>\n

\u201c\u201dAs the world turns, it makes no sense for contemporary society to pledge allegiance to the founding era\u2019s culture, realities, laws, and understanding of the Constitution,\u201d<\/p>\n

I just want to point out how far society has fallen when judges and legal scholars are using pop-culture references rather than legal precedents to make their arguments. Clown world is here.<\/p>\n

3. Taylor\u2019s Inevitable Superbowl Win<\/strong><\/h3>\n

Today is Superbowl Sunday, and that\u2019s always an interesting day to spot messaging (subliminal or otherwise) in the Superbowl ads as well as on the field.<\/p>\n

And this year Taylor Swift will be there, just like she\u2019s been everywhere else.<\/p>\n

The same year she coincidentally became the biggest star in the world she coincidentally started \u201cdating\u201d a football player, who is coincidentally a Pfizer spokesman, and whose team coincidentally made it to the Superbowl.<\/p>\n

And when that team coincidentally wins and Taylor coincidentally gets to kiss her Pfizer-sponsored boyfriend in front of the biggest TV audience of the year, it will be just one big coincidence.<\/p>\n

As political scientist Richard Bensell told ABC News<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\u201cIf you were trying to design a public relations campaign or situation that would maximise her appeal to the American electorate and to her fan base, you couldn\u2019t do better,\u201d<\/p>\n

Quite. And not many seem to be putting 2 and 2 together on this.<\/p>\n

I have no idea what the purpose of this \u201clet\u2019s make everyone talk about Taylor Swift everywhere all the time for a year\u201d project is, or what and\/or who she sold her soul to create it, but it\u2019s damn weird.<\/p>\n

Some say it\u2019s about endorsing Biden, but elections are rigged so that\u2019s pointless.<\/p>\n

Maybe she\u2019s going to run for President.<\/p>\n

BONUS: Warning sign of the week<\/strong><\/h3>\n

\u201cClimategate\u201d scientist Michael Mann won a 12-year-long legal battle this week. In 2012 Mann\u2019s work was called fraudulent by two journalists writing for the Competitive Enterprise Institute and the National Review respectively, Mann sued for defamation and this week was awarded $1 million in damages by a jury.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s an interesting piece of timing for a 12-year battle to end, given the current\u2026climate (pun very much intended).<\/p>\n

The Guardian article<\/a> covering the case closes with a quote from Mann:<\/p>\n

\u201cI hope this verdict sends a message that falsely attacking climate scientists is not protected speech,\u201d<\/p>\n

That\u2019s a potentially worrying sign.<\/p>\n

It\u2019s not all bad\u2026<\/strong><\/h3>\n

I dunno, maybe it is<\/em> all that bad.<\/p>\n

Here\u2019s some music:<\/p>\n