'Gain of Function" WTF?

What Would God Do?

As much as I would rather not, I can’t ignore the fact that there are people who are funding biolabs towards ‘gain of function’ research. Logically, this is a thousand times more perilous than the Nazis working on the bomb. I am dumbfounded by how oblivious humanity is to the implications of this knowledge. We are like 15th-century American Indians.

This funding is predicated on the claim that it is necessary to research a defense to potential pathogens. However, making a virus communicable in humans seems like an unnecessary step in trying to figure out how to defeat a virus itself. Adding AIDs DNA to a virus somehow wreaks of offensive research as opposed to defensive research. Add to this the fact that it was all conducted without transparent approval, one cannot avoid the obvious conclusion that this research is a criminal endeavor intended to offer tremendous power to a predator and capable of inflicting unimaginable harm on humanity.

Now personally, the very last thing I want to do with my time on this Earth is to try and save it. I would argue that one of the greatest banes of humanity is the preponderance of the savior complex. It’s not because I don’t respect the good intentions of those who would save the world, it is the fact that no one to date has demonstrated sufficient knowledge or depth to take on that job and in my estimation, have always been wrong.

However, the dilemma many of us wrestle with our whole lives is trying to decide what it is we either want to or should do with out time here. One way to try to make these decisions is to try an imagine what God would do if he were in our shoes. We try to imagine what is the most clever, most beneficial, most useful allocation of our time. And if we do this, we have to admit that the appearance of a global existential threat is probably one of those things if not THE thing to which we must direct our attention. And again, it is the last thing I want to spend my time on but I have to admit, ignoring this threat just does not seem to be an option.

Which leads me to the point of this article. Faced with the fact that there is a secret cabal of those who rationalize biological warfare, those of us in their path will be making a decision we cannot avoid. We will either ignore the threat as the American Indians did or we will act decisively to eliminate this threat.

So how do we eliminate this threat from those who are funding ‘gain of function’ research? My assertion is that the threat is not the research itself but rather the situation or set of circumstances that has made this series of events possible. We have established a structure of government that has enabled a group of individuals to act secretly and independently to fund and operate secret labs in foreign countries while at the same time neutering any structures that might be responsible for ensuring that rogue elements cannot wreak havoc. Ultimately, we have to admit these failures and in doing so we have to admit that those to whom we have entrusted power through a supposed election process are complicit or at least incapable of correcting the problem.

Given that our elected officials have not and indicate no intention to eliminate these labs or the system that created them, we have to admit that they are also the reason why these labs exist. One way or another, the funding of these black ops and the refusal to gut them is why they exist. The only way to prevent the funding of these labs is to establish government structures that will pass laws that prevent this funding and prosecute those behind it. Arguably, the only way to eliminate ‘gain of function’ labs is to have the general population vote on the issue. And since our current system of supposedly being ‘represented’ has only led to their funding, it is apparent that it is a woefully inaccurate and inadequate way of expressing the will of the people.

Imagine if this issue of funding ‘gain of function’ research were put before the people. How many do you think would seek to fund it. How many do you think would want to know why it was moved over seas. Maybe the public would ask, “Was the Ukraine war just about preventing the disclosure or closure of these labs?” What are the odds that these labs would have ever been funded much less continue to exist?

So as a person who is asking themselves “What would God do?”, I conclude that I am obligated to work towards a Ghandi-esk effort towards a free country based on true self-governance as opposed to the current government system that resembles a British-esk aristocracy. Towards this end, I ask the reader to consider the advantages of a government based on community by community online citizen legislatures through the utility of smartphones.

With #GOVTbySMARTPHONE combined with a philosophy of ‘local supremacy of law’ every citizen in a community would have a seat at the table and like-minded communities like liberal enclaves, conservative enclaves, the Amish, or Muslims could govern themselves, free from the dictates of outside communities. Ideally, every citizen could submit their version of a community budget so that every person could spend their fraction of their community’s budget so that EVERYONE GETS WHAT THEY WANT.

The end result would be a nation of competing localities, like teams in a National Governing League, all competing with one another to see what system of governance is most successful at producing a happy population. Well advised policies would yield good results and flourish while poorly advised policies would flounder. Communities that decriminalized crime would eventually learn to correct their mistakes while those that incentivized productivity or efficiency or sustainability would flourish.

This concept, the idea that everyone have a seat at the table while individual tables be free from centralized dictates is the ultimate manifestation of our current concept of a Democratic Republic. It offers the protection envisioned in a republic while optimizing democracy. It is the 21st-century version of a Democratic Republic and it is the greatest opportunity to advance the art of governance since civilization began. It is also the only way to eliminate the corruption of government that has brought us to the brink of extinction.

What is the most honest interpretation of reality? How do we decide what it is we need to do? One argument is to try to imagine ‘What would God do?”.

Now many would argue two things. One is that God is so far beyond us as to make any such guessing patently ridiculous. The other is that God would just do the all-loving kind of thing. However, logically, if we were to conclude this, we will almost certainly just end up in an oven at some point.

Logically, if God were in our shoes, he would do the thing that allows him to extract him/her self from a bad situation and if possible, put itself in a good situation. And the manner of it’s action would probably benefit all or at least not injure another. So how would I, if I were God, act if I find myself in a situation where the people in power seem to be acting in an irresponsible if not psychopathic manner? For example, if they are taking political prisoners, releasing violent criminals, forcing deadly vaccines, funding ‘gain of function’, or executing wars for profit?

Now of course I don’t pretend to have THE answer but I can posit one plausible solution which is along the lines of how Gandhi liberated India. I contend that what God might do and thus, what we probably should do, is do what we can to convince all the rest of us who are being fitted for chains or body bags, towards an action that can plausibly remove the threat at the top, without undue harm, all the while resulting in a far better outcome or at least an outcome that no longer harbors or could resurrect the threat currently existing.

Logically, the best way to remove the Hitlers of the world from power and to replace an existing governing structure with one devoid of the threat of a future Hitler is to rouse essentially everyone in a society to reject the authority of the offending person or governing structure; just like Gandhi did in India. Accordingly, it might be asserted that for all those who conclude that they should act as if they were God playing the role of a commoner, it is incumbent upon us to work to raise a national consciousness against the existing power structure or ruling element.

Somehow, all those who would emulate God must work to convince the 99% to reject the idea that the current 1% have any authority and more importantly, how authority is defined so that government does not keep resulting in crazy people at the top. The truth is that any governing structure that funds ‘gain of function’ research is an existential threat to humanity and making sure that these people are stopped and are not allowed to happen again is the very most important obligation all of us have towards ourselves and each other.

To this end, I propose that all those not in power make their own videos calling for a form of governance where every citizen has a seat at their communities table and every community table is protected from other community tables. This form of governance is simply the 21st-century version of a Democratic Republic through the miracle of #GOVTbySMARTPHONE where every citizen is an online legislator and all governing decisions are made by millions instead of a few.

The people at the top of governments aren’t there out of some altruistic yearning. They are there because that’s where the money is and they are people who want as much of it as they can get. It’s not that they are particularly bad people, they just aren’t the Mother Theresa type. The simple reality is that governments are just tools for taking from the masses and giving less back out of a necessity for organization. Those who administer government naturally want to get theirs and those who fund campaigns want to get theirs.

The only way to have a government that is not corrupt is to have a government where there are too many players for any few persons to profit. The beauty of everyone having a seat at the table, is that there are too many players for them to form a fraternity of self-interested individuals. When you have the whole population at the table, the many are not willing to let a few gain advantage. Hence, you get a government that serves the interest of the entire majority as opposed to the interest of a minority special interest.

Our current form of government vests great power in an administrative position which is then guaranteed to go to the victor of a great battle between high-status individuals. Ultimately, the most pathological, vicious, criminal, and capable person ends up on top because as we all know, cheaters always win. If God is at the bottom because he fundamentally does not have a pathological need to dominate others and he does not want to kill a lot of innocent people, his only logical course of action is to convince the 99% to turn on the 1% by simply not accepting their claims of authority.

Somehow, God as a peasant, must convince the 99% that it is a better thing that the 99% make the laws as members of an online legislature, rather than delegating that power to the handful of people who win a battle of publicity through the bribes of the richest few. The sad truth is that our ‘representative’ democracy may actually be the very worst form of government possible as it awards power through an Olympics of human deceit. In the past, the people on top were just the winners of a birth lottery or a financial Olympics. Now most on top are the winners of a façade Olympics of unmitigated deceit.

Which leads us to the issue of ‘Reading the Room’. The sad reality is that our process of delegating power to the most capable cheater is why Hitler, and Stalin and Mao happened. It is an inevitable result of delegated power. The bottom line is that power is delegated to those most capable of gaining your confidence, AKA con-artist. Arguably, humanity will keep running into their generation’s Hitler until and unless enough of us consider what we should and are probably responsible for doing which is to act to save ourselves just as we might imagine God would do if he were in our shoes. As just one of many, we need to imagine how we might pull off a Gandhi so that if God were a peasant, he would end up on top without an ocean of bloodshed. Logically, all we have to do is convince the 99% to tell the 1% to get lost as it is now possible for the 99% to conduct the tasks of government through the miracle of online legislatures and #GOVTbySMARTPHONE.

So go out there and do what God would do. Pull a Gandhi to replace, without bloodshed, a government based on the best confidence artist with one that is the most egalitarian, inclusive, fair, is devoid of corruption, and will serve the interests of the population. Make your own videos calling for a national conversation on the merits of community by community government by smartphone.