Published On: Thu, Mar 19th, 2020

Closing schools: anti-containment for economic warfare that exposes UK Government’s coronavirus “formalism”

Share This
Tags

The UK Government has announced that from Friday 20th March all state schools in the UK are to be closed until further notice. The public has been told that the measure is to contain the spread of the SARS-COV-2 coronavirus that is claimed by Government to cause Covid-19.

However, the UK Government’s action in emptying schools of children defies the meaning of containment – discharging being the opposite of containing – and exposes it to justified charges of “formalism”, or putting on an ineffective show for the sake of appearances, which is how the residents of Wuhan recently criticised the Chinese authorities in an unusual protest where they shouted out of windows from their situations of effective house arrest (please see the article Wuhan residents comment on Covid-19 coronavirus and authoritarian coping measures: “it’s all fake”).

While the Chinese Government had its own political reasons for entirely locking down particular territories where there had been growing dissent in the populace, the UK Government appears to have commenced a scheme of economic conflict upon the people of Britain. The previous article at FBEL discussed how efforts to discourage the public to go to work was sabotage and an aspect of a criminal racket, but ultimately it is very likely that Government has launched an operation to readjust the ponzi Anglo-Globalist financial system out of the City of London (and an article on this subject has already been promised).

The reason why emptying schools is detrimental to the economy should be self-evident if one understands that British society is now arranged so that state schools act as a surrogate for parents who have to go out to work to pay the bills – and most people do understand this, although they might not appreciate that the scenario where a household can’t afford to provide childcare to the offspring living in it has been deliberately engineered.

Even if they are able to lay off employees who have, because of the school closures, indicated that they need long periods of time off work, employers will no doubt be contemplating how they will fare at tribunals where they have been accused of acting unreasonably in the face of supposed national emergency. Potentially, then, in the coming future, for an indiscernible period of time, employers will have holes in their work force which they will still need to pay for. And while companies do give employees compassionate leave, or short notice holiday, they usually wouldn’t have clutches of employees claim the same time off simultaneously.

The UK Government even recognises the damage that will be done to general productivity by its action because it has made conditions to its school closure measures: the children of key workers, namely NHS staff, food delivery drivers, police officers, and care workers, will be required to keep attending school. Putting aside the notion of still-open closed schools (which makes a nonsense of the measure), what makes these parents key is that they need to be seen to be productive within the Government’s demonstration of activity in managing the so-called Covid-19 pandemic. Of course, the phrase “seen to be productive” is used because what the Government is doing is just for the theatre; the existence of a Covid-19 pandemic is highly unlikely as far as any objective evidence suggests.

New readers at FBEL coming across the last sentence in the previous paragraph might be astonished by it, and that’s why column inches are never wasted by stating the facts of the case over again: when people were dying of pneumonia in China, the so-called source of Covid-19, the illness was blamed on a coronavirus and called Novel Coronavirus-Infected Pneumonia (NCIP). The coronavirus that was suspected to be present and causing the pneumonia was eventually called SARS-COV-2, but it only remained a suspected unique causation agent for the disease. As was explained in the previous article (linked to above):

If this coronavirus has been found in the… people in the UK who have now been said to have died of Covid-19 – and this has not satisfactorily been shown to be a fact – even then it is not clear that death can actually be attributed to the disease. It is not clear how many deaths have been from other issues, with the SARS-COV-2 coronavirus being coincidentally present in the host. Moreover, and perhaps more pertinently, Covid-19 is said to be a respiratory disease, but where hospital patients die having had symptoms to suggest Covid-19 in this way, it is extremely likely that these people have in fact fallen foul of pneumonia not necessarily caused by SARS-COV-2.

This reality concerning SARS-COV-2 is perhaps confirmed by the fact that children generally do not develop Covid-19. One theory that we could postulate is that even if children do host the coronavirus, they won’t have suffered a lifetime of immune deficiency compromise, and are not at this time hospitalised with other serious illness by which they would be prone to become ill with pneumonia, aspects of pneumonia, or complications of it. In short, children generally do not die of Covid-19 because this disease is not a killer, if it exists at all; Covid-19 is only attributed to deaths by decrepitude, and done so out of malevolence.

Even so, the public have been reassured that children are asymptomatic carriers of SARS-COV-2, and this is why schools have had to be closed. To be clear, the closure of schools is said to be supposed to stop the spread of the virus through the child population and then into adults.

However, consider the following exercise that will show that emptying schools will in fact potentially increase the risk of Covid-19 in adults, and for this exercise we assume that Covid-19 is a real disease caused by SARS-COV-2.

There are 20,832 primary schools in the UK (source) – and we will limit the exercise to that type of educational establishment because the child who attends it is of an age that will definitely require supervision by an adult. The average number of children in a school is 281 (source), giving a total number of primary school children in the UK as 5,853,792. Class size average is 27.1 children per cohort (source), so to be simplistic, this means that in a school situation, in the UK there are 216,007 adults supervising the same number of cohorts, each of 21.7 children, between the hours of 9am and 3pm for 5 days a week.

Now if we stop these children going to school (and for clarity’s sake, we’ll empty the schools of the children of key workers too†), the ratio between a cohort (consisting of a dramatically reduced number of children) and an adult changes drastically. Simply put: more adults become involved.

We can allow that 60% of children will be one of a set of siblings attending the school at the same time, and for the sake of simplicity say that there are never more than two siblings in the school at the same time. Let us say, then, there will be 1,756,137 cohorts consisting of two children, and 2,341,517 cohorts of one child. That means that 4,097,654 adults will now be supervising children between the hours of 9am and 3pm for 5 days a week. That’s 19 times more adults supervising children than there would be if schools remained open.

Now consider that not all of these extra-school scenario supervising adults will be parents (because of the parents’ work commitments), but instead they will be relatives (most likely) or hired help. We have discovered that if only one nineteenth (5.2%) of these supervising adults are not also parents, then this would mean newly exposing the same number of people (who otherwise might not have daily contact with children) as there are teachers in the land. So, we’re talking about the wholesale replacement of the teacher supervisor class with other newly exposed adults when the rate of parental supervision not being available is only 5.2%.

So, now consider this: the rate of households where both parents are in full time employment is about 30% (hacked from the ONS), and with 60-odd percent of households having two cohabiting adults in them, that benchmark 5.2% figure is going to be a good deal lower than the one that should pan out. Basically, shutting the schools down will cause more exposure to children for hundreds of thousands more adults than otherwise there might have been.

Furthermore, because parents who are relying on additional supervising adults will still be going out into the world to work, they will continue to provide a risk for the child to become infected with the coronavirus, thus negating the stated intended effect of, and invalidating the very reason for school closure. Moreover, most of the additional supervising adults are going to be the elderly, and therefore people who are potentially more vulnerable to Covid-19, because the burden of taking care of children will usually fall upon grandparents.

Clearly, if the Government believed in Covid-19, it would not be closing down schools. In fact, one of the features of school is that it contains children in one place; school is intrinsically about containment similarly as a hospital intensive care unit will intrinsically (supposedly) be about containment of critically infected Covid-19 patients. The Government is in fact closing schools because to do so creates a impression of emergency, plus it is evidently intended to force a good deal of people away from the workplace to look after children. It is not about public health.

While of course the Government is indeed despicable for forcing this environment, it is the author’s hope that parents will take advantage to learn about the possibilities of home schooling whichever way they would like to organise it (either collectively with other families with one adult remaining off work to teach, or by using that additional adult supervision). This coronavirus episode may provide an experience whereafter parents will want to extract their children from state schooling, and even from the control imposed by the national curriculum – which will certainly serve UK Government right. Removing oneself and one’s family, and then one’s community from the Government’s controlling system is the ultimate way to prevent oneself falling prey to the gross abuse of power that Government is at this time perpetrating, because it will cause an offset of power, and it will challenge Government authority, and ultimately overcome it – at which point the politicians and financiers who have this month declared economic war on the nation can go to jail.

In the meantime, it becomes a patriotic duty to go to work, and to trade as one normally would, and not sit at home to let the economy atrophy. And if the Government’s emptying of the schools threatens your productivity, don’t be afraid to get the help you need from family.

 

† If we wanted to consider these, they might even be normally sized cohorts – less of them, of course – but the data is not easily available.

It's important to donate to FBEL - please see here to find out why
A PayPal account not required.
T-shirts to protest compulsory face coverings - click image