The Night?

If you want to defend a position, you don't want it to be enveloped by cover, you want clarity about what is going on around you.

Well, I want to defend against biological weapons just as much as against nuclear or chemical weapons. And are not these things cover?

• A consensus that medical research justifies the development of potentially dangerous viruses and is worth the risk of the latter's accidental release and the accompanying tendency to cover up such accidents,
  
• politicians mucking up danger assessment,
• vaccination programs. 
  

It is obvious what cover the first point provides. The cover stemming from the second point is mostly the result of diminished public trust in danger assessments making it harder to respond and masking sabotage. (If the directed are in doubt about what's going on, so soon the director will be.) And for the third point: Vaccines establish biological classes to which biological weapons can respond in different ways and if they are rushed it is easy to defend arbitrariness in their deployment and later blame different responses to biological weapons on their immaturity.

I consider it quite possible that the current situation seems harmless and well under control to the authorities, but it has actually opened the door to biological attack as wide as it can possibly be opened and I wonder what kind of a defence would be possible under the current circumstances.

Add to this that the United States are headed towards a situation in which half the country would consider a military coup no worse an attack on democracy than the last election and you can easily imagine the death of democracy.

Yet, while the night lurks in the shadows, the darkness will consume itself and will do so thoroughly.