Bastiat Crimes And Vaccine Cultists

New term for an old crime

Currently there’s no official term in law for someone who intentionally creates a problem, with the intention of selling a solution.

Some propose a ‘con’, but a con implies neither the problem is real, nor the solution. Like how car mechanics charge $1000 to ‘change’ an oil filter. Some might suggest ‘fraud’, but this is where the problem already existed, and the solution alone is fraudulent, like snake oil that repels snakes. A ‘scam’ would imply no product nor service exists at all, like the Nigerian prince and his lottery-gold.

So what to call a crime where a real problem is created, and a real solution is offered? (The solution does not necessarily need to work optimally or at all).

Enter: Bastiat Crime

Frédéric Bastiat

French economist Frédéric Bastiat was the man who inspired the ‘broken window fallacy’ in economics, a term used to denote people who believe — erroneously — that destruction stimulates economy.

In one of his arguments, he sets a hypothetical where a glazier (window-maker) profits from the destruction of a baker’s window; he points out their gain is another’s loss. Bastiat criticises the idea of burning down Paris just to generate income from building houses:

What will you say, Moniteur Industriel—what will you say, disciples of good M. F. Chamans, who has calculated with so much precision how much trade would gain by the burning of Paris, from the number of houses it would be necessary to rebuild?

Bastiat proposes the elements of ‘create a problem, sell a solution’. A type of crime. Someone who has calculated that a specific type of destruction will bring them profits. Ergo, this type of crime should be called a Bastiat crime, a form of broken window fallacy.

Bastiat Crimes Are More Common Than You Think

A wide variety of Bastiat crimes have been committed. Companies release malware and computer viruses, then sell solutions (which in turn can also cause problems), as anti-viral products or removal tools. Some release malware, then when victims ask for help, install even more malware as ‘the solution’.

Microsoft — as part of agreements with hardware manufacturers — make their software consume more system resources unnecessarily, and implement unnecessary hardware demands (like UEFI and TPM), forcing people to waste money on hardware upgrades that they in reality they do not need, usually with the overused argument of ‘security’. No examples of actual threats given.

In return, hardware manufacturers agree to always bundle Windows mandatorily with every computer — whether the customer wants it or not (an OS [Operating System] monopoly), always guaranteeing a sale of a Windows OS. Non-proprietary Linux, for contrast, happily runs on very old systems, does not ‘require’ UEFI or TPM, and supports a wide variety of hardware architectures.

Apple intentionally worsen the performance of their old phones, disable software updates, and cripple the battery life, to force people to buy ‘newer’ Apple phones (they were sued by 34 States over this Bastiat crime). There’s a term for this specific subset of behaviour — planned obsolescence — something the lightbulb industry have done for centuries. However it is something else if they’re the ones who break a previously perfectly functional device.

In planned obsolescence, they create the problem in their own product in order to sell more of their own product. In Bastiat’s analogy, it is as if the glazier had sold windows that automatically cracked after a period of time so someone bought more panes of glass. See Bastiat as the general, overarching theme, and planned obsolescence a specific subset.

Disabled DLC Is A Type Of Bastiat Crime

Not to be confused with all types of ‘DLC’ (downloadable content). Example, if you make a one-time transaction for a product you keep, that is not a Bastiat crime. It only becomes a Bastiat crime if you’ve already bought the item with the features already available, but they’ve intentionally disabled (broken) those features to force you to pay more after purchase.

Have you ever encountered a manufacturer who offers a car, but then disables aspects of the car unless you pay a subscription service?

A few examples: Mercedes plan to charge an extra $1,200 per year just to let you accelerate faster the car you physically already own and paid for, and BMW will happily switch off the physically installed heater in your car unless you pay them.

Essentially, manufacturers are disabling (breaking) functionality of the product they’re selling, in order to force you to pay more. Subscription, a type of planned obsolescence that stops working the moment you stop endlessly giving them cash.

A Bastiat crime. They’re not contributing anything new. And you can’t argue they need the money because they can put it in the price of the vehicle. Is the extra acceleration really worth an extra $1,200 per year? No. Extortion.

Parallels To The Mafia

There’s no valid argument for this. The hardware feature is already physically built into the vehicle. You’re not paying for the physical goods, or the shipping, or the physical installation, as you’ve already paid for them. You’re essentially paying them to flip a switch to ‘on’ and not turn it back to ‘off’.

The company isn’t constantly improving it over time, they’re not giving you a new engine. They’re not servicing nor repairing it. You don’t gain any asset value in exchange. You can’t sell on the feature and the value of your car does not increase. If anything, your value decreases because it has less available features compared to other cars that are ‘all-in’.

Mr Mercedes would like you to pay up or your acceleration gets it

Essentially you’re paying them to pretty-please not break your vehicle in certain, specific ways. This has parallels to the mafia who would demand ‘protection money’ from shop owners in order for the mafia goons to not break their shop.

Even if you pay the DLC protection racket money, some systems won’t let you use it anyway if you can’t connect to the internet, so they break it regardless even if you do pay. Keep paying the glazier or the window disappears and lets the cold in! Can’t call the glazier to verify? Poof, the window disappears in a puff of smoke and logic.

Bastiat crimes are everywhere. Everyone knows what they are, everyone is familiar with at least one example. It isn’t new.

Vaccine Cultists Commit Bastiat Crimes

If you recall, previously presented was a landslide of evidence that vaccine manufacturers cause a great many outbreaks themselves. Their labs leaks pathogens, of which publicly they make no pennance for.

They’ve harmed a great many — farmers forced to cull livestock due to Foot and Mouth, leaked from the Mercial vaccine lab (who also happen to sell the Foot and Mouth vaccine); the poultry industry forced to cull chickens due to the multiple H5N1 (Avian Influenza; bird flu) releases from the USDA Southeast Poultry Research Labatory (who also happen to sell the Avian Influenze vaccine); the Swine Flu releases from labs conducting vaccine trials on Swine Flu; the vaccine-derived polio outbreaks.

The type of Bastiat crime the vaccine industry are committing here are orders of magnitude worse than any other. Unlike with car subscriptions or hardware mandates trying to squeeze for extra cash, with the vaccine industry viral releases, people get physically harmed, maimed, killed and bankrupted by these viral releases into the wild.

Killing People For Profit

The vaccine cultists are so in-love with their vaccine product that any ends justifies any means, including making spreadable vaccines of which you have no say.

So what if they kill children and the elderly, ruin farmers and wipe out livestock? The cultist rationalises away their murder, ‘they deserved it, they could have chosen the vaccine’. You could have just repented and converted to their religion, regardless of how irrational it was. ‘You had a choice!’, they scream.

How many vaccine cultists have you seen who wish death, dismemberment, denial of medical treatment, for those that do not worship at the altar of the vaccine? A stance so extremist and unhinged even those who support vaccines found it uncomfortable. Your child must die at the cult of vaccine’s altar.

Killing people with deadly viruses that they themselves released is for the greater good in the deluded worldview of the vaccine cultist. There is no nuance. You either get the shot or you’re a disbeliever who should be shunned from society like an apostate.

Faux Concern From A Real Cult

It isn’t genuine charity, either. Vaccine companies hoarding billions is an acceptable thing, in their worldview. Ripping you off is required to save your life, that’s how important the vaccine is. Critics making millions from — gasp — a book sale is a giant conflict of interest. You’re only allowed to sell books if you support the cultists, otherwise it is a ‘conflict of interest’. The billions? They’ve ‘earned’ it. The millions? That’s just grift by misinformation.

And the concept they’re cultists comes from the vaccine industry itself. Even amongst those within the vaccine industry, the unfettered cult-like nature was apparent. One man was driven from his job for daring to raise the possibility of safety concerns in a shot still in development. He described the vaccine as being treated like a ‘god on an altar’, and anyone who dares questions it is accused of blasphemy.

Cultists Will Invent Imaginary Rules

Blasphemy goes by a different title now. “Misinformation”. Your words are lies and slander against the vaccine god, regardless of evidence or facts. It does not matter how many peer-reviewed studies you present — they’re the wrong type, presented in the wrong format.

One vaccine cultist demanded I only present peer-reviewed articles from just the Lancet or a ‘renowned University’ (notice they don’t specify what Universities?) and no ‘.com website’ (IE the entire internet). The Lancet is a .com site; as is Twitter itself. They will accept a .com link on a .com website despite disavowing .com websites. This demand was after they were given the .CSV list full of studies.

The vaccine cultist must be spoonfed upon their own contradictory terms, where they will invariably nitpick technicalities of their own imaginings based on the cognitive dissonance trap they have invented for themselves.

You must appease them. No effort required on their part. All other peer-review outlets are beneath the vaccine cultist, all other data formats are invalid, only they may dictate what evidence is valid. You have no say, you must jump through their hoops. Jump questioner, jump!

Religions Have Rules: Cults Don’t

Religions have rules by which you can judge conduct by. The rules are public, readable and transparent. They apply to everybody.

Cults use the thin veneer of a religious zealotry to justify their abusive practices by operating to contradictory rules that work in a manner of double-standards that aren’t transparent, don’t apply to everybody, and are thrown out the second they are inconvenient.

Criticising the vaccine with evidence: misinformation. Being paid to promote unsubstantiated claims about a medical product in order to sell it: factual reporting. Selling a medical product at extensive markup: earned. Selling a critical book that takes months to write and publish using research: selfish and greedy. Hiding information: privacy and trade secrets. Publishing truthful information: a criminal act of fraud that misleads people. Forcing a medical product on people to save lives: ethical. Questioning a product to save lives: unethical.

Rules For Thee

The cult operates by the double-standard. Only the cult members must benefit; you must not. Their rules, not yours. You must first signal you are still part of the vaccine cult by saying “I’m not an anti-vaxxer but…” before any other cultist will even possibly consider your tepid, unquestioning views.

That evidence? Hah, you just misinterpreted the word of vaccine, you’re not qualified to read the book of vaccine, only the authorised priests of vaccine may interpret it, re-read it again until Asch conformity kicks in and you agree with the appeal to authority fallacy.

You must disavow your allegience to any other thoughts or concepts. Vaccines are good. Blasphemy of the vaccine is bad. Question it and be denied access to services, put under house arrest, fined, insulted, censored, removed from your job and denied the freedom of travel.

See? You agreed with the cult of your own free will. You chose this. It was a choice. Heretic. You just imagined it was mandatory, all those fines and prison a figment of your imagination. What evidence? Look what you did, you made us punch you. We had to forcefully inject you. It was for your own good. Forcefully socially isolating you and rejecting you from our cultist social circle is for your own good.

Releasing viruses to commit massacres in order to sell more of the vaccine is acceptable in the world of the vaccine cultist. There is no red line. They can do no wrong. Even if they murder children and your family. There can be no quarter and no forgiveness with a cultist.

Help finance the Daily Beagle’s giant financial conflict of interest in protecting the public by subscribing today.

All hail the vaccine cult! Share with other vaccine cultists so they may also worship at the altar of the vaccine (and receive free complementary robes).

Or leave your thoughts of vaccine blasphemy below: