Just as no amount of flat temperature data would dissuade the climate cult, so no amount of flat (or even negative!) data on mask effectiveness will shake the faith of the Church of Covid. Beautiful Theories cannot be disproven by mere information.

Our pretensions to civilization have become very thin. Political violence was legitimized last year and is spreading wildly now. "Might makes right" is clearly the only "principle" behind freedom of speech. That's why Chinese Communists will never be censored by Big Tech.

When every "principle" becomes nothing but a ruthless exercise of power, it's not surprising that a growing number of people conclude they must demonstrate some sort of power in order to be taken seriously. Violence is the crudest exercise of power.

A well-run civilization makes it clear *universally* that violence is absolutely unacceptable. Giving free passes for irresponsible rhetoric and destruction to groups favored by the dominant political ideology of the State undermines that message.

We must also people peaceable means of expressing themselves and controlling their own lives, to relieve the pressures that can lead to violent outbursts and other forms of lawlessness. The less healthy discourse and freedom of action you have, the more pressure builds up.

It's dangerous when large numbers of people begin drawing the conclusion that might makes right, that laws and principles bend easily for those who have the political strength to bend them. Might makes right is the code of anarchy and barbarism, the antithesis of civilization.

Xi Jinping's speech at Davos boiled down to: The world has no choice but to do business with China, and if you want to do business with China, you need to stop criticizing our tyranny and questioning our lies about the

Xi's address to the World Economic Forum will serve as well as any other moment for historians to mark the beginning of the Authoritarian Era. He said nothing new, but he restated the narratives and demands of Chinese fascism from a post-pandemic position of aggressive strength.

For the first time, Xi spoke to a world that is beginning to accept the tenets of authoritarianism, thanks to the incredible political and economic damage from China's coronavirus. China's ideals have become as viral as Covid-19.

Thanks to the pandemic, the political elites of the world now universally see their citizens as dangerous mobs that must be tightly controlled for their own good. Most of them always thought that way, but now they can say it openly and act aggressively on their prejudices.

Xi clearly stated that China will not be contained, censured, or judged for its actions. He denounced Western ideals of human rights as "arrogance" and imperialism. After Covid and Biden's inauguration, he sees no nation with the strength or will to thwart China's ambitions.

Time once again to emphasize the differences between totalitarianism, authoritarianism, and fascism. They're often used as synonyms but they are different, although they do tend to lead to each other. Order one, and the other two are usually delivered soon enough.

Totalitarianism is best understood as the politicization of everything. Every facet of life is infused with political meaning... and subjected to political control. There is little room for privacy or individualism. Every word and deed is seen as a political action.

Totalitarianism does *not* require authoritarian government, although it usually leads to such. You can be totalitarian without having any real government power at all, enforcing your political will through mob actions and corporate power. Examples from recent history abound.

Totalitarianism is the easiest of the three deadly "isms" to slide into, because it can easily be disguised with claims of its good intentions. Totalitarians usually claim to be motivated by the Greater Good. They claim to represent the interests of sympathetic victims.

Totalitarians claim that society is unjust and must be corrected by force. Before they gain the power to become authoritarians, they often assert the right to use force outside of the law because the government is corrupt or serves the interests of their ideological enemies.

Ever since 9/11, we've been instructed that tiny minorities of extremists are solely responsible for their reprehensible actions. There was no greater sin than blaming law-abiding people who share some of their beliefs.

That's how we got the "lone wolf terrorist" cliche. A great herd of lone wolves swept across the world, each completely isolated from anything but the most direct support for their heinous deeds. "Tiny minorities of extremists" were blamed for "hijacking" the beliefs of millions.

The Western world did backflips to completely firewall the actions of terrorists from the larger bodies of people they claimed to represent. We hired a legion of consultants to show us exactly where the line between extremism and legitimate belief was drawn.

We wouldn't even name the adversaries of civilization. We declared a "global war" on their methods, to avoid criticizing their beliefs. The Obama administration launched a huge, expensive "Countering Violent Extremism" initiative that pointedly treated extremism as generic.

The greatest of pains were taken to draw very sharp and bright lines between violent extremism and even the most provocative and incendiary acts of legitimate speech and political organization. This was true of the race riots in the Obama years, as well as terrorism.

Thread on very strong inbound CA storm. A cold & clear morning will quickly give way to increasing clouds, NorCal valley rain & snow down to 1,500-2,000 ft (locally lower) later this PM. Current satellite imagery shows this strengthening system off the coast. (1/10) #CAwx

Tonight, a rapidly intensifying cold front will sweep across NorCal. This front will be unusually well defined, for a CA winter storm, and will replace an already cold airmass with...another cold airmass! (2/10) #CAwx

The cold frontal passage is expected to be quite dramatic across NorCal in the overnight hours. A convective "narrow cold frontal rainband" (NCFR) will likely develop, which could bring a period of torrential rain or snow to many areas, as well as possible lightning. (3/10) #CAwx

Extremely heavy precipitation is possible for a 30-60+ minute period when this NCFR feature moves ashore. Over an inch of rain could fall per hour in some spots. This portion of the event poses a high threat of debris flows in/near recently burned areas. (4/10) #CAwx

In addition to torrential rainfall, the cold front/NCFR will be accompanied by very strong wind gusts across much of NorCal. In fact, high-res models are suggesting potential for gusts of 60-70 mph even in lower elevation places. Widespread power outages possible. (5/10) #CAwx

The whiteness of this piece on "climate refugees" (corrected link) is deep.

The piece centers the story of Jen and Ryan Cashman, a white couple + their kids who used to live in Paradise, California.

It does include an interview with Dr. @JalonneWNewsome who explains that climate change hits folks of color harder, and they may be less able to move due to fewer economic resources + less willing to move b/c of greater ties to their communities.

After this perfunctory nod to her excellent work, then the reporter (*cough* abuser *cough*) goes on to segue with one of the biggest "yeah, buts" I've ever heard...

"If you have the luxury of choosing where to live and climate change is a factor, here's the formula..."

EU Summit just agreed a “binding EU target of a net domestic reduction of at least 55% in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030” - so UK going somewhat further at 68%...

That is in reference to 1990 carbon emissions - which is the standard point of reference

VDL trying to sound conciliatory - making point about the ratchet clause that all sides “remain free - sovereign” to do what they are want as regards matching future increases in regulations, but that both sides should retain right to adapt conditions for market entry

On fishing VDL says UK must understand legitimate expectations of EU fishing fleet based on decades and sometimes centuries of access ...

journalists at the EU summit seem more interested in asking Merkel/ VDL about Turkey than summit Brexit discussions, so far zero questions - some informational value there ...

Many wonder how epidemiology could have become so politicized. But epidemiology - like climate science (the other "mysteriously politicized" subject) has intrinsic politics: to take epidemiology seriously, you have to acknowledge that our species has a shared destiny.

1/

Much of the debate over "liberty" can be summed up as "you do you" - I'll swing my arm over here, you keep your nose over there, and so long as we both respect each others' "freedom," I won't punch you in the nose and your nose will remain unpunched.

2/

This breaks down when applied to epidemiology: "You wear your mask, I'll leave mine at home, and we'll both exercise our freedoms" is like "You swim in the no-pissing end of the pool, I'll swim down here in the pissing end, and we'll both get our way."

3/

We're in the same epidemiological pool, and the science is clear: masking's benefit is primarily in protecting others from you - your presymptomatic, asymptomatic (or symptomatic) spread of particles. Your decision not to wear a mask puts me in danger.

4/

If your worldview ascribes political outcomes to individual choices (implying that poverty or misfortune are the result of a combination of laziness and inferiority), then anything that demands a systemic view challenges its very foundations.

5/