As we career headlong into the insanity of mandatory vaccination and compulsory covid certification, it is as well to ask, who is behind all this madness? The easy answer is that it is the politicians, but that is the wrong answer. The politicians certainly play a large part, in implementing the policies, but the driving forces behind these policies are medical. It is the getting together of the medical profession and the government in a marriage made in hell that brings forth into this world the extreme policies of forced vaccination and covid apartheid, underpinned by obligatory state registers, under the banner of covid security. It is as well to remember that there is nothing new under the sun, and humanity has been here before. The last time something similar happened on such a scale was not quite a century ago, in one of the most scientifically and culturally advanced countries in Europe. The time was the nineteen thirties, the place was Germany, and at that marriage made in hell, the banner over the altar read not covid security, but racial hygiene.

It is tempting to dispose of the Nazi doctors as a freak show of minority fanatics who gained temporary largesse during the rise of German National Socialism, unrepresentative of the ordinary German doctor, or indeed other doctors elsewhere or at other times; an aberrance formed in the crucible of Nazidom. But a body of historical research, much of it published in the nineteen eighties, tells us the reality was very different. Far from having Rassenhygiene forced upon them by the Nazis, the German medical profession had long held dreams of forcing racial hygiene on the German people on an industrial scale. By the late nineteenth century, fears were afoot among the profession of a degeneration in German stock caused overbreeding of inferiors. These notions evolved over time into rassenhygiene, or racial hygiene, as a complement to personal hygiene. Just as the individual was exhorted and expected to keep him or herself clean, so too did the German doctors of the early twentieth century see it as their job to keep the collective stock of German people clean, and free from impurity. The profession with its devotion to racial hygiene was ready to start flirting with the Nazis long before the Nazis developed their own versions of racial cleansing; and it was only a matter of time before the two converged and set up a union.

As indeed they did. As Nazi ideology became ever more rooted in principles of biological purity and natural hygiene — picture the blonde hausfrau surrounded by her radiant children — so too did Nazi ways with ‘applied biology’ appeal to doctors. In 1929, four years before Hitler came to power, forty four doctors came together to form the National Socialist Physicians’ League, which became part of the Nazi party, and was run on Nazi Führerprinzip lines, to coordinate Nazi medical policy. Ten years later, almost half, 43-44%, or around 40,000 or more (estimates vary) of all German doctors had joined the League — and so, in effect the Nazi Party. The enthusiasm for all things Nazi didn’t stop there. Over a quarter, 26%, of all male doctors joined the SA (the brownshirts), and 7% of all male doctors became members of the SS. The ultimate source for these staggeringly high percentages is a paper by Michael Kater published in 1979 (in German, see page 610); a summary table published in 1989 can be viewed here. The German medical profession embraced Nazidom with far greater zeal than any other comparable profession.          

The intermarriage of the German medical profession’s rassenhygiene and the Nazi’s ‘applied biology’ was fertile ground for the growth of the obscene policies and programs that followed. First came the 1933 Law for the Prevention of Offspring with Hereditary Diseases that permitted  — note permitted, not ordered, meaning the doctors acted voluntarily — the sterilization of anyone suffering from ‘hereditarily determined’ illnesses, including congenital mental deficiency, schizophrenia, manic-depression, hereditary forms of epilepsy, blindness, deafness and serious physical deformity, Huntington’s chorea and chronic alcoholism. To achieve this, the state, with the willing aid of the medical profession, set up compulsory registers for all genetic defectives, while the doctors devised ever more efficient, and barbaric, ways of achieving mass sterilisations.

At the same time, a fundamental redefinition of the role of a doctor took place. The old notion that the doctor cared for his or her patients was replaced with idea that the doctor’s proper role was care for the health of the Volk, or people, or, in the Nazi context, the Aryan race. “The physician understands that a higher task awaits him than the care of the individual human being who has fallen ill, namely, the care of the future of his people,” wrote an influential advocate of the New Order in 1927. A later historian is said to have commented that Nazi doctors believed that “the primary concern of physicians should be the healthy people who [have] the most to contribute to the Volk, and not the care of the sick, the weakly, and the useless who are only preserved in an artificial world, such as the artificial world of the mental hospital”.

The same ideals were advanced Otmar Verschuer, a leading Nazi and geneticist who worked with Mengele, in 1933. Recognising the poverty of individualism as a basis for medical practice; Verschuer declared that a patient was no longer to be treated as an individual, but only as “one part of a much larger whole or unity: his family, his race, his Volk”. Embodied in these principles were the idea of the Volk, or people, as the entity, an organic sum greater than its individual parts, parts that could be diseased and undesirable, and necessitate removal. The German doctors who practised Nazi medicine — the sterilisations, the Aktion T4 programme, and ultimately the Final Solution — deluded themselves that they were practising good medicine, in the interests of the Volk, and of the public health, a delusion many hung on to, even in the face of the Nuremberg trials.

As we in Britain career headlong into the insanity of mandatory vaccination and compulsory covid certification, it is as well to ask, who is behind all this madness? The politicians certainly play a large part, but, as they so relentlessly tell us, they are guided by the science, and that means medicine. As the clamour rises for individuals  to get vaccinated for the benefit of all, do we not hear echoes of the Nazi medical ideal of caring not for the individual, but for the Volk? It has happened before, and not just in Nazi Germany. Perhaps one of the most chilling expositions of the primacy of the Volk comes not from a doctor, or even a politician, but an American lawyer. Upholding the legality in 1927 of forced sterilisation of the feeble-minded in the state of Virginia, Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes famously declared that ‘Three generations of imbeciles are enough’. Chilling enough on its own, but to get the full blast of contemporary chill, we need the fuller quote (emphasis added):

“It is better for all the world, if instead of waiting to execute degenerate offspring for crime, or to let them starve for their imbecility, society can prevent those who are manifestly unfit from continuing their kind. The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover cutting the Fallopian tubes. Three generations of imbeciles are enough.”

These words may be the words of a lawyer, but it is not lawyers, or even politicians, who administer compulsory vaccinations, or cut Fallopian tubes without consent. It is instead doctors, who have entered a marriage made in hell.


  1. Hippocentaurus Reply

    You are right to flag up the unpleasantly authoritarian streak in Public Health (the Prussian state’s version was termed ‘The Medical Police’) but, although not letting doctors off the hook, the current culture in British Public Health partly reflects it being taken over by social scientists/behaviourists. The only thing these so-called experts have to offer is advice on methods of controlling the behaviour of the population and the politics of many of them makes them particularly eager to do this.
    There is though a fundamental difference between SAGE and the Rassenhygienists. SAGE have not advocated policies that would eliminate the ‘unfit’ but have actually gone to the other extreme. The interests of children, the fit and those of reproductive age have been sacrificed to the alleged interests of the of the elderly, sick and disabled.

  2. dearieme Reply

    Sometimes I think that the closest connection of medicine to science is their common tendency to become corrupted.

    The Covid police aren’t different in style from the Global Warming police and other eco-fascists.

    • Tom Welsh Reply

      Or maybe their strong desire to believe themselves superior, elites set apart from the foolish masses in need of “guidance”.

  3. Annie+Davenport+Turner Reply

    Excellent history lesson, Dr No, and fascinating. Plus, of course, when it comes to Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes, whose full quotation I’d never seen, it can only be a ?.

    The only thing is, I’ve yet to hear of anyone receiving their gene-therapy from a doctor; ‘have-a-stab-at-its’ in car parks, bored nurses fed up with ‘the fainters’, and anyone with an hour to spare, yes, but a doctor in their surgery, no. Along with the baffling stories of those dishing these things out ‘with full consent’ (a blank info sheet, not shown or given anyway) not having patient notes anywhere in sight (so not knowing about any contraindications), and then the info about the various jabs (because who cares who had which, when, or in what order; are we bovvered..) not going into the recipient’s notes. Medicine? I don’t think so. Big greed, yes, and possible – I’m not dwelling on it, yet – removal of ‘the useless eaters’, maybe.

    • Tish Farrell Reply

      I’d been thinking about this too, Annie. In most cases it seems the interventions are not being delivered by people’s own practitioners, so yet another line of accountability is broken. As you suggest too, the chance for properly informed consent or discussion about contra-indications is also lost. And then what happens if there are later medical events which may or may not be related to the jabs? At yesterday’s Question Everything on-line summit reviewing the effects of lockdowns, a member of the audience raised the issue of people with side effects receiving no support or interest in the matter from their own doctors. And now on top of this I see there is a big campaign to give everyone flu shots. And no one to be held accountable when some suffer adverse reactions or worse?

    • dr-no Reply

      Annie/Tish – the jabs can be given certain ‘registered healthcare practitioners’ under a so-called Patient Group Directive eg this one for the Pfizer vaccine*. Anecdotal evidence strongly suggests that the vast majority of people do not give informed consent, because they are not informed sufficiently of the risks and benefits. And yes, this way of ‘prescribing’ certainly fuzzes up lines of accountability and responsibility.

      * There is also a ‘National Protocol’ – see here.

  4. James Robinson Reply

    Interesting read Dr No.

    The potency of power is likely to be very difficult for the controlling medics to give up. It has also seemingly hampered their abilities to make any rational risk / benefit analysis and judgement.

    But much of their influence would be very quickly made impotent if they did not have the backing of the media. Turn the TV off, put your app riddled phone down, inc the ‘pingdemic’ nonsense and give up the obsession! Balanced, rational reasoning could then make make way and setup much needed ‘divorce’ proceedings.

  5. Helen McArdle Reply

    Dr No, I also see the parallels and it weighs heavily on my mind.

    In a week where 88% of the UK adult population has received at least one vaccine dose and 68% are double vaccinated, MPs in England have just approved compulsory vaccination for care home staff, despite no impact assessment. Will more care home residents now die as a result of the foreseeable worsening staffing crisis over the winter? Who knows. And in another U-turn, the UK government is now recommending ‘higher risk’ venues use the NHS Covid Pass as a condition of entry.

    Over the water, Macron has announced that all French health workers face mandatory Covid vaccination and vaccine passports will be required in restaurants, shopping malls, hospitals (?!) and on transport, cutting off unvaccinated French people from their daily lives. To get a vaccine passport you have to be fully vaccinated, have a fresh negative test (which will no longer be free) or have recently recovered from the virus.

    Boris is now self-isolating following contact with a double-vaccinated minimally symptomatic PCR positive colleague, despite the PM apparently having already had severe Covid-19 and also being double-vaccinated, testing negative and being asymptomatic.

    We now know that double vaccinated people can both acquire and transmit infection, so a vaccine pass is not proof of ‘safety’.

    Instead of addressing the question of why only 20-50% of SYMPTOMATIC infected people self-isolated in the first and second waves, we are obsessed with the risk that asymptomatic and pre-symptomatic infected people may pose. When it comes to ASYMPTOMATIC transmission, the ABSOLUTE difference between the risk of acquiring infection from an asymptomatic PCR positive unvaccinated person and the risk from an asymptomatic PCR positive vaccinated person is likely to be miniscule, especially when the exposed person is double-vaccinated. So why push for mandatory vaccination?

    None of this makes sense but it no longer matters, because The Science has long since segued into The Ideology. We are sleepwalking into a biofascist security state; one where we accept, and some even embrace, the prospect of immunological apartheid.

    Maybe understanding history and human nature will help us recognise when we are on a particular path that may end very badly. In Becoming Evil (How Ordinary People Commit Genocide and Mass Killing), James Waller presents a model of Extraordinary Human Evil. It is worth a read. The current recommendations, when followed to their logical conclusion, predict the Social Death of the Unvaccinated. We already have Us-Them categorisations; the Out-Group being the Anti-Vaxxer, the Covidiot, the Immunologically ‘other’.

    On 13th July the UK Govt advised ‘vulnerable people’ to avoid unvaccinated people.

    Dehumanization is ‘most likely when the target group can be readily identified as a separate category of people belonging to a distinct racial, ethnic, religious or political group that the perpetrators regard as inferior or threatening. Dehumanisation includes dual deprivations. The first is depriving victims of their identity by defining them entirely by a category to which they belong. The second deprivation is excluding this category from the community of the human family.’

    The third element required for Social Death is Blaming the Victims. The Unvaccinated have earned their suffering by their actions or character. Not only that, but now we have the government, endorsed by the usual media medics, holding the Unvaccinated responsible for ongoing restrictions. The Vaccinated are congratulated, “You are the reason we are able to cautiously ease restrictions next week, and return closer towards normal life. Now let’s finish the job. If you’re over 18, book both your jabs today.”

    It is not now considered acceptable for a person to be allowed to make an individual risk-benefit assessment in their decision whether or not to take the vaccine. It is no small irony that many of the vocal proponents for mandatory and coerced vaccination, whilst proselytising about the greater good, have a much clearer personal benefit>risk equation.

    Things are set to get ugly with the othering of the Unvaccinated. In the context of history, the current direction of travel gives me sleepless nights. But we may still have time, and don’t have to go there if we choose not to. As a start we can boycott all venues that requires the NHS Vaccine Pass as a condition of entry.

    • Hippocentaurus Reply

      A very sound post. It gives me sleepless nights too. The worst aspect is that a free press that should be our protection against this is the major cheerleader.

    • dr-no Reply

      Helen – thank you for such an outstanding comment. You have nailed the invidious evil of us and them thinking, the engine of the Third Reich, communism and apartheid, and how so many among us have fallen into the trap, some unwittingly, but all too many with raging enthusiasm. One only has to view #freedumbday on twitter to see the rancour and aggression of the righteous. Dark and ugly times lie ahead.

      Hippocentaurus – the mainstream media have behaved disgracefully throughout, but that’s what happens in authoritarian states. What is extraordinary is that they have willed themselves into becoming such ardent propagandists. Whatever happened to independent thought? Dr No is reminded of the 2014 quote from the State Council of the People’s Republic of China that opens Covid Passports and the Model Individual:

      “Model individuals will be commended in accordance with regulations, and extensive publicity will be conducted through the news media to create a trustworthy and glorious public opinion atmosphere.”

      As Dr No types this, the Today Programme is busy creating a trustworthy and glorious public opinion atmosphere…

  6. Annie+Davenport+Turner Reply

    Although I’m sure this man was/is a wow on stage when responding to an audience, he might well a woffler be in this ‘just talking to a zoom screen’ rather clunky video. But I think he makes some incredibly salient points as to why so many appear to be hypnotised; they are. And this is how. (Maybe the fact no one has ever managed to hypnotise me says something good! How about anyone else here?)

  7. dearieme Reply

    “Maybe the fact no one has ever managed to hypnotise me says something good! How about anyone else here?”

    No one has dared to try, Annie. Except the mass media, obvs.

  8. Helen McArdle Reply

    Many people in surgery are reporting anxiety, depression and a sense of hopelessness. A common theme is that they have no idea why. Maybe that hypnotist is on to something Annie. I did once get hypnotised, but I wanted to be.

    FreedumbDay: Good grief. It is reminiscent of that ‘Blood on Your Hands’ interview back in the winter. The one where those who could not tolerate face coverings were told they have blood on their hands; those same face coverings that Colin Axon now tells us are nothing more than comfort blankets.

    Is this hatred rooted in fear? Who is it directed at? The Govt? The Lockdown Skeptics? The Unmasked? The Unvaccinated? Some imagined foe? The Venn Diagram of Other is getting a bit messy. Can one be Unvaccinated and still have a Blue Heart?

    When did stigma and shame and othering ever further the cause of Public Health? I don’t remember that working out too well in the 80s. Why would someone who thinks they might be accused of some misdemeanour or moral failure choose to take a test and risk the fury and judgement of society and these medics? Would those people also be less likely to seek help if unwell? More likely to put their symptoms down to ‘The Cold’.

    I’d be quite scared waking up in hospital and recognising the eyes of Dr Contempt from freedumbday.

  9. steve Reply

    Below is a graphic, which is based on what American psychologists learned about the communist strategy to gain compliance of captured American service personnel during the Korean War.

    The underlying structure creates the behaviour one wants. By focusing on the underlying structure, it’s pretty easy for rational people to make what seem like rational decisions. They will never know, they have been manipulated. Marketers have been doing it for decades.

    The column on the left-hand side is the Chart of Coercion, the column on the right-hand side are based Covid-19 policy strategies. This is based on the USA so won’t exactly map to UK policies, but I think you will see they are very close.

    Communist Coercion and COVID-19

    I guess the question remains, is the coercion based on a belief it’s for the public good, or is it based on the power of governments to exert control for controls sake?

    I’m finding it increasingly difficult to observe the system and see what most don’t see.

    Health, Education, the Money System are all bound up with underlying structures which drive behaviour and gets us nowhere!


  10. dr-no Reply

    Interesting comments, thanks. Psyops and all that: on one level, it all comes under the broad umbrella — or should that be in the stinking slop bucket — of propaganda, with the details in the methods of how the propaganda is achieved. Propaganda was central to Nazis methods, and it is all part of the marriage made in hell, and the end result is the same, terrified rabbits caught in the glare of the headlights. The only difference is the rabbits will get run over if they doesn’t wake up, where as those in thrall to the fear of covid have taught themselves, or rather been taught, to fear fear itself. It is the most dangerous of trances, because it is, or can easily be made to be, self-perpetuating. Pinging elastic bands on the wrist doesn’t quite break this kind of trance.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *