The high profile case of Novak Djokovic has been edifying for those who think for themselves and believe in the principle of non coercion.
This morning, the Australian government cancelled the tennis ace’s visa for a second time, with immigration minister Alex Hawke overturning the decision of Judge Anthony Kelly who, it should be noted, had slammed the authorities for refusing Djokovic entry, asking “what more could he have done?”.
While Hawke says the decision to cancel the visa was made “in the public interest”, it seems more like spite, a petulant act against a tennis player of international repute who dares to follow the science when it comes to natural immunity from Covid-19 after recovery.
Djokovic received the ire of the press and a large swathe of Australian and international society because he did precisely what they were unwilling to do; he stood up for himself. Like a big lurking gladiator, he is supposed to just shut up and play. He was never supposed to question those who (mistakenly) consider themselves his “intellectual betters”.
The bare facts on Djokovic, despite the concerted efforts to slur him as some sort of ignoramus are this: Djokovic was granted a visa which allows him to enter Australia and compete in the Australian Open (of which he is the reigning champion).
Djokovic tested positive for Covid and recovered, and as such benefits from natural immunity. It is reported that he therefore received an exemption from Australia’s otherwise totalitarian covid vaccination requirement. However when he got to Australia, the authorities detaimed him and threatened to deport him.
And so we have a chance to hear Djokovic give his side of events as it plays out in the courts.
The time-line of the Djokovic cases is as follows.
If all of this is accurate and Djokovic had indeed contracted Covid on December 16 –a thing which has been confirmed by Spiegel who confirmed the positive PCR after contacting the Serb testing system – then the issue that the Autralian government are contesting, a form error in Djokovic’s travel declaration, is irrelevant. Whether Djokovic received his test result on Dec 16 or 17th makes zero difference to the Australian authorities or to his Covid status. But the witch hunt is on and the press and the branch-covidian adherents are hungry for some sin to burn him for.
This stinks like a show trial. It stinks of the malicious intent of the infamous communist state torturer Beria, who famously used to say “show me the man and I’ll show you the crime”. Well Beria would say, “here is Djokovic and we will concoct a charge through trawling through every transaction of his life untill we find an error.”
Djokovic’s thought crime is that he doesn’t want a vaccine. And that some people, in the manner of fanatics, are thirsting to find some substitute crime to punish him for this and to aid their case, are pursuing him through the court of public opinion with a slur campaign.
Really the only thing that matters is that Djokovic doesn’t want a vaccine and that is his decision.
Across the political tribes (there is no discernible difference between factions that call themselves left and right now) the exercise of liberty and personal autonomy is now a no-no. What with having a near exclusive hold on the means of messaging, through the legacy media and big tech, the covid hyper cautious in the cultural elite are baffled that in this domain of sports, that they can’t get a complete control of the message. One sports star who won’t comply has an outsized reach and influence, and this drives many in the media crazy.
This is not the first sports star who has confounded the institutional interests on Covid.
When Orlando Magic MBA player, Jonathan Isaac, declined the vaccine, he was inundated with an onslaught of invective and emotional blackmail from the grossly ill-informed hacks in the corporate press. His calm and reasoned reply silenced his critics. He clearly had a better understanding of the disease, the risks, and the risks of the vaccine than any one of his critics.
Unlike his detractors, Issac also showed a mature awareness of civics, and the principles upon which the west was built.
Civic awareness and the principles of freedom is something which seemed sorely missing from Pat Spillane’s broadside attack on the Tyrone team when they played Kerry in the All-Ireland semi final. As we are all aware, the Tyrone panel had an outbreak of Covid and had to delay their date with Kerry. Spillane turned this into an attack on the unvaccinated in a “show me your papers” sort of rant. Needless to say he made a show of himself, and gave a lot of credence to Joe Brolly’s disparaging remarks on his intelligence down the years.
Another major thorn in the side of the corporate press was, and still is, the NFL’s Green Bay Packers quarterback, Aaron Rogers. Rogers also defied the Covid stassi. John Riordan of Irish Examiner wasn’t gonna back down from this fight though.
Rogers, in case you are interested, caught Covid and took monoclonal antibody treatments. This therapeutic worked a charm, which is perhaps the biggest reason the powers that be don’t want people listening to him. It might counter the “vaccines are our only hope” narrative.
In time-honoured hack fashion, Riordan starts his ‘j’acusse’ with a sob story, and we must assume that the fault for the death of all past heroes rest squarely with the unthinking non-thinking of people like Rogers. He “surpassed Irving’s heights of selfishness” says Riordan, who knows absolutely everything necessary to know about viral diseases, and can most likely predict the future.
Riordan’s impotent fury is a mix of cringe and conceit. Of course it is maddening for the institutionalised sports hacks that Rogers has answered his critics both eloquently and decisively. He is not backing down. Since then Rogers has scaled the heights again and is in the running for the NFL MVP award (Most Valued Player).
Young men pay attention to what Rogers has to say, much more than they do to journalists who preach at them, and so this drives those same journalists demented. In the world of the legacy media, sports stars are sort of pet mascots who will be allowed endorse whatever intellectual dross comes out of the left wing institutions.
If they kneel for BLM, they are to be admired for “standing up against the powerful” and for their intellectual rigour (sic) – if they push back against the might of the media institutional narratives, they are just stupid meatheads.
This caricature is far more earnest than jest. In no field is the adage, ‘Those who can do, those who can’t write about it’ more apt than in sports journalism. There is a conceit of being in the intellectual club amongst journalists. This is aggravated by a sense of insecurity – of not having what it takes to “make it”- which really leaves many writers resentful and supercilious. The intellectual field is their domain they feel, and the meat heads gym-jockeys should leave the thinking field to them.
By the way, Jonathan Isaac stands out from the crowd on many moral and intellectual levels. Hear about him here as he talks about his forthcoming book
I’m excited to share that “Why I stand” is live for preorder today! In it I share my story of what has changed my life and why i felt the need to share it before the world! Thank you to Everyone who has helped along the way! 🥲🙏🏽 Pre-order Today!!! 🙌🏾https://t.co/lXYXaS68YW pic.twitter.com/ZkjRGCYlOn
— Jonathan Judah Isaac (@JJudahIsaac) January 10, 2022