Face-mask enthusiast and British communist Professor Susan Michie has been appointed to a worryingly influential role at the World Health Organisation.

Nicknamed ‘Stalin’s nanny’ during her time at Oxford University, where she obtained a BA Honours for experimental psychology, Michie has been made the Chair of the WHO’s Behavioural Advisory Group.

Naturally, the general public – already irate about an unelected foreign bureaucracy leaning on domestic governments during the pandemic (to the ruin of civil liberty and economic prosperity) – voiced their disapproval.

This backlash washed into Michie’s social media accounts, where Michie promptly initiated a ‘mass block’ function using Twitter Block China.

‘The good news is that this is an effective way of ridding nastiness from your timeline. Download the Chrome extension, select the malicious accounts with a large number of followers, go to their list of followers and run the Block Chain – voila, they are gone in their 100s.’

Just like dissenters in Stalin’s regime.

Calling all these people ‘abusive trolls’ is a misdirection. More likely, they were ordinary people furious that a hardline communist was assuming a position of influence over global public health. Public health has always valued autonomy and individual choice – any creep toward manipulation, mandate, and political punishment for those who refuse has been met with global protests.

The public want the pandemic to be over and for their lives to return to normal. Permanent mask-wearing, as championed by Michie, is a point of hostility.

When asked how long the UK public should wear masks, Michie replied, ‘I think forever, to some extent.’

It doesn’t help that the organisations Michie is involved with champion the role of increased digitisation of public biometric data in the name of ‘health goals’ – which translates to implementing Digital Identity systems integrated with health records to provide governments with a framework for medical surveillance.

Michie’s role at the World Health Organisation centres around devising ways to ‘boost’ public compliance to WHO directives related to vaccine uptake, mask-wearing, social distancing, vaccine mandates, medical surveillance, and lockdowns. This involves a collaboration with technology, domestic policy, and environmental changes – which sounds a bit like an incestuous breeding ground for apocalypse regulation where eating bugs helps stop the next pandemic, or some nonsense.

To better understand the role of the WHO’s Behavioural Advisory Group, the following are screenshots from the 2020 report titled, Behavioural considerations for acceptance and uptake of Covid-19 vaccines: WHO Technical Advisory Group on Behavioural Insights and Sciences for Health.

Michie credentials for the role are not in question, as she has served as Professor of Health Psychology, Director of the Centre for Behaviour Change at University College London and Co-Director of the Behavioural Sciences Policy Research Unit while also being involved in the Human Behaviour Change Project and Complex Systems for Sustainability and Health.

Projects pursuing human behaviour are a little terrifying, as they encourage the hyper-digitisation of people and their biometric data then, through various Artificial Intelligence databases, seek to extract information about human behaviour and use that to adjust public behaviour – probably under the heading ‘for the greater good’, but really it’s a high tech version of a cult leader questioning a convert and then using their personal secrets to trap them. Formally, these behaviour programs were mostly used to sell products through targeted advertising which, while annoying, is not as alarming.

This is not a sci-fi future existing in the thought bubble of a random heavily medicated bureaucrat. Digital Identity is a World Economic Forum policy tabled at Davos that has since made its way into legislation in dozens of Western nations, including Australia, after the Morrison government championed it as a way to ‘protect the economy after Covid’.

Public outrage regarding Michie mainly results from her near half-century membership with the British Communist Party. Her nickname of ‘Stalin’s nanny’ is a red flag to most liberty-minded people.

For those who missed it, or have been living in the fantasy world of communist university professors, Stalin’s regime is regarded as one of the most evil, manipulative, and horrific to walk the Earth. Communism has killed more people than Mussolini’s fascism and Hitler’s national socialism combined, but you can still wear a hammer and sickle as a big shiny virtue badge.

It is astonishing that anyone would associate with communism, but the United Nations and World Health Organisation are full of proud collectivists, partly because South America, Africa, Russia, and China – where many representatives come from – contain collectivist dictatorships, several of which are recipients of Chinese investment.

Ethiopia is one of these regimes. They gave us the current WHO Director-General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus. He is a controversial figure, whose membership of the Tigray People’s Liberation Front (a communist, Marxist-Leninist party) and his eventual appointment to Minister of Health in Ethiopia and later Foreign Minister saw him serve as part of a heavily criticised regime. His election to the WHO was described as ‘nasty’ where China strongly backed his appointment and has since been accused of leaning on the WHO during the early stages of Covid when they avoided scrutiny for the origin of the pandemic.

This has led to the generalisation that the WHO is ‘China-centric’ rather than a proper independent global authority.

Why would any Western nation bow to edicts coming out of this communist marriage of convenience? How much of the ‘behavioural health advice’ issued by the WHO is about deconstructing the power of capitalist democracies under the guise of ‘public health’? A lot, it appears, given ‘the science’ changes every five minutes and health orders are, largely, irrational, unproven, and contradictory. They have, however, been successful in expanding government power, eroding citizen rights, and collapsing economies.

The concept of manipulating public behaviour is, in and of itself, sinister. Health choices should be made by individuals with clarity free from government and bureaucratic manipulation better known as ‘propaganda’. Appointing people to specialise in this role is an outrage.

Why not appoint more people to explore the growing mound of corpses piling up against governments who forced vaccines on the public under threat of job losses, being locked out of the economy, or what amounts to house arrest?

Instead of forcing compliance through behavioural schemes, why not convince the public of safety by launching investigations into widespread concerns resulting from the unnecessary deaths of young people?

After all, true science doesn’t require tricking humanity. People line up willingly for genuine innovations that make their lives better.

The Spectator Australia's Morning Double Shot delivers a hearty breakfast of news and views straight to your inbox

Weekly round up of the best Flat White blogs - delivered straight to your inbox