5 ms·

There is a political element to covid that is often... ignored.

eternalban 6y ago
You win the prize for the understatement of the century. The ideological clarity of the covid regime is sublime. All sorts of debated matters are decided, by "science", and that is that. Whether by accident or design, the covid regime, the "new normal" that MSM has been educating us about from the very beginning, is a blueprint for a global authoritarian technocracy with its own internal logic, ethics, and mores.
- hootbootscoot 6y ago
  MSM... isn't that a nutritional supplement? does it aid conditions of "foaming at the mouth"? I find your usage of intellectual terms employed in a very anti-intellectual effort of a very base nature. What, pray tell, is the ideology of a virus? Yes, the scientific method is probably a more sensible means of deciding things than "whatever gets my knickers in a bundle". If you are suggesting that trained medical specialists shouldn't head pandemic intervention efforts, I respectfully and wholeheartedly disagree. Your worldview elevates "the bad guys" and denigrates "the good guys" so there's your inverted logic and morality to deal with, pity, it must have been the secret chips in your childhood vaccines...
- stallmanite 6y ago
  I share your concerns about authoritarians using this occasion to bend things in a bad direction but are you asserting that the virus is not a real thing or that some group with authoritarian aims is behind its release? Because if the virus is a real thing then surely protesting by gathering into crowds and falling victim doesn’t harm the bad guys right? Help me understand if you don’t mind, serious questions it’s hard to word things so they don’t sound incendiary to one side or the other (or both) since the issue is so politically charged.
  - SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
    I think it's quite a bit more than bending in a bad direction. Many countries are still under their emergency authoritarian restrictions - to this day, troops are patrolling the streets of Melbourne to make people stay inside.
  - eternalban 6y ago
    It's a perfectly reasonable set of questions. Please note I stress that I am commenting on the virus "regime". Is the virus real? I think we should assume it is real, regardless of the facts. Let's say it is real. Should we concern ourselves with whether it is (a) natural phenomena, or (b) man-made; and whether regardless of its provenance, the spread of the virus was due to (a) chance events, or (b) intentional release? Again, I say, to seriously answer any of these questions is an unreasonable burden. So, let's call it an "act of god". Now, we are at the point to discuss sensible response, rational response, reasonable response, to a collective health issue: a virus that has reached pandemic stage and posses certain risk probabilies across various demographics. Does the above scenario mandate that governmental norms be bent if not broken? For example, is it acceptable that from now on society will be governed by executive decrees and not legislative bodies? How long should we tolerate such encroachments on what we know to be the basis of free societies? Should not a health care matter of such grave import and impact on our lives be subject to the input of a wide range of experts in related subject matters? What "authority" has designated certain institutions, such as the Imperial College as an example, as fonts of indisputable claims regarding the gravity of the situation and required remedies? Why are dissenting experts and workers in the "frontlines" subject to media blackout, de-platforming, and loss of income? I could go on and practically write a little book here. But that should suffice as to "why" some of us are rather concerned, to say the least.
    - sterwill 6y ago
      You asked a lot of questions that seem to imply a lot of conspiracy-driven actions, but you didn't really state any definite opinions or present any evidence that supports those implications. If you're going to "write a little book here," you're going to have to say what you believe and present the evidence for why you believe it.

You win the prize for the understatement of the century. The ideological clarity of the covid regime is sublime. All sorts of debated matters are decided, by "science", and that is that. Whether by accident or design, the covid regime, the "new normal" that MSM has been educating us about from the very beginning, is a blueprint for a global authoritarian technocracy with its own internal logic, ethics, and mores.

hootbootscoot 6y ago
MSM... isn't that a nutritional supplement? does it aid conditions of "foaming at the mouth"? I find your usage of intellectual terms employed in a very anti-intellectual effort of a very base nature. What, pray tell, is the ideology of a virus? Yes, the scientific method is probably a more sensible means of deciding things than "whatever gets my knickers in a bundle". If you are suggesting that trained medical specialists shouldn't head pandemic intervention efforts, I respectfully and wholeheartedly disagree. Your worldview elevates "the bad guys" and denigrates "the good guys" so there's your inverted logic and morality to deal with, pity, it must have been the secret chips in your childhood vaccines...
stallmanite 6y ago
I share your concerns about authoritarians using this occasion to bend things in a bad direction but are you asserting that the virus is not a real thing or that some group with authoritarian aims is behind its release? Because if the virus is a real thing then surely protesting by gathering into crowds and falling victim doesn’t harm the bad guys right? Help me understand if you don’t mind, serious questions it’s hard to word things so they don’t sound incendiary to one side or the other (or both) since the issue is so politically charged.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  I think it's quite a bit more than bending in a bad direction. Many countries are still under their emergency authoritarian restrictions - to this day, troops are patrolling the streets of Melbourne to make people stay inside.
- eternalban 6y ago
  It's a perfectly reasonable set of questions. Please note I stress that I am commenting on the virus "regime". Is the virus real? I think we should assume it is real, regardless of the facts. Let's say it is real. Should we concern ourselves with whether it is (a) natural phenomena, or (b) man-made; and whether regardless of its provenance, the spread of the virus was due to (a) chance events, or (b) intentional release? Again, I say, to seriously answer any of these questions is an unreasonable burden. So, let's call it an "act of god". Now, we are at the point to discuss sensible response, rational response, reasonable response, to a collective health issue: a virus that has reached pandemic stage and posses certain risk probabilies across various demographics. Does the above scenario mandate that governmental norms be bent if not broken? For example, is it acceptable that from now on society will be governed by executive decrees and not legislative bodies? How long should we tolerate such encroachments on what we know to be the basis of free societies? Should not a health care matter of such grave import and impact on our lives be subject to the input of a wide range of experts in related subject matters? What "authority" has designated certain institutions, such as the Imperial College as an example, as fonts of indisputable claims regarding the gravity of the situation and required remedies? Why are dissenting experts and workers in the "frontlines" subject to media blackout, de-platforming, and loss of income? I could go on and practically write a little book here. But that should suffice as to "why" some of us are rather concerned, to say the least.
  - sterwill 6y ago
    You asked a lot of questions that seem to imply a lot of conspiracy-driven actions, but you didn't really state any definite opinions or present any evidence that supports those implications. If you're going to "write a little book here," you're going to have to say what you believe and present the evidence for why you believe it.