4 ms·

Tweet: "What if governments learned from the MKUltra experiments in the 50's that trauma allows you to control people, so they purposely orchestrate disastrous

Tweet: "What if governments learned from the MKUltra experiments in the 50's that trauma allows you to control people, so they purposely orchestrate disastrous events to keep their citizens afraid + dependent on them, and that's one of the reasons that mental illness has been rising? lol" I'd say it indeed seems government amplifies/escalates disastrous event fear (e.g. covid) Why? grow their magnitude of control e.g. ease of applying authoritarianism, and to please their $ backers / lobbyists (currently pharma companies are the #1 lobbyists in DC).

specialist 5y ago
A few years before The Shock Doctrine [2007], I noticed that the worse conditions got, the better the tyrants seemed to do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine Unoriginal, I know. But at the time, I felt like I was going crazy, and appreciated the validation.
ironmagma 5y ago
Sometimes. But other times, it plays the reverse role. In the Ebola scare during Obama’s presidency, and even early in the Covid days, for example, the government downplayed the danger of the virus, saying (for Covid) handwashing is all that’s necessary and that masks are not helpful.
- AndrewBissell 5y ago
  Yes but they have since flipped to such a degree that many people overestimate their risk of hospitalization or death from infection by 10 times or more. The consistent messaging since March 2020 has been that you should be deathly afraid of Covid, no matter your age or comorbidities.
  - ironmagma 5y ago
    Who says the best outcome is when perceived risk equals actual risk? It may be better for everyone involved to overestimate the risk, same as driving a car.
    - bordercases 5y ago
      You never have access to actual risks. You can only have well made or poor risk assessments. And one risk assessment is perceived only relative to another.
    - parineum 5y ago
      "Better" does a lot of work for you there. I find being less afraid better than being more afraid as much as I find being alive better than being dead.
      - ironmagma 5y ago
        Since when is being risk-aware the same thing as being afraid? Pilots for example are quite aware of most of the risks in flying and follow an insane amount of procedure to mitigate them. But you won’t see them quivering day in and day out because of the massive amount of fear; on contrary, they are some of the best performers under pressure you will find. The notion of being afraid scarcely ever even enters their minds.
        parineum 5y ago
        The people who are quivering are the ones who have an inflated sense of the risk and never get on the plane. Taking procedures against the dangers of flying is a symptom of (rational) fear. If the risks of flying were overestimated, you might see something like half olane capacity to carry parachutes for all individuals on board and emergency escape hatches to allow in flight egress. Surely less people would die if they did that and that would be "better". Your example of pilots is a great example of my point. Pilots are likely much more informed about the actual dangers of flying and the safety precautions involved. Imagine if they overestimated the danger by 2x, 10x or 100x. Being a pilot would be much more stressful and I bet plenty would find a new job.
        ironmagma 5y ago
        > parachutes for all individuals on board Those have definitely been considered, but a plane crash happens so quickly and uncontrolled that an emergency skydiving lesson is not going to make things safer for you. You’ll almost certainly be safer in the brace position inside a metal tube that’s at least partly designed to be able to keep you safe in such a situation. I would not be so quick to assume that pilots don’t overestimate risks. You probably want them to, so they’re careful when it comes to walkarounds and inspections. It would be interesting to see a comparison of pilots’ estimated risks for all the parts of a plane breaking versus those from the actuaries, engineers, and maintenance techs.

specialist 5y ago

A few years before The Shock Doctrine [2007], I noticed that the worse conditions got, the better the tyrants seemed to do. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shock_Doctrine Unoriginal, I know. But at the time, I felt like I was going crazy, and appreciated the validation.

ironmagma 5y ago

Sometimes. But other times, it plays the reverse role. In the Ebola scare during Obama’s presidency, and even early in the Covid days, for example, the government downplayed the danger of the virus, saying (for Covid) handwashing is all that’s necessary and that masks are not helpful.

AndrewBissell 5y ago
Yes but they have since flipped to such a degree that many people overestimate their risk of hospitalization or death from infection by 10 times or more. The consistent messaging since March 2020 has been that you should be deathly afraid of Covid, no matter your age or comorbidities.
- ironmagma 5y ago
  Who says the best outcome is when perceived risk equals actual risk? It may be better for everyone involved to overestimate the risk, same as driving a car.
  - bordercases 5y ago
    You never have access to actual risks. You can only have well made or poor risk assessments. And one risk assessment is perceived only relative to another.
  - parineum 5y ago
    "Better" does a lot of work for you there. I find being less afraid better than being more afraid as much as I find being alive better than being dead.
    - ironmagma 5y ago
      Since when is being risk-aware the same thing as being afraid? Pilots for example are quite aware of most of the risks in flying and follow an insane amount of procedure to mitigate them. But you won’t see them quivering day in and day out because of the massive amount of fear; on contrary, they are some of the best performers under pressure you will find. The notion of being afraid scarcely ever even enters their minds.
      - parineum 5y ago
        The people who are quivering are the ones who have an inflated sense of the risk and never get on the plane. Taking procedures against the dangers of flying is a symptom of (rational) fear. If the risks of flying were overestimated, you might see something like half olane capacity to carry parachutes for all individuals on board and emergency escape hatches to allow in flight egress. Surely less people would die if they did that and that would be "better". Your example of pilots is a great example of my point. Pilots are likely much more informed about the actual dangers of flying and the safety precautions involved. Imagine if they overestimated the danger by 2x, 10x or 100x. Being a pilot would be much more stressful and I bet plenty would find a new job.
        ironmagma 5y ago
        > parachutes for all individuals on board Those have definitely been considered, but a plane crash happens so quickly and uncontrolled that an emergency skydiving lesson is not going to make things safer for you. You’ll almost certainly be safer in the brace position inside a metal tube that’s at least partly designed to be able to keep you safe in such a situation. I would not be so quick to assume that pilots don’t overestimate risks. You probably want them to, so they’re careful when it comes to walkarounds and inspections. It would be interesting to see a comparison of pilots’ estimated risks for all the parts of a plane breaking versus those from the actuaries, engineers, and maintenance techs.