3 ms·

> That's why I don't really understand why there are still covid restrictions in countries that are close to full vaccination, like the UK Because it s not abo

> That's why I don't really understand why there are still covid restrictions in countries that are close to full vaccination, like the UK Because it s not about the pandemic. It s about asserting control over population and making them obey whatever govts, ongs, big pharma or big corps come up with. A kind of a mass scale social engineering project. Edit: this btw doesn t need to be some sort of a secret group project. It can rise naturally and decentralized among many connected decision groups(govts, academia, big corps, etc) which already happened.

bodge5000 5y ago
A pandemic seems like an awfully long and expensive way of doing that, especially considering they already did so before the pandemic through so many means (many of which actually make them money rather than cost them, I assume you pay taxes?) The only group who can be said to have really profited off this is pharma. Maybe they have orchestrated the whole thing, but I'd like to see some evidence first.
- whoooooo123 5y ago
  The pandemic doesn't need to have been deliberately engineered; it only needed to provide an opportunity for nefarious actors to exploit. Unless you think we're living through the only crisis in history which powerful people haven't exploited to further their existing agendas.
  - bodge5000 5y ago
    Well again that's not particularly new, even outside a crisis, that's part of every day life. Your hardly a nefarious actor if you're not exploiting anything.
- elastic_is_slow 5y ago
  > A pandemic seems like an awfully long and expensive way of doing that... Actually a pandemic is a great way of establishing control and surveillance. Read Michel Foucault's analysis of the way the plague has shaped the society and power play between decision makers and average citizens. https://foucault.info/documents/foucault.disciplineAndPunish.panOpticism/ https://foucault.info/documents/foucault.disciplineAndPunish... > The only group who can be said to have really profited off this is pharma. Really? The rich getting richer off the lockdown doesn't count? The governments getting excuses to strengthen the hold on their citizens? Two groups off the top of my head. Also don t try to find some ulterior motif for all of this(conspiracy ppl do this a lot), it can very well be done just for the sake of it.
evnc 5y ago
Why is this different from other instances of governments instituting laws or regulations for the sake of public safety, of which there are already many? Are seatbelt laws a mass experiment in social control? Are laws mandating wearing underwear in public "about asserting control over population and making them obey"?
- elastic_is_slow 5y ago
  > Are seatbelt laws a mass experiment in social control? For this, or other instances you might come up with, you had a large consensus between the rulers and the ruled. No one questioned the motif behind seatbelt wearing or other public safety measures. Do you have such a consensus for vaccine mandates, lockdowns, mask wearing or covid passports? It seems not. The only consensus you have is at the top between those who hold the power, resources and influence. When you have skeptic voices and vaccine hesitant people among medical personnel we can t really talk about a consensus. If you can't even persuade some doctor or nurse to agree with your medical decisions without using coercion what should the average joe do? What does that tell us about the motifs of those that hold the decision power?

bodge5000 5y ago

A pandemic seems like an awfully long and expensive way of doing that, especially considering they already did so before the pandemic through so many means (many of which actually make them money rather than cost them, I assume you pay taxes?) The only group who can be said to have really profited off this is pharma. Maybe they have orchestrated the whole thing, but I'd like to see some evidence first.

whoooooo123 5y ago
The pandemic doesn't need to have been deliberately engineered; it only needed to provide an opportunity for nefarious actors to exploit. Unless you think we're living through the only crisis in history which powerful people haven't exploited to further their existing agendas.
- bodge5000 5y ago
  Well again that's not particularly new, even outside a crisis, that's part of every day life. Your hardly a nefarious actor if you're not exploiting anything.
elastic_is_slow 5y ago
> A pandemic seems like an awfully long and expensive way of doing that... Actually a pandemic is a great way of establishing control and surveillance. Read Michel Foucault's analysis of the way the plague has shaped the society and power play between decision makers and average citizens. https://foucault.info/documents/foucault.disciplineAndPunish.panOpticism/ https://foucault.info/documents/foucault.disciplineAndPunish... > The only group who can be said to have really profited off this is pharma. Really? The rich getting richer off the lockdown doesn't count? The governments getting excuses to strengthen the hold on their citizens? Two groups off the top of my head. Also don t try to find some ulterior motif for all of this(conspiracy ppl do this a lot), it can very well be done just for the sake of it.

evnc 5y ago

Why is this different from other instances of governments instituting laws or regulations for the sake of public safety, of which there are already many? Are seatbelt laws a mass experiment in social control? Are laws mandating wearing underwear in public "about asserting control over population and making them obey"?

elastic_is_slow 5y ago
> Are seatbelt laws a mass experiment in social control? For this, or other instances you might come up with, you had a large consensus between the rulers and the ruled. No one questioned the motif behind seatbelt wearing or other public safety measures. Do you have such a consensus for vaccine mandates, lockdowns, mask wearing or covid passports? It seems not. The only consensus you have is at the top between those who hold the power, resources and influence. When you have skeptic voices and vaccine hesitant people among medical personnel we can t really talk about a consensus. If you can't even persuade some doctor or nurse to agree with your medical decisions without using coercion what should the average joe do? What does that tell us about the motifs of those that hold the decision power?