3 ms·

It's grotesque to lump together people with reasoned concerns about lockdowns, forced vaccines and other measures with the most extreme anti-vac conspiracy type

It's grotesque to lump together people with reasoned concerns about lockdowns, forced vaccines and other measures with the most extreme anti-vac conspiracy types who go on about 5G and microchips. This kind of smug disdain for millions of individual considerations is a kind of elitism that not only lacks sympathy for others but also has no business making binding legal decisions for whole populations. As for this idea of controlling "disinformation pipeline that motivates counterproductive behavior". What I hear is nearly Orwellian terminology there... It's based on very tenuously sustained affirmations about an information problem that magically only started being a problem under specific recent political circumstances and also tries to undermine some very important parts of how the free societies we've built over centuries work.

unclebucknasty 5y ago
>It's grotesque to lump together people with reasoned concerns I didn't lump "those people together", which is evidenced by the transitional sentence that began, "Then, there's the whole family of theories...". "Then" is used here, as in "additionally". So, no reasonable people were "smugly disdained" in the production of that comment. Secondly, I did indeed state that some of the egregious behavior I described is directly linked to this massive peddling of the idea that the government's efforts to fight the pandemic are really efforts to curb freedoms and/or harm them in some way. And to further clarify, those ideas do exist in degrees, up to and including the insane conspiracy theories at the extreme end. But, let's be clear: the very idea that what the gov't is doing to control the pandemic is really intended to harm people or confiscate their freedoms is itself a conspiracy theory. And, if it motivates effectively the same behavior, then it functions in the same manner, irrespective of what its adherents believe about 5G or vaccine microchips. So, I do think some who don't go as far as believing the extreme stuff can still be demoralized by disinfo and cultivate a distrust of gov't as a result, in much the same way as ads affect us all, even when we don't think they do. >As for this idea of controlling "disinformation pipeline that motivates counterproductive behavior". What I hear is nearly Orwellian terminology there I never wrote "controlling". That was your word. But, what I did state was that it's a problem when disinformation motivates behavior at scale, and that it's a threat to a functioning society. >very tenuously sustained affirmations about an information problem Some polls show up to 56% of Republicans believe that a theory that involves Dems eating babies and running a global pedophile ring is all or partly true. The theory involves a secret person who provides them with clues. That's 25% of the population. It's become a cult and a growing mass psychosis. So, I'm not understanding why you think the idea of addressing problems like that is "Orwellian", but the problems themselves are of little concern. I find this mass psychosis chilling beyond whatever comes after Orwellian. >that magically only started being a problem under specific recent political circumstances and also tries to undermine...free societies... Magically? I'm sorry my friend, but that reads like a conspiracy theory. The plain read is that we had a president who trafficked in lies and disinfo, was buttressed by elements who did the same, and benefitted from it. If the "magic" that you're alluding to finds no culpability there, then it's magic indeed.
unclebucknasty 5y ago
You changed the subject by dramatically accusing me of "grotesque" behavior that I didn't engage in, pivoted to a suggestion that disinformation is not a real problem, then strongly implied that the claims about disinformation are themselves part of a conspiracy to undermine our freedom. That is incredible. But, straw men aside, I'd still appreciate a reply to the core question, because I'm genuinely interested in understanding the base POV at work here... That is, there's an entire swath of people who resist even the most basic efforts to control the virus. And, these people also tend to be the very same who decry lockdowns and other "prohibitions" as an intrusion on their freedoms. So, exactly what responsibility do they have here? And, what exactly do you believe governments are justified in doing to protect the public health?

unclebucknasty 5y ago

>It's grotesque to lump together people with reasoned concerns I didn't lump "those people together", which is evidenced by the transitional sentence that began, "Then, there's the whole family of theories...". "Then" is used here, as in "additionally". So, no reasonable people were "smugly disdained" in the production of that comment. Secondly, I did indeed state that some of the egregious behavior I described is directly linked to this massive peddling of the idea that the government's efforts to fight the pandemic are really efforts to curb freedoms and/or harm them in some way. And to further clarify, those ideas do exist in degrees, up to and including the insane conspiracy theories at the extreme end. But, let's be clear: the very idea that what the gov't is doing to control the pandemic is really intended to harm people or confiscate their freedoms is itself a conspiracy theory. And, if it motivates effectively the same behavior, then it functions in the same manner, irrespective of what its adherents believe about 5G or vaccine microchips. So, I do think some who don't go as far as believing the extreme stuff can still be demoralized by disinfo and cultivate a distrust of gov't as a result, in much the same way as ads affect us all, even when we don't think they do. >As for this idea of controlling "disinformation pipeline that motivates counterproductive behavior". What I hear is nearly Orwellian terminology there I never wrote "controlling". That was your word. But, what I did state was that it's a problem when disinformation motivates behavior at scale, and that it's a threat to a functioning society. >very tenuously sustained affirmations about an information problem Some polls show up to 56% of Republicans believe that a theory that involves Dems eating babies and running a global pedophile ring is all or partly true. The theory involves a secret person who provides them with clues. That's 25% of the population. It's become a cult and a growing mass psychosis. So, I'm not understanding why you think the idea of addressing problems like that is "Orwellian", but the problems themselves are of little concern. I find this mass psychosis chilling beyond whatever comes after Orwellian. >that magically only started being a problem under specific recent political circumstances and also tries to undermine...free societies... Magically? I'm sorry my friend, but that reads like a conspiracy theory. The plain read is that we had a president who trafficked in lies and disinfo, was buttressed by elements who did the same, and benefitted from it. If the "magic" that you're alluding to finds no culpability there, then it's magic indeed.

unclebucknasty 5y ago

You changed the subject by dramatically accusing me of "grotesque" behavior that I didn't engage in, pivoted to a suggestion that disinformation is not a real problem, then strongly implied that the claims about disinformation are themselves part of a conspiracy to undermine our freedom. That is incredible. But, straw men aside, I'd still appreciate a reply to the core question, because I'm genuinely interested in understanding the base POV at work here... That is, there's an entire swath of people who resist even the most basic efforts to control the virus. And, these people also tend to be the very same who decry lockdowns and other "prohibitions" as an intrusion on their freedoms. So, exactly what responsibility do they have here? And, what exactly do you believe governments are justified in doing to protect the public health?