4 ms·

> Does anyone actually know a real "5g causes corona" person? I've seen them at marches, that's about it. The people that I know about will not express such a

> Does anyone actually know a real "5g causes corona" person? I've seen them at marches, that's about it. The people that I know about will not express such a strong opinion. But they are not sure about what to believe, and people in their circle may share many conspiracies. So, they are not strong believers but may decide to not vaccinate as they "hear things about the vaccine". > It is being used as a control mechanism I think that you are missing the degree. One thing is to create a reminder that we are in a pandemic, another it's to think that a government in the shadow is using control mechanisms to brainwash the population so they can take over the country. Both are "control mechanisms" if you want that interpretation. But, only the second one is referred in the news because it's a conspiracy theory. So, it fits with the 5G desease thinking.

helloworld11 5y ago
>I think that you are missing the degree. One thing is to create a reminder that we are in a pandemic, another it's to think that a government in the shadow is using control mechanisms to brainwash the population so they can take over the country. Then its an idiotic, bullying and frankly authoritarian "reminder" that should be thoroughly rejected as a piece of government policy. Forcing people to do something you the controller largely believe useless just to emotionally "remind them" that they should submit to a series of control measures is not something worth applauding. It's akin to a parent randomly punishing a child in minor ways for no good reason just to remind them who's in charge. That would be considered abusive. From government it's okay?
krylon 5y ago
An important part of the problem, I think, is that there are plenty of examples of large corporations putting people at risk or harming them, either knowingly or out of negligence, and then lying like a rug about it or trying to cover it up. Think of the tobacco industry denying or downplaying the risks of smoking, knowing full well about the harm it causes. Or the pharma industry pushing opioids on physicians and patients, claiming with a straight face they were not addictive. I'm too lazy right now to go looking, but I'm certain there are plenty more cases like this. Suspecting large corporations or even entire industries of putting profits above the health or lives of lots and lots of people is not really crazy. Suspecting that Covid vaccines are a vector of implanting microchips in people so they can be mind-controlled via 5g is crazy, IMHO. But the line between these is somewhat blurry. And neither corporations nor governments seem to be doing a very good job of dealing with this other than paint people who are hovering in that blurry area in the crazy corner. One may feel morally righteous in doing so, but it is very counterproductive. If we want people to come back to the "sane side", we need to convince them, not pressure or insult them.
- throwaway22032 5y ago
  Is it blurry? It seems to me like the difference comes about when you move from something which is reasonably plausible or justifiable but can be shown evidentially to be incorrect, versus something that's just well, random. "I don't trust vaccines because pharmaceutical companies have a financial incentive for me to take them/my government is forcing me/etc" are reasonable viewpoints to hold. The reasoning is based on correct information and true premises, it's sensible to be skeptical of something that suddenly comes out of nowhere and is being pushed from all angles. You can even hold that viewpoint and take the vaccine anyway because you figure, sure, they want to push them, but that doesn't mean they're not also actually useful and beneficial for the recipients. I'm struggling to explain here, but basically, the right side of the equation "X is happening" is correct, but the left side "therefore Y" is problematic. "I don't trust vaccines because they have 5g microchips in" is wrong on both sides. They don't have 5g microchips in, we can show that. Even if they had an incentive to do so, they can't. That's the line in my view, whether something is even possible.
  - krylon 5y ago
    A lot of people that go full-on cuckoo bananas conspiracy theorist start out with a realization like "big pharma is pushing opioids on the people, killing thousands, just to line their pockets", and then gradually slide towards things like "Bill Gates wants to microchip people so he can control their brains". It's not like they go from 0 to 100 in a single step. The best metaphor I can come up with is the event horizon of a black hole. To an outside observer, it's a very sharp line indeed. But to somebody falling into a black hole, Wikipedia tells me, it is impossible to tell when they cross the event horizon. If you only observe specific points, there is a clear line between sane and crazy; but if you move between these points, you probably don't perceive that line as you approach and cross it. And human beings have a strong tendency, once they accept some kind of belief, to interpret all evidence/observations so as to support that belief, even if it seems to prove the exact opposite to someone who doesn't share that belief.
    - throwaway22032 5y ago

helloworld11 5y ago

>I think that you are missing the degree. One thing is to create a reminder that we are in a pandemic, another it's to think that a government in the shadow is using control mechanisms to brainwash the population so they can take over the country. Then its an idiotic, bullying and frankly authoritarian "reminder" that should be thoroughly rejected as a piece of government policy. Forcing people to do something you the controller largely believe useless just to emotionally "remind them" that they should submit to a series of control measures is not something worth applauding. It's akin to a parent randomly punishing a child in minor ways for no good reason just to remind them who's in charge. That would be considered abusive. From government it's okay?

krylon 5y ago

An important part of the problem, I think, is that there are plenty of examples of large corporations putting people at risk or harming them, either knowingly or out of negligence, and then lying like a rug about it or trying to cover it up. Think of the tobacco industry denying or downplaying the risks of smoking, knowing full well about the harm it causes. Or the pharma industry pushing opioids on physicians and patients, claiming with a straight face they were not addictive. I'm too lazy right now to go looking, but I'm certain there are plenty more cases like this. Suspecting large corporations or even entire industries of putting profits above the health or lives of lots and lots of people is not really crazy. Suspecting that Covid vaccines are a vector of implanting microchips in people so they can be mind-controlled via 5g is crazy, IMHO. But the line between these is somewhat blurry. And neither corporations nor governments seem to be doing a very good job of dealing with this other than paint people who are hovering in that blurry area in the crazy corner. One may feel morally righteous in doing so, but it is very counterproductive. If we want people to come back to the "sane side", we need to convince them, not pressure or insult them.

throwaway22032 5y ago
Is it blurry? It seems to me like the difference comes about when you move from something which is reasonably plausible or justifiable but can be shown evidentially to be incorrect, versus something that's just well, random. "I don't trust vaccines because pharmaceutical companies have a financial incentive for me to take them/my government is forcing me/etc" are reasonable viewpoints to hold. The reasoning is based on correct information and true premises, it's sensible to be skeptical of something that suddenly comes out of nowhere and is being pushed from all angles. You can even hold that viewpoint and take the vaccine anyway because you figure, sure, they want to push them, but that doesn't mean they're not also actually useful and beneficial for the recipients. I'm struggling to explain here, but basically, the right side of the equation "X is happening" is correct, but the left side "therefore Y" is problematic. "I don't trust vaccines because they have 5g microchips in" is wrong on both sides. They don't have 5g microchips in, we can show that. Even if they had an incentive to do so, they can't. That's the line in my view, whether something is even possible.
- krylon 5y ago
  A lot of people that go full-on cuckoo bananas conspiracy theorist start out with a realization like "big pharma is pushing opioids on the people, killing thousands, just to line their pockets", and then gradually slide towards things like "Bill Gates wants to microchip people so he can control their brains". It's not like they go from 0 to 100 in a single step. The best metaphor I can come up with is the event horizon of a black hole. To an outside observer, it's a very sharp line indeed. But to somebody falling into a black hole, Wikipedia tells me, it is impossible to tell when they cross the event horizon. If you only observe specific points, there is a clear line between sane and crazy; but if you move between these points, you probably don't perceive that line as you approach and cross it. And human beings have a strong tendency, once they accept some kind of belief, to interpret all evidence/observations so as to support that belief, even if it seems to prove the exact opposite to someone who doesn't share that belief.
  - throwaway22032 5y ago