3 ms·

"but we don't know if it was deliberately targeted or not [...] They are collecting Chinese DNA so we can target people by race" He is very clearly doing the "

"but we don't know if it was deliberately targeted or not [...] They are collecting Chinese DNA so we can target people by race" He is very clearly doing the "wink to audience" dance in this paragraph. Yes, it gives him plausible deniability because he hasn't come out and explicitly said that C19 is ethnically targeted but he's following the Tucker Carlson and Glenn Beck "just asking questions and pointing things out and look, if the audience take something more away from that WINKS TO AUDIENCE what can I do?" bullshit.

lowkey 3y ago
I may be wrong here, and you are certainly entitled to your own opinion. In my mind he isn't doing a nefarious "wink to audience" or as some might say a "dog whistle." Instead he is genuinely saying that we don't know one way or the other but we should be open to the possibility of either option. One could, of course take a more cynical view and maybe that is the right course of action in a potentially adversarial situation such as this. To be fair, the same argument could be made of the US and their 46 recently acknowledged biolabs in the Ukraine alone. We have many others around the world. I'm not an expert in adversarial bio-warfare or geopolitics so I can't say for sure what the right course of action. I do however, love a statement he made in response to a question he was once asked by a reporter on how he would handle the potential of China invading Taiwan under his presidency. His response was: "Strategic Ambiguity" in other words recognize the threat, prepare for the threat, but don't show your hand too early so as to keep your opponent on it's toes. On a related note, RFK Jr. has, in my opinion, a truly novel view on how to engage with China in general. In his view, China is not interested in taking on the US in either a hot or cold war, and would prefer to compete with us on an economic rather than a military theater of engagement. In his view, and in mine, how you engage with your 'enemy' can have an enormous impact on how they choose to respond. If the US under RFK Jr. were to signal that we also have no interest in engaging militarily against China but instead that we wish to compete with them for economic dominance - well then we might just teach each other how to be good free market competitors, competing on the basis of hard work, productivity and innovation. As we look to compete with our rivals in AI, the next likely competitive threat - I would hope that this sort of framing would lend itself better to a China-US and even a global alignment on a policy framework that prevents an AI apocalypse.
- akerl_ 3y ago
  I'm pretty OK not being open to the possibility that COVID-19 was deliberately developed as a weapon against certain races, in the same way that I'm OK not being open to the possibility that the world is flat. We don't actually have to give all possible opinions even footing.
ifyoubuildit 3y ago
Can you expand on what it is you think his goal is in your scenario? Cause I can't think of one that makes any sense.
- zimpenfish 3y ago
  > Can you expand on what it is you think his goal is in your scenario? Fund raising for his vanity campaign. Attracting votes from Trump-adjacent voters who may have buyer's remorse from 2016 but still want a lunatic conspiracy candidate. The same goals as anyone spouting this kind of dog whistling nonsense.
  - lowkey 3y ago
    This is an extremely cynical take IMO. Coupled with an ad-hominem "lunatic conspiracy candidate" reference. It's a low-value comment, not worthy of HN.
  - ifyoubuildit 3y ago
    Ok so in your mind he's courting the anti-semite vote by using coded language to claim that what, the jews and chinese are in cahoots against white and black people? In an off the record discussion, why not just come out and say that if it was actually his point? He put out a public response with someone that is very pro Israel right after, which seems like it would torpedo his chances with the anti-semites. One of the thing's that's going to hurt him in the polls the most I think is actually his very pro Israel stance. It's funny to see people try to paint him as an anti semite at the same time.

lowkey 3y ago

I may be wrong here, and you are certainly entitled to your own opinion. In my mind he isn't doing a nefarious "wink to audience" or as some might say a "dog whistle." Instead he is genuinely saying that we don't know one way or the other but we should be open to the possibility of either option. One could, of course take a more cynical view and maybe that is the right course of action in a potentially adversarial situation such as this. To be fair, the same argument could be made of the US and their 46 recently acknowledged biolabs in the Ukraine alone. We have many others around the world. I'm not an expert in adversarial bio-warfare or geopolitics so I can't say for sure what the right course of action. I do however, love a statement he made in response to a question he was once asked by a reporter on how he would handle the potential of China invading Taiwan under his presidency. His response was: "Strategic Ambiguity" in other words recognize the threat, prepare for the threat, but don't show your hand too early so as to keep your opponent on it's toes. On a related note, RFK Jr. has, in my opinion, a truly novel view on how to engage with China in general. In his view, China is not interested in taking on the US in either a hot or cold war, and would prefer to compete with us on an economic rather than a military theater of engagement. In his view, and in mine, how you engage with your 'enemy' can have an enormous impact on how they choose to respond. If the US under RFK Jr. were to signal that we also have no interest in engaging militarily against China but instead that we wish to compete with them for economic dominance - well then we might just teach each other how to be good free market competitors, competing on the basis of hard work, productivity and innovation. As we look to compete with our rivals in AI, the next likely competitive threat - I would hope that this sort of framing would lend itself better to a China-US and even a global alignment on a policy framework that prevents an AI apocalypse.

akerl_ 3y ago
I'm pretty OK not being open to the possibility that COVID-19 was deliberately developed as a weapon against certain races, in the same way that I'm OK not being open to the possibility that the world is flat. We don't actually have to give all possible opinions even footing.

ifyoubuildit 3y ago

Can you expand on what it is you think his goal is in your scenario? Cause I can't think of one that makes any sense.

zimpenfish 3y ago
> Can you expand on what it is you think his goal is in your scenario? Fund raising for his vanity campaign. Attracting votes from Trump-adjacent voters who may have buyer's remorse from 2016 but still want a lunatic conspiracy candidate. The same goals as anyone spouting this kind of dog whistling nonsense.
- lowkey 3y ago
  This is an extremely cynical take IMO. Coupled with an ad-hominem "lunatic conspiracy candidate" reference. It's a low-value comment, not worthy of HN.
- ifyoubuildit 3y ago
  Ok so in your mind he's courting the anti-semite vote by using coded language to claim that what, the jews and chinese are in cahoots against white and black people? In an off the record discussion, why not just come out and say that if it was actually his point? He put out a public response with someone that is very pro Israel right after, which seems like it would torpedo his chances with the anti-semites. One of the thing's that's going to hurt him in the polls the most I think is actually his very pro Israel stance. It's funny to see people try to paint him as an anti semite at the same time.