4 ms·
It's fascinating to me how deeply in denial the majority of people are; the desire to "go back to normal" despite circumstances having irrevocably changed. We
by btbuildem 3y ago
It's fascinating to me how deeply in denial the majority of people are; the desire to "go back to normal" despite circumstances having irrevocably changed.
We truly are a species abhorrent of change. What is that saying, "the definition of insanity is doing the same thing and expecting different results"? - this is where we are. It boggles my mind how people believe Covid has just gone away, when we did absolutely nothing differently to make that happen.
Earlier this year I've read "Upheaval" by Jared Diamond. One thing that stood out immediately for me was his premise of adopting selective change: (paraphrasing here) to protect what is valuable, and change what is directly implicated in the ongoing crisis. The story of Dr John Snow and the pump handle comes to mind.
From the article itself:
"Payinda said employers - including schools and hospitals - should be doing more to ensure clean air by providing CO2 monitors and adequate ventilation."
"Employers are talking about the inordinate numbers of employees that they have out sick due to repeated respiratory infection. Yet they're doing almost nothing to protect their employees from repeated respiratory infection."
- version_five 3y agoIt's funny, I think the denial is on the other side, the Stockholm syndrome hysterics that never want to let go of whatever psychological thing happened to them during covid. Yes there's a new respiratory virus, it's not a reason for us all to act crazy forever, but it's garnered this insane "following" of people who now want the world to revolve around it. Time to move on. Edit: I'm not trying to convince anybody, I know there's a group that's to far gone for that that really needs proper mental health support. My comment was really just a reaction to accusing the normals of "denial", which is a bit much.
- notacoward 3y agoWhat's really funny is that you used "Stockholm syndrome" to (not) make a point about who's able to tell friend from foe. You do know that the term is associated with fraud and sexism, right? https://cryingoutforjustice.blog/2015/06/03/the-myth-of-stockholm-syndrome-and-how-it-was-invented-to-silence-an-indignant-young-woman/ https://cryingoutforjustice.blog/2015/06/03/the-myth-of-stoc... Your characterizations of interlocutors as "hysterical" and not normal are no better. It's a level of defensiveness rarely seen in people confident of having facts on their side. GP was right to mention denial.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]