XXXIVwin
Hall of Fame
- Joined
- Jun 1, 2015
- Messages
- 4,951
Mac, I really hope you reconsider your position. I don't want to take your words out of context, but I felt alarmed by the things you said that I highlighted in bold above.
While there's no doubt that you are sincere, I think you underestimate the ability of political organizations to manipulate data, twist information, create propaganda, and misuse "science" to achieve power and control over national and even world populations. The rise of the National Socialist (aka NAZI) party in the 30's is sadly not our only example but it's our best example of how this happens, and how easily vast populations of well-educated people can be led to hand more & more power ("freedums') to their central governments until it's too late for "them" (common people) to do anything about it short of civil unrest & revolution. Centralizing power seems like a "smart" idea, and in many ways, communist (one-party) countries are able to "mandate" (interesting word, rooted in the ancient Chinese Mandarin government) quick actions and rapidly effect and enforce policies to control outbreaks, but the price of that level of national control is things like Tiananmen Square.
I think that the rise of the NaZi party tempted many world governments to follow their template to achieve more "efficient" control over their constituents. Their ability to manipulate the well-educated people of Germany into happily ushering them in & handing over all their freedoms was legendary. Mao used the same tactics, as well as Lenin, manipulating their young & educated, beginning with insidious education systems, to gain more & more control over universities, the press, national media, "grass roots" organizations of every kind, until one day, their entire country becomes an echo chamber populated by sycophants. And they sound "smart", they are incredibly powerful orators and exude intelligence, and everything they say seems to be "new", but it's really old (c.f. Machiavelli).
For the NaZi's, it was the Jews -- alarming and misleading their "smart" people into making foolish decisions, such as nationalizing industries, abdicating gun rights, and tracking certain demographics (Jews). For the Maoists, it was anyone over 30. For the Leninists, it was the Bourgeois & the wicked "witch" of the West (riffing on Russian childhood fears of Baba Yaga, just realized that, wow that was pretty smart). And, for us today, the popular "otherization" is anyone "clinging to their Bibles and their guns", which has now expanded to include "anti-vaxxers" during our current situation. Anyone questioning the agenda put forth by "science" (which tells us that African races are "inferior" according to such wonderful eugenicists as Darwin, Hitler and Margaret Sanger) and echoed endlessly by the national media must believe in "idiocracy", as if we'd want our national leaders to be idiots.
So, my question for you Mac, is: if it weren't for your kids / grandkids, exactly how far would you go? Which of your "freedums" guaranteed by your Constitution are you willing to "suspend" for the sake of a national pandemic response? And make no mistake -- power NEVER cedes itself. Their mandatory tracking apps and mandatory curfews and mandatory economic controls over private industries will NOT just go away, they WILL become permanent. Because, handing control over your private life & work is "smart", isn't it? Won't we live safer lives? But what's the cost to YOU?? and what WILL be the cost to those kids / grandkids of yours?
Thanos didn't go far enough? he just wanted to reduce the galactic population to "sustainable" levels, echoing Malthus. Why not do it in a "smart" way? we don't have to have a "Modest Proposal" type solution, we'll just euthanize those who are a drag on the State, such as the elderly, the crippled, the mentally incompetent, and the racially "inferior". Sound like a crazy consipracy theory? surely this couldn't happen in our modern, scientifically advanced world, right? it happened in the 30's, to a well-educated German population, and it can very, very easily happen today. All it takes are teaching our kids math problems like "how much would it save the State yearly if 30,000 deaf/dumb/blind citizens were euthanized if they cost 9,000 / year?" (a real math problem in the Nazi controlled state education system)
Your post is proof that it's already working. Many Americans are screaming for the federal government to have a "national response", in the name of "science". Case in point: the recent media articles about the new "whistleblower" scientist, Dr. Bright, who claimed he was canned because he wanted our government to have "science" based response. Digging just a bit into the article, he said such "science" based recommendations he made that he was ostensibly fired for included responding to the pandemic on a "national" level. NO science was put forth in the article; in fact, his recommendations weren't scientific, they were POLITICAL. Honestly, if the response works, what difference does it make if it's coordinated by FEMA or SEMA's??
Apparently, that difference is EVERYTHING. We've already seen it during Katrina, when political grandstanding by Louisiana state officials killed people -- buses sat there in parking lots around Baton Rouge because they first demanded assurances that FEMA would pay the costs. Buses that could have been mobilized, and were there for that very purpose, instead, sat there. But that's Louisiana, right? surely this wouldn't happen today, right? then why did Gov.'s Brown & Newsome systematically dismantle pandemic response programs & liquidate equipment (including entire field hospitals ready to go & ready to be mobilized) that Gov. Schwarzenegger built up? maybe, because it implies that the state of CA would be responsible for it's pandemic response, instead of the federal government? have you considered that possibly Trump thought he could reorganize federal pandemic programs because he thought it would be redundant, assuming states like CA and NY still had the pandemic equipment & programs they built under W??
It's obvious that there is some organization to the national media and democratic party that is pushing for more & more federal control until we resemble China. Disaster responses MUST be national. Pandemic responses MUST be national. Vaccination programs MUST be national, and MUST be carried out by multi-billion pharma corporations, many of whom have DEEP political ties. They can't simply allow common people to govern themselves, or determine our own heath care, because we're too stupid. Experts MUST control our lives, our decisions, and our work. It's "smarter", it's more efficient.... but in the end, what's the result? what's the goal? what's the dream? certainly not an American dream. It's a Soviet dream. It's a Eugenicist's dream. It's a National Socialist's dream.
Keep going in the direction you're headed, Mac... keep panicking, keep screaming for your rights to be sold for a proverbial bowl of soup, and you WILL get West Germany. Soviet Russia. Starvation. Killing Fields. Cuba. Venezuela. A Gray, Red world. We've seen the results over & over, and still we're no "smarter", we keep making the same, foolish decisions people have been making for millennia.
And now, for the tin-foil-hat portion of the debate...
Your evidence that we are on the slippery slope toward policies of euthanasia? Many Americans are screaming for the federal government to have a "national response", in the name of "science". Oh horrors!
And what's up with your continued use of quotation marks around the word "science?" Science is science, it's not "science." Oh and by the way, you lump together Hitler and Darwin as both being "eugenicists"? Gimme a break. Darwin died before the term "eugenics" was even invented.
There are way too many wild inaccuracies and ridiculous leaps of logic in your posts to possibly confront, so I'll settle on one. You wrote, "Dr. Bright claimed he was fired for scientific reasons. This was splashed across all major media outlets. However, his recommendations had nothing to do with science. He gave political recommendations. Therefore, he LIED."
Here is a verbatim transcript of what Dr. Bright said: "I believe this transfer was in response to my insistence that the government invest the billions of dollars allocated by Congress to address the Covid-19 pandemic into safe and scientifically vetted solutions, and not in drugs, vaccines and other technologies that lack scientific merit." Dr. Bright was advocating for one main point: only if a drug has undergone rigorous testing, (involving thousands of people in double-blind studies with and without placebo), THEN it should be made available for widespread use, but not before. There it is again-- science! Oh horrors!
You also wrote, Anyone questioning the agenda put forth by "science" ... and echoed endlessly by the national media must believe in "idiocracy", as if we'd want our national leaders to be idiots. Well, guess what, it's too late. The profound mistrust of science by our national leadership has already led to tens of thousands of unnecessary deaths AND prolonged economic misery. Which country is doing a better job containing the coronavirus-- South Korea or the USA?
But hey don't worry, if you mistrust "science," there are other possibilities. Since Lysol kills the virus, maybe we should consider what happens if it was ingested? Or maybe people can be "injected" with sunlight?
Idiocracy indeed.