China locked itself down January 23rd.
I think many capitalists got word states all over the world were seriously considering locking their nations down, and that’s why the stock market started crashing before Italy, the US and so on locked themselves down, not necessarily the virus itself, but the looming reaction to it.
If government pushes the people too far, leading to civil unrest, the jail cells formerly reserved for burglars and carjackers will be filled with protestors and those resisting draconian measures like forced tests, quarantines and inoculations.
Or with people trying to resume socioeconomic normalcy without government permission.
If government locks the socioeconomy down for several months, a year or indefinitely, like many in the MSM are calling for and predicting, civil disorder will ensue, and our civilization could spiral out of control.
Thanks, yea I know it’s absurd, big government and MSM refuses to count the socioeconomic costs, either because they’re incompetent, or more likely, multiple agendas are being simultaneously pushed.
I’m not saying the extermination will happen overnight, it’s a centuries long process.
An authoritarian, oligarchic world state brings us many steps closer to achieving their goal.
Pretty sure African Americans, for whatever reasons, I’m sure it’s more than just one, are less healthy and more susceptible to viruses in general.
If the deep state is anti any race in particular, it’s anti-white, it’s demonstrated that time after time with its anti-white, open borders, pro-diversity policies in white countries, but moreover, the deep state is anti-people in general, well with the exception of the chosen people of course.
The deep state uses white countries to wage war on the 3rd world while simultaneously importing 3rd world immigrants and refugees to white countries.
There’s only one country with a right to national integrity and sovereignty, and I know you know what country it is I’m talking about.
While they speculate this virus could (key words there, speculate and could, like maybe I could become an astronaut or ultimate fighting champion), spread and kill 1% of the population, assuming their own death toll is correct, as of today you have only about a 1 in 10 000 chance of contracting Covid and dying from it, but you have about a 1 in 500 chance of dying in a vehicular accident, about a 1 in 10 chance of developing diabetes and about a 1 in 5 chance of developing heart disease, yet billions of people will inessentially (whatever that means, suddenly everyone in government and MSM knows exactly what’s essential and what isn’t, as if it’s elementary, self-evident) get behind the wheel or stuff their faces with bacon cheeseburgers, fries and a coke every other day.
Our government’s policies make no sense.
That’s a 1 in 500 chance of dying in a car accident in your lifetime. Right?
So what are the odds of contracting COVID and dying from it in a lifetime? It’s going to stay around, you will have many chances to be infected and you don’t intend to be vaccinated.
If a politician or priest tells Americans to jump, most or many Americans will tell him to fuck off.
But if a scientist gets on-air and tells Americans to jump, particularly if it’s to avert an imminent, personal danger, 99% of them will ask how high?
I notice there’s a disconnect there when it comes to science.
Very few people question it.
Yet scientists lie and cheat just like any other group of people, it’s just you rarely if ever hear about it.
I believe this may be how they’ll get people to trade all or most of their liberty for the illusion of security ultimately, this is their soft spot.
With climate change the supposed threat is decades or centuries away, and every few years they’ve got a new climate bullshit story, global cooling becomes global warming becomes climate change, but this…we’ve never seen anything quite like this before on this scale, the fear mongering is unprecedented.
The thing about new viruses tho, once they’ve spread and infected almost everyone and killed those most susceptible, those remaining will be largely immune to them, so unless this virus mutates and becomes just as deadly next year as it was this year, which is unlikely, it’ll be significantly less deadly next year.
I mean I’m not saying I know for sure what’s going to happen, of course I don’t, I’m just sharing my opinion and my reasons why.
But I’m not going to relinquish an ounce of my sovereignty just because big brother says so, they have to convince me, and at this point I haven’t seen anything compelling.
If the only way to avert those deaths is to surrender our economy and society, then yes, I’m fine with letting them die.
However, if this virus is indeed a greater threat than others, I think there’s probably better ways of dealing with it.
Most or at least a significant % of deaths occur in nursing homes.
So lock them down.
Buy protective gear for nurses to wear and meticulously sanitize everything.
They’re probably already doing that anyway to some extent, and that’s probably what’s going to keep old people from getting infected, not shutting down thousands of small businesses and laying off millions of workers.
But I’m not sure, do old people really want to live their twilight years like that?
Not being able to go out or see their families?
Is it even physically healthy for them to live like that, let alone mentally?
Most of them only have a few years or months to live.
I read a statistic from a mainstream source that said 80% of 90+ year olds recover, and that’s just confirmed cases, again, I’m sure many times more get it but are wholly or largely asymptomatic, and this virus won’t infect everyone this year.
As for old people not in nursing homes, give them the information and let them decide.
If old people lock themselves at home and their families keep distance and wear protective gear, just visit them to bring groceries until a vaccine becomes available, most or a significant % of old people could be saved that way.
But again, is that really how they want to live?
How bout we let them decide?
As for old people living on their own without family, I’m sure government could come up with something, it spends trillions on bombing the shit out of brown people in the middle east every year, how bout they spend some of that money on making sure old people living alone don’t have to go to the grocery store this year?
Hire thousands to deliver food to them in a safe and sanitary way, but this shutting down millions of jobs and small businesses?
Absolute insanity.
Lamb, when’s the last time you have been philosophically relevant? Don’t answer this, it’s rhetorical.
The death rate of this HOAX is NOT significantly higher than a regular flu season. Until you can provide data, to contrast or contradict what Gloom has already put-out, do you have a point here???
“Religion” never died, like these viruses, only updating and adapting.
The “Secularization” of Abrahamic Religion, Culture, Christianity, etc. has moved onto Science. If you are a “Scientist” then you speak the Holy Words, which none can refuse.
You can focus quarantine on the most vulnerable. REally lock them down and protect and support them. A lot of those people are not drivers of the economy, though of course some are, but the impact on the economy would be very different. Also those people are likely to be highly motivated to quarantine and welcome a real support for that - help ordering groceries, perhaps technical computer support to set up Skype and Zoom for social contact and any other practical needs beyond food.
Right now we are slowing down the spread, not necessarily restricting the spread. There’s a good chance that there will be future waves, if the lockdown is let up. If it is not let up than the effects on the economy get even larger and this will kill people. It will weaken democracy because people will have less power and less ability to get engaged. How much is very hard to estimate but everyone is choosing, via their support of this or that plan, killing people. One issue is ‘how many peole will the plan I support kill?’ but there are other important values also. If one’s plan weakens democracy this has long term effects - and, of course, deadly ones - also.
None of this is easy. But it is being presented by some experts as if the current approach is just plain obvious and anyone suggesting anything different is nuts or immoral.
Sweden has perhaps the most lax approach of any Western nation. Restrictions are mild, schools are open, people can move freely. So far. The world’s press reacted to this by calling it an experiment.
As if every other nation was not also experimenting. Nobody knows for sure what the best approach is.
there could be some population number control but i don’t see the earth’s population ever being lower than 6.5 or so billion people. and keeping populations low through preventive measures isn’t the same as extermination. there may be little local genocides here and there but i don’t think there’s a deep state wanting to exterminate vast numbers of people. if anything they want to use them and put them to work. we’ll be expanding very rapidly in the next couple hunerd years and even counting the future robots, there’ll still billions of people living and working.
it just doesn’t make sense to bother with exterminating people when you can keep them alive and make them productive instead. covert germ warfare and shit is too difficult to do… when you could just as easily manage the people and make them acquiesce to some level of control. and the earf still has plenty of space. there’s undeveloped areas all over the earf.
First of course, you avoided altogether the distinction made between being around those infected with the coronavirus and all those other folks.
As for being philosophically relevant, that depends on how you react to my main point: that for others to be philosophically or morally or politically relevant, they must think exactly like you do.
In fact, when is the last time you were ever wrong about something as important as this? From my experience, few objectivists will cite examples here. Why? Because to admit they were once wrong about something as important as this is to acknowledge that they may well be wrong this time too.
Which prompts me to note those two words that leap to mind [mine] in reacting to posts like yours: objectivist and Kid.
But: these words are no less subjectively and subjunctively rooted in dasein than your words are in regard to me.
Anyway, the arguments made by those say covid-19 is more dangerous than the yearly flu revolve mainly around this: