It looks like they’re rolling out the next phase of their long term plan.
They’ll try to squeeze in as many agendas as they think they can get away with, or have to, if the economy was going to implode anyway; permanent martial law, population reduction by 5G and mandatory vax, a cashless society…
They still have to sell it tho, it has to look good or necessary to the public.
They’ll sell it as humanitarianism, alleviating poverty, keeping us safe from climate change, viruses, drug dealers, terrorists, heteronormativity, the patriarchy and white supremacy.
In exchange they’ll want more control over our bodies, minds, economy and society.
The bureaucrats, financiers, philanthropists, doctors, economists, psychiatrists, climate and social scientists are looking out for us, they’ve got our back.
What’s left of our democracy and rights will be incrementally traded in for oligarchy and privileges.
Yea, I don’t think this is going away.
Regardless of whether the Covid Crisis is a hoax, exaggerated or the truth, there’ll be another virus in a few months or years, and another virus.
It’s like the war on drugs or the war on terror, they empower the deep state, so why would they want them to end?
If the enemy, real or imagined, is defeated, then the suspencion of certain rights and freedoms of ours is no longer warranted.
So the enemy can’t be defeated, and if it is, they need a new one.
After the fall of the soviet union it became necessary to manufacture the jihadist.
Is the NWO right around the corner?
Or is this just the next increment, one of many more to come still before the NWO has been fully realized?
Maybe Michael Jackson was wrong and they do really care about us drums.
It’s time to stop trusting doctors, psychiatrists and scientists.
They’re no better than lawyers, politicians and used car salesmen.
[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eU32Ojf8-rA[/youtube]
Yeah, trust only the instant experts of the internet.
Trust no one.
That’s impossible.
How about ‘have some healthy skepticism about everyone’?
Sure. But I’m not seeing that.
I’m mostly seeing a rejection of one group and an embrace of another. That’s unequal skepticism.
The rejected “mass media” is simply replaced by YouTube videos and other internet sources. “YouTube doctors” are trusted and “mass media doctors” are mistrusted. The same goes for scientists.
I’m also seeing the idea that experts, doctors, scientists don’t have any more knowledge and understanding than the “ordinary man in the street”. That’s too much skepticism. 
A problem with skepticism is ignorance. How can you evaluate experts, doctors or scientists unless you have a significant knowledge in their area of expertise? You really can’t. You’re forced to rely on agreement between experts, on governing bodies, educational credentials.
I care about my life, health and safety far more than any doctor or scientist does.
Parents care about their children’s lives, health and safety far more than doctors and scientists do.
The public cares about itself far more than big brother, big business and big pharma do.
We’re all experts in our own bodies, minds and lives by virtue of being ourselves.
We have intimate knowledge of ourselves doctors and scientists can never have.
Moreover, while most doctors and scientists have more knowledge about a particular and peculiar way of approaching health (some individuals can self-educate and become as or more knowledgeable), they don’t have more knowledge about health in and of itself, as there’s many other ways of approaching health they don’t want you to know about.
The public is an expert in the public by virtue of being itself, the upperclass pontificating from their ivory towers will never understand us and our needs.
You’re aware of your expertise and I’m aware of my ignorance. 
By your reasoning, we should give doctors, psychiatrists, economist and sociologists complete control over our bodies, minds, the economy and society, or as much control as they want, whenever they want it.
That’s not democracy, nor is it individual liberty, that’s scientific dictatorship.
Scientists don’t have knowledge of us as individuals or a collective, what they have knowledge of is the dozens, hundreds or thousands of people they ran tests on in laboratories under strict conditions.
What applies to a few under controlled conditions may not apply to the many under uncontrolled ones.
Their knowledge is abstract, artificial and incomplete, not concrte, natural and complete.
It’s also partial, not impartial.
9 times of 10 or 99 of 100 their studies are funded by big brother, big business and big pharma.
Scientists conducting independent investigations are often sidelined.
At most science should supplement our understanding, it is far from the be all and end all of it.
The reverence we have for scientists today, is akin to the reverence Frenchmen had for popes and priests half a century or so before the French revolution.
Give em an inch…
It’s like some scientists want more and more control over our lives.
What we’re witnessing right now from the scientific community may be just the beginning.
They may push the public too far.
The positive factor, is that more and more people are turning off the “Mass Media” and searching for “alternative” media, the internet, blogs, youtube, forums, etc.
If the Mass Media can be further destabilized and deplatformed, Trump beating them with “fake news” (and they are), the better it is for everybody.
Trump has been right about one thing more than anything else: the Mass Media Mob IS an enemy of the State. Or, in other words, functioning from their own “State” which is categorically different than the Western/US State. It’s about competition, and control, over the Meta-Narrative.
Yup, that’s a good thing.
And as big brother subsidizes social media to gain control over it, good alternatives to youtube and so on like bitchute are popping up.
I may list some alternative and social media sites on this thread/elsewhere later.
I agree with Trump on this.
We need a hell of a lot more grassroots, independent media (more grassroots, independent everything for that matter), the more the merrier. A lot of MSM is BS.
The people have a lot of enemies, sometimes the state itself is their enemy, but the MSM is one of the top 3 or 5 enemies.
While there are biases in scientists in general, paradigmatic ones, I think it might be better to call ‘them’ technocrats. It is this ‘place’ where applications of science, industry and government meet in individuals. It has to do with what gets investigated (incuding of course funding) and what does not. What tools will be attempted to make, and which will not be looked into. How the public is ‘educated’ about these inventions and how the side-effects and problems are downplayed and poopood via backdoor to media (and front door) PR and legal shenanigans and so on. And while scientists are certainly involved, I think they have blinders and are really like technicians. They focus on their research and what is in front of them, not really looking at wider pictures which also involves expertise not in their usually high specialization. IOW they don’t look at politics or economics or psychology or propaganda or what is not being looked at. They are looking at their careers and their line of research. This is not me letting them off the hook and I am sure some few scientists have a more conscious role, but I think in general they are just being used and aimed by the major players. I get pissed at them and their hubris and unjustified dismissals and more, but their more like worker ants than real players.
I can understand you taking Gloominary as saying this and he is perhaps saying something more in this direction than I am. But he is basing his reactions to long term study of various experts, government positions, and trends in society. Ask him where his skepticism against these experts is coming from. Find out the long term context of why he is particularly skeptical of certain things and not others. In the last big virus…Swine Flu, SArs…I forget but they had a big vaccine campaign. I don’t have the energy to go into it now, but there were so many authority hallucinations, mistreatments, and enormous mistakes and corporate irresponsibility around vaccine manufacture at that time
that some skepticism needs to be on the table. And that’s just one part or one of the areas of what Gloominary, I think correctly, is seeing as a trend in the way elites are moving society.
It makes sense to express and argue for a skepticism aimed at power and monolithic positions in society. People who mention anything that remotely looks like a conspiracy theory are labeled traitors, evil, mad, per se.
Of course people with marginalized position are going to aim their primary skepticism at hegemonic forces. And this is good. the authorities can then present their case in a more rational way then they have. Your suggestion earlier, I think it was you, that one of their motivations for lying might be to control us because they don’t trust us with the truth…that’s a habit they better unlearn, if that is the motivation. It has long term terrible consequences even if there goals and methods are benign. IOW it is bad for them and those they are trying to help. Western governments and corporations are perfectly capable of using scientists and experts in the ways the old Soviet countries did.
Further this…
is a radical oversimplification. There are plenty of experts skeptical about what is going on. And scientists are not simply honest monads isolated in their labs. They are connected to governmetns and corporations or universities that are connected to both. They are affected by paradigms and their own economic needs and so on, often not consciously. Experts contesting all sorts of things from wars, to pandemic policies, to should transpersons be allowed to compete in sports, to conspiracy theories are shut down professionally damaged or fired, mocked in the media, lose funding and potential funding, and sometimes worse. You literally have no idea what large percentages of experts think about a wide range of issues.
You can paint it as simply like Gloominary just listens to some guy with no skills and knowledge who he finds in a blog online and your beliefs come from experts, and feel confident and smug you are right and he is a silly fool. Or you could spend time actually finding out where he has gotten his ideas over a long period of time.
As a society we are terrible at deailng with minority opinions. And the West has a long history of doing this, for example in relation to other cultures.
Even if it turns out that the skeptics were wrong, in this case, society has a diseased and extremely dangerous set of habits in dealing with minority opinions. You little mocking emoji being a tiny trivial example of the attitude. There’s no shortage of experts critical of the current policies.