Then we understand the meaning of “politics” differently. From my perspective whenever one person bumps into another, there is always the possibility they will want to do different things in regard to a particular set of circumstances. Like vaccines. And that can create a conflict.
Then what?
1] might makes right: One of them has the brute power to make sure that vaccination policy is in accord with their own value judgments
2] right makes might: they both agree on one rational/moral assessment of the situation and, in regard to vaccinations, behave in harmony accordingly
3] democracy and the rule of law: they moderate their points of view, negotiate a compromise and create a vaccination program such that both sides gain something and no side loses everything
Or, in a larger society, they create a legislative/executive/judicial process such that one party is able to get most or all of what they want but it is agreed that the other party might be successful in electing those who will give them most or all of what they want instead.
Or they can create a constitution and fall back on a more or less strict construction of it.
K: as for our respective intelligence, I simply ask our readers to decide
for themselves based upon our posts…
and you still haven’t engaged in my primary points about
how big pharma is engaged in “Nazi plots”?
how do vaccinations create a “Nazi plot”?
how does a vaccination create an situation like autism
and what would be the point?
whereas we know, fact’s once again, that vaccines have
eliminated or limited such diseases like polio and smallpox
and measles and chickenpox…… diseases that killed
and disabled millions of people… fact…
your faith in the tree, the “evil” of vaccines doesn’t explain the
forest of the end of terrible killers that is smallpox and the
chickenpox and the measles, among others, found in the use of vaccines…
You still believe votes in the US are actually tabulated for mayors, congressmen, senators, governors and even the president. Dude! You are so 30 years ago!
K: I ask for facts and you give me something about me being in denial…
feel free to offer us some facts about what you say… for example, proof
that “ALL” voting machines have modems…
you point out some conspiracy about how votes are manipulated,
great, show me the evidence… to do such a manipulation requires
thousands of people to be in the loop of the conspiracy……
where is your proof that thousands of people are manipulating
our elections?
who is committing the crime?
and how does the crime go unreported given
that thousands of people are required to make
a conspiracy like this work
any facts or evidence to show us you are right?
it has nothing to do with denial and that ain’t a river
in Egypt…
show us your proof…
I know enough not to believe in some wild eye conspiracies…
Sure, if, in any particular community, everyone can agree that only after an absolutely safe and effective vaccine has been created will an actual public policy be established.
And the odds of that?
After all, those of particular religious faiths already start out by insisting that all of this is in the hands of God.
Okay, what of their children and the state?
And, until a vaccine is created that all parents accept, what of the laws requiring children to obtain particular vaccinations before being admitted into public schools?
How on earth is it realistic to take the fact of power/politics out of this in the interim?
Reported? Propaganda has come a LONG way since Nazi Germany Peter!!! A really long way!! The US is a propaganda state and a Nazi state.
It’s been massively reported that
a.) yes, all vote counting machines have modems.
b.) because of what’s known about defeating this technological truth, we can conclude that the “government” doesn’t want votes to count.
Dude, Peter, you don’t know shit about voting machines, you’ve read no literature, you haven’t seen them in person and you know nothing about modems or hacking.
People who do know this shit, can’t say for 100% certain that our votes are being hacked, but they can say for 100% certain that they can be hacked.
Since the problem has already been solved and not implemented, now they can say for 100% certainty that they are being hacked.
Anyways, we veered off a bit from the point I raised earlier. We do have whistle blowers like Kennedy but they don’t effect change.
The nazis won ww11 in the form of America from project paperclip. The propaganda ministers from Nazi germany learned a lot of lessons after the German attempt about how to control a state, give people the perception of threat, peace and freedom
Anyways… like a Nazi state, the US is experimenting massively on the US population both psychologically and physiologically.
But: My own perspective here is no less a profoundly problematic existential contraption rooted subjectively in dasein. Now, if what you are arguing is that I am arguing that everyone else is obligated to view their own perspective in that manner in turn then, well, sure, if that’s what you believe “in your head” then that makes it true. For you.
But beyond just believing it, how would you go about demonstrating to others that they are obligated to believe what you do too?
I will flat out admit that I can’t demonstrate my own frame of mind here. On the contrary, the gist of my argument in regards to things like vaccinations is that, sans God, mere mortals are only able to exchange moral and political assessments rooted in prejudices rooted in dasein rooted in the understanding that given new experiences, new relationships and access to new information, knowledge and ideas, “I” am always confronted with at least the possibilty of reconfiguring my point of view about the rightness or the wrongness of vaccines.
Again, this, in my view, is what the objectivists among us most fear. Not that they aren’t right about their own point of view here, but that no point of view can ever be clearly, definitively demonstrated to be either right or wrong.
I’m saying that you insist that everyone discuss it in terms of your perspective … political economy, dasein, definitive demonstrations. And in the religious threads … morality, salvation and afterlife.
Why do you think that you are accused of being a spammer and a troll? You go into a thread and switch the topic to dasein and your interests.
Come on, most of my contributions/posts at ILP revolve around threads that I started. In fact, I don’t participate at all in the preponderance of threads.
And, over and over and over again, I make it crystal clear that my interest in philosophy revolves around morality here and now and immortality there and then. At the existential juncture of identity, value judgments and political economy.
This and such “metaphysical” quandaries as determinism and the nature of existence itself.
No, I think those here inclined to label me a spammer and a troll are pissed off at me for others reasons. I have my own take on that and they have theirs.
After all, in forums of this nature some are more readily made to look like, say, stooges than others. If I do say so myself.
Nice anecdotal ‘evidence’. Notice no response to any of the research. So basically you decided to re-assert your position. And you consider yourself, for some reason, on the rational team.
And there are those people who believe that. I don’t. I think it is much more nuanced than that. But pick the most extreme position, dismiss it without evidence or argument, if that makes you think you actually just did something or contributed to a conversation.
In a world where the tobacco industry managed to create vast amounts of scientific research befuddling all sorts of government regulartion for decades, you’d think people who simply trust industry generation pr and research would consider it possible that SOME vaccines are problematic and unsafe.
But no. People like you feel not the slightest need to investigate a damn thing. You come with anectdotal evidence, make blanket assertions, respond as if the only counter-position is binarily opposite yours, and investigate nothing.
