Wuhan Killer Sneeze (thanks Tea)
- Thread starter HMGovt’s Glorious Return!
- Start date
-
- Tags
- "the delta variant" starring arnold schwarzenegger #braille4bats and dancing!!! biscuits nuts bodies in the streets cool people with bad lungs corpsey = patient zero do you ever look at this thread and wtf get pits done haha protein printer go brrr i'm trapped please help johnson’s technique please boris die public health films for bats rodent trumpet rotting corpses sailing the sea of biscuits slick prick soggy biscuits wash hands or die trying we are the swarm wear a fucking baguette then wubonic plague wuhan got you all in check
- Status
wild greens
Well-known member
Lot of care home deaths but "community" transmission is horrific from the moment December hits and just spirals
A lot of those deaths are from slightly lower age percentiles than in previous months
I understand the "intrigue" but very poor governance
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
Why does the UK feel a million miles away from doing anything like this?
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
I had expected a lot more pushback.
Somehow the government's psychological manipulation has worked.
As has keeping the football up and running.
Somehow the government's psychological manipulation has worked.
As has keeping the football up and running.
yyaldrin
in je ogen waait de wind
this is a good summary of the dynamics at play: https://enoughisenough14.org/2021/0...s-from-families-they-have-destroyed-families/
mixed_biscuits
_________________________
Trust in the government is too high here, with the middle-classes softened up by decades of placid government and comfortable living.
sus
Moderator
The real tragedy is that you're too much of an ignoramus to tell an "adolescent edgelord alt-right" take from a standard continental philosophy reminder
sus
Moderator
Nah just Postmodern Condition, do you recommend?
sus
Moderator
There are similarities, of course—which is why you see a fair amount of Theory on the "adolescent edgelord alt-right" (Deleuze & Guattari and Zizek, prominently). Both are critiques of a complacent, assuming liberalism—a liberalism that doesn't realize the deep power structures that certify its "scientific truth" as an "objective fact," thereby precluding opposition. This is a basic Foucauldian stance, really.
wild greens
Well-known member
Lol I would not allow myself to be patronised on the Internet by anyone who namedropped four philosophers in a paragraph surely it is time for a hastily written riposte
luka
Well-known member
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
You think that because a large part of your self-esteem is bound up in your self image as a lone Neo who has seen through the Matrix, while everyone else is a brainwashed sheeple. Trust in government here is low, and declining, with good reason:
Index: Trust in Institutions 2019
By Michelle Winowatan, Andrew J. Zahuranec, Andrew Young, Stefaan Verhulst The Living Library Index – inspired by the Harper’s Index – provides important statistics and highlights global trends in governance innovation. This installment focuses on trust in institutions. Please share any additi
thelivinglib.org
The most recent figures here are from 2019. I think it's safe to assume they won't have improved over the course of last year.
Maybe you think any number higher than 0% is too high, but anyway, the idea that most people trust the government is clearly false.
sus
Moderator
For instance, with masks, the first months of COVID we heard almost every major government institution in the West parroting the WHO line: there's no evidence masks work.
Now, there were a couple problems with this claim. First, there was a sort of evidence: it had been used to great efficacy by Asian countries for decades, and then there's the basic mechanics of the thing—we know how flus and colds and similar viruses spread; the symptoms are the means of transmission that the virus establishes. Coughing, sneezing—the particles spread from my lungs into yours. Common sense and historical precedent were on the side of mask-wearing.
But these were disregarded—specifically, the claim "masks don't work" was built off the argument that there had been no studies of mask-wearing's efficacy stopping COVID's spread specifically. Nevermind the basic scientific error that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Nevermind they hadn't even yet gone looking for evidence, nevermind that the rigorous scientific work needed to establish mask efficacy w/r/t COVID would either be ethically impermissible (you'd have to run a study exposing humans to the virus with and without masks) or else require large statistical samples over time (i.e. we'd have to wait and compare countries/regions' rates with and without masks). So the kind of "evidence" the WHO desired was basically impossible to get.
The common sense + historical precedent should've been enough while we waited on more rigorous studies, but there was a political agenda: mask supply was limited, and governments wanted to make sure it stayed in the hands of emergency workers. That's pretty reasonable! But look how that "ought" ended up smuggled into a "scientific" "is"—it wasn't just that we should refrain from buying masks, it was that they didn't work. (Nevermind the incoherence of arguing emergency workers needed masks for protection, but masks offered no protection.) Suddenly there's a regime of liberals going around calling anyone wearing a mask paranoid, or shouting at them in bodegas about their "alt facts" and conspiracies. These liberals, too, believed they were on the side of "the facts"—only to reverse course as soon as the official government line changed.
Also important to remember: The director of the WHO is Ethiopian. Chinese and Ethiopian relations are so established they have their own Wikipedia page. China is well-documented as funneling massive amounts of money into the third-world to get UN members to vote their way. This doesn't necessarily mean that the WHO downplayed COVID because of Chinese influence, but it's certainly grounds for suspicions, and a reminder of the Foucauldian role of power in determining "truth."
What we have is a perfect illustration of the idea, which reaches back to and beyond Nietzsche, but is expressed most thoroughly by post-structuralist thought, that "truth and power are two sides of the same coin."
Your naive liberal view of "science", Tea, is not the one found in the halls of science—it's the one found in the halls of government, echoed by technocrats whose job it is to control the populace.
Now, there were a couple problems with this claim. First, there was a sort of evidence: it had been used to great efficacy by Asian countries for decades, and then there's the basic mechanics of the thing—we know how flus and colds and similar viruses spread; the symptoms are the means of transmission that the virus establishes. Coughing, sneezing—the particles spread from my lungs into yours. Common sense and historical precedent were on the side of mask-wearing.
But these were disregarded—specifically, the claim "masks don't work" was built off the argument that there had been no studies of mask-wearing's efficacy stopping COVID's spread specifically. Nevermind the basic scientific error that absence of evidence is not evidence of absence. Nevermind they hadn't even yet gone looking for evidence, nevermind that the rigorous scientific work needed to establish mask efficacy w/r/t COVID would either be ethically impermissible (you'd have to run a study exposing humans to the virus with and without masks) or else require large statistical samples over time (i.e. we'd have to wait and compare countries/regions' rates with and without masks). So the kind of "evidence" the WHO desired was basically impossible to get.
The common sense + historical precedent should've been enough while we waited on more rigorous studies, but there was a political agenda: mask supply was limited, and governments wanted to make sure it stayed in the hands of emergency workers. That's pretty reasonable! But look how that "ought" ended up smuggled into a "scientific" "is"—it wasn't just that we should refrain from buying masks, it was that they didn't work. (Nevermind the incoherence of arguing emergency workers needed masks for protection, but masks offered no protection.) Suddenly there's a regime of liberals going around calling anyone wearing a mask paranoid, or shouting at them in bodegas about their "alt facts" and conspiracies. These liberals, too, believed they were on the side of "the facts"—only to reverse course as soon as the official government line changed.
Also important to remember: The director of the WHO is Ethiopian. Chinese and Ethiopian relations are so established they have their own Wikipedia page. China is well-documented as funneling massive amounts of money into the third-world to get UN members to vote their way. This doesn't necessarily mean that the WHO downplayed COVID because of Chinese influence, but it's certainly grounds for suspicions, and a reminder of the Foucauldian role of power in determining "truth."
What we have is a perfect illustration of the idea, which reaches back to and beyond Nietzsche, but is expressed most thoroughly by post-structuralist thought, that "truth and power are two sides of the same coin."
Your naive liberal view of "science", Tea, is not the one found in the halls of science—it's the one found in the halls of government, echoed by technocrats whose job it is to control the populace.
Mr. Tea
Let's Talk About Ceps
You wouldn't know "philosophy" if it ran up and yanked off your MAGA cap, m8.
luka
Well-known member
hes just smashed you Tea its a bit late for the insults. youve been demolished!
- Status