Personally I am just grateful for the always relatively few dissenters who stuck their heads over the parapet, only to face the slings & arrows thrown at them by those who profit from the almighty narrative. It appears to have backfired on the pols financially & to a certain extent politically, especially in the US from where most of the resistance occurred - but it created more billionaires so TPTB now have a greater choice of donors.
I personally learned a lot from it in relation to health matters, but I'm fortunate due to my work in that I can usually listen all day to vids, podcasts etc while taking notes to help some of the mud to stick. Nobody is held accountable as was the case during the GFC - maybe Fauci will be thrown under the bus but I wouldn't bet on it, while the host of factcheckers & the MSM hacks will as they have already done so will just lie about something else.
I don't believe that it is sustainable as it does appear that more people are gradually waking up, while it does look like that due to the actions of the ideologues on both sides of the pond, things are likely to get a whole lot tougher economically, with the added possibility of a nuclear holocaust as the Neo-colonial opportunities for looting increasingly dry up.
An interesting decade so far in the the Chinese curse sense,
"Why was it not discussed in a scientific and open way?"
Is it so hard, to consider the possibility, that the people wanted it to happen? No matter how freaky the narrative, the people as a collective, amplified the narrative. Because we wanted it so much. Needed it. More than anything else.
Is it so hard to consider this possibility? Yes, it is. Because if we do, it opens a door to complicity. Of all of us. Whereas if we keep the door tightly closed, locked and barred, behind a fantasy of "why was it not discussed openly", we can escape, by blaming wealth and power, or They. Not I.
It's so simple if you think about it.
Because the need of the great masse, was not a factual one. There was no cause and effect to measure. The people needed, wanted, it to be true, notwithstanding no objective scrutiny. It was an urgent collective need which held large power to act. But unconsciously. A bit like the dark side in all of us individuals. We all have it as bad as the evil cabal, but we all bury it away deep hoping no one will find out. The collective, as a great masse, acts in the same way. Society is not only a good thing.
This action, and others like it, are also known, as 'visionary rumours'.
An ancient, primordial, instinct. Which emerges from existential threat. And when no actual threat exists because society is now so strong, the primordial instinct creates an image of a threat to fill the void that must be filled.
I have no evidence supporting this. Except it keeps happening. And there is no better alternative hypothesis as is evident in the Dr's discussion.
I'm still waiting for the idea to be properly challenged. It's not clear if the reason for lack of challenge is because the messenger is neither an authority or celebrity of any kind at scale. Or that it is too close for comfort whomever delivers it, in other words, it is forbidden knowledge within the mind of the collective. Or maybe it's a simple matter of no one bothering to think outside the box and understand something different from the mainstream.
The Dr's analysis here is quite poor for an intellectual. If one is aware of a narrative that is blocking scrutiny, that is openly stating conscious activity. And a great masse which has formed a narrative is not conscious of itself. So circular reasoning.
And of course the Dr finally caves in and starts alluding to political forces. At last she reveals her escape. But does she realise it?
It's so simple. The people wanted it to be so. No other theory comes close and as she says "leaves her perplexed".(Interwoven, entangled )Is the perplextion because she is not conscious of deeper possibilities, maybe because she is a hard core scientist too, just from a different "camp".
This is good original writing isn't it. It's not actually hard.
Apt comparison with the Chilcot report. In both cases one of the central conclusions was the official narrative of the critical moment being reported - not just by the gov. itself but by most of the media - "With unwarranted certainty." The official narrative is always so very certain. They were 'certain' there were weapons of Mass Destruction - but it was a blatant lie for which no one went to prison. And Covid - they were certain it had a natural origin and all other alternatives were 'conspiracy theories - and that too was a lie. They were not and could not possibly have been certain. And we paid with lives for both those lies.
You could also place yourself in this systemic denial. Except it would on a higher scale to which you subscribe to the lie. You have a mortgage. So are indirectly making slaves out of your fellow men. But are you conscious of this?
Personally I am just grateful for the always relatively few dissenters who stuck their heads over the parapet, only to face the slings & arrows thrown at them by those who profit from the almighty narrative. It appears to have backfired on the pols financially & to a certain extent politically, especially in the US from where most of the resistance occurred - but it created more billionaires so TPTB now have a greater choice of donors.
I personally learned a lot from it in relation to health matters, but I'm fortunate due to my work in that I can usually listen all day to vids, podcasts etc while taking notes to help some of the mud to stick. Nobody is held accountable as was the case during the GFC - maybe Fauci will be thrown under the bus but I wouldn't bet on it, while the host of factcheckers & the MSM hacks will as they have already done so will just lie about something else.
I don't believe that it is sustainable as it does appear that more people are gradually waking up, while it does look like that due to the actions of the ideologues on both sides of the pond, things are likely to get a whole lot tougher economically, with the added possibility of a nuclear holocaust as the Neo-colonial opportunities for looting increasingly dry up.
An interesting decade so far in the the Chinese curse sense,
"Why was it not discussed in a scientific and open way?"
Is it so hard, to consider the possibility, that the people wanted it to happen? No matter how freaky the narrative, the people as a collective, amplified the narrative. Because we wanted it so much. Needed it. More than anything else.
Is it so hard to consider this possibility? Yes, it is. Because if we do, it opens a door to complicity. Of all of us. Whereas if we keep the door tightly closed, locked and barred, behind a fantasy of "why was it not discussed openly", we can escape, by blaming wealth and power, or They. Not I.
It's so simple if you think about it.
Because the need of the great masse, was not a factual one. There was no cause and effect to measure. The people needed, wanted, it to be true, notwithstanding no objective scrutiny. It was an urgent collective need which held large power to act. But unconsciously. A bit like the dark side in all of us individuals. We all have it as bad as the evil cabal, but we all bury it away deep hoping no one will find out. The collective, as a great masse, acts in the same way. Society is not only a good thing.
This action, and others like it, are also known, as 'visionary rumours'.
An ancient, primordial, instinct. Which emerges from existential threat. And when no actual threat exists because society is now so strong, the primordial instinct creates an image of a threat to fill the void that must be filled.
I have no evidence supporting this. Except it keeps happening. And there is no better alternative hypothesis as is evident in the Dr's discussion.
I'm still waiting for the idea to be properly challenged. It's not clear if the reason for lack of challenge is because the messenger is neither an authority or celebrity of any kind at scale. Or that it is too close for comfort whomever delivers it, in other words, it is forbidden knowledge within the mind of the collective. Or maybe it's a simple matter of no one bothering to think outside the box and understand something different from the mainstream.
The Dr's analysis here is quite poor for an intellectual. If one is aware of a narrative that is blocking scrutiny, that is openly stating conscious activity. And a great masse which has formed a narrative is not conscious of itself. So circular reasoning.
And of course the Dr finally caves in and starts alluding to political forces. At last she reveals her escape. But does she realise it?
It's so simple. The people wanted it to be so. No other theory comes close and as she says "leaves her perplexed".(Interwoven, entangled )Is the perplextion because she is not conscious of deeper possibilities, maybe because she is a hard core scientist too, just from a different "camp".
This is good original writing isn't it. It's not actually hard.
The Great Barrington Declaration, as forgotten as The Chilcot report.
I enjoyed listening to this Pod.
The Great Barrington Declaration is an open letter published in October 2020
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Barrington_Declaration
Apt comparison with the Chilcot report. In both cases one of the central conclusions was the official narrative of the critical moment being reported - not just by the gov. itself but by most of the media - "With unwarranted certainty." The official narrative is always so very certain. They were 'certain' there were weapons of Mass Destruction - but it was a blatant lie for which no one went to prison. And Covid - they were certain it had a natural origin and all other alternatives were 'conspiracy theories - and that too was a lie. They were not and could not possibly have been certain. And we paid with lives for both those lies.
You could also place yourself in this systemic denial. Except it would on a higher scale to which you subscribe to the lie. You have a mortgage. So are indirectly making slaves out of your fellow men. But are you conscious of this?