Is the right stoking the fear of government overreach in the wake of the pandemic to expand concentration concentrations of power over the people?

[Ad_Quid_Orator]

Don't fall for their fear mongering (and blatant projection).

[Snakeyes7]

Fauci has been nothing but a thorn in the side of the American people. Moving the goalposts on when these stupid lockdowns are going to end, thinking that the lockdowns were a good idea at all, saying that he must be obeyed and that questioning him is questioning the entire concept of science. The dude is a total scumbag and is the reason why we will never get out of this lockdown mess unless we do something about it.

Also, have you seen Australia lately? Some of the major cities are under martial law. Soldiers are arresting hundreds of people a day even for things that they told them to do, they go as far as to kill dogs that people adopt so that they won't leave their home and I have heard rumors that at random points citizens need to take a selfie to prove that they are at home when prompted or else they will get a visit with the police. The worst part about all this is that most people APPLAUD this bullshit or maybe they'd be imprisoned if they spoke out against it or something.

Is that what you want? This CAN happen here and I think the biggest reason it hasn't happened yet is because they know the citizens guns are a threat to that plan.

[Ad_Quid_Orator]

Are you serious, the US has a long history of deploying soldiers in the event of natural disasters yet that hasn't brought us any closer to authoritarianism.

www.army.mil/.../the_army_response_to_hurricane_katrina

[Ad_Quid_Orator]

And apparently someone hasn't been keeping up with current events:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiQoGFf4cDw

[Snakeyes7]

They were only there to provide resources to help rebuild after the hurricane. The threat was already gone and had no excuse to keep people in line unlike covid.

The Australia thing came out less than 24 hours ago. You can't expect people to be fully aware of that by now. It looks like it is back to the original lockdown which is still pretty draconian compared to most of the US but be it as it may, assuming that they aren't pulling a fast one on their citizens, I'm glad this happened. Hopefully we can get it down to zero everywhere sometime soon.

[Ad_Quid_Orator]

They were only there to provide resources to help rebuild after the hurricane. The threat was already gone and had no excuse to keep people in line unlike covid.

And once the pandemic is over we won't have a need for lockdowns.

[Snakeyes7]

Covid 19 will always exist just like how there are still small pox and polio viruses still floating around. We need to protect the vulnerable but we can't let it control our lives. This pandemic is giving the government the perfect opportunity to sneak in the great reset. Where you will own nothing and you will be happy. As happy as the people will be watching history repeat itself.

[Ad_Quid_Orator]

H1N1 is still around but as soon as the danger passed, the laws put in place to limit the propagation of the Spanish Flu were rescinded. And people fear mongered with BS rhetoric about how safety measures were leading to government tyranny that the right is now.

[Snakeyes7]

Yeah but the regulations never got as bad as this did. The government and its bootlickers weren't saying "fuck your bill of rights, we're locking you in your house until WE say you can" and later "the vaccine is available, if you get it we will THINK about letting you have your life back, and then decide against it".

[Ad_Quid_Orator]

The government didn't force anyone to be locked in their house unless they had coronavirus and quarantine orders had been used before.

But businesses were closed and mask mandates were imposed. And if those are violations of the bill of rights then I guess so are fire codes and indecent exposure laws.

Also, we live in a Democracy so it's not the government saying it, it's the popular will of the people saying we don't want millions to die or ACTUALLY be forced to stay in their homes or risk contracting a deadly diseases.

www.wptv.com/.../study-finds-most-americans-support-lockdown-to-slow-covid-19-spread

Now before you say if the majority of Americans want to play it safe, they can do that but don't force it on others. NOT HOW PANDEMICS WORK. While there is an inverse correlation between social distancing and the realized spread rate, the relationship isn't linear. It only takes a small percent of the population to act irresponsibly to have a large increase in the spread rate:



https://youtu.be/gxAaO2rsdIs

[Snakeyes7]

Just because they have used stay at home orders before doesn't make it right. It's a violation of the first amendment.

I dont care about the masks they are the least of my concerns of the pandemic but taking businesses away is more of going against the country's original vision of people having the right to be in pursuit of happiness. All closing down small businesses while the Walmart remains open so everyone goes there instead as despite the virus magically not disappearing as soon as you enter just shows the state support for major corporations and their desire to increase the wealth disparity.

Wrong, we live in a republic. We have a representatives in the Electoral College to account for everyone living in every state to make sure that people in all areas get a fair say. It's not the same thing. Also that sample size is extremely small that's like 0.004% of the population.

Well then I guess we're never gonna get over this pandemic then. No matter how totalitarian you make the world, there will be people who will either refuse to do it and get killed along with the many many other new problems you will introduce being an authoritarian society.

The lockdowns, many have argued have been a far worse problem than covid would ever pose. Suicides have been skyrocketing due to isolation or loss of their job making poverty much more common and has likely lead to a lot of divorces between families which would increase.

I'm not saying that we should all be exposed to people with covid, not wear masks nor am I saying that those who can get the vaccine shouldn't. I'm saying that no matter where you run and hide, you will never be invincible covid or otherwise. That's why I am all in favor of having people choose their fate for themselves not make the state do it for them.

[Ad_Quid_Orator]

-The first amendment doesn't give you the right to jeopardize public safety by spreading deadly pathogens.

-The constitution promised life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness; you don't have liberty if you can't leave your home without fearing contracting a deadly pathogen (as for life, that's self explanatory).

-Democracies and Republics aren't mutually exclusive and trying to say we aren't a democracy is just a sad attempt by the right to validate their authoritarian mindset.

-The Spanish flu pandemic ended even though the descendants of the original pathogen are still around and when it did the "totalitarian measures" were taken down.

-The arguments that the lockdowns have been worse for the economy than the virus would have been ignores a basic principle of epidemiology: the impact of too many people becoming too sick to work (and keep in mind that the virus doesn't discriminate between essential and non-essential workers) would be far greater than the lockdown if we just let the virus rip.

-When you allow yourself to contract a deadly pathogen, you're dictating the fate of others by spreading it. Something the right has to come to terms with is that any fight against a pandemic is first and formost a collective one; individualistic snowflakery has no place here.

[Snakeyes7]

- Sorry, I don't see anywhere on any of the founding documents that they cease to be human rights if a pandemic comes. The state isn't the one that grants it its our own existence, it's the states job to protect it and I want my tax dollars back.

- Yes it did promise that. If you think your happiness is being trapped in your own home cowering in fear of a disease, you are free to do just that. It's not the job of the state to make you do that.

- Both parties in congress want this perpetual, tax funded, medical surveillance state and to be even more powerful than it already is with very few fighting it. Also can you remind me which side is trying to label people as oppressiors again based on the actions of a few with race and gender?

- So how is the end of a pandemic defined? Clearly, the definition back during the influenza was a lot more lax than it is now considering the media goes "oh no! Here comes another variant! Guess we gotta keep locking down."

- Then what do you expect us to do? We can't just shut the economy down for a virus that will only just keep getting more and more variants. How are people going to get food and medicine they need if there aren't going to be anyone delivering the goods to a store with no one running it? Also, how is locking everyone in their homes any better? If someone were to get the virus while going to get food and not notice it, everyone in the home they are locked down with will get it. It seems to me there's no avoiding this.

- For something as contagious as covid, where you spread it by breathing and you won't know if you have it until two weeks later, it makes no difference as the only thing you can do to help is reduce the area of effect or whatever its called by wearing a mask. You can't make the chance of spreading it zero.

[Ad_Quid_Orator]

-"The state isn't the one that grants it its our own existence, it's the states job to protect it"
Limiting the spread of a pandemic is protecting your existence.

-The constitution doesn't promise you the right to force others to stay in their house on pain of contracting a deadly pathogen which is what you're doing when you violate social distancing and mask mandates. You only see freedom as the freedom to oppress others.

-Both parties agreed to loosen restrictions when fewer people were dying of the disease so the idea that they want a perpetual surveillance state doesn't hold up to scrutiny.

-It ends when the difference in the number of people dying per time period that year and previous years is statistically insignificant and if you look back at the Spanish Flu pandemic there were multiple ways and there were likely several variants coming about. The only reason that the variants weren't ID'd is because we couldn't sequence their genomes.

-Once we learned how to curtail the spread of the virus, locking down the economy was no longer necessary and even among the current delta wave new case rates are starting to go down without a lockdown.

-Yeah, hence we have mask mandates. And if you think the government making people wear a face covering is authoritarian, then WTF do you call indecent exposure laws.

[Unpersuadable]

The US government has been overreaching longer than I've been alive. It is not stoking fear if it is real. The left would argue the same about climate change.

A federal mandate that drives a company to fire a person or eventually go bankrupt because the person doesn't do what they want is directly in opposition to the right to pursue happiness.

Do not confuse this with happiness being a right. Its not and never was.

American government is not the "boss" of the people, it is the servant and it is rebelling. The federal government is attempting a coup on the lives of its citizens.

[kyleelyn199723]

The left side has far more fear mongering than the right

[Ad_Quid_Orator]

The measures the government is implementing now have a long track record of saving lives during a pandemic:
www.contagionlive.com/.../analysis-spanish-flu-pandemic-proves-social-distancing-works

An authoritarian faction using the fear of a force of nature to reconcile power is pretty much unheard of.

So that's bullshit.

[joeldalton]

@kyleelyn199723 don’t waste your time.

[crmoore]

Considering that the very government they're referring to has implemented race-based medicine accessibility, race-based loan forgiveness, race-based employment, and many other deplorable things (within just the last few years, mind you), no. And government overreach has been a consistent problem all throughout history. It's not something to be taken lightly.

[Ad_Quid_Orator]

But the boogeyman that governments use to overreach is a subversive faction or a hostile nation, not a force of nature. But downplaying the severity of natural disasters has a long history of expanding the influence private concentrations of power have over society.

[crmoore]

According to what? Saying "governments use A or B to powergrab" doesn't mean they can't use C. There's not a rule in government saying "governments can only begin overreach if their excuse is a hostile nation." And you didn't mention downplaying the severity of natural disasters. I thought we were discussing the accusation of government overreach?

[crmoore]

I think I merely misunderstood your second sentence. So you can disregard my last two sentences of my last response. Regarding your last sentence, can you elaborate?

[Ad_Quid_Orator]

I'm saying that governments overhyping the danger posed by natural disasters to reconcile power is virtually unheard of while corporations downplaying the severity so people don't act collectively against them (disaster capitalism, see the second video in the description) occurs quite often so we should be more worried about the latter.

[crmoore]

While I don't think I'd agree with you on what extent we should not worry about governmental overreach during natural disasters, I do agree that we should be almost, or possibly even just as, concerned with privatized power.

[disgustingweebtrash]

Oh no! How dare they say it as it is!

[Ad_Quid_Orator]

"What is" is that when authoritarians fear monger, they use hostile nations or subversive factions, not forces of nature.

[disgustingweebtrash]

Yuri Bezmenov warned about your kind it's fine, you'll be shot by the people you defend