Noam Chomsky says the "right response" to The Unvaccinated is "to insist that they be isolated

[Sammy]

 

https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/st...95789716086787

I never liked this Communist piece of $#@!.

[oyarde]

Another rich $#@! who says he is anti capitalist. An occupy person who is old enough to know better.If he lived on my lands I would deport him.

[A Son of Liberty]

I need someone to explain the rationale behind this vax hysteria to me, because I don't get it. Usually, even in their most incoherent, I can at least parse out a thread of reasoning in leftist arguments. But this vax thing absolutely mystifies me. It is admitted and understood that the vax'd can get and spread the Bug, and I get that the argument in favor of people getting vax'd is that they'll get a milder case of it (supposedly), but how is an unvax'd person a threat, therefore, to a vax'd person? Is the argument that the unvax'd person is passing a more virulent strain of the Bug, somehow, and thus the vax'd are somehow going to end up almost as tho' they are unvax'd? Because that doesn't seem to make logical sense. It seems that, granting that the rest of their arguments are legitimate, the only ones who are at risk are the unvax'd, which seems like a personal choice to me. And I also get the argument that the unvax'd will put greater strain on hospitals, etc. (I get it, but I don't agree with it of course because as we saw at the height of the pandemic in 2020 the only strain, broadly speaking, was on people needing specialized care outside of COVID). But I don't get, for example, the headlines that appeared after Powell died that, somehow, the unvax'd were to blame.

So, can anyone parse out the logic here for me? Because this one is entering into the realm of Brawndo for me and, for as bad as it is, I didn't think we were there yet.

[donnay]

Why would anyone listen to this moron is beyond me. *SIGH*

[acptulsa]

So, can anyone parse out the logic here for me? Because this one is entering into the realm of Brawndo for me and, for as bad as it is, I didn't think we were there yet.

Logic? Supremacist.

https://twitter.com/OrwellNGoode/sta...67887629049861

[Sammy]

Another rich $#@! who says he is anti capitalist. An occupy person who is old enough to know better.If he lived on my lands I would deport him.

You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to oyarde again.

[TheTexan]

To be fair,

Noam isn't (at least in this clip) suggesting mandatory isolation. At least not for covid.

If it were a bigger threat ( smallpox ), yes, he would say, mandatory isolation. But we "arent there yet", he says.

Not a completely unreasonable position tbh. (judging by this clip alone)

[TheTexan]

I need someone to explain the rationale behind this vax hysteria to me, because I don't get it. Usually, even in their most incoherent, I can at least parse out a thread of reasoning in leftist arguments. But this vax thing absolutely mystifies me. It is admitted and understood that the vax'd can get and spread the Bug, and I get that the argument in favor of people getting vax'd is that they'll get a milder case of it (supposedly), but how is an unvax'd person a threat, therefore, to a vax'd person? Is the argument that the unvax'd person is passing a more virulent strain of the Bug, somehow, and thus the vax'd are somehow going to end up almost as tho' they are unvax'd? Because that doesn't seem to make logical sense. It seems that, granting that the rest of their arguments are legitimate, the only ones who are at risk are the unvax'd, which seems like a personal choice to me. And I also get the argument that the unvax'd will put greater strain on hospitals, etc. (I get it, but I don't agree with it of course because as we saw at the height of the pandemic in 2020 the only strain, broadly speaking, was on people needing specialized care outside of COVID). But I don't get, for example, the headlines that appeared after Powell died that, somehow, the unvax'd were to blame.

So, can anyone parse out the logic here for me? Because this one is entering into the realm of Brawndo for me and, for as bad as it is, I didn't think we were there yet.

Haven't you seen the death counts? Don't you watch the news?? Thousands of people are dying - every day!!!!

[Sammy]

Why would anyone listen to this moron is beyond me. *SIGH*

Chomsky who claims to be "anti war" preferred Hillary Clinton over Ron Paul.

 

https://twitter.com/MaxBlumenthal/st...90014533816323

[CaptUSA]

I need someone to explain the rationale behind this vax hysteria to me, because I don't get it. Usually, even in their most incoherent, I can at least parse out a thread of reasoning in leftist arguments. But this vax thing absolutely mystifies me. It is admitted and understood that the vax'd can get and spread the Bug, and I get that the argument in favor of people getting vax'd is that they'll get a milder case of it (supposedly), but how is an unvax'd person a threat, therefore, to a vax'd person? Is the argument that the unvax'd person is passing a more virulent strain of the Bug, somehow, and thus the vax'd are somehow going to end up almost as tho' they are unvax'd? Because that doesn't seem to make logical sense. It seems that, granting that the rest of their arguments are legitimate, the only ones who are at risk are the unvax'd, which seems like a personal choice to me. And I also get the argument that the unvax'd will put greater strain on hospitals, etc. (I get it, but I don't agree with it of course because as we saw at the height of the pandemic in 2020 the only strain, broadly speaking, was on people needing specialized care outside of COVID). But I don't get, for example, the headlines that appeared after Powell died that, somehow, the unvax'd were to blame.

So, can anyone parse out the logic here for me? Because this one is entering into the realm of Brawndo for me and, for as bad as it is, I didn't think we were there yet.

Here's the logic:

"I was scared. So I got the vaccine. And now I have a strong confirmation bias. I'm still scared that I may have been misled. If you are right, that means I was wrong and did a stupid thing. Therefore, if you get the vax, too, we'll be in the same boat and I'll be comforted - even if we're both wrong."

"Oh, and you're an uncaring racist, misogynist, homophobe that wants poor people to die."

[TheTexan]

I need someone to explain the rationale behind this vax hysteria to me, because I don't get it. Usually, even in their most incoherent, I can at least parse out a thread of reasoning in leftist arguments. But this vax thing absolutely mystifies me. It is admitted and understood that the vax'd can get and spread the Bug, and I get that the argument in favor of people getting vax'd is that they'll get a milder case of it (supposedly), but how is an unvax'd person a threat, therefore, to a vax'd person? Is the argument that the unvax'd person is passing a more virulent strain of the Bug, somehow, and thus the vax'd are somehow going to end up almost as tho' they are unvax'd? Because that doesn't seem to make logical sense. It seems that, granting that the rest of their arguments are legitimate, the only ones who are at risk are the unvax'd, which seems like a personal choice to me. And I also get the argument that the unvax'd will put greater strain on hospitals, etc. (I get it, but I don't agree with it of course because as we saw at the height of the pandemic in 2020 the only strain, broadly speaking, was on people needing specialized care outside of COVID). But I don't get, for example, the headlines that appeared after Powell died that, somehow, the unvax'd were to blame.

So, can anyone parse out the logic here for me? Because this one is entering into the realm of Brawndo for me and, for as bad as it is, I didn't think we were there yet.

Slightly more serious answer:

They think that the vaccinated are less likely to spread covid. (ignoring for the moment natural immunity)

They might even be right. I don't know and don't care either way tbh. Doesn't change my rights.

[TheTexan]

If people are so scared about catching what is basically the Flu, then just wear a N95 mask. You'll look silly, but its at least less silly than wearing the stupid $#@!ing cloth masks.

It's also hard to take any argument about Covid seriously, when people don't give even 1 measly $#@! about preventing future Covid's from happening (GoF)

[A Son of Liberty]

Here's the logic:

"I was scared. So I got the vaccine. And now I have a strong confirmation bias. I'm still scared that I may have been misled. If you are right, that means I was wrong and did a stupid thing. Therefore, if you get the vax, too, we'll be in the same boat and I'll be comforted - even if we're both wrong."

"Oh, and you're an uncaring racist, misogynist, homophobe that wants poor people to die."

I get that it may boil down to that on a subconscious level, but that's not the popular rationale - it can't be. They usually have something of a coherent narrative, if not flawed.

I'm vax'd. I'm not terrified of the consequences of being vax'd. I got vax'd because I was urged by a family member, for good reason. If it turns out I've been injected with a genocidal chemical, so be it. Life comes at you. But I don't understand the rationale behind the broader state-media-complex push to vax everyone.

[TheTexan]

I get that it may boil down to that on a subconscious level, but that's not the popular rationale - it can't be. They usually have something of a coherent narrative, if not flawed.

I'm vax'd. I'm not terrified of the consequences of being vax'd. I got vax'd because I was urged by a family member, for good reason. If it turns out I've been injected with a genocidal chemical, so be it. Life comes at you. But I don't understand the rationale behind the broader state-media-complex push to vax everyone.

It is logical, if you accept that:

1) people who have an active infection are more likely to spread the virus
2) people who have neither vax nor natural immunity, are more likely to have an active infection

Then it does kind of make sense.

The main issue is that they tend to leave out the natural immunity part, which we have no $#@!in idea at this point how many people have, because apparently its not worth testing?

(Note: I'm not stating an opinion here on whether #2 is actually true or not - I haven't done any research to say either way)

[A Son of Liberty]

It is logical, if you accept that:

1) people who have an active infection are more likely to spread the virus
2) people who have neither vax nor natural immunity, are more likely to have an active infection

Then it does kind of make sense.

The main issue is that they tend to leave out the natural immunity part, which we have no $#@!in idea at this point how many people have, because apparently its not worth testing?

(Note: I'm not stating an opinion here on whether #2 is actually true or not - I haven't done any research to say either way)

Neither 1 nor 2 should matter to the vax'd, however. That's what I'm saying - I can't figure out the logic as to how the unvax'd pose a risk to the vax'd. It's not being explained in any clear and rational manner, it's just being asserted.

As I've said, I can get the logic behind masks, for example. I don't agree with it, and I will argue against it, but there are at least cases within the broader argument where I can understand their rationale. But I'm not seeing that with the vax thing.

SOMEONE has to be able to explain this concept - that the unvax'd pose a real and lethal threat to the vax'd. Otherwise we've entered into the realm of Brawndo, and for as often as I've asserted that Idiocracy was a documentary, I did NOT think we were there yet...

[TheTexan]

Neither 1 nor 2 should matter to the vax'd, however. That's what I'm saying - I can't figure out the logic as to how the unvax'd pose a risk to the vax'd. It's not being explained in any clear and rational manner, it's just being asserted.

Well, the general idea is that the vax reduces your chances of getting covid, doesn't eliminate it entirely. So, if there's more spreaders (e.g., the unvax'd), there is more chances of getting covid (vax'd or not).

As I've said, I can get the logic behind masks, for example. I don't agree with it, and I will argue against it, but there are at least cases within the broader argument where I can understand their rationale. But I'm not seeing that with the vax thing.

LOL the cloth mask thing makes 0 sense to me. May need you to explain that to me.

[Anti Globalist]

I have a better solution: How about I stay unvaccinated and not isolate?

[TheTexan]

I have a better solution: How about I stay unvaccinated and not isolate?

Do you just want people to die?

[Anti Federalist]

I need someone to explain the rationale behind this vax hysteria to me, because I don't get it. Usually, even in their most incoherent, I can at least parse out a thread of reasoning in leftist arguments. But this vax thing absolutely mystifies me. It is admitted and understood that the vax'd can get and spread the Bug, and I get that the argument in favor of people getting vax'd is that they'll get a milder case of it (supposedly), but how is an unvax'd person a threat, therefore, to a vax'd person? Is the argument that the unvax'd person is passing a more virulent strain of the Bug, somehow, and thus the vax'd are somehow going to end up almost as tho' they are unvax'd? Because that doesn't seem to make logical sense. It seems that, granting that the rest of their arguments are legitimate, the only ones who are at risk are the unvax'd, which seems like a personal choice to me. And I also get the argument that the unvax'd will put greater strain on hospitals, etc. (I get it, but I don't agree with it of course because as we saw at the height of the pandemic in 2020 the only strain, broadly speaking, was on people needing specialized care outside of COVID). But I don't get, for example, the headlines that appeared after Powell died that, somehow, the unvax'd were to blame.

So, can anyone parse out the logic here for me? Because this one is entering into the realm of Brawndo for me and, for as bad as it is, I didn't think we were there yet.

Logic is racist.

You'll take the jab because we tell you to take the jab, got it, prole?

Now, move the $#@! along.

[fisharmor]

As I've said, I can get the logic behind masks, for example. I don't agree with it, and I will argue against it, but there are at least cases within the broader argument where I can understand their rationale. But I'm not seeing that with the vax thing.

How are these two topics in any way different?
Both involve engaging in mere theatrics that have no discernible effect on the issue at hand.
Both have pretty serious counterarguments that are simply disregarded.
Both are sociological experiments in identity politics.
Both are, at this point, pretty much totally falsified.

The only substantive difference between the two is that they've raised the stakes with the vax. Before it was just an incredibly disgusting (and formerly very illegal) inconvenience, and now they're injecting multiple rounds of experimental crap into you.

They're openly talking about the Great Reset and now even referring to "the before time" like it's literally Mad Max level post-apocalypse at this point. We're totally at Brawndo right now. I mean just look at how they're blaming everything under the sun for the disastrous economy right now EXCEPT the vax mandates.

I think it's abundantly clear they think you're stupid enough to believe this without even a coherent argument.

[TheTexan]

I think it's abundantly clear they think you're stupid enough to believe this without even a coherent argument.

Assuming the vaccine works at all, it seems to be a coherent argument.

Greater average immunity = less spreaders = less chance of murdering Colin Powell

This argument for the vax of course becomes less and less viable, as more people gain immunity the natural way, but still - the logic is there, is it not?

Unless of course you're in the "vaccine does not work at all" camp at which point I would humbly retire from this line of debate, as I have no horse in that race. (I don't know, and I don't care, if the vaccine works)

[Brian4Liberty]

I get that it may boil down to that on a subconscious level, but that's not the popular rationale - it can't be. They usually have something of a coherent narrative, if not flawed.

I'm vax'd. I'm not terrified of the consequences of being vax'd. I got vax'd because I was urged by a family member, for good reason. If it turns out I've been injected with a genocidal chemical, so be it. Life comes at you. But I don't understand the rationale behind the broader state-media-complex push to vax everyone.

Easy. Follow the money. Record profits for the pharma industry.

Secondarily, I have long had a hypothesis that they don't want unvaxxed people out there to be a control group. If everyone is vaccinated, you would never be able to prove that some adverse side effect was due to the vaccine. For a hypothetical example, if Alzheimers suddenly became an epidemic, and it wasn't effecting the unvaccinated beyond the usual numbers, it could be blamed on the vaccine. If everyone is vaccinated, there is no (control) group of people for comparison.

[Anti Globalist]

Do you just want people to die?

Depends on which people you are referring to. The narcissistic psychopaths that run this world? Yes I would very much like those people to die.

[Ender]

The real question is:

If this vax actually works why are the vaxed afraid of the unvaxed?

[TheTexan]

If you accept that:
1) the vaccine provides at least a small amount of immunity, and
2) people with immunity are less likely to be spreaders

Then it follows that vaccinating everybody would indeed reduce the number of people speading covid, and reduce covid overall.

Am I the only person in this thread, that understands that they have a legitimate argument here?

There are of course numerous & bountiful reasons to not take the vaccine, but the lack of a coherent argument is not one of them...

[acptulsa]

If you accept that:
1) the vaccine provides at least a small amount of immunity, and
2) people with immunity are less likely to be spreaders

Then it follows that vaccinating everybody would indeed reduce the number of people speading covid, and reduce covid overall.

Am I the only person in this thread, that understands that they have a legitimate argument here?

There are of course numerous & bountiful reasons to not take the vaccine, but the lack of a coherent argument is not one of them...

Yes, you're the only one who doesn't understand that they don't have an argument. There is no little bit of immunity. It's similar to, but different from, being a little bit pregnant. If you're a little bit pregnant, you'll be a lot pregnant soon enough. And if you aren't immune, you don't have immunity at all.

[oyarde]

I'm just going to put this out here and everybody can do what they like . The shot does not work . If it did you wouldnt get it . If someone got it before it was that obvious , OK . If it is that obvious and you decided to get it anyway , OK . Dont expect me to participate in it .

[TheTexan]

Yes, you're the only one who doesn't understand that they don't have an argument. There is no little bit of immunity. It's similar to, but different from, being a little bit pregnant. If you're a little bit pregnant, you'll be a lot pregnant soon enough. And if you aren't immune, you don't have immunity at all.

That's quite possibly, the dumbest thing I have heard from you in quite a while. Well done, sir.

[donnay]

The real question is:

If this vax actually works why are the vaxed afraid of the unvaxed?

Because the media tells you so. FEAR, sells. It also makes mental patients out of people.

[cjm]

The real question is:

If this vax actually works why are the vaxed afraid of the unvaxed?

In a word, propaganda.

I've got jabbed friends who are not afraid of me and jabbed friends that are. The biggest factor separating the two groups appears to simply be susceptibility to propaganda. The ones that fear me are also the ones that fear private gun ownership which is constantly smeared by the propagandists. These are also the same people that always seem eager to repeat the talking points they heard on the idiot box the night before... which is why I'm convinced it's the susceptibility to propaganda instead of "naturally" held beliefs.

I could be at the local tavern after playing basketball with some friends and the conversation is mostly debrief -- what's your shot of the day? how's your ankle doing? -- but then someone has to say, "that new stimulus bill is going to be great" (or similar). It's always the same guys that bring up the talking points (propaganda) and those are the same guys that are afraid of guns and afraid of unjabbed me. That's my take.