People can easily become like those they choose to surround themselves by. Regular self-reflection and openly conversing with complete strangers on airplanes (in coach!), etc can be a good thing.
As for those in your inner circle, I offer the following: 'Forgive' and 'forget' and truly two different words for a reason. I highly recommend the book, "Caring Enough to Forgive, Caring Enough Not to Forgive" by David W. Augsburger which discusses true forgiveness vs. false forgiveness. Simply amazing book for those who have been betrayed. And from the Bible, Matthew Chapter 18: 15 `If your brother does something wrong to you, go to him. Talk alone to him and tell him what he has done. If he listens to you, you have kept your brother as a friend. 16 But if he does not listen to you, take one or two others with you to talk to him. Then two or three people will hear every word and can prove what was said. 17 If he does not listen to them, tell the church. If he does not listen to the church, treat him as one who does not believe in God and as bad as a tax collector.'
I think the lack of conversation with others is probably playing a role in this. It's easy to yell at each other online, it's different if one were to spend time talking with others. There was a book I read a while back called "Reclaiming Conversations" I believe. It's not data-driven and apparently those on good-reads didn't like the book because of that, but I find the sentiments tend to ring true in that social media has made it difficult for us to talk to one another without going through a screen first. It makes things far too inauthentic when one can choose what to say before they say it. That also doesn't take into account that tone and intent is easy to miss online!
I do have some friends where it feels rather difficult to talk to because they assume to know my position and it's one of those things that bothers me. I just need to embrace I have a big disagreeable side.
I'll be on the lookout for that book Lee! And that verse is so apt! I'm not religious but I do find that many of these verses have a lot of meaning and there's plenty of truth in them. Including the tax collector stuff!
Apologies for commenting late Lee! I've pinned your comment so hopefully people can see your links!
I understand what you mean, but I can also see how talking in person could go either way, plus nowhere lol ... however, it's worth a try if it's a 33% chance and they are worth it.
Thanks for pin. For ultra-dipolmatic, peace keepers, that book is a great find.
“Essentially, many people who may have argued that things have gone too far may not have been arguing that at the beginning.”
This comment caught my eye. Frankly I’m conflicted. At what point does one say something has gone to far? I was against the entire situation from day 1. I was arguing it had gone too far from the start. I am not an exceptional human being, just a regular person. I am not sure what to do about people thought it was OK now believe it has gone too far. Amnesty, forgiveness, reconciliation? At this point they are useless words. They may never gave meaning for me again.
There's certainly a lot of subjectivity there. My comment was more in the vein that everyone is at some stage of "awakening" or "awareness". As I stated I myself was bought in on the COVID narrative for the first few months, and it took me some time to see the ridiculousness of it. The same goes for many people who we now consider to be champions against the COVID narrative including Ron DeSantis.
So my argument is in suggesting to what extent do we draw hard cutoffs, or will some eventually relegate themselves to a state of purity, in which case those who were Day 1 Skeptics are only allowed into the COVID critical circle.
Frankly, for me it's not too much of a concern as I'll write what I write, but if we have to start drawing lines then we're going to start implicating many people and just stirring more of that divisiveness.
That's why I just don't find it fruitful to criticize my friends and family to the same degree I would have years prior. It's not helpful, and it's just exhausting mentally to do so.
Great and thoughtful write-up. My thought (hey, you asked) is that Emily Oster was employed as the canary in the coal mine to gauge the magnanimity of those from which forgiveness is being sought. If we dip our collective toe in the water of admitting we were wrong, what kind of response will we get? Unfortunately, this coal mine is so full of methane gas that not only has the canary died, but the coal mine is blowing up. I for one am not happy with the intense negative response. Sure we all *feel* that way, but do we need to act that way? I think anyone on the cusp of admitting they were wrong will now crawl back in their shell, and that is not a good thing. Ideally we would have welcomed Ms. Oster with open arms and saved the brash response for those that truly deserve it (looking at Biden, Fauci, and all those jerks that said truly nasty things).
As someone who knows nothing about her I found it weird that a ton of anger was taken out on her. Was she the one who was in charge of locking people down, did she have ties to Fauci or the FDA?
For all intents and purposes, her role is similar to that random person in the store who may gawk at someone for not wearing a mask, or may stir up a fuss if you get to close.
At the end of the day, I'm wouldn't want to waste my time and energy over something so trivial.
As a canary one would have to wonder what sort of canary, and general such a remark would then start going into 4D chess territory and it all gets convoluted to the point we start becoming paranoid over who may be in on "the Amnesty project".
Totally agree! I thought it was odd too, but I think it's years of pent up anger coupled with a groupthink/bullying kind of attitude that I don't like. One person tries to see if there may be some forgiveness and everyone jumps down her throat. I agree it's paramount that this never happen again, but also important that we make it through this without completely dividing the country
The response I want to have to Jimmy Kimmel and everyone that laughed at the following:
“That choice doesn’t seem so tough to me. Vaccinated person having a heart attack? ‘Yes, come right on in, we’ll take care of you.’ Unvaccinated guy who gobbled horse goo? Rest in peace, wheezy.”
is
“That choice doesn’t seem so tough to me. Unvaccinated person having a heart attack? ‘Yes, come right on in, we’ll take care of you.’ Vaccinated guy who ignored the publicly reported adverse effects and just said jab me again daddy? Rest in peace, clotty.”
But I would NEVER say that (this is for example only) and I don't feel that way anyway. Which just leaves me in awe what someone must come to to utter those words in a public setting. I really wonder how much money Kimmel got for that. Sick and nasty bullying.
I've heard people make comments that it's fine if people don't get vaccinated, they can just end up in the hospital. They didn't know my vaccination status, but I generally find it weird that such comments can be made so brashly without any hesitancy in understanding. It's an assumption that one would respond with an "I agree" or "yes", essentially messaging to the base.
I just generally don't like it when people assume my position on things. Why not ask rather than assume and strawman or critique the position that was artificially constructed about me?
Forgiveness really is something I do for my self. I have compassion for all of us who were caught up in the fear porn before we saw it for what it was.
Now? I'm poking fun publicly at family and people who are still masking etc, I mean, why are they still hanging on to needing to mask and jab? What's going on there?
As for amnesty? Next Tuesday will tell whether that will grow wings of any sort.
Poking fun in a jocular manner is fine. I personally don't care to wear masks anymore and I haven't for maybe over a year or longer.
But it generally goes back to the idea of autonomy in that people should be able to do whatever they want. However, if the argument is that cloth masks are effective then that may be something that deserves discussion.
Ah, next Tuesday. Either we see midterm results or we are getting tacos!
Nov 4, 2022·edited Nov 4, 2022Liked by Modern Discontent
I hear you, but I still see people driving alone in their car with mask on, or riding their bike through town, with mask on.
I appreciate personal autonomy. It is what I want. These are not behaviors of autonomous choice. They are behaviors of the deaf dumb and blind who have been beaten in to submission
I see it too. It's certainly confusing and it does make one want to say something. I guess being introverted helps one to remain silent in those cases.
It's also hard when you're unsure how people would respond to your inquiry. Generally the first steps into a conversation are the hardest.
And it's true that if they do so with the assumption it is helping them then that makes it difficult if they aren't even wearing n95 or higher since it wouldn't be protective. Many people need to be told what to think, and if it wasn't COVID it'd be something else.
I've seen people look up the weather online and see it says it will be sunny rather than look above and see the dark, looming clouds. I tend to think that common sense is bred out and COVID is an example of that really occurring.
I find it hard to forgive and forget. My perspective on certain family members who I had great respect has change. The more you proclaim your expertise, the more I'm going to hold you to a higher standard. I'm no expert but I certainly could see good people with everything to lose, try to warn us all of the fraud and danger. Some of them are still being persecuted and ruined, for speaking truth and being right. I'll start thinking of forgiveness when they all are acquitted and given the recognition they deserve.
The "anti jabbers" should have an apology from the pro jabbers who have come to their senses. A lot of dead and injured people found out the truth the hard way. The toll continues to rise even as we speak. The proponents of this fairy tale need to be brought to justice. Mainstream propagandists need to be exposed as the liars they are and prosecuted.
The lie is still being pushed, what are these "Johnny come lately" doing to stop this? People are still wearing masks and getting jabs, are the reformed trying to educate these "lost" self righteous people?
The wedge has been driven between us, it has been said that, that was part of "the objective". The older generation is being killed off in great numbers. Those of us who have known freedom the longest are disappearing fast, so much for "big brothers or "uncle Sam's" love and concern.
My trust in anything govt is gone. Along with that is my trust of people in general. That's sad on my part, something got broke along the way.
So don't ask me for forgiveness, till you demonstrate actual regret and a willingness to repent.
I certainly understand your take Patrick. There's been so much going on that it stews up quite an angry force, especially as things can sometimes appear pessimistic in nature.
At the end of the day, for me I'm a bit indifferent because I'd rather figure out what exactly is going on and if certain people will be held accountable. I can't wish ill-will onto those who wanted me dead the same way I would hope no one suffers adverse reactions from the vaccines.
But I do understand your point. I think people should rightfully feel how they feel but know that holding onto that anger can really be harmful. Always keep in mind your own personal well-being when considering all of these issues.
Nothing wrong with people posting what they want, but I guess it was a little weird in seeing that a lot of remarks were made against the amnesty rather than the article itself.
Like I said I didn't see much in it aside from Oster thinking of Oster. Otherwise there wasn't much else there.
And so it's one of those things that makes me wonder if a lot of reading glossed over the title and headline itself and assumptions were made from that alone.
Sure, but then in that circumstance is the criticism rightfully lobbied at Oster, or is it at The Atlantic which may be using Oster as a front. In either case, the criticisms would then be targeted toward The Atlantic which hasn't had a good track record anyways hence people's reticent perspective against The Atlantic.
That's one of the issues I have. At the end of the day Oster was some random professor who threw her hat into the amnesty ring. Whether it was her place, or whether she is serving as a front it doesn't matter to me since that all just makes for unnecessary distraction and, quite frankly, adds to the divisive rhetoric.
The Two Minutes of Hate was a forced, ingenue, state imposed denouncement of "the current enemy".
What you read were the genuine expressions of anger and resentment of real people whose lives have been affected by the policies implemented as a result of virus.
Oster may have been the recipient of these expressions, but the real recipient should be those whom the general public trusted to make decisions for the betterment of humanity.
As I stated above I am one of those people who lost their jobs over the vaccine mandates. It's a shame that the group is as large as it is.
That being said, I can't become angry at Oster over what others have done. I don't know her aside from the article, and so I'll gauge my assumption based on the article which I find doesn't add much to the conversation.
I can get angry at her, but that would just create more divisiveness. The energy is better spent towards those who deserve it.
Sure - but you can have a show trial for a real crime vs a show trial for a fake crime, it's still a show trial. Likewise, Oster is just a scapegoat for a different idea of "amnesty" to vent at just because she said the word.
Honestly Emily Oster does not strike me as an obvious candidate for Crimes Against Humanity trials. She is a clueless data driven writer, who does not realize that data supplied by crooks is of negative value, and is unlikely to be a hardened Covid Criminal like Newsom, Hochul, Bill Gates, Walensky, dean of college who mandated vaccine for my dear relative, etc etc.
Her request for "amnesty" was made on behalf of other people.
BTW Walensky is missing for 2 weeks already due to a "mild" case of Covid and her last tweet was Oct 21
Thanks for writing this. It definitely gives pause (at least to me) for a the negative attention directed at Emily Oster. I hate it when I get caught jumping on the bandwagon without thinking beyond the moment. I needed this!! And I love my crazy family!!
The bandwagon can be something that is so tempting because it provides an ingroup. It's easy to target someone and get those clap backs or support. I generally find those sorts of comments annoying because it doesn't add much to the discussion.
Everyone has their qualms with their family, but at the end of the day I wouldn't want to make enemies with those who aren't deserving of that sort of anger. IT just leaves us even more divisive while those in power can scatter away without any accountability.
While in agreement on the very real potential of negative consequences on my health were i to hold on to anger, my forgiveness of the gullible private citizen who actively did things to harm me for my choice not to get vaccinated will be at a distance. There is a big difference between forgiving and forgetting, ie pretending the other party never revealed this ugly part of themselves, and forgiving as in “you are gullible and possess a mean streak, and I feel sorry for you and forgive you but will, for my own safety, keep my distance.” I might forgive, but will never trust the demonstrably untrustworthy.
I wrote a very harsh letter to the editor of The Atlantic. I might disagree with Oster and bemoan the "expertise" conferred upon her, but my beef is with The Atlantic and the rest of the media that stoked the hysteria, became, essentially, an arm of the state and the PR department for Pfizer, and actively censored and cheered censorship of important information.
Many of these outlets are deserving of criticism. They act as knowledge brokers for the public and I am very disappointed in their inability to disseminate information. That goes without even getting into the issues of partisanship that exists in these outlets.
I meant to include a comment about how my New Year's Eve post actually ended up serving more as a form of catharsis and I didn't feel too strongly about my idea later. I think there's a lot of pent up rage that isn't being vetted properly. I think the constant viewing of Substack or other social media outlets can really add to the negativity and I think it can sometimes end up making us worse of both mentally and physically.
I was just thinking about twitter in this way. I gave it up for a long time to only jump back into the rock fight wondering what has suddenly been giving me pain.
I never had Twitter until I made this Substack and wanted to promote it. It wasn't soon that I quickly ran afoul of Twitter's arbitrary Terms of Services so that ended only a few months in.
Even then, I saw how detrimental Twitter can be. Trying to fit comments into such little text means you either miss out on a lot of context or you just post snarky quips that people like. It doesn't really provide anything of deeper substance and I'm rather glad that I got banned, even if it likely inhibited my growth.
Now I'm concerned that Substack may be a little similar. I've been sort of eyeing the meta of Substack hoping it doesn't go the same ways as other social media outlets.
I certainly hope not. This conversation we are all having alone makes this platform better than any other that I know. Truth Social is twitter for people that got banned. . Rumble is freedom YouTube. And down the line. All different but the same. Where would you go telegram? I’ve dipped my toes in there but pretty unmanageable and not sorted out enough as far as I’m concerned. But I’m also very impatient. Keep us posted but stick here for a bit either way. You’re promoting and engaging in healthy conversation. Thanks
A patient told me about this article last week, we discussed impressions and moved on. Then I read the opinion page of the WSJ and caught the article and made my way over to the Altantic Mag. I found it underwhelming, I wished the scope of its discussion was broader (because its an interesting question and socially relevant). I think it touched a nerve for people who felt understandably mistreated (its hard to forgive when feeling other feelings)... I'm not convinced amnesty without nuance or the proper process will yield a satisfying result. This is a huge topic with multiple layers and players (mentioned in the comment section by others)- it will take time to uncouple and stratify expectations in 1:1 interactions vs individuals:institutions and the harm done.
Yes the opinion page from the WSJ was interesting since it seemed to be more of a tangential argument in which those who wish to use Oster's post as a front will do so. However, in those cases the use of a front shouldn't obfuscate the malfeasance conducted by those wishing to find a shield, such as the individual in the WSJ article who appeared to have wanted to cover for their ties to unions and enforcing the closure of schools for so long.
Nuance is certainly needed. I'm not myself ready to just toss out any old relationship, even though a few months prior I was leaning in that direction. At the end of the day it's pretty exhausting to have to deal with such issues to be quite honest. It's a lot better to treasure those who's company we enjoy rather than worrying who we keep in the friendship circle.
Nov 3, 2022·edited Nov 3, 2022Liked by Modern Discontent
I forget where I read the discussion on the word "amnesty" but it seems kind of appropriate to this discussion. Amnesty refers to pardoning someone for crimes committed, usually against the State. I believe that the Oster article is a trial balloon to gauge the general public's response to absolving those who have committed atrocities against humanity of their criminal acts. In this regard, my response is a firm, "No".
Many will say that, despite the profound effect that the Covid virus and its State imposed response, they didn't have the time to research alternate options. To them, I say, "I, an average college graduate in an unrelated field, made the time to not only search for these obfuscated options, but I also took the time to educate myself in areas of which I had no prior knowledge. You, the politician, the scientist, the governmental regulator, all of you whose job is is to be educated and trusted to help make important decisions that effect millions of people's lives should have done the same. No Amnesty and no forgiveness until after you have received your due punishment."
To the masses of our fellow citizens who believed what those in power were saying, I forgive you for that. However, if you ever, even in your heart, wished ill upon your fellow man for not adhering to the catechism of Covid policy, I will not forgive you for dehumanizing your fellow man.
Nobody should ever forget the incredibly harmful and damaging policies and rhetoric that was espoused by a great portion of the populace. Everyone should mourn the tragic losses incurred as a result of the governmental and corporate responses to the pandemic. The harms that have been committed by a select group of people upon the entirety of humanity, either through willful ignorance, outright greed, or malice should not be allowed to go unpunished, for we will be experiencing the effects of their deeds for generations.
One crucial point is that it's perfectly acceptable to start of naïve. We all lack knowledge, yet it's a yearning to learn and grow that makes us better. The same group that argues for established and consensus data also try to tell us that the science is changing. Which one is it? Can established science change? Surely it's not established then?
Or maybe we shouldn't be so quick to assume that the evidence we have is all of the evidence that will ever come about. A big issue is that much of the information was never routinely updated, never properly disseminate, and the public was never properly engaged and informed.
I made a comment once, and maybe it was in my New Year's Eve post, but it was something along the lines of "I stay angry because being angry lets me remember". While true, I'm realizing how damaging such a mentality can be. Being angry can consume you and take over your life. Many days, especially due to writing about COVID, I find that I'm rather stressed and in a typically foul mood and I tend to wonder if holding onto such anger is a reason for it.
It's one of the reasons why I enjoy writing about different topics. It alleviates much of that anger. I mentioned to someone that a lot of us are dealing with pent up rage with no way of venting. I think many of us need something cathartic to get our anger out. Then afterwards we can self-reflect and see if our perspective has changed.
Indeed. Emergency Room RN, fortunately unjabbed, spent many many sleepless nights researching *everything* because of my fears. Soon enough (maybe April 2020?) my research showed that there really was not all that much to fear if you were relatively young and relatively healthy, and even if you did contract Covid, there were effective treatments (if you could get someone to prescribe them. Those who took the time to research knew very early on what the deal was.
What some of the people with power did was absolutely evil, for example Fauci specifying Remdesivir as treatment when he knew from previous use that it had a high kill rate and forcing mandates so that people who wanted bodily autonomy had to choose between that and their jobs and supporting their family.
I was not personally affected very much as it was easy for me to stay at home during lockdowns and the only thing I had to forego was my exercise class, so anger is not the emotion I am feeling.
However I would like to see justice and accountability for such crimes and all those who perpetuated it so that it never happens again.
I think it would also help if those who were duped (hypnotised, in my opinion) into attacking those who didn't toe the line, sincerely apologised to those they attacked. (especially anyone who was injured by the vax)
Justice and accountability, as well as facts would be nice. When it comes to apologies, I guess it's to each their own. I've become rather indifferent to it more because I'd rather figure out what's going on than be worried about receiving apologies from others.
I don't need any apologies from any of my friends and relatives as none of them excluded me.
I have a friend who is more socially oriented than I am and who was excluded by close friends of many years standing (they have stopped now) but it is hard for her to move on because they act as if it didn't happen. If they apologised it would help to repair their relationship
I also think that the more public apologies we have from prominent people (celebrities who endorsed the narrative (Tim Robbins for example) will help people wake up to what is going on as sadly we live in a society where people follow their lead instead of thinking for themselves.
I've shared these thoughts elsewhere:
People can easily become like those they choose to surround themselves by. Regular self-reflection and openly conversing with complete strangers on airplanes (in coach!), etc can be a good thing.
Hold people who committed crimes accountable. - https://leemuller.substack.com/p/poll-who-is-the-most-guilty
As for those in your inner circle, I offer the following: 'Forgive' and 'forget' and truly two different words for a reason. I highly recommend the book, "Caring Enough to Forgive, Caring Enough Not to Forgive" by David W. Augsburger which discusses true forgiveness vs. false forgiveness. Simply amazing book for those who have been betrayed. And from the Bible, Matthew Chapter 18: 15 `If your brother does something wrong to you, go to him. Talk alone to him and tell him what he has done. If he listens to you, you have kept your brother as a friend. 16 But if he does not listen to you, take one or two others with you to talk to him. Then two or three people will hear every word and can prove what was said. 17 If he does not listen to them, tell the church. If he does not listen to the church, treat him as one who does not believe in God and as bad as a tax collector.'
More thoughts on true, good apologies from family and friends here: https://leemuller.substack.com/p/those-two-little-words
I think the lack of conversation with others is probably playing a role in this. It's easy to yell at each other online, it's different if one were to spend time talking with others. There was a book I read a while back called "Reclaiming Conversations" I believe. It's not data-driven and apparently those on good-reads didn't like the book because of that, but I find the sentiments tend to ring true in that social media has made it difficult for us to talk to one another without going through a screen first. It makes things far too inauthentic when one can choose what to say before they say it. That also doesn't take into account that tone and intent is easy to miss online!
I do have some friends where it feels rather difficult to talk to because they assume to know my position and it's one of those things that bothers me. I just need to embrace I have a big disagreeable side.
I'll be on the lookout for that book Lee! And that verse is so apt! I'm not religious but I do find that many of these verses have a lot of meaning and there's plenty of truth in them. Including the tax collector stuff!
Apologies for commenting late Lee! I've pinned your comment so hopefully people can see your links!
I understand what you mean, but I can also see how talking in person could go either way, plus nowhere lol ... however, it's worth a try if it's a 33% chance and they are worth it.
Thanks for pin. For ultra-dipolmatic, peace keepers, that book is a great find.
“Essentially, many people who may have argued that things have gone too far may not have been arguing that at the beginning.”
This comment caught my eye. Frankly I’m conflicted. At what point does one say something has gone to far? I was against the entire situation from day 1. I was arguing it had gone too far from the start. I am not an exceptional human being, just a regular person. I am not sure what to do about people thought it was OK now believe it has gone too far. Amnesty, forgiveness, reconciliation? At this point they are useless words. They may never gave meaning for me again.
There's certainly a lot of subjectivity there. My comment was more in the vein that everyone is at some stage of "awakening" or "awareness". As I stated I myself was bought in on the COVID narrative for the first few months, and it took me some time to see the ridiculousness of it. The same goes for many people who we now consider to be champions against the COVID narrative including Ron DeSantis.
So my argument is in suggesting to what extent do we draw hard cutoffs, or will some eventually relegate themselves to a state of purity, in which case those who were Day 1 Skeptics are only allowed into the COVID critical circle.
Frankly, for me it's not too much of a concern as I'll write what I write, but if we have to start drawing lines then we're going to start implicating many people and just stirring more of that divisiveness.
That's why I just don't find it fruitful to criticize my friends and family to the same degree I would have years prior. It's not helpful, and it's just exhausting mentally to do so.
Great and thoughtful write-up. My thought (hey, you asked) is that Emily Oster was employed as the canary in the coal mine to gauge the magnanimity of those from which forgiveness is being sought. If we dip our collective toe in the water of admitting we were wrong, what kind of response will we get? Unfortunately, this coal mine is so full of methane gas that not only has the canary died, but the coal mine is blowing up. I for one am not happy with the intense negative response. Sure we all *feel* that way, but do we need to act that way? I think anyone on the cusp of admitting they were wrong will now crawl back in their shell, and that is not a good thing. Ideally we would have welcomed Ms. Oster with open arms and saved the brash response for those that truly deserve it (looking at Biden, Fauci, and all those jerks that said truly nasty things).
As someone who knows nothing about her I found it weird that a ton of anger was taken out on her. Was she the one who was in charge of locking people down, did she have ties to Fauci or the FDA?
For all intents and purposes, her role is similar to that random person in the store who may gawk at someone for not wearing a mask, or may stir up a fuss if you get to close.
At the end of the day, I'm wouldn't want to waste my time and energy over something so trivial.
As a canary one would have to wonder what sort of canary, and general such a remark would then start going into 4D chess territory and it all gets convoluted to the point we start becoming paranoid over who may be in on "the Amnesty project".
Totally agree! I thought it was odd too, but I think it's years of pent up anger coupled with a groupthink/bullying kind of attitude that I don't like. One person tries to see if there may be some forgiveness and everyone jumps down her throat. I agree it's paramount that this never happen again, but also important that we make it through this without completely dividing the country
The response I want to have to Jimmy Kimmel and everyone that laughed at the following:
“That choice doesn’t seem so tough to me. Vaccinated person having a heart attack? ‘Yes, come right on in, we’ll take care of you.’ Unvaccinated guy who gobbled horse goo? Rest in peace, wheezy.”
is
“That choice doesn’t seem so tough to me. Unvaccinated person having a heart attack? ‘Yes, come right on in, we’ll take care of you.’ Vaccinated guy who ignored the publicly reported adverse effects and just said jab me again daddy? Rest in peace, clotty.”
But I would NEVER say that (this is for example only) and I don't feel that way anyway. Which just leaves me in awe what someone must come to to utter those words in a public setting. I really wonder how much money Kimmel got for that. Sick and nasty bullying.
I've heard people make comments that it's fine if people don't get vaccinated, they can just end up in the hospital. They didn't know my vaccination status, but I generally find it weird that such comments can be made so brashly without any hesitancy in understanding. It's an assumption that one would respond with an "I agree" or "yes", essentially messaging to the base.
I just generally don't like it when people assume my position on things. Why not ask rather than assume and strawman or critique the position that was artificially constructed about me?
Yes, throw them all out, best quote in the piece.
Forgiveness really is something I do for my self. I have compassion for all of us who were caught up in the fear porn before we saw it for what it was.
Now? I'm poking fun publicly at family and people who are still masking etc, I mean, why are they still hanging on to needing to mask and jab? What's going on there?
As for amnesty? Next Tuesday will tell whether that will grow wings of any sort.
Poking fun in a jocular manner is fine. I personally don't care to wear masks anymore and I haven't for maybe over a year or longer.
But it generally goes back to the idea of autonomy in that people should be able to do whatever they want. However, if the argument is that cloth masks are effective then that may be something that deserves discussion.
Ah, next Tuesday. Either we see midterm results or we are getting tacos!
I hear you, but I still see people driving alone in their car with mask on, or riding their bike through town, with mask on.
I appreciate personal autonomy. It is what I want. These are not behaviors of autonomous choice. They are behaviors of the deaf dumb and blind who have been beaten in to submission
I see it too. It's certainly confusing and it does make one want to say something. I guess being introverted helps one to remain silent in those cases.
It's also hard when you're unsure how people would respond to your inquiry. Generally the first steps into a conversation are the hardest.
And it's true that if they do so with the assumption it is helping them then that makes it difficult if they aren't even wearing n95 or higher since it wouldn't be protective. Many people need to be told what to think, and if it wasn't COVID it'd be something else.
I've seen people look up the weather online and see it says it will be sunny rather than look above and see the dark, looming clouds. I tend to think that common sense is bred out and COVID is an example of that really occurring.
I didn't appreciate them telling new what to do, so I don't tell them now. Being "right" is a fool's mission
I find it hard to forgive and forget. My perspective on certain family members who I had great respect has change. The more you proclaim your expertise, the more I'm going to hold you to a higher standard. I'm no expert but I certainly could see good people with everything to lose, try to warn us all of the fraud and danger. Some of them are still being persecuted and ruined, for speaking truth and being right. I'll start thinking of forgiveness when they all are acquitted and given the recognition they deserve.
The "anti jabbers" should have an apology from the pro jabbers who have come to their senses. A lot of dead and injured people found out the truth the hard way. The toll continues to rise even as we speak. The proponents of this fairy tale need to be brought to justice. Mainstream propagandists need to be exposed as the liars they are and prosecuted.
The lie is still being pushed, what are these "Johnny come lately" doing to stop this? People are still wearing masks and getting jabs, are the reformed trying to educate these "lost" self righteous people?
The wedge has been driven between us, it has been said that, that was part of "the objective". The older generation is being killed off in great numbers. Those of us who have known freedom the longest are disappearing fast, so much for "big brothers or "uncle Sam's" love and concern.
My trust in anything govt is gone. Along with that is my trust of people in general. That's sad on my part, something got broke along the way.
So don't ask me for forgiveness, till you demonstrate actual regret and a willingness to repent.
I certainly understand your take Patrick. There's been so much going on that it stews up quite an angry force, especially as things can sometimes appear pessimistic in nature.
At the end of the day, for me I'm a bit indifferent because I'd rather figure out what exactly is going on and if certain people will be held accountable. I can't wish ill-will onto those who wanted me dead the same way I would hope no one suffers adverse reactions from the vaccines.
But I do understand your point. I think people should rightfully feel how they feel but know that holding onto that anger can really be harmful. Always keep in mind your own personal well-being when considering all of these issues.
I understand about the anger issue. Already has hurt once close reltionships. Thank you for your comment.
Apart from Igor's interesting meta-take, most of the Oster-bashing that went through substack was just a big Two Minute's Hate -fest
Nothing wrong with people posting what they want, but I guess it was a little weird in seeing that a lot of remarks were made against the amnesty rather than the article itself.
Like I said I didn't see much in it aside from Oster thinking of Oster. Otherwise there wasn't much else there.
And so it's one of those things that makes me wonder if a lot of reading glossed over the title and headline itself and assumptions were made from that alone.
If it was just Emily Oster asking for amnesty for herself, it would belong on her private blog or twitter.
Instead it was published in The Atlantic, a bellwether magazine for the ruling elite.
Sure, but then in that circumstance is the criticism rightfully lobbied at Oster, or is it at The Atlantic which may be using Oster as a front. In either case, the criticisms would then be targeted toward The Atlantic which hasn't had a good track record anyways hence people's reticent perspective against The Atlantic.
That's one of the issues I have. At the end of the day Oster was some random professor who threw her hat into the amnesty ring. Whether it was her place, or whether she is serving as a front it doesn't matter to me since that all just makes for unnecessary distraction and, quite frankly, adds to the divisive rhetoric.
I disagree with your assessment.
The Two Minutes of Hate was a forced, ingenue, state imposed denouncement of "the current enemy".
What you read were the genuine expressions of anger and resentment of real people whose lives have been affected by the policies implemented as a result of virus.
Oster may have been the recipient of these expressions, but the real recipient should be those whom the general public trusted to make decisions for the betterment of humanity.
Please do not confuse the two.
As I stated above I am one of those people who lost their jobs over the vaccine mandates. It's a shame that the group is as large as it is.
That being said, I can't become angry at Oster over what others have done. I don't know her aside from the article, and so I'll gauge my assumption based on the article which I find doesn't add much to the conversation.
I can get angry at her, but that would just create more divisiveness. The energy is better spent towards those who deserve it.
Sure - but you can have a show trial for a real crime vs a show trial for a fake crime, it's still a show trial. Likewise, Oster is just a scapegoat for a different idea of "amnesty" to vent at just because she said the word.
Honestly Emily Oster does not strike me as an obvious candidate for Crimes Against Humanity trials. She is a clueless data driven writer, who does not realize that data supplied by crooks is of negative value, and is unlikely to be a hardened Covid Criminal like Newsom, Hochul, Bill Gates, Walensky, dean of college who mandated vaccine for my dear relative, etc etc.
Her request for "amnesty" was made on behalf of other people.
BTW Walensky is missing for 2 weeks already due to a "mild" case of Covid and her last tweet was Oct 21
A true compliment
But frankly I am also full of anger and sadness
Forgive and fire! Not just Fauci and his minions - the entire alphabet soup of health regulatory agencies (CDC, FDA, NIH, etc.) must be abolished.
But if we abolish all of the alphabets I'll only be left with soup! Can I at least have some crackers? That makes it a meal then right?
Thanks for writing this. It definitely gives pause (at least to me) for a the negative attention directed at Emily Oster. I hate it when I get caught jumping on the bandwagon without thinking beyond the moment. I needed this!! And I love my crazy family!!
The bandwagon can be something that is so tempting because it provides an ingroup. It's easy to target someone and get those clap backs or support. I generally find those sorts of comments annoying because it doesn't add much to the discussion.
Everyone has their qualms with their family, but at the end of the day I wouldn't want to make enemies with those who aren't deserving of that sort of anger. IT just leaves us even more divisive while those in power can scatter away without any accountability.
While in agreement on the very real potential of negative consequences on my health were i to hold on to anger, my forgiveness of the gullible private citizen who actively did things to harm me for my choice not to get vaccinated will be at a distance. There is a big difference between forgiving and forgetting, ie pretending the other party never revealed this ugly part of themselves, and forgiving as in “you are gullible and possess a mean streak, and I feel sorry for you and forgive you but will, for my own safety, keep my distance.” I might forgive, but will never trust the demonstrably untrustworthy.
Yes, agree.
I have only wanted forgiveness, or avoiding it entirely, when I know I've been a bully
I wrote a very harsh letter to the editor of The Atlantic. I might disagree with Oster and bemoan the "expertise" conferred upon her, but my beef is with The Atlantic and the rest of the media that stoked the hysteria, became, essentially, an arm of the state and the PR department for Pfizer, and actively censored and cheered censorship of important information.
Many of these outlets are deserving of criticism. They act as knowledge brokers for the public and I am very disappointed in their inability to disseminate information. That goes without even getting into the issues of partisanship that exists in these outlets.
Tgank you for this text. I helped me let go a little more of my anger.
I meant to include a comment about how my New Year's Eve post actually ended up serving more as a form of catharsis and I didn't feel too strongly about my idea later. I think there's a lot of pent up rage that isn't being vetted properly. I think the constant viewing of Substack or other social media outlets can really add to the negativity and I think it can sometimes end up making us worse of both mentally and physically.
I was just thinking about twitter in this way. I gave it up for a long time to only jump back into the rock fight wondering what has suddenly been giving me pain.
I never had Twitter until I made this Substack and wanted to promote it. It wasn't soon that I quickly ran afoul of Twitter's arbitrary Terms of Services so that ended only a few months in.
Even then, I saw how detrimental Twitter can be. Trying to fit comments into such little text means you either miss out on a lot of context or you just post snarky quips that people like. It doesn't really provide anything of deeper substance and I'm rather glad that I got banned, even if it likely inhibited my growth.
Now I'm concerned that Substack may be a little similar. I've been sort of eyeing the meta of Substack hoping it doesn't go the same ways as other social media outlets.
I certainly hope not. This conversation we are all having alone makes this platform better than any other that I know. Truth Social is twitter for people that got banned. . Rumble is freedom YouTube. And down the line. All different but the same. Where would you go telegram? I’ve dipped my toes in there but pretty unmanageable and not sorted out enough as far as I’m concerned. But I’m also very impatient. Keep us posted but stick here for a bit either way. You’re promoting and engaging in healthy conversation. Thanks
A patient told me about this article last week, we discussed impressions and moved on. Then I read the opinion page of the WSJ and caught the article and made my way over to the Altantic Mag. I found it underwhelming, I wished the scope of its discussion was broader (because its an interesting question and socially relevant). I think it touched a nerve for people who felt understandably mistreated (its hard to forgive when feeling other feelings)... I'm not convinced amnesty without nuance or the proper process will yield a satisfying result. This is a huge topic with multiple layers and players (mentioned in the comment section by others)- it will take time to uncouple and stratify expectations in 1:1 interactions vs individuals:institutions and the harm done.
Yes the opinion page from the WSJ was interesting since it seemed to be more of a tangential argument in which those who wish to use Oster's post as a front will do so. However, in those cases the use of a front shouldn't obfuscate the malfeasance conducted by those wishing to find a shield, such as the individual in the WSJ article who appeared to have wanted to cover for their ties to unions and enforcing the closure of schools for so long.
Nuance is certainly needed. I'm not myself ready to just toss out any old relationship, even though a few months prior I was leaning in that direction. At the end of the day it's pretty exhausting to have to deal with such issues to be quite honest. It's a lot better to treasure those who's company we enjoy rather than worrying who we keep in the friendship circle.
I forget where I read the discussion on the word "amnesty" but it seems kind of appropriate to this discussion. Amnesty refers to pardoning someone for crimes committed, usually against the State. I believe that the Oster article is a trial balloon to gauge the general public's response to absolving those who have committed atrocities against humanity of their criminal acts. In this regard, my response is a firm, "No".
Many will say that, despite the profound effect that the Covid virus and its State imposed response, they didn't have the time to research alternate options. To them, I say, "I, an average college graduate in an unrelated field, made the time to not only search for these obfuscated options, but I also took the time to educate myself in areas of which I had no prior knowledge. You, the politician, the scientist, the governmental regulator, all of you whose job is is to be educated and trusted to help make important decisions that effect millions of people's lives should have done the same. No Amnesty and no forgiveness until after you have received your due punishment."
To the masses of our fellow citizens who believed what those in power were saying, I forgive you for that. However, if you ever, even in your heart, wished ill upon your fellow man for not adhering to the catechism of Covid policy, I will not forgive you for dehumanizing your fellow man.
Nobody should ever forget the incredibly harmful and damaging policies and rhetoric that was espoused by a great portion of the populace. Everyone should mourn the tragic losses incurred as a result of the governmental and corporate responses to the pandemic. The harms that have been committed by a select group of people upon the entirety of humanity, either through willful ignorance, outright greed, or malice should not be allowed to go unpunished, for we will be experiencing the effects of their deeds for generations.
One crucial point is that it's perfectly acceptable to start of naïve. We all lack knowledge, yet it's a yearning to learn and grow that makes us better. The same group that argues for established and consensus data also try to tell us that the science is changing. Which one is it? Can established science change? Surely it's not established then?
Or maybe we shouldn't be so quick to assume that the evidence we have is all of the evidence that will ever come about. A big issue is that much of the information was never routinely updated, never properly disseminate, and the public was never properly engaged and informed.
I made a comment once, and maybe it was in my New Year's Eve post, but it was something along the lines of "I stay angry because being angry lets me remember". While true, I'm realizing how damaging such a mentality can be. Being angry can consume you and take over your life. Many days, especially due to writing about COVID, I find that I'm rather stressed and in a typically foul mood and I tend to wonder if holding onto such anger is a reason for it.
It's one of the reasons why I enjoy writing about different topics. It alleviates much of that anger. I mentioned to someone that a lot of us are dealing with pent up rage with no way of venting. I think many of us need something cathartic to get our anger out. Then afterwards we can self-reflect and see if our perspective has changed.
Indeed. Emergency Room RN, fortunately unjabbed, spent many many sleepless nights researching *everything* because of my fears. Soon enough (maybe April 2020?) my research showed that there really was not all that much to fear if you were relatively young and relatively healthy, and even if you did contract Covid, there were effective treatments (if you could get someone to prescribe them. Those who took the time to research knew very early on what the deal was.
What some of the people with power did was absolutely evil, for example Fauci specifying Remdesivir as treatment when he knew from previous use that it had a high kill rate and forcing mandates so that people who wanted bodily autonomy had to choose between that and their jobs and supporting their family.
I was not personally affected very much as it was easy for me to stay at home during lockdowns and the only thing I had to forego was my exercise class, so anger is not the emotion I am feeling.
However I would like to see justice and accountability for such crimes and all those who perpetuated it so that it never happens again.
I think it would also help if those who were duped (hypnotised, in my opinion) into attacking those who didn't toe the line, sincerely apologised to those they attacked. (especially anyone who was injured by the vax)
Justice and accountability, as well as facts would be nice. When it comes to apologies, I guess it's to each their own. I've become rather indifferent to it more because I'd rather figure out what's going on than be worried about receiving apologies from others.
I don't need any apologies from any of my friends and relatives as none of them excluded me.
I have a friend who is more socially oriented than I am and who was excluded by close friends of many years standing (they have stopped now) but it is hard for her to move on because they act as if it didn't happen. If they apologised it would help to repair their relationship
I also think that the more public apologies we have from prominent people (celebrities who endorsed the narrative (Tim Robbins for example) will help people wake up to what is going on as sadly we live in a society where people follow their lead instead of thinking for themselves.
Thanks for the thoughtful response. I appreciate your feedback. I agree it can be exhausting on all fronts, aspects, and sides.