^^^^^
Great observation, drstrangelove; i tend to agree that there is historical & incremental brainwashing/conditioning tactics in play to sway demographics to view opposition to State-sponsored dictates as 'taboo'.
JackRiddler » Mon Oct 30, 2023 9:23 pm wrote:...
In any case, you're starting yet another thread in which you want to once again mount a prosecutorial case against the apparatchiks of a system for doing what they did. But rather than see them as apparatchiks of a system, loyal servants trained to be loyal servants, you want to define them by the degrees or education or expertise they supposedly have, and effectively blame "education" rather than class or system, and blame them for their status rather than their decisions. Or blame the apparatchiks' training, rather the fact that they are willing apparatchiks -- even as their most effective opponents possess the same training, are also doctors and scientists! That's in your thread title. "Educated" is a "class," and it's the problem.
The apparatchiks themselves are probably not as confused on this point. They know what pays them directly, and it's not that they had an education (a precondition) but that they do a job within a larger organization, or they have a career as faithful producers in a field.
Also, you seem to want to allow no moral difference between these apparatchiks and the far larger group of conformists, or those who only conform because they're misinformed, or because they're afraid, or because they're lazy. You want to say the apparatchiks are apparatchiks and the conformists conform because of their "education," which self-evidently does not describe either. Further, this fails to describe a reality in which conformity cut across lines of both education and class. Plenty of people without college went along and still go along!
Yes,
this approach you're choosing is reactionary, too bad. Yes, "education" is a central obsession of right-wing culture war, which doesn't mean anyone who attacks it is right-wing, but it's still so, and for a reason: It's not looking at structure. It is not looking at systems but at individual behaviors. It is confusing the reality. From a practical or strategic standpoint, it is designating a lot more enemies than can be defeated, or that need to be defeated in the cause of self-defense, or than actually see themselves as enemies to what you think (at least until you insist that they are, in which case you might reinforce that idea for them). You seem to want some kind of general retribution, some score settling. Years of this now. This desire and the arguments it produces are not so different in their logical structure from what the vocal Covidian haters of the mandate opponents wanted and hoped for.
You are misframing. I placed "educated" in quotes as a shorthand but broadly, it applies predominantly to the professional/comfortable/upper classes. To repeat, you are once again attempting to frame my position as if I don't account for plenty of exceptions, which of course there would be. I emphasized it in the bolded bit of my OP. YES, there were quite a few doctors, scientists, businesspersons (individuals across classes) etc, that did not comply and even vocalized their opposition to policies. BUT clearly this was a relatively SMALL minority in 2021/2022.
I believe it's short-sighted take to call this "reactionary" (as bolded in your response, above). Of course 'structure' is an inherent part of what occurred. I've emphasized this numerous times over the last few years, the systemic aspects that contributed to what we experienced in 2021-2022. BUT: the PEOPLE that complied or silently adhered were/are COMPLICIT as well. Your attempts to diminish this or frame it as a "right wing" talking point seems like an effort to re-categorize what occurred into a different type of discussion (though I'll grant that there are numerous tropes by both 'left' and 'right' wings that will interpret events and classify/define them to reinforce their world views, etc; some of these interpretations have more merit than others, though quite a bit of it tends towards tribalistic bias).
The FACT remains that when these policies were being implemented and enforced, the MAJORITY of those in the professional/comfortable/Educated classes DUTIFULLY COMPLIED, applied little/no DISCERNMENT, and in a significant number of cases were the loudest CHEERLEADERS for the overt acts of discrimination, segregation and otherizing of the "unvaccinated". (the example I presented above as "Exhibit B" is merely 1 of thousands).
IT is PRECISELY due to the overall dutiful compliance (and at times zealous participation) of this
very influential 'professional' class -- their COLLECTIVE COWARDICE, COMPLICITY, PARTICIPATION IN DISCRIMINATION and HUMAN RIGHTS ABUSES [due to unwillingness to challenge their conformity, 'taboo' factors as raised by drstrangelove, incentives to 'play along', and/or other forms of incremental conditioning/brainwashing measures over time, etc.] that these policies were successfully implemented and PERSISTED far longer than they should have. As mentioned in the primary covid thread,
TO THIS DAY 'Vaccine Mandates' persist in far too many colleges, including (unsurprisingly) the so-called "Ivy Leagues".
The simple reality is that
If a MAJORITY -- particularly an influential majority -- voiced and EXPRESSED opposition when it was needed, the egregious harms to (and loss of) lives, livelihoods and HUMAN RIGHTS abuses would not have occurred (or, at the least the duration of these affronts would have been greatly diminished, AND there'd likely be greater potential for near-term repercussions/accountability).
And clearly, there remains, today, a REFUSAL to take ownership of this complicity and recognize/acknowledge the BIG part played by so many, and particularly those in the 'professional'/more affluent classes (and typically, yes, they are largely "educated" as well).
When the opportunity rose for them to SPEAK UP and VOICE opposition to BLATANT and BRAZEN AFFRONTS to human rights, due process, ethics, rules of procedure, livelihoods..... they [the professional, educated, largely affluent classes] FAILED. To the contrary, they largely PARTICIPATED in these affronts.
[slight Edit to content in an attempt to tone down rhetoric]