Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

fatBoyWithThinKnees t1_iy3g7ag wrote

Reply to comment by cartoonist498 in China COVID cases hit fresh record high after weekend of protests by TequillaShotz

>and that something had to be done.

Ahh... no. A rational person did not have to think something had to be done.

−32

cartoonist498 t1_iy3hz0r wrote

We had plenty of US states that were firmly right wing state governments and even state governors publicly denying the seriousness of COVID.

Every single one of those states mandated restrictions at one point. Their bullshit was just to appease their base but their actions said something very different.

It's your choice to disagree with the consensus of every single state government, and frankly every country in the world, that the pandemic was serious enough to temporarily restrict freedoms. Whether that's "rational" is up for debate.

21

fatBoyWithThinKnees t1_iy3imjn wrote

>Whether that's "rational" is up for debate.

Well, that's great! We should have that debate. In China, it sounds like they're not entertaining that debate. The debate wasn't entertained two years ago in much of the western world, instead any opposition was dismissed as conspiracy theorist, science denying misinformation.

−30

Dragonheart0 t1_iy3kqif wrote

You mean the lockdown two years ago that happened before there were vaccines and known treatments? To prevent hospitals from getting overloaded, which ended up happening especially in areas that refused to follow precautions?

Yeah, maybe there's a reason people have different opinions on lockdowns now vs. the situations back then...

18

cartoonist498 t1_iy3xnil wrote

Do you live in China? I sympathize with you if you do.

I live in a country that had lockdowns but also made all data publicly available, with that data provided by entities separate from those in power to ensure transparency.

We had the same numbers that the executive branch of our government had, updated daily, and daily being scrutinized by the public to ensure the lockdowns were justified and didn't go on for longer than it needed to.

Again what was "rational" in terms of limiting our freedoms was up for debate, but my country was nothing like China where the cities being locked down literally don't know if there's 1 case of COVID or 1 million.

6

fatBoyWithThinKnees t1_iy40vms wrote

>Again what was "rational" in terms of limiting our freedoms was up for debate

Was it? Does that include the media's widespread claim that anything anti-lockdown was conspiracy theorist or science denying thinking (example)? Does that include the fact that many people were banned from subreddits they'd never even visited simply because they participated in a forum for lockdown skeptics (example)? Does that include the large numbers of videos that were removed from YouTube, flagged as misinformation (example), for trying to question the long term impact of lockdowns?

I'd argue no, it very much was not up for debate.

−13

Force3vo t1_iy480r3 wrote

>Was it? Does that include the media's widespread claim that anything anti-lockdown was conspiracy theorist or science denying thinking (

From your own article: protesters claiming that COVID-19 was a hoax

So if they claim Covid didn't exist and was just a lie by the government they are conspiracists and science denier.

>Does that include the fact that many people were banned from subreddits they'd never even visited simply because they participated in a forum for lockdown skeptics (

And you lie. If people actively participate in subreddits that were made for brigading other subreddits and spreading lies surely they should have to live with getting banned from subreddits that don't want to deal with that shit.

If I knew my neighbor would be a part of a group that when invited will steal your key so they can all get into your house at night shitting all over the rooms I'd also not invite them.

Oh and your "source" says nothing about people never even visiting those subreddits. In fact it proves the person was banned PRECISELY for actively participating in it.

>Does that include the large numbers of videos that were removed from YouTube, flagged as misinformation, for trying to question the long term impact of lockdowns?

So you ended trying to make a point and hoped nobody would click your sources I guess. Because the article says that Youtube removed a million videos that were spreading COVID misinformation. Which has nothing to do with your cherry picked example of questioning the long term impact of lockdowns.

If you think that just making up a story how COVID doesn't exist and all the people that died or were badly ill because of it are just actors/liars/whatever shouldn't be seen as conspiracy theories or science denial then it's 100% not the fault of the media you think that way.

9

CoreParad0x t1_iy4vowi wrote

In their original post, /u/cartoonist498 stated > Whether or not you agreed with the measures taken by your government any rational person would agree that there was truth in the numbers and that something had to be done.

If you look at the history of the person you're replying to, they think climate science is still up for debate and not largely settled. Neither of you are dealing with one of these rational people, probably best not to bother, you aren't going to pull this persons head out of their ass.

3

Force3vo t1_iy5eojp wrote

I do that mostly so shitty viewpoints aren't left uncommented and less informed people think it's truth. Not fir the people living in fantasies already.

3

CoreParad0x t1_iy5ewlx wrote

Ah yeah, makes sense, and good point. It's definitely worth getting the info out there for people who actually want it, and in that case thanks for doing that.

1

cartoonist498 t1_iy4jcc8 wrote

Was it not? There was anti-lockdown content literally everywhere. I was personally sent dozens of videos and articles, and no doubt there were hundreds or thousands more, claiming COVID-19 was an engineered virus by Bill Gates being used by sinister ungodly forces to enslave the human race.

These videos/articles were all publicly available and free for anyone to view. The anti-lockdown view was very much in the public eye and free for anyone to find. Entire US state governments became anti-lockdown after initially locking down due to the severity of infections and deaths. Are you suggesting entire US states were somehow censored from the internet?

So, obviously, it was up for debate.

7

aza-industries t1_iy6nzhc wrote

It must be blissful being so ignorant. The envy of us all for sure.

0