Corona Virus as a means to expand State control?

I suppose describing the effectiveness of prohibition is a matter of perspective. It led to a lot of organized crime behavior that still exists to this day. Who knows how much brain damage was caused by drinking moonshine? I honestly can't make a solid argument either way. I DO know that prohibition of "sin" tends to have very bad results overall.

 

i think you are assuming people drink more because of strong emotions. I agree. But in the US, I think MOST ppl are drinking and consuming lots of vice more because they are stressed or bored. Not so much a strong emotion (fear, worry, grief, etc) just your average crisis management.

But from the addicts perspective, boredom is simply one of many trigger. Not sure if it is also a strong emotion ?

In Singapore the govt defaults to more control in crisis. In the 1900s the US was that way. In fact we are the reason Singapore is the way it is now. They simply retained our manifest destiny morals that we abandoned prior to the nuclear bomb.

Even in the US we have blue laws which restrict alcohol consumption that date back to the 1800s which essentially predates prohibition.

Alcohol is a caged tiger that we tolerate and bring out on occasions. It kills more people by far than any other drug but it is also the most widely used drug.

The real question is : what addictions does the Singaporean have access to to mítigate the crisis ?

porn, for example, relaxes many users here but not without consequences. It is illegal in many Muslim countries, and non Muslim countries ; would offering it now to pass the time in strict isolation be smart ?

 

The trouble with all kinds of drugs is for the vast majority of us we can drink etc without becoming helpless addicts but a minority of us cannot control it,

Every Western government defaults to more control during a crisis, whether it is a disease, terrorism or any other social problem, to single out the Singapore government is unfair .
None of the emergency laws enacted by our governments will come off the statue books .

 

every government lurches towards control but some governments look to leverage crisis as an opportunity to enact mass sweeping changes. Especially liberal big government types. I remember how the Democrat architect and strategist rahm emmanuel was famous for this singular policy under the underwhelming Obama. Bush did even worse when he created homeland and the worst agency out of the 9/11 fiasco I think the government had ever dreamt up in tsa. I hate that agency with a passion. Primarily because in travel a lot and these good people seem to feel they are demigods. I hate to say it but I felt zero pity when this dept has problems and is embarrassed nationally. It’s a waste and should be shrank or undone.

yes. I imagine some new bureaucracy will be created out of covid. I hope I’m wrong but something this scale In blood and tears won’t go unanswered. It crippled the global economy. There will be cries for all kinds of stuff. In Europe right now they have something called “corona bonds”; ... it’s coming man. The crappy game changer that many will accept and few understand how fundamentally life will be in the future.

 

That's actually not entirely true. I'm from Finland and the finnish government would be a huge one compared to most of the civilized world. Despite that our democracy doesn't seem to be threatened by this crisis, whereas the right wing conservative government of Hungary just made their country into the first dictatorship within European Union.

 

I cannot be the only one who is fed up with Scandinavian countries and Finland telling the rest of the world how great and wonderful their countries are.

 

Well if you insist on being triggered I won't try to stop you, enjoy yourself.

I think you are the only one as the Norsemen rarely boast about their political systems. Americans do it all the time though - that can get annoying.

 

No it is the north countries that are forever going on about how clever they are , they are greener , more healthy , more democratic , richer , cleaner et al.
Finns and Finland never like to remember that they fought for the Nazis in WW2 Finnish Jews were turned over to the Nazis by Finland and murdered .
You should hang your heads in shame . And you have the cheek to critise another country.
Finns are not Norsemen, Finns did not speak Norse which is a German language, Finns speak an Uralic language . Which means they are not Norsemen.
You should know this if you are Finnish.
I am not an American.
I am also well aware that Hungary also fought for the Nazis .

 

To me that sounds more like a you problem than me problem ngl. I won't stop being patriotic just because it makes you insecure.

Okay. Beat us in those things so we won't have anything to boast about.

I don't have a problem remembering that. It's a historical fact. Not the most pleasant one, but there's no point in crying over something that can no longer be taken back.

Uh-huh? So if a country makes a mistake, the citizens of the said country can never again critisize any other countries? Every country has some dirt in their past. You are from UK, right? Shouldn't you just go somewhere be ashamed of your country's contribution to colonialism?

Even if what you said was true, I was hardly critisizing any country. Saying that Hungary is by definition a dictatorship as of now is more of a fact than a moral judgement. In fact I was answering to someone else's criticism of all countries witg big government, which includes Finland. Why aren't you mad at need4realchg criticizing other countries despite USA's past sins? Hypocritical much?

 

S o you agree you are not Norsemen ?
Many of the mistakes made by countries is through ignorance and what was considered acceptable at the time .
In no way was Nazism considered acceptable at the time. Dismissing it like you do shows the kind of person you are, I am sure the relatives of those Jews do dismiss it so easily as you.
At no time did I say the UK was a good country or the system was good , you were the one saying your country was better than others.

 

Yes.

Is that so?

Here's how the allies showed their non-acceptance towards nazism by repeatedly allowing Hitler do whatever the fuck he wanted with no intervention: https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.fo...ern-leaders-failed-to-stop-the-nazi-rise/amp/

Here's something about how popular nazism was in other countries:
https://www.google.com/amp/s/time.com/5414055/american-nazi-sympathy-book/?amp=true

https://www.thenational.scot/politics/18190252.many-british-supporters-nazis/

USA and UK weren't by any means the only countries with a problem with nazi sympathizers. In fact the "jewish problem" was a popular issue around the world. Antisemitism was sadly popular at the time:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Question

So idk, seems like nazies were pretty well tolerated.

Was I? Can you quote me saying that or something along those lines? As I said, I was merely defending against someone else bashing on the type of government my country has.

Edit: considering that the person in question later on liked my correction, I suppose bashing on was too strong term. Rather spreading incorrect information.

 

i said especially ; not only.

i am enjoying the conversation, and I don’t mind your nationality. I grew up as an American in Europe too so I feel I have seen both sides; let’s discuss.

The usa holds the title of leader of the free world” but she sure does a lot of enslaving things. I’m not talking about stuff from 50+ years ago.

I like to cite facebookgate as exhibit prima. That demonstration showed the world that not even congress could interrogate Facebook founder with clear questions to uncover its scope and control and access to their OWN political needs.

If you take it at its core, government is a form of mass protection; normally in Civil protection but also through laws and codes or ethics shared through some cultural, ideological or spiritual identity.

The issue with freedom is that the larger the mass the more taxing it is on the leaders to truly trust their populace. Many leaders do not. Many educators do not. Many enforcers do not trust their fellow man.

in Texas for example the Democrats (liberals) want a police enforcement of stay at home while the republicans (conservatives) want to trust their citizenry to do the right thing and not congregate. It’s voluntary. Cities are run by mayors normally democratic but states are managed by governors who are republican. Versus New York which is highly urbanized and democratic and liberal. The difference is stark. Same for California. Their attitude is (imo) one of control and fear.

This extends into prohibiting church gatherings throughout the south of USA where the ideology of the church goer sometimes flip flops but the problem doesn’t.

I also understand China has the unenviable problem of having such a large country. I personally think that’s why they end up with this “strong man system.” China should be broken into smaller countries so that it is easier to manage but the rich/poor gap is far too wide for that to happen so the government bears down. The strong man/dictator becomes the solution. Is that the best solution? I don’t have any other country except maybe India with this many people to have to manage. Imagine tripling the us population with our current status quo. Yeah we would probably become more like China.

But if I trust my fellow man I need not attempt to control him. This is why I lean away from liberal/ social democratic solutions. They simply don’t work or promote social trust.

Consider this — the logic behind m issuing stay at home orders is that people who are afraid they might be sick and isolated from their families often DONT share and then the problems get worse. Having police ok the streets to force folks to stay inside is not the best solution it’s the solution of an afraid citizenry. If we were discussing French Revolution I’d understand. Their actions were based on strong emotions including fear. Fear based politics should be discouraged.

In quarantine mode ; Californians are encouraged to snitch on each other. Does that sound more like the US of The former USSR? This is my point. When we trust each other we are acknowledging a personal freedom of choice.

Choice is a touchy thing.

Even the Middle East petrocrats have opened up their societies when their trust quotient was improved.

society is based on trust. Especially the modern concept of money.

if you can eliminate trust then you have an atmosphere of fear.

The stock market is my exhibit A-Z.

 

I have spent extensive time in Sweden. It sucks. (Sorry, just my opinion.)

 

China is the world's oldest country/culture and historically #1 power (the last 500 years of Western dominance are an anomaly). So I don't think they're quitting now lol.

This is a really good observation. Snitching was a big thing in Europe during the Nazi and communist times. How do you know about that?

Regarding the topic: Norden seem to be doing well in the freedom and democracy department.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy_Index
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_in_the_World

 

Love this. Yes. China is definitely a slow boil. It takes money and allies to overthrow a government. Ask Juan Guaidó who thought all he needed was the international community together to overthrow a known dictator. Yet it failed.

So unless the Chinese discover oil somewhere domestically ... even powerful Chinese millionaires who speak out can still be “disappeared.” And covered up. Easily.

 

Sorry for taking so long to respond. There was a lot to unpack here.

Of course, but I don't think there is necessarily any correllation, much less causation between big government and overdoing measures against corona. In addition to the Finland vs Hungary example I gave you, I have also understood that Sweden is pretty much taking the most laid back approach to corona of all countries. Also in many countries it's the right wing that's advocating for taking more drastic measures against the disease. I just feel like saying that countries with big government are more likely to go totalitarian because of this crisis is a blanket statement and that ultimately it all boils down to other variables.

So far I mostly agree.

Not sure wether I agree or disagree, but idk if it's all that relevant to the debate, so I'll move on for now. Feel free to pull my attention back to this if you feel like I overlooked it.

Now I think this is where our disagreenment is. Here's what I think: Any political leaning can be and oftentimes is based on fear and mistrust. For instance immigration is a huge issue in today's world and the conservatives are usually taking a stance against immigration. The reasonings for this are usually that the immigrants won't integrate to the culture and will cause troubles ranging from unemployment all the way to organized crime. This reasoning is one of fear. You don't trust the immigrants to behave themselves. Another issue on which conservatives base their arguments on mistrust is social security. One of the biggest arguments against having a proper social security is that people wouldn't work if the economic system doesn't force them to do so. (Which I'd argue seems like bullshit when you take a look at Wikipedia's list of countries by employment rate, but since this isn't a thread about what economic system is the best, I'll try to avoid going down that road from now on.) So while I'll admit that some policies of liberals and social democrats are based on mistrust, so are some policies of conservatives. I do agree that we should strive to trust each other, but I don't think it's very realistic idea to completely remove fear and mistrust from politics. At least for now.

Now I do think that while some restrictions are necessary to combat this disease, I do agree that for instance the policing you said democrats are advocating for and the snitching going on in California are taking it way too far. To be honest all that sounds like it's from some dystopian movie or something.

 

I agree with your analysis and forgive me I wanted to generally say: “large government begets large government solutions generally.”

As a conservative I find that “large government solutions are by definition intrusive and controlling.

Here I feel the need to qualify the difference between a conservative and a republican.

a republican wants a big government solution to his problems. (Ie George w bush creating tsa). Or the unforgettable military complex and obsession with huge military spending in times of peace.

a conservative wants to shrink the government reach to spend less on the solution and let states manage themselves from a much smaller federal footprint.

Trump is in the leader of the Republican Party but he’s not very republican in ideology.


I especially agree that immigration has long been a lightening rod in stoking xenophobic fear from both parties here and in many countries of course; just like freedom for the enslaved stoked the fear of the planter class in the 19th century , or the freedom of workers, women , gays, stoked the fear is the swm in the 20th century.

People who view liberty of one social group as a threat to themselves are at a base level, cowardly.

the KKK jumps to mind. And the behavior of bullying or shaming only shrinks the stature of one doing it.

This is what always bothers me about trump China bashing... it used to be Iraq bashing, or Russia bashing , or Cuba bashing, etc. I can’t really tell if Trump badmouths China as a trade strategy ( because he knows how prideful the PRC really is and to Lose face is the ultimate biatch slap) or if he is generally just pissed at their attempt of a power grab via so many cyber attacks, spies, trade imbalance, debt negotiations , or possibly now a biological accidents.

Trump has a strong mistrust of the “deep state”. I like that about him as a conservative. I identify with his mistrust. I don’t think our government normally is held accountable enough.

 

The "war" on the virus is, as always, about economics.
Our financial system, the low interest rates, the high debt, was about to collapse anyway, especially in Europe.
Btw. in Europe the stock exchange began to implode a couple of days before the governments put on restrictions.
The virus is a good occasion to reset the system. Now people have to stay at home, the shops are closed, most of the banks are closed. Imagine if someone tried to close the banks two months ago, so people cannot take their money, they would go nuts.

The socialist policies brought us there. Now they all can blame the virus instead of themselves for what happened to the economy. They will reset, people will loose their assets,they will buy it with the money they just have to print and then, the restrictions will be even tighter. It is obvious that we will never go back to how life was two months ago, those restriction might be taken back, but only partially.

In Europe, their currency might even fall appart. And the new one will be 100% digital, there will be no bills. there will be no cash. This is also planned for long now. The bitcoin was / is just a test for them.
And filthy guys like Gates can push down his vaccines in 7 Billion throats. I pray to god that his vaccines are not as shitty as his software.

That is my humble opinion.

The virus? Let's have a look at some statistics:
1. In Germany, the average person dying from Corona is 84
2. The mortality rate (the real one, not the simulated one) is 0.37% what is lower than for the flou.
3. Every person in Europe dying with the Covid, is taken into account. When a guy who has corona dies in a traffic accident, they count him a Corona dead.

Up to you. Make your own opinion. You can just trust the media, or you can think.

 

I have a Canadian relative who wont stop talking about how civilized their country is. What’s civilized about rationing healthcare and jailing people for Facebook posts?

 

@Vendettana i made a post very close to your statements. I would expect the Euro to collapse—- I made a post about it a week ago.

As for irony: Canada blasted the US on taking in immigrants — but they didn’t flinch when corona virus came. Same as US closing their border in the best Interest is the country they adopted the same tactics and did not receive
Migrants (healthy or sick).

That, for some reason, is so deeply satisfying. Wish there was a word for it.