Forum Index > Full Moon Saloon > The Politics of the COVID-19 Response
Previous :: Next Topic  
Author Message
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12000 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 8:45 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Ski wrote:
Well... actually, the original title of the thread was "The Politics of Covid-19", because the other "Covid" thread kind of got run off the rails.

It's called "co-opting" (aka "commandeering") - I mentioned it here. What's happening here right now is an example of "If we can't co-opt (or commandeer) the words, we'll just hijack the entire conversation to suit our own narrative."
Done primarily for the purpose of distraction, deflection, and obfuscation.
Pretty easy to see through, really: as jinx'sboy calls it above: "endless shite".

The original title is long gone because the OP is manipulating it in response to comments they don't like. Ignore doesn't save you from title changes driven by disagreement with comments from yours truly, does it.

Unable to accept that ideas other than theirs show up in threads, the claim is made that other arguments are 'hijacking' a thread apparently intended to be an echo chamber. You obviously won't publicly recognize your preference that a narrative you agree with be unchallenged. You call it commandeering, other folks call it conversation. Only one side values disagreement, and it's demonstrably not yours. Tom kindly allowed this one thread to cover the political aspects of this issue because they are so intertwined with the covid topic, and now you can't handle disagreement.

There is zero recognition that one cannot 'hijack' a thread without commenters responding, and that this in and of itself shows interest in the back and forth on topics.

Then there's the idea that no alternative ideas can be valid, so the purpose must be sinister (distraction, deflection, and obfuscation).

What's happening right now is you're complaining about.. disagreement. It seems as if there is no legitimate way to disagree with your ideas.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 7235 | TRs
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
  Top

Snarky Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 8:46 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MtnGoat wrote:
Randito wrote:
On the moral front then.  Chosing to go without a mask during a pandemic risks harming other people.   What is the moral justification for risking the health of others when it can easily be avoided?

The entire issue is a value judgment, and 'risk' and 'harm' are so subjective as to be dang near religious in basis. Nearly everything one does is some form of 'risk' to others.

The moral justification is simple..everyone owns the right to judge risks and act accordingly for themselves. I don't insist you disregard what you see as risk, and all I ask is folks respect other's right to judge risks and act on them as well.

You didn't provide a moral justification for placing others at risk.  You merely said you didn't believe there is a risk.

You are no longer contesting whether the state has the legal authority to regulate whether people need to wear masks in public spaces.
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Waterman
Member
Member


Joined: 21 Mar 2015
Posts: 332 | TRs
Location: Big Snow Quadrangle
Waterman
  Top

Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 8:51 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Ski wrote:
Waterman wrote:
The debate of how to adjust to living with covid -19 has moved from a conversation based on health and science to a conversation about liberty.

Well... actually, the original title of the thread was "The Politics of Covid-19", because the other "Covid" thread kind of got run off the rails.

It's called "co-opting" (aka "commandeering") - I mentioned it here. What's happening here right now is an example of "If we can't co-opt (or commandeer) the words, we'll just hijack the entire conversation to suit our own narrative."
Done primarily for the purpose of distraction, deflection, and obfuscation.
Pretty easy to see through, really: as jinx'sboy calls it above: "endless shite".

You are entirely right ski, the conversation has been hijacked. How to mitigate the effects of this virus which should be based on health and science.
The branch covidiens have made the issue into wanting their liberty, to do as they please.
I for one will not be patronizing any business that doesn't put the welfare of their workers and the public first.

--------------
Two roads diverged in a wood, and I,I took the one less traveled by. And that has made all the difference.
Robert Frost
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12000 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 8:51 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Randito wrote:
You didn't provide a moral justification for placing others at risk.  You merely said you didn't believe there is a risk.

You are no longer contesting whether the state has the legal authority to regulate whether people need to wear masks in public spaces.

Of course I did. The fact that these are all value judgments, IS the moral justification. It is no different from freedom in religion aside from the fact it's secular.

Are you now claiming it is immoral to disagree with subjective judgments made by anyone other than those you already agree with?

I am no longer contesting that because there is no common to both sides way to discuss it with you, correct. You want to discuss wether power can do what it does, while I am interested in wether it is morally right to do what it does, and *then* discuss the law. I find the 'because the State said so' aspect of moral arguments vs law, useless in terms of right and wrong, and yet you wish to focus on it.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12000 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 8:57 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Waterman wrote:
You are entirely right ski, the conversation has been hijacked. How to mitigate the effects of this virus which should be based on health and science.
The branch covidiens have made the issue into wanting their liberty, to do as they please.
I for one will not be patronizing any business that doesn't put the welfare of their workers and the public first.

Based on 'health' and 'science' in the political formulation you want to apply, which works out as way of evading your injection of predetermined value judgments into both. I wonder if you even recognize this.

If you claim to want objective use of 'health' and 'science', then show us how the mandates and actions you support on the basis of either do not in any way contain value judgments. Science does not produce value judgments. Somehow, your version does. This is the indication that what you are arguing is not science.

It is that simple and that black and white. Show us the covid virus with 'must close buisnesses for X weeks' written on the side of it. Attempting to cover your own prescriptions and values with abuse of science is a lousy but common evasion.

Hijacking:
It's funny that any time comments which do not agree with some ideals appear, it's called hijacking, as if discussion requires agreement.

I challenge each and every person who thinks threads are 'hijacked' to tell us how people who disagree with statements made here, can disagree openly without being attacked as 'hijacker'.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 7235 | TRs
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
  Top

Snarky Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 9:12 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MtnGoat wrote:
Are you now claiming it is immoral to disagree with subjective judgments made by anyone other than those you already agree with?

Are you claiming that your layman's judgement that there is no risk entitles you to ignore the recommendations of people with professional knowledge of the subject?

What if you encounter another layman whose judgement is that what you are doing places them in immediate danger and they need to kill you in self defense?
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12000 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 9:13 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Randito wrote:
Are you claiming that your layman's judgement that there is no risk entitles you to ignore the recommendations of people with professional knowledge of the subject?

What if you encounter another layman whose judgement is that what you are doing places them in immediate danger and they need to kill you in self defense?

Of course I am, because *science* does not produce value judgments. Someone can professional all day long about X risk to Z percentage, Q% chance of Y% shedding for N days, etc...and have no expertise whatsoever, in any way, on the value judgments related to these numbers for someone else.

And a note: I never claimed there was no risk. I suggest you strike that argument from your list of considerations concerning my comments. .

I find the continual, persistent, never ending attempt to evade the fact that we're talking about value judgments, ludicrous, evasive, and corrosive to honest decision making.

Unless we agree on this, there is really no road left on discussion if resolution is the goal. Someone will claim 'science' which somehow magically contains value judgments they agree with, I'll note that science has zero value judgments, and...end of the road deadlock.

The risky layman out to kill me:
If I encounter that, then I'll have to apply my value judgments on it, just like real life aready is. What you describe is already the basis for many a crime between laymen.

I find the use of credentialism as a form of evading the facts about value decisions easily dealt  with. There is no 'expert' or non layman anywhere in existence who has sufficient expertise to make value judgments for someone else. The dang near continuous practice of acting as if expertise overcomes the fundamental problem of making value judgments for other people is a thin veneer for acting as a superior to the target. I don't know if it's obvious, but I totally and completely reject the use of other people's lives and actions as a means instead of their own ends.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12000 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 9:30 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
I find myself wondering just how it is so many folks cannot admit that science does not produce value judgments or policy prescriptions. It produces value free facts only.

What said facts mean in terms of action, morality, policy, how one uses those facts is up to each person, but that is no longer science.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Kascadia
Member
Member


Joined: 03 Feb 2014
Posts: 455 | TRs

Kascadia
  Top

Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 9:36 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MtnGoat wrote:
Kascadia wrote:
LOL

The bravery, the bravery

Correct.

Braver than those hiding at home, demanding other folks be forced to hide at home too, because they choose to and their fear is more important than other people.

Well, #2 perhaps:

Definition of brave
1
: having or showing mental or moral strength to face danger, fear, or difficulty : having or showing courage
a brave soldier
a brave smile
2
: making a fine show : colorful
brave banners flying in the wind

--------------
It is as though I had read a divine text, written into the world itself, not with letters but rather with essential objects, saying:
Man, stretch thy reason hither, so thou mayest comprehend these things. Johannes Kepler
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12000 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 9:41 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
perhaps, yup. Part of it is showing that not everyone agrees and there is solidarity in knowing that, it reveals common purpose. This is after all the principle behind a lot of demonstrations.

Nice to see defined terms! One doesn't even have to agree, what's important is knowing the context for the words used however they are defined, then one can judge the argument properly.  up.gif

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Kascadia
Member
Member


Joined: 03 Feb 2014
Posts: 455 | TRs

Kascadia
  Top

Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 9:45 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MtnGoat wrote:
what's important is knowing the context for the words used however they are defined, then one can judge the argument properly.  up.gif

I would certainly agree with that, and I have, particularly since I used the word first and you clearly understood the point.  LOL

--------------
It is as though I had read a divine text, written into the world itself, not with letters but rather with essential objects, saying:
Man, stretch thy reason hither, so thou mayest comprehend these things. Johannes Kepler
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12000 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 9:47 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
yeah i did, and I still appreciated the effort you put in.

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 10921 | TRs
Location: tacoma
Ski
  Top

><((((°>
PostWed May 06, 2020 9:57 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
Waterman wrote:
I for one will not be patronizing any business that doesn't put the welfare of their workers and the public first.

You may well be onto something there.

COSTCO just made it mandatory for all customers entering their retail outlets to wear masks.
(I would assume that also applies to employees as well.)

Whole Foods requires all staff members to wear masks, but not customers. They do supply masks at the door for customers who want them.

Trader Joes made it optional for their staff members to wear masks, but they are strongly recommended. (Almost all of the employees at the University Place store were wearing masks when i went in there last week.)

Safeway requires all staff members to wear masks in Washington and California but not customers. (Safeway customer service line 1-877-276-9637)

Fred Meyer (owned by Kroger) (1-800-576-4377) does not require (but highly recommends) masks to be worn by their staff members.

After a number of customer requests, Harbor Greens (on Bridgeport Way SW just off 27th) now requires all staff members to wear masks (but not customers). (Most of the customers were wearing masks the last three times I was in that store.)(Their produce is fabulous.)

H&L Produce (aka Tacoma Boys) (3 locations) does not require staff or customers to wear masks. (More than 3/4 of the customers were wearing masks when I was in there last week.)(Also fabulous produce.)

I would posit that a serious effort by private citizens appealing to these businesses might have a positive effect.
If Costco can do it, why not Safeway and Fred Meyer and Trader Joes?

--------------
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. 
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message Send e-mail This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12000 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 10:00 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
No problem with this, it's private property after all and they have the moral right to regulate it as they see fit. (within boundaries of rights as I usually express them, etc etc...this aside is a futile attempt to forestall strawman arguments  rolleyes.gif )

Now to use such a legal precedent to roll back other legal infringements on private property. Randito, this is your cue. LOL

--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
MtnGoat
Member
Member


Joined: 17 Dec 2001
Posts: 12000 | TRs
Location: Lyle, WA
MtnGoat
  Top

Member
PostWed May 06, 2020 10:10 am 
This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
NY law does actually require proximity to infected patients in an environment chock full of high risk people...

Quote:
The March 25 order that forced infected patients on them allows for no exceptions and has not been changed.

Over 1,700 more coronavirus deaths reported in NY nursing homes
The killer fifth paragraph still reads: “No resident shall be denied re-admission or admission to the NH solely based on a confirmed or suspected diagnosis of COVID-19. NHs are prohibited from requiring a hospitalized resident who is determined medically stable to be tested for COVID-19 prior to ­admission or readmission.”

Owners and managers said Tuesday they are not aware of any loosening of the policy. They also say that hospitals still are referring infected patients to them on a near-daily basis and they are expected to take them if they have an empty bed.

To them, the March 25 order was a death sentence. Some facilities say they had no deaths or even positive patients before that date, but many of both since, including among staff members


Yes, you read that right. The "we know best, and it's 'or else' for you" folks actually *banned* testing prior to admission. These are the 'experts' I am told are ruled by 'science'. Credentialism kills.

Quote:
Cuomo is legendary for micromanaging and has been praised for his detailed daily briefings during the pandemic. He has closed schools, religious services and businesses because each human life is “priceless.



--------------
Diplomacy is the art of saying 'Nice doggie' until you can find a rock. - Will Rogers
Back to top
View user's profile Search for posts by this user Send private message This topic is locked: you cannot edit posts or make replies. Reply with quote
  Display:     All times are GMT - 8 Hours
Forum Index > Full Moon Saloon > The Politics of the COVID-19 Response
  Happy Birthday Locutus, coldrain108!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
   Use Disclaimer Powered by phpBB Privacy Policy