Is it just me?

I am a regular person in most ways, not prone to depression. This does not mean that I do not suffer it, but rather that I do so as part of normal mood cycles. It is not natural to be on a constant high. Things can get us down. The key is this: Depression is the brain’s way of telling us “Please. Make changes.” But I am powerless in that regard. The outside world has crept into my brain.

I still carry on, as that is my nature, to push through even when not enthused about things.

Depression is contagious. My wife feels my moods even if I say nothing. Where is it coming from? As I go out and about, grocery shopping or even out to lunch, I feel a state of resignation from those people behind face diapers. “Torpor” is defined as a state of inactivity, or lethargy. I don’t sense enthusiasm, anywhere. I don’t hear crowd noise or laughter. People are down, maybe tired of being regimented, but also too scared to either protest or resist. And they just keep piling it on.

The current “second wave” is fake, of course. The PCR test is not finding any virus. It IS the virus.

Lakewood, part of Denver, has three small lakes in a public park called Bear Creek. It has been dreadfully hot down there, and people were boating, fishing and swimming, relaxing there. The Health Department shut it all down.

That’s cruel and unusual. It is also pointless unless the point is to make people suffer. There is no medical justification. People endure it, but it has worn them down. They are depressed. I feel it in the air.

Sad eyes

I’ve known from the beginning that this whole tragic meltdown was 1) planned long in advance, and 2) unrelated to health. Insiders refer to what is going on as the Grand Reboot. What I see is a fundamental psychological and propaganda operation which is destroying people’s cognitive abilities. Jacques Ellul, the French writer who studied propaganda, said that agitation propaganda, or agitprop (which is all this is), for a prolonged period does permanent damage to brains. I see this now. I see people hidden behind face diapers who are scared of me because I will not/do not wear one. I try to have an exchange with them and find they cannot be reasoned with. Their cerebral cortex is shut down, the reptilian brain running the show. This is what agitprop does to people.

It’s getting to me. I’ve never locked down for one day, worn a face diaper or distanced. But I see it and feel it in the air … people have succumbed. They are in a state now where if told to goosestep in public, they will do so. There is no resistance in them. That is so discouraging. They just march and do what they are told.

For me … I’ll continue to carry on as before, and welcome any advice. What are you doing to stay positive? The Pandemic State now owns the minds of everyone I know except you who read this, and my wife. It is a State of Fear combined with hypnosis, Zombie Apocalypse.

116 thoughts on “Is it just me?”

  1. Hang in there! Just be glad you aren’t living in Los Angeles! It’s gotten so weird here. Take away all the positives of living in LA (outdoor activities, concerts, eating at fun restaurants & bars, theatre, movies, etc.) you are left only with the bad things about LA (traffic, smog, some of the elitists people, etc). Ugh.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  2. It’s getting to me as well. My wife walked into a gas station today and realized that she was violating the city mandatory mask order when someone yelled at here. She said she just burst into tears. It’s getting to her.

    I’ve got friends who are doctors who are telling everyone they know that this is the new normal…that masks should become a way of life and that social distancing is here to stay. I absolutely reject that idea and it sickens me that intelligent people are believing this. These doctors are especially frustrating when they add “Trust me…I’m a doctor.” But they sincerely believe that what they are doing is important and saving people’s lives.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  3. I just went to the post office, where an employee was spraying and cleaning the lobby literally nonstop. She sanitized the door 3x in less than 5 minutes. After a 10 minute wait, I was being checked out when suddenly my lungs were severely irritated by the chemicals; I held in my cough from my burning lungs until I got outside and began coughing until I gagged. This is not normal or healthy. I’m sure everyone thought I had the virus and she disinfected the area when I left. My lungs are still irritated. My daughter said maybe those people weren’t human when I asked how come the chemicals didn’t seem to bother anyone else.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  4. For me, I am working to find the inner growth, magic of life possible, without any permission required from any official ‘body’, or even the neighbour next door. I can certainly send/share some interesting info I’ve come across. Honestly, think it is why all this is happening. for once we access our ‘true’ power these ‘monsters that be’ can’t grab you or me. I have an interesting pdf I could share. Lorenzo. Publisher http://www.newagora.ca check us out. Happy, as possible, to work closer togehter.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

    1. My cousin and I (she recently having lost an adult son) were discussing how she is now facing the hardest part, after the funeral when people go back to their lives. I call this time “the hours,” not after a crappy pretentious movie, but after that time when we are most alone during grief … 2am. I suggested meditation, but quickly added that I do not know how to meditate. I fall asleep. She has had the same experience.

      Something going on here however … my mood elevated after writing this piece, and I liked your comment, HLM.

      Liked by 2 people

      Reply

  5. When a thousand people stormed the beach at Normandy they were met with an opposing force.
    If a thousand people stormed the beach at Bear Creek, how much opposition would they have?

    Yes, this second wave is bllcrp (as was the first).

    “They” can stop small crowds – but the large crowds? well… people seem to like being controlled – except for (uhh) protestors

    Like

    Reply

  6. I normally wouldn’t post anything that Yahoo news puts out since it’s usually tabloid style disinformation. However I just saw a headline that brightened my day and hopefully yours too.
    I haven’t seen our CEO make any statements about Covid being a hoax, yet he did recently retweet Chuck Woolery’s comment about it being a lie. Maybe that retweet is Trump’s way of saying it’s a hoax, without having to say it himself. In the past Trump has made a statement about Global Warming being a hoax. Seeing this headline in March-May would have been great, however better late than never:

    “Trump identifies another hoax: The coronavirus”

    https://www.yahoo.com/news/trump-identifies-another-hoax-the-coronavirus-152649383.html

    Like

    Reply

    1. Trump’s role in this show is to create further division and cognitive dissonance. He spoke the truth when he said that the more we test, the more Covid cases we get… but in the minds of many Americans, he’s a lunatic, so they reject the truth because it comes from his mouth. And they resent the “deplorables” who follow him and the “deplorables”–mostly uneducated and economically downtrodden people, the most powerless among us, who support Trump under the insane delusion that he’s fighting for them… well, they have to do what they’re told at their jobs. They will model what they think Trump is doing–play along to get along. What an incredible stroke of genius to have the man playing the President of the United States also pose as a whack-job conspiracy theorist.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. Sanity check…it’s not really true that Trump supporters are the economically downtrodden. In truth, Hillary won the lowest income group (sub $30K) and Trump won all other income groups, including $250K plus. Among employed, taxpaying, married, home-owning Americans, Trump destroyed Hillary.

        I agree with your overall point, but I do think it’s important not to internalize DNC propaganda. Part of their sour grapes response to Hillary’s loss was to spin a narrative that Trump must have won the election due to a few unemployed West Virginia coal miners. Which obviously makes no numerical sense.

        The DNC and the media LABELED Trump voters “low status, but in many ways the opposite is true. Hillary won among welfare recipients, single mothers, spinsters, baristas, and government employees. Trump won among business owners.

        Trump is no great shakes. They’re all part of the same team. I’m just providing this sanity check about 2016 voter demographics to remind us that we can’t really take ANY media narratives as fact. EVERYTHING is designed to persuade (or disorient, or demoralize), nothing is designed to inform.

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

        1. Charlie–I appreciate your point, you’re probably right, I get where you’re coming from… but honestly, my statement about Trump supporters was based on Trump supporters I actually know in my actual life and my actual town. In my real-life world, the Trump supporters tend to be at the lower end of the economic scale than the Trump haters. I don’t know where you get your data about Trump supporters vs. Hilary supporters, but I also don’t know of any source of data that isn’t compromised in one way or another. Again, though, in the broader world outside my mid-sized Indiana city, you’re probably right.

          Like

          Reply

  7. The trick to getting everyone goosestepping is a scientific rationale.

    “Researchers studying air currents have recently determined that by disrupting the air in front of one with a steady, repeated kicking motion, the virus particles will be harmlessly dispersed. Unfortunately, an apathetic public will probably resist as some claim the dispersal technique looks like ‘goosestepping.'”

    Then, several weeks of pundits lamenting the lack of goosestepping. Followed by celebrity goosestepping. Next day, you see soccer moms doing it.

    Sorry to laugh, it is a depressing spectacle out there.

    Anyway, this could really work.. My local governor Kay Ivey is famous for her downhome saying “Ain’t no step too high for a high stepper.” So she could be the face of goosestepping promotions.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

    2. I love this idea and suggest that you promote it. There’s a concept out there called “Auto Hoaxing.” Might as well push the ridiculousness ourselves!

      Your idea as a letter to the editor would be a piece of art!

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. You’re not afraid people might take it seriously? : )

        Since people enjoyed it here I might put it on my fb page, and an anti-mask group on there… See what response it gets in those venues. Maybe the “normies” will get an inkling of how ridiculous they look to me/ us. I doubt it, but maybe.

        Like

        Reply

        1. I am wondering if I can order masks with words I want on them, as with baseball caps. I was thinking about that while hiking today, and came up with a couple that are probably lame: “There’s no bug, Doug”, “There’s no virus, Cyrus” but maybe just “There’s no virus, folks” would work as well. I’ll take what ever anyone wants to offer, as my ideas, inspired by Paul Simon’s Fifty Ways to Leave Your Lover, on reflection seem lame.

          Like

          Reply

              1. I just ordered a custom mask from Zazzle that says, “viruses are NOT dangerous”. I’ll see if they cancel the order. Based on what happened to you, I imagine they will cancel it. So, “WHO’s on first, Amazon’s on second, and Zazzle’s on third?” I feel like we are living in an Abbott and Costello skit. If only this were funny.

                Like

                Reply

                1. I hope your order went through. If not, I got what I wanted (There is no Virus!) from a company called Etsy. Just plug “This Mask is Useless” into the Google and it will take you to their site. They have a wide selection and offer personalized.

                  Like

                  Reply

          2. I’m a fan of, “There’s nothing wrong with the air around here.” – Richard Dreyfus, Close Encounters of the Third Kind

            Like

            Reply

  8. My answer to the problem of mask-induced mass depression is to get out, go to the park, and smile at everyone, absolutely everyone.

    Where I live masks are not mandatory if you’re outside “exercising” which includes walking. In the park there are always lots of people not wearing masks. I make it a point to smile at everyone, whether they’re wearing a mask or not. Of course sharing a smile with those not wearing masks gives them (and me) a lift in mood for obvious reasons, but I’ve noticed that even those in masks will more often than not smile back too. I see it in their eyes. I always feel great when I take a walk in the park. Smiling helps me establish a connection with people on both sides of the mask-wearing question. It gives them a sense of hope and camaraderie that they are all aching for.

    You can’t ever know exactly why a given person is wearing a mask. But I think those who are afraid of being infected, or who think the barefaced are being reckless, are in the minority. Most do it to stay out of trouble or to be perceived as “good” by other mask wearers. It may seem counterintuitive but these people also want to feel accepted by the non-mask wearers. So I make a special effort to smile at them, too. I can tell that nearly everyone’s mood is lifted by being smiled at, doesn’t matter if they’re wearing a mask, and can’t fully show the smile that they’re smiling back themselves.

    Liked by 3 people

    Reply

  9. I face the same inner battle. I’ve found that, cliche as it is, the concept of having an “attitude of gratitude” really does help. Whatever I focus on–positive or negative–tends to magnify, expand, grow, take over my life. Today, I went to a store where a sign on the entrance said “Please wear a mask when shopping.” My heart sank–then I opened the door and discovered that the few customers inside were not wearing masks–only the employees. I was grateful to be living in an armpit of a city in a flyover state that the people running this agitprop campaign don’t, apparently, give a shit about. Yes, we have plenty of Karens, but I’d say it’s still about half and half in terms of face-diaper-wearers. I’m grateful that I have friends who, even if they don’t completely agree with me, don’t completely disagree with me either. I’m grateful to have a job where I’m pretty independent and (so far) have been able to ignore the “suggestion” that I wear a face diaper and keep my distance. It seems to me you have a lot to be grateful for, Mark–you’re retired, you have (I gather) a like-minded wife, and you have a blog where you can bring those of us who see through this together.

    There was a time in my life when I made a daily gratitude list, every morning and every evening, to pull myself out of depression. I haven’t had to start that ritual again, but I’m keeping it on stand-by.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

  11. I find the following quote to be helpful.

    From “Thoughts on Coronavirus” by Neil Kramer

    If our sense of self-security is anchored solely in the physical world, then we invite anxiety around every corner. When the world trembles, we tremble. The truth is, all earthly things come and go, including wars, plagues, famines, tsunamis, earthquakes, peace, prosperity, stability, etc. Must our harmony come and go with them? Or is there another way? Right now we are being given a world teaching that compels us to carefully consider how we formulate our sense of inner peace. Contemplate. The answer lies in cultivating a relationship with that which does not come and go. That which is outside and above nature, the super-natural. The divine.

    Liked by 1 person

    Reply

    1. My cousin who lost her son is devoutly Catholic, and I told her that I hoped her faith offered her comfort during her personal crisis. She said it is very hard as she can only attend services “on TV.” I don’t think she gets a truly religious experience that way. What a loss.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

  13. Mark, I fully appreciate and share your sentiments. Today, while food shopping without a face diaper, an employee asked me to put one on, and when I said I have a medical exemption, she literally jumped back 2 feet and put her hands up in “don’t shoot” position. Another employee later requested the same from me, and when I replied, she said “Oh, I’m so sorry.” She felt pity for me. But that was better than being treated by a leper from her colleague. I got more stares and double-takes today from fellow shoppers (all face diapered) than I have since this whole agitprop crime began. I am deeply grateful to be able to find solace, support and education here at POM. This thread, in particular, has been incredibly elevated and insightful.

    Like

    Reply

    2. I agree that there is lots of value in just coming to a place where there are people who “get it.” *cue theme song to Cheers

      Thanks for allowing us to vent. It does help. It’s been a challenge.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

    3. I keep forgetting the name of the respiratory ailment Mark suggested we say we have. So far, no one has confronted me about my diaper-free face, so I haven’t needed it. If anyone does, I’ll just say I have a medical condition. If they ask what it is, I’ll say I’m allergic to fascism. If they ask if I have a doctor’s note, I’ll say doctors give me the worst breakouts of all.

      Liked by 1 person

      Reply

      1. “Hypercapnia.” If asked for a doctor’s note, tell them they are not allowed to make such a demand due to medical privacy laws.

        You might also ask them about the authority behind masking and distancing, since no legislation has been undertaken. Tell them if they boot you that you were looking for an opportunity to sue their sorry asses, and thank you.

        Like

        Reply

        1. why not be tricky, wear a mask, but let your nose hover above free and breath through that. only sayin’ sometimes the trick maneuver is the best, you still win, and don’t end up fighting with the fools. Don’t get me wrong, I don’t wear a mask when not required, but had to visit a friend in the hospital, so put one on, kept my nose free, nobody said nothing, so in the end, I did what my heart wished to, and I was also a personal winner. http://www.newagora.ca check us out, happy for feedback etc.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

  14. 1828 Webster’s
    SOUL, noun

    The spiritual, rational and immortal substance in man, which distinguishes him from brutes; that part of man which enables him to think and reason, and which renders him a subject of moral government. The immortality of the soul is a fundamental article of the christian system. Such is the nature of the human soul that it must have a God, an object of supreme affection.

    “…enables him to think and reason…”

    Isn’t what we are witnessing the mass separation of souls (spirit, psyche) from the mind and body? Once “de-spirited,” man is easy prey for the forces pushing “hive-mindedness.”

    If our chosen “god” is immoral/amoral government and/or our “christian system,” which is equally corrupt and immoral, we always have Creator (Nature), being ignored and steadily destroyed by man’s folly, waiting for our return. To restore our natural state of being, there must be knowledge of its existence and its supreme powers (laws).

    Man’s laws are always in opposition to the laws of nature. Donning masks, like following laws, are a choice. Who’s laws? The ultimate choice, made voluntarily, is to be, or not to be, a slave. The hive mind offers a false sense of security in numbers.

    Like

    Reply

  15. 1828 Webster’s
    SOUL, noun

    The spiritual, rational and immortal substance in man, which distinguishes him from brutes; that part of man which enables him to think and reason, and which renders him a subject of moral government. The immortality of the soul is a fundamental article of the christian system. Such is the nature of the human soul that it must have a God, an object of supreme affection.

    “…enables him to think and reason…”

    Isn’t what we are witnessing the mass separation of souls (spirit, psyche) from the mind and body? Once “de-spirited,” man is easy prey for the forces pushing “hive-mindedness.”

    If our chosen “god” is immoral/amoral government and/or our “christian system,” which is equally corrupt and immoral, we always have Creator (Nature), being ignored and steadily destroyed by man’s folly, waiting for our return. To restore our natural state of being, there must be knowledge of its existence and its supreme powers (laws).

    Man’s laws are always in opposition to the laws of nature. Donning masks, like following laws, are a choice. Who’s laws? The ultimate choice, made voluntarily, is to be, or not to be, a slave. The hive mind offers a false sense of security in numbers.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

      1. Thanks, Mark. Very timely. Consent is the key. True freedom is the ability to say “NO.” Our job is to “de-bamboozle” and educate (share knowledge) where we can so our fellow man (men and women) can arrive at the Truth and choices that offer real, lasting benefits without having to sell one’s soul (deal with the devil).

        Liked by 1 person

        Reply

  16. I experience a similarly styled depression. Not chronic, just sometimes it is there. These are some things I do that help me:

    Instrumental reggae music, especially in the morning while I sit in the Sun.

    Smoking Ganga

    Preparing a meal

    Shooting hoop (getting a portable basketball hoop was the best thing I’ve done during covid)

    Outdoor activities with my kids

    Writing things that rhyme relating to my experience, poetry?

    Keeping my attention on nature. I’m no gardening expert, but just keeping some basil going or a marijuana plant is nice to see. Observing nature reminds me that life is everlasting. It sounds lame but I think my depression stems from knowing this stage of my life will end.

    Ras Kitchen-the YouTube channel provides wisdom, comedy and newfound cooking methods-for me at least

    Like

    Reply

  18. I live in a county where masks are mandated, and somewhat enforced by stores. I got unlucky yesterday at a Mexican supermarket, where an employee walking out saw me approaching the entrance and told me masks were required. I think if I had been inside already it would’ve been easier to brush him off.

    I don’t care for the medical condition idea myself, although “allergic to fascism” is a nice spin on it. But I don’t like suggesting I’m some “other” kind of sick as a way to be included among our new sickly masses.

    I told him the truth, that I found masks for healthy people to be degrading and demeaning, an insult to basic human dignity. Of course it was said with some irony, a bit quixotic since it was probably like a foreign language to him even if he had excellent English. He wanted to sell me a mask I could use. I could’ve worn one some other store gave me, just to get inside, and then taken it off. But it was all an annoyance at that point so I left.

    But it made me wonder more seriously about the idea of lawsuits, which many have floated. Yes businesses have a right to set rules to a point; but when you’re a grocery store, among a handful; and you require healthy people (how can they prove I’m unhealthy? I don’t have to submit to any test on their account) to do culturally unprecedented things (aside from in slave castes, or among outlaws or other outsider groups) that abuse their right to personal bodily autonomy, in order to feed themselves… Even if you’re “merely following orders” from the govt, it seems legally actionable somehow to me. One doesn’t encounter a cop I suppose, unless you physically tussle with somebody. In which case, that’s what the cops are handling, not the mask. So it seems ro me that one ought to be able to sue these grocers for colluding (by obeying these unlawful government orders) to prevent people from feeding themselves.

    Like

    Reply

    1. Grocery stores are private. You’d have to sue under a civil rights act preventing discrimination in public accommodations. Therefore, you’d have to get the people sane enough not to wear a mask to be ruled by a court to be a protected class.

      Like

      Reply

      1. Is it really a class though? You would be fighting for all people (pro or anti mask) to have the right to choose what they do with their own bodies, it seems to me.

        But you are saying that grocery stores would be considered public accommodations? You’re not talking about just government facilities?

        It is just incredible to me that my “fellow citizens” are okay with the idea that I may not be able to feed myself if I find mask laws degrading to human dignity. And how can private businesses assume that I’m sick, and impose arbitrary rules based on that assumption?

        What if I turned it around on them? What if I assumed that all their employees are sick, and sued them for failing to take measures that I deem would be more effective than what they’re currently doing? What if I document that some employees are not wearing gloves, or have their masks hanging down around their neck? What if I insist that they all wear face shields, as well as masks?

        Like

        Reply

    2. I dunno. I find the lawsuit thing silly. You would probably lose, as it is no trouble for you or any of us to just roll our eyes and wear the stupid mask. It’s dumb, but it’s not an ACTUAL impediment for you to wear the thing. It’d be like suing over a “No shirt, no shoes, no service” policy. Can’t imagine that’d be a winning lawsuit. It’s stupid, oh yes. Extremely stupid. But it’s not a crazy burden for you to put the stupid thing on.

      Fortunately I live in a place where it is not mandatory, and the area is very conservative in their political leaning. You all would probably consider it heaven on earth. The mask wearing ratio is about 50/50, and nobody hassles you if you don’t wear it.

      But I admit, I’ve worn a mask twice. Once to get a haircut and another time to see a movie. Employers will require them to come back to the office as well. It’s going to be something we will have to roll our eyes at and occasionally do. The real damage being done is to the human mind and soul.

      It’s all a damn nightmare, but I really doubt we have as good of a chance of winning a lawsuit as some people have suggested. To me, this is a funny way to focus. We should all be studying the science so that we can win if we ever end up in a debate with a masknazi. They tend to be horribly misinformed about the data behind it. The way to win is on scientific grounds, not legal grounds. I find this focus on the legal side to be unusual.

      Like

      Reply

      1. I think masks are an impediment. They effect one’s breathing ferfeckssake.

        The no shoes no service defense isn’t applicable to civil rights acts. Private companies are not allowed to discriminate against protected classes. The 64 act was one of the reasons the founder of rko’s son pretended to be martyred of course.

        However, I don’t think there’s a judge in the land that would squeeze the mask refusers into the disability protected class…

        “The U.S. government has a public policy to promote equal rights for all citizens. One way to encourage this idea is to actively discourage discrimination against members of protected classes (such as racial minorities, women, and the disabled). To prevent discrimination in public accommodations, the government enacted certain laws at the federal, state, and sometimes local levels. Specifically, the federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, national origin, and religion.”

        https://civilrights.findlaw.com/civil-rights-overview/public-accommodations-equal-rights.html

        Like

        Reply

        1. I’m not following you here. You say “No shirt, no shoes” (NSNS) does not apply because of civil rights, but then you say you don’t think mask refusers would fall into the disability protected class? So NSNS does apply, then? Not sure why you disagreed in the first place if you were just going to circle back. This isn’t some big civil rights thing. It’s an annoyance, for most people. Some people are probably more comfortable barefoot and they’d see shoes as a similar nuisance. It doesn’t mean they have some huge civil rights violation if they’re forced to wear shoes to buy food. I find all these legalistic arguments to essentially be misdirection/bad advice to send dissenters down the wrong road.

          Look, unless you have a documented breathing disability, I’m pretty sure that it’s exactly like “No shirt, no shoes”. I’m not in favor of masks, I just think all these legalistic arguments are silly and the wrong approach for a dissenter to take. You won’t have a leg to stand on, and you will have ignored very solid scientific and logical arguments for why the masks are worthless and ridiculous.

          BTW, just say “JFK”. You aren’t doing anyone any favors by randomly referring to things in cryptic ways (rko’s son). You are just making yourself hard to understand.

          Like

          Reply

          1. I was just typing at timr to let him know how he would have to sue…

            “Grocery stores are private. You’d have to sue under a civil rights act preventing discrimination in public accommodations. Therefore, you’d have to get the people sane enough not to wear a mask to be ruled by a court to be a protected class.”

            …then you chimed in with…

            “It’d be like suing over a “No shirt, no shoes, no service” policy. Can’t imagine that’d be a winning lawsuit. It’s stupid, oh yes. Extremely stupid. But it’s not a crazy burden for you to put the stupid thing on.”

            …I just reminded you that the no shoe no service defense doesn’t matter in a civil rights action and seeing as I stated directly above that timr would have to have mask refusers designated a protected class in order to establish a cause of action under a civil rights statute. I don’t see what the problem is. That’s enough of that though. I’m not gonna argue legal niceties with someone that calls himself fauxlex.

            I’d rather talk about Apollo, the physician, and koronis(it’s means what it looks like) and that who logo you posted on the thread you closed. You game?

            Bytheway, I’m gonna keeping calling jfk the founder of rko’s son. I think its noteworthy. Did you know JFK’s daddy started rko before I typed it?

            Like

            Reply

            1. Yes I did know that. And the people who didn’t know it are only confused by such random, “out of left field” references. They aren’t learning by your references, they would just see your comments as gobbledygook.

              It’s no help to anyone that you choose to be unclear. You could have just as easily said “JFK, the son of the owner of RKO” and it would at least be coherent (albeit no less random). Gobbledygook seems to be the perfect term for how you choose to communicate here.

              Let’s imagine someone doesn’t understand the reference. How do you think they’re going to find anything useful from “RKO son”? They can’t. Even adding some context from your comment still leads to totally irrelevant search results.

              I am just trying to encourage you to try and start communicating more clearly here. You think you’re helping people by being cryptic, but you’re not.

              Anyway, this is tiresome and off topic. I apologize Mark for carrying on with this. SMJ, best of luck to you.

              Like

              Reply

      2. I agree, lawsuit for refusal to wear mask would not fly. I had just gotten done this AM reading Mathis, and I guess I am suggestible, as he stated as such, that 100,000 lawsuits were waiting to happen. We do need lawsuits, but winnable ones, such as for closing down churches and public facilities. The first amendment is a dead letter.

        Like

        Reply

      3. I wish I found it trivial, but I can’t accept some store manager insisting that I put a bag on my face. Normal clothing has cultural precedent. But telling healthy people to take a medical precaution “in case they’re really sick” is invasive of bodily autonomy. It’s demeaning to one’s human dignity.

        On the class action or civil rights thing, I don’t think it should be the self chosen class of anti maskers. It’s more like, any customer should have the right to choose.

        I think you MIGHT in that case even bring pro maskers onto the lawsuit. I have talked to pro maskers who nevertheless don’t like it being mandated on them. So even if you WANT to wear a mask, this lawsuit would protect your right to make that choice for yourself.

        Faux lawsuits may or may not work, it’s new to me. But I don’t think science discussions will make much dent in heads full of mush. At least lawsuits, if you get a mass of people behind them, carry a threat of financial loss and bad PR. As well, it could give some stores an excuse to dissent from the mandate— fear of lawsuits.

        Like

        Reply

        1. Look, I completely agree that it is demeaning and ridiculous and pointless. You will find no greater ally than me on that front.

          It is just that I do not agree with the legalistic approaches I keep seeing out of conspiracy blogs (such as the Taos one and many comments here). They would have you believe that there is a mountain of easy lawsuits to win. To me, this is not true and is practically misdirection. It keeps us away from pushing harder on the scientific arguments.

          Mark is right that certain major cases might be won. Something like churches being specifically ordered to close. But we are not going to win any lawsuits just related to a mask requirement at a grocery store.

          This whole “any customer should have the right to choose” argument…I just don’t feel it holds any water. You would be told in response that the mask is no undue burden on you (unless medically documented breathing problems), and I am not sure that I even really disagree with that. It is indeed the pinnacle of stupidity, but it is not a terrible burden to wear. So then your argument amounts to the “No shirt, No shoes” logic. It is equivalent to someone who strongly feels they should be able to shop without shoes on. Is wearing shoes some kind of huge burden to them? No. They might think so, but no. It is the same with masks. I am sorry, but it really is.

          You will find no bigger ally in arguing against mask wearing in people without symptoms. However, those arguments for me will all be based on science and logic. The legalistic “it is against my liberty!” arguments just do not hold water for me, and they guide us right into a trap…it is a great way to lose the argument. If you want to win an argument against a mask-wearer, you cannot just say “I should have the right to choose, it is against my liberty, the government is not right to enforce such an order!”. That might be true enough, but it is a lousy way to frame your dissenting position. It ensures that your mask-head opponent will be successful in response.

          The person will just say “It is not a major burden to you and we are trying to save lives! What is your problem? Quit being a baby and wear the mask!”. This is why the correct approach is to be armed with the scientific understanding for why their “it saves lives” argument is wrong. You need to make them feel silly for wearing a useless mask, not try to make this some kind of civil rights outrage.

          Argue against the inherent logic of mask-wearing. Remind them that the virus particles are immensely smaller than the mask pores, that the mask can absorb through your eyes, that the real risk is touching infected surfaces, and on and on. Wearing a mask to prevent virus spread in healthy people is an absurd notion, and by the same logic should mean that everyone wears gloves and goggles and long sleeves. Point to the fact that masks are neither scientific nor logical. Point to the fatality rate of 0.3% (a common cold). Remind them that our immune system is supposed to get practice against bugs like the common cold. This whole situation has been blown completely out of proportion, and these masks are SCIENTIFICALLY useless.

          And at the end of the day, just don’t seek out such fights. If someone comes at you to wear one, be armed with a mask that says “This mask is pointless” or “Mind-control device”. We are going to have to get used to wearing them, as stupid as it all is. The best way to hit back is to undermine the masks from within, while wearing one if you have to. Wear it only when absolutely necessary, and even then you should attempt to undermine it. If it becomes an actual debate, stick to attacking the faulty science behind wearing a mask. There is a huge wealth of data in that area that will play to your advantage and make them look like fools for wearing the mask. If the bedrock of your stance is to say it’s against your “right to choose”, you will lose the debate and look bad.

          Liked by 1 person

          Reply

          1. TL;DR, a legalistic approach guarantees your opponent will be on firm ground while a scientific approach is how to actually debate an opponent. We need to make sure we can strongly argue against masks on scientific grounds rather than legalistic grounds.

            Like

            Reply

            1. I am old enough to remember the arguments about seat belt laws. My aunt insisted her husband’s life was saved because he was thrown from a car crash, but if belted he would have died in the fire. Lots of rhetoric about the Constitution and liberty, lots of threats of lawsuits. Yet here we are, fifty years later, all wearing seat belts like good compliant citizens.

              This is not in any way an argument for masks. It is to point out that—for those who wear their seat belt like the law says—they are just as much as “sheeple” as the mask-wearers they mock today.

              Fauxlex is correct: only on the basis of science can the argument be won. The legal arena has too many precedents already to support public health policies like masks.

              Liked by 1 person

              Reply

              1. Yep…and I really, really do not want anyone to think that I am pro-mask. I am 100% anti-mask. It is just that mask dissenters should not be suckered in by all these legalistic arguments that I keep seeing. Those are bad, losing arguments. It is why I am trying to come out against that approach. I do not want mask dissenters to set themselves up to lose debates by using a legalistic approach.

                The winning arguments are scientific and logical. Think about this: why masks? If we are talking about healthy people, it should really be laws forcing you to wear gloves, laws making it illegal to touch your face, and laws mandating hand washing every few hours. This is where a healthy person’s real risks are…picking up the virus from a touched surface. Wearing a mask for them is not doing anybody any good. They are not sneezing, so the mask is pointless. Not to mention, they are picking up virus particles from touched surfaces and wearing a mask forces them to touch their face much more frequently! (Note: Ask any healthy mask wearer why in God’s name they aren’t wearing gloves?!? Watch the baffled look you will get, as though they thought the face mask was some kind of all-purpose protective force-field. It always helps to make the mask wearers feel stupid.)

                We have gotten on fine for millennia with run-of-the-mill common colds floating around. That is all this is, at worst, and this has always been my key response on the subject. I have never been afraid of the common cold in my life, and I see no reason to start now. There is simply no need for new laws in this area. And you will be told the elderly are at risk, but they always were at greater risk. This is no new risk to the elderly. You should always hesitate to visit the elderly during cold/flu season…hundreds of seemingly standard bugs could kill them! For scientific reasons, this is simply not a logical area for the government to try to legislate.

                The only winnable debate position to take in this has to be based on a firm scientific and logical bedrock that undermines the concept of mask-wearing. Even so, we will be forced to occasionally wear the damn things just because it is being forced from the top. I really do recommend we all go out and get masks labelled “This is a mind control devise”. It will definitely come in handy in the future.

                Liked by 1 person

                Reply

                  1. Unfortunately I don’t think this will be helpful to us. That might be an excellent way for store owners who do not agree with the law to duck it, but it won’t do the average person any good. Stores can simply make this “store policy” and they are pretty well protected. If there is a law in place, then moreso. They won’t ask you if you have a medical condition, they will just refuse entry. Even if they do ask, I’m not sure you can sue them if you openly reply to the question. Sorry, I don’t think this will really help us. I quite enjoy that the store owner put up that sign though.

                    Like

                    Reply

                    1. Sorry sir, you cannot enter the premises without a mask.

                      Oh, that. Yes, I have a medical exemption.

                      Sorry, sir. No exceptions.

                      I don’t think you understand. Wearing a mask is harmful to my health. At the same time, I need groceries. You are allowed to stay open as an essential business. So you need to let me shop.

                      You’ll have to get someone to buy your groceries for you. No exceptions.

                      But the order requiring us to wear masks lists exceptions. Medical is one. It is not up to you. Your no exceptions policy is illegal. I need your name.

                      Dave.

                      Full name, Dave. I need to see your store ID and your full name. You’ll be named in the lawsuit. What you are doing is clearly illegal.

                      I’ll get my supervisor.

                      In the meantime, I need some groceries.

                      Sir, if you enter this store without a mask, we will call police.

                      Police are not responding to mask calls. They’ve got better things to do. Get your supervisor. In the meantime, I need a few items. [Dave leaves. I get groceries.] Meanwhile. Dave returns, no supervisor in tow. It has been explained to him that there is a medical exemption and that the store could be liable.

                      He assumes you’ve left. When you leave, wink at him.

                      Like

                    2. I do agree that lying about a medical exemption is a legitimate way to get past the store policies. As grounds for some kind of lawsuit? Not as much. But I agree, that should suffice in forcing the store to let you in.

                      Like

                    4. I hear you. There has just been a lot of talk of lawsuits here lately. On the “medical exemption” idea, I’ll cook you up some forgeries to use! Dr. Tobaggan hereby exempts Mr. Nick Pappagiorgio from face mask policies.

                      Like

                    5. I like it, the DL, but not needed. It is a bluff, that’s all. We cannot be hurt by it. Cops will not come, supervisor will be scared by the medical exemption meaning that they cannot have exceptions, Dave will be pissed but powerless. Win win.

                      Like

                    6. In my town there have been a few situations. The police are required to answer the calls. They have stated in the media they will not arrest or ticket for mask refusal. However if someone refuses to leave a store when asked, they can be arrested for trespassing and disorderly conduct. I’ve seen the same happen years ago with baggie pants or clothes with gang signs. Store policies seems to be like at will employment. The fine print with medical conditions or the business being an essential service and must serve customers regardless, doesn’t seem to hold up.
                      You have to do what the property/business owners declare or leave the premises.

                      Like

                    7. This what I’m saying. We’re realistically just going to have to wear them, stupid as they are, unless we want to have some serious trouble. My situation is better because they’re not mandatory, so if I’ve got to wear it at the barber or movie theater it’s easier for me to dismiss the burden. For all of you where it’s mandatory everywhere, I can understand why this is driving you nuts.

                      Like

                    8. Masks are a form of brainwashing. They intensify the fear and reinforce the notion that there is a virus. The agitprop campaign has gone maniacal, and the people behind it are surely psychopathic monsters. Humanity is being degraded, slowly pummeled into a state of torpor, where even those of us left with functioning brains are feeling the sheer power of the terror campaign. How long can we maintain?

                      We live in the mountains, cannot see our neighbors. Our county, to this point, has the stupid regulations and plexiglass and signs in the floors (I cannot make my feet stand on a “stand here” sign”), but oddly, no formal mask requirement. In those places down in Denver where they do, it is the employees who are the little Hitlers, and I am openly rebellious. They hate it when they cannot subdue me. The key is to have the confrontation, but to leave when they call in the thugs. Not much they can do when I am in the parking lot.

                      We own our house, are retired and at this point are allowed to enjoy our savings. Yes, I know, lucky stiffs. We have talked about our alternatives in our early 70s, seeing our fellow geriatrics killed by ventilators and tubes. We decided today we stay here under all circumstances, as nursing homes and Assisted Living facilities have become killing asylums. Our home is our only refuge from madness. I know they will come to our door with a vaccination needle, and that we will have to submit to that to be a be able to travel or attend a concert or ball game. They don’t seem able to enforce lockdown on us, that is, we never felt the pressure point of that device, coming and going as we please. I have resisted at every possible pressure point, telling my wife that moral courage is a pain in the ass. We hope that the fooking vax does not kill us. These are eugenicists, aka, murderers.

                      Like

                    9. By the way, my imaginary dialogue with Dave is nothing more than a way of having fun with fools, as they have indeed trapped themselves with a health exemption coupled with HIPAA privacy restrictions, most useful if by unfortunate circumstance, you are in a doctor’s office. Hoist them by their own petard. Doctors are all over HIPAA by law. Tyrants, of course, despise laws and ignore them and push our faces in the muck of their corruption.

                      Like

                    10. The law is simple. Private companies can deny service unless they are discriminating against a protective class. People with disabilities are a protected class. Therefore you must prove that you have a disability that prevents you from wearing a mask. Once the disability to wear a mask is proven the private business must make reasonable accommodation for you. That doesn’t mean they have to let you in the store of course. They could just bring your groceries out to you if need be.

                      There are some affirmative defenses the business could raise. They could claim they are morally opposed to serving people who refuse to wear masks or somesuchshite. That’s how some of the pharmakoi got out of providing morning after pills.

                      Liked by 1 person

                2. Faux-

                  As far as winning people over with scientific arguments, or making them feel foolish, I really don’t see it. Just like with any issue, people early on make up their minds, in both camps, and then get more entrenched into their views, generally speaking. You can see it happen on facebook, each side preaches to the choir with memes and news stories. I try to engage with pro-maskers some, but where they used to discuss, they seem to just ignore my comments now (and I’m perfectly polite, and make shockingly brilliant points that demand rebuttal, of course!)

                  That’s why I think legal and constitutional challenges, especially if widespread and persistent, could gum up their works much more effectively. There are many, many angles from which to approach it; I’m not saying I’ve hit on it exactly yet. Ideally some brilliant legal minds would zero in on the strongest line of attack. It is noteworthy (as Miles points out) that the ACLU is MIA. This is EXACTLY a case where they should be on the front lines. If any liberals had brain cells left, they should see how discrediting that is. I mean, these poor workers being required to wear masks, now that really IS burdensome, physically— I’ve heard anecdotally that people say they’re more exhausted after work, that they were falling asleep at their desk until they began cheating on the mask, etc.

                  But I want to clarify that MY lawsuit plan of attack, as a shopper for groceries, would not be framed around its being physically burdensome to wear masks. That is an annoyance; I would say a major annoyance if one sees no medical utility; but yes, arguably just an annoyance.

                  However my argument would be that it’s a form of mandated political speech, which is morally repugnant to my sensibilities.

                  A) It’s ineffective (or harmful even) on scientific grounds, ergo
                  B) its only function is one of symbolism.

                  It represents consent to a corrupt political order that supports anti-scientific medical fascism. It represents also:

                  -symbolically covering the mouth = lack of a voice, powerless
                  -covering the face = anonymous, dehumanizing, suppression of individuality
                  -covering the face = covering “the image of god”, from the religious view that man is created in God’s image, hence a religious infringement if one subscribes to that belief
                  -culturally harkens to caste systems in Middle Eastern religions, or slave practices historically, in which face coverings are used to mark lower castes
                  -represents endorsement of tyrannical, fascistic views promulagated by a tiny cabal of oligopolistic media powers (using corrupted, scientifically bankrupt claims)

                  -represents endorsement of political speech by the US government, as the practice is not scientifically justified (its scientific utility cannot just be asserted; prove it in a court of law; in any event, who says I have to worship at the altar of science — it DOES change from one day to the next, and no worldview has a defacto claim on any individual— a “truth” the cultural authorities should especially appreciate, as they promote gender and identity relativity, and other relativities)

                  -represents an intrusion by private business into the realm of political speech, as, again, the practice is ineffective/ harmful on health grounds

                  -Is functionally equivalent to a business mandating customers wear armbands with swastikas on them in order to enter (which may be legally defensible for one business acting independently, but when they all simultaneously enforce such an edict, in response to government mandate, it’s an infringement of the 1st Amendment free speech clause, and a restraint on trade, as all shops become de facto government agents, and their “private space” is now a government/ public space— clearly they are not exercising “private preference,” as they all in unison march in lockstep to government edicts. This is virtually the definition of fascism if I’m not mistaken, and nullifies the whole argument that businesses are exercising their private property rights.)

                  Like

                  Reply

    3. TimR, I’m with you on not wanting to pretend I’m sick. It seems just as dispiriting as pretending I’m stupid and wearing a face diaper. I really have no idea what I’m going to do if I’m forced to assert my right to leave my face unmasked.

      Like

      Reply

    1. That is pretty good.. Still wish we were all more direct abt giving the middle finger to these pirate sons of b***s but I’ll take what I can get…

      Maybe I’ll say, instead of “I have a medical condition,”
      “Hey bub, how do you know I don’t have a medical condition that exempts me from wearing a mask?”

      “Well, do you?”

      “Look at you, going around asking people if they have medical conditions.. I wonder what HIPA says about that..”

      Like

      Reply

      1. I feel bad for you guys, so sorry that you are caught between a rock and a hard place; i am afraid of the rage i would feel if i was caught up in that; nevertheless, may i have my two sense? Here it is:

        NO ARGUMENT CAN EVER BE WON….that is the nature of the rational mind; that is the nature of human speech; there is always one more point that could be made; there is always a loophole, a blind spot, obfuscations, a semantic trick, a denial of facts, a clever twist and so on ad nauseum. I say again, an argument or a (debate) is never really won. Or rather, it can be won for minds that care to be fair, for minds that know how to think and for hearts that can be humble; but a person will believe what they want to believe and so the legal and scientific arguments are both pointless…
        …but there you are, in it and these shitheads are eyeing yo and glaring at you and getting into your face; since you need to go buy food, i just do not have any intelligent solution to offer.
        then again, why not push it to the point of letting the police come and escort you out?
        Why not speaking very loudly in the supermarket say how you are really feeling:
        “HEY PEOPLE WHO DO YOU KNOW WHO HAS GOTTEN SICK AND DIED/ COME ON STEP UP AND SAY NOTHING OF WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD ON THE MEDIA. WHO KNOWS FROM FIRST HAND EXPERIENCE YOUNG HEALTHY PEOPLE WHO HAVE DIED FROM THIS….”
        you know the soapbox kind of thing, but even that, it cannot be won i suppose because some might just step up and give you a story they think is true; which just proves my point; these people will not be reasoned with, in any way; in any form , nor in any fashion…
        you are living now in a ghost house; you cannot deconstruct the ghost house, so you must find a way out; good luck.

        lastly, i have a strong hunch in these last few days that your host is somehow misleading you…deliberately giving you a format to let off steam and in that way misdirecting you; the way Mark and Faux write about Miles smells really stinky to me…dishonest

        Like

        Reply

        1. Directly above is a photo supplied by Big Swede that seems to resonate … they grant a medical exemption, and due to HIPAA, no one can ask about it. They may have crossed themselves up. I say we take advantage of it. Refusing admission due to lack of mask but ignoring a legal medical exemption could indeed result in the implied threat of a real lawsuit. Not a real lawsuit, of course. It is perfectly legal to threaten to sue someone even if you’ve no real intent. (College business law, circa 1970s.)

          You’re a little sensitive on the Mathis side, as if he is immune to criticism. I could have gone off on him, since he impugned POM as just bloody blokes out to get him. Instead I merely mentioned that he claimed a hundred thousand lawsuits in the making, and discussion here ferreted out that there was no such thing. Stand down if you would.

          Implying I have an agenda? Ever heard the word “genuine?” Comments had gone away, so I did not expect much from this post. What I wrote was heartfelt. I cannot speak for Faux, but I know he can speak quite well for himself, so be prepared to duck.

          Like

          Reply

          1. i happen to agree with you mark that his idea of 100,000 lawsuits is just silly; he has been pushing that for months…to sue people; on this issue, i agree with you; my comments about your attitude to mm is general,NOT only this post…and ok i only mean to say that your general comments about him seem stinky..maybe i am wrong; i love the guy but do not get on one knee when i pronounce his name!! i see what i believe are his faults….

            Like

            Reply

            1. I generally give him credit for his good work. In my recent piece on the Cuban Missile Crisis, I hinged it on a MM piece about the Bay of Pigs being baloney.

              He’s got nothing kind to say about me, however. And this sticks with me … Josh figured out who wrote the Bob Zerunkel piece and must have told MM, and still MM insisted the writer was MI6, knowing better. That was a lie for benefit of his readers.

              But my issues with the guy are not big issues. I can live with everything, take what is good.

              Like

              Reply

        2. “why not push it to the point of letting the police come and escort you out?”

          I agreed with much of what you said about how truly arguments or debates in a public sphere cannot be won. However, your statement above…I mean, really? If you want a criminal record, fees, jail time, etc. for no good reason then be my guest. I just don’t understand this “get arrested, scream at people” mentality. But it’s your life.

          As for the Taosian, Mark hasn’t been part of those conversations lately so put that one on me. And speaking of “stinky”, that is just how I feel about that particular site. It does not smell right to me. But we do not exist to have every comment chain be about that. We’re not rehashing that here.

          Like

          Reply

          1. POM doesnt exist to have every comment chain be about that, but will you deny that MM is there in the shadows of everything and everyone on POM?
            Feels that way to me; as for my ability to remain critical about someone i admire deeply, see my above comment to Mark.
            As i have already said..or have i?, i believe that miles has begun to identify with his enemy to such a point, that he often treats others as “the families ” or whatever you wish to call it..are treating him; it is a common thing to become what you hate, and i want to give credit where credit is due; since you all believe he his basically correct in his take on things, can we imagine what he has to live through..alone.
            I do not feel you speak about him sincerely Faux; it is as if you cannot even feel comfortable pronouncing his name…now that is interesting

            Like

            Reply

            1. Oh, I would agree with that. Mostly because the Taos site is genuinely my biggest introduction to this world. It deserves all credit due on that front, and in that way it technically is always something not too far from the surface. Agree.

              As for not using the name, I do this quite intentionally because I’m specifically NOT just trying to trash the site. If I were going around using the name over and over, it would draw traffic. This alone should tell you that I do still find the site worthwhile enough. I’m not trying to take it down. As much as I sense with every fiber of my being that something is amiss there, I realize that it is among the best sites for people in our world to get background on a variety of issues.

              With that said, it’s puzzling the way you can’t whisper that name without waves of attack in response. It’s funny, “the fog” seems an amazing exercise in unanimity, while POM is constantly attacked and fractured. I would have so much more respect for Taosians if they were able to look at that site with a fair eye.

              Just because it’s an inspiration and close to the surface doesn’t mean we ought to have every comment section get taken over by that subject.

              Like

              Reply

              1. Mark please allow me a few comments and then i will not pursue the issue further:

                really Fauxlex , you give yourself away when you admit that Miles Mathis was the biggest introduction of the world to you; the rest is sour grapes, and you are obviously the frustrated and weakly fox who couldn’t jump high enough to reach the grapes…and/ or, the farmer shooed you away, out of his garden, with a contemptuous wave of the hand.

                All you say implies that the website is not the website of one single man; you deny Miles reality and speak of “taosians”:
                Your whole post above is doubletalk and doublethink and it is stinky; and again do not mistake me for his followers from CTTF because i agree with you that they are blinded by the light…and Josh is just Miles’ lapdog.

                Like

                Reply

  20. here is the ammunition you need to get through to these people:

    you need to instill in them a doubt about the governments intentions, since, in their hearts is actually already a doubt;

    during your soapbox moment, you may mention 9-11 or such things that many have doubts about; you may ask; “dont you believe that there might be political reasons the governemnt is calling this an epidemic? Do you not know that the word epidemic means that millions are dying ? Is this really an epidemic?I too believed it at first, but look around you…who is sick?!!!

    this kind of talk, it seems to me, is the best way to go. you must appeal to their immediate sense of reality; all intellectual ideas will be lost on them

    Like

    Reply

  21. Appropros of nothing, but it seems like a good fit here: I just went into a Walgreens and laughed when I saw the pharmacist’s mask didn’t cover his nose.

    Reading all the comments, I’m beginning to think it’s a waste of time to spend too much time crafting any sort of argument with anyone. We can use people’s inherent cowardice and sheepishness to our advantage. You walk into a store and an employee tells you to wear a mask? After a polite but firm “No,” just keep walking with your shoulders back and your head held high. (I’ve been walking with much better and more expansive posture lately, thanks to my voice lessons. Maybe I’m projecting, but I sense people looking at me a little strangely, like, what’s he doing looking so alert and engaged and confident in himself? That’s not how we’re supposed to behave…) If, after walking past the employee, a supervisor is called, and the demand to leave the store is repeated, just repeat the same polite but firm “No.” If they threaten to call the police, tell them to go ahead. My guess is that, nine times out of ten, most of those cowardly employees will just slink away and let you do what you want to do.

    Not getting angry–not getting emotional–not giving up on our lives or ourselves or our fellow man, but just boldly continuing to do what we want to do without argument or verbal protest, is probably the most terrifying response imaginable for the people who have orchestrated this show of power.

    Liked by 2 people

    Reply

  24. “How often it consoles me to think of barbarism once more flooding the world, and real feelings and passions, however rudimentary, taking the place of our wretched hypocrisies”
    ~William Morris

    Like

    Reply

  25. And adding to my reply up above in that long thread (which I hope people will read and give their opinion)– another symbolic connotation of the masks, is their cultural connection to gimp sex slave masks, as reminiscent of the fetish objects used by bondage and sadism enthusiasts.

    Another reason being mandated to wear a mask is degrading to human dignity, and an offensive intrusion on personal liberty.

    Like

    Reply

  26. The television was invented for this purpose of mind f#@king the masses into believing well educated (sounding) well groomed suits. Now the internet was invented to data bank us & of course gate keep the ‘too close to the truth’ blogs. ‘We are spiritual beings having a human experience.” ~John Trudell.

    Like

    Reply

    1. That’s nothing. Politics has been sucking up all the air in the room for many, many years.
      Also politics has just been sucking.

      Like

      Reply

  28. I don’t know if people are burned out right now, or if this comment got lost in that long thread up above.. Just wanted to respond to Fauxlex’s criticism of legal avenues. He was saying it would be dismissed as a petty annoyance or something, but I have a different angle on it (see below.) Not saying this would work necessarily, but just throwing it out there for comment:

    As far as winning people over with scientific arguments, or making them feel foolish, I really don’t see it. Just like with any issue, people early on make up their minds, in both camps, and then get more entrenched into their views, generally speaking. You can see it happen on facebook, each side preaches to the choir with memes and news stories. I try to engage with pro-maskers some, but where they used to discuss, they seem to just ignore my comments now (and I’m perfectly polite, and make shockingly brilliant points that demand rebuttal, of course!)

    That’s why I think legal and constitutional challenges, especially if widespread and persistent, could gum up their works much more effectively. There are many, many angles from which to approach it; I’m not saying I’ve hit on it exactly yet. Ideally some brilliant legal minds would zero in on the strongest line of attack. It is noteworthy (as Miles points out) that the ACLU is MIA. This is EXACTLY a case where they should be on the front lines. If any liberals had brain cells left, they should see how discrediting that is. I mean, these poor workers being required to wear masks, now that really IS burdensome, physically— I’ve heard anecdotally that people say they’re more exhausted after work, that they were falling asleep at their desk until they began cheating on the mask, etc.

    But I want to clarify that MY lawsuit plan of attack, as a shopper for groceries, would not be framed around its being physically burdensome to wear masks. That is an annoyance; I would say a major annoyance if one sees no medical utility; but yes, arguably just an annoyance.

    However my argument would be that it’s a form of mandated political speech, which is morally repugnant to my sensibilities.

    A) It’s ineffective (or harmful even) on scientific grounds, ergo
    B) its only function is one of symbolism.

    It represents consent to a corrupt political order that supports anti-scientific medical fascism. It represents also:

    -symbolically covering the mouth = lack of a voice, powerless
    -covering the face = anonymous, dehumanizing, suppression of individuality
    -covering the face = covering “the image of god”, from the religious view that man is created in God’s image, hence a religious infringement if one subscribes to that belief
    -culturally harkens to caste systems in Middle Eastern religions, or slave practices historically, in which face coverings are used to mark lower castes
    -represents endorsement of tyrannical, fascistic views promulagated by a tiny cabal of oligopolistic media powers (using corrupted, scientifically bankrupt claims)

    -represents endorsement of political speech by the US government, as the practice is not scientifically justified (its scientific utility cannot just be asserted; prove it in a court of law; in any event, who says I have to worship at the altar of science — it DOES change from one day to the next, and no worldview has a defacto claim on any individual— a “truth” the cultural authorities should especially appreciate, as they promote gender and identity relativity, and other relativities)

    -represents an intrusion by private business into the realm of political speech, as, again, the practice is ineffective/ harmful on health grounds

    -Is functionally equivalent to a business mandating customers wear armbands with swastikas on them in order to enter (which may be legally defensible for one business acting independently, but when they all simultaneously enforce such an edict, in response to government mandate, it’s an infringement of the 1st Amendment free speech clause, and a restraint on trade, as all shops become de facto government agents, and their “private space” is now a government/ public space— clearly they are not exercising “private preference,” as they all in unison march in lockstep to government edicts. This is virtually the definition of fascism if I’m not mistaken, and nullifies the whole argument that businesses are exercising their private property rights.)

    Like

    Reply

    1. Thank you TIMR, this is most cogent and concise summary of strategies to counter mask-wearing that I’ve read in the past couple months, and I have read widely.

      So far I have tried to avoid any venue or situation requiring a mask, but it’s growing more difficult.

      Currently living in an area that recently and insanely mandated outdoor mask-wearing, I have only left home once in the past few weeks. I had chosen to work from home and don’t own a car, but the new circumstances have me feeling that I’m under house arrest — unless I comply by going out and “proclaiming my obedience to the state” with the mask. Indeed the earlier “lockdown” period in March-April was not even as bad as now.

      The last time I went out to shop, I jogged 4 miles in the heat and sweated out 4 pounds of weight. Had I slowed to walk comfortably, then legally I would no longer be “exercising vigorously” and therefore be required to wear a mask, else subject to a hefty fine by the police, even in the fresh air and blocks away from the nearest person.

      Certainly absurd, and I’m considering to move away in a few months, if there will be any sane place left to move to by then. Cheers.

      Like

      Reply

    2. Timr..anything you try to do according to the LAW means that you have to play by the rules that they have set up; therefore, it is a foregone conclusion: You will lose when they want you to lose and win when they want you to win; there is no fighting them on their terms and that is why i suggested above that you hit them on a personal level; they carry within them a seed of doubt anyway about their government; why not play gently and politely on that; and make them look stupid…humiliate them, only as a very last resort, and only if they get nasty with you.

      you yourself seem to understand that their minds, once made up, cannot be changed very easily ; still, i insist the best way is to get personal; most people cannot handle cold intellectual logic. Nor can i say exactly the best way to play on their internal unconscious doubt about the government; each conversation would be alittle different.maybe if i had had to deal with it, i might have something more clever to offer, but as you know, life here in japan, goes along exactly as before; i am just $4000 richer thats all

      Like

      Reply

      1. also, all your arugments will mean nothing since the comeback will always be:”we are trying to save lives.” in other words, no argument will stand against their terror of death and sickness. Freedom scientific evidence property rights whatever you throw at them, in their minds, LIVING , at any coast, being healthy, is all that matters to them.

        incidentally there is no such thing as private property; if a man cannot do what he wants in his restaurant, then it is not his; if a man doesn’t pay his property taxes, his land is taken away; if i make you pay me $1 a week to wear that shirt of yours, and if you do not pay me, i will stick a gun to your head and make you pay…so who owns that shirt? me or you? That is simple libertarian stuff. The argument against that is also easy to imagine;

        “well what if that restaurant owner wants to molest 5 year old girls in his restaurant? is that ok also?

        and then i say…..blah blah blah..and then he says ….

        you see, no arugment is winnable,. To the slave mentality, only SAFTEY matters, and they will always come back to that in one form or another….

        so perhaps shaming them is the best way.

        Like

        Reply

    3. Hey Tim, sorry for the late comment, but I do really like the idea of lawsuits at least to “gum things up” for the mask pushers. If we had tons of resources, I agree with you that this is the ideal way to screw with them. The only problem is that I am not sure this would filter down very well to the individual level (as you describe your own concept of a lawsuit). I could see many organizations suing that the laws are an undue government burden. However, I guess my point was that it’s very different for the individual. We’re not like churches, Constitutionally protected. You are arguing that it forces you to make a political statement, and as much as I completely agree with you, I am not sure how much success you would have in the courts on that front. Think of the seatbelt example…if you feel a seatbelt restricts your personal liberty (it does), can the government still give you some $20 ticket for not wearing one? I fear we have very little recourse from ending up down this kind of road.

      It’s telling that there haven’t been lawsuits coming from the political “right” or the ACLU (as has been pointed out). This tells us more than anything that dissent is not permitted, and that the orders here come from the very top. Sadly, if something is being normalized with such heavy weight, and there is some argument for an increase in public safety, we are kind of screwed in being able to stop it. Even if these arguments are faulty, they will be believed. Tyranny is arriving here in a very bizarre form.

      It’s a nightmare scenario for us. I do hope there are large-scale lawsuits from churches and businesses. Those can be won. However, for individuals I think we are just facing the cold truth that under Fascism we have little recourse.

      Like

      Reply

  29. The entire globe appears to be having a collective nervous breakdown.
    Surely Nature will intervene and there won’t be a damned thing the PTB will be able to do about it.

    Like

    Reply

  30. Masks have nothing to do with health. They are about control. When you put on a mask, “for a few minutes” or “to get in the door” you have consented to be controlled by psychopaths.
    Masks have nothing to do with health. They are evil. If you put on a mask “to avoid confrontation” or for any other excuse, you have become complicit in this depraved psychological operation and have betrayed your own soul.
    It is useless to try to argue about masks. You cannot convince those who are trying to enforce these ridiculous rules. Just tell them you can’t wear a mask and continue with your business.
    It is useless to try to argue about masks. The masktards are brainwashed. You cannot reason with them because their minds are not functional. If a masktard tries to complain that you are not muzzling yourself, pretend you cannot hear them and ignore these lost souls.
    Don’t ever put on a mask. Don’t sell your soul to evil psychopaths.

    Like

    Reply

Leave a comment