latest

Book/Manuscript.md

@@ -2042,69 +2042,55 @@ A "Covidian" would be one who is "of" Covid; the consequence of having been in a
 
 Conversely, the "Covidist" would best describe the alarmist, fear-mongering initiate to the "Covid Cult" who leverage broad cognizance of this event in order to advocate for transformation of society, agreement with their Critical description of reality, particularly if it involves a Marxist-style hierarchical analysis, and a general desire for a Collectivist endpoint which they indicate as necessary given the occurrence of a "deadly pandemic" which manifested precisely because not enough had yet been done to drive the world towards their conception of an ideal state of mankind.
 
-A very dear one to me, for what it's worth, as this was the first time we traversed past the line from demanding uniformity of verified expressions and entered into uniformity of physical access to the body. This was the first time where embodiment of the state rhetoric became a rule and where everyone could be categorized as an immediate threat. It's where one couldn't fully understand whether their participation was itself an expression of state rhetoric.
+A very dear one to me, for what it's worth, as this was the first time we traversed past the line from demanding uniformity of expression and entered into uniformly providing physical access to the body. This was the first time where embodiment of the state rhetoric became a rule and where everyone could be categorized as an immediate threat. It's where one couldn't fully understand whether their participation was itself an expression of state rhetoric or an intelligent choice of actions based on their understanding of the environment.
 
-For the first time, the state could dictate the movement in everyone's house, the manner in which relations of family members are to be managed and expressed, and a means by which one family member could use state rhetoric, state narrative, and the threat of state enforcement mechanisms to pressure, castigate and designate the moral standing of other family members.
+For the first time, the state could dictate movement in ever house, the manner in which relations of family members are to be managed, and a means by which family members could use state rhetoric, narrative, and the threat of state enforcement mechanisms to pressure, castigate and judge the moral standing of other family members.
 
 It gave anyone an opportunity to utterly betray their closest relatives while maintaining ample plausible deniability through the continuous publication and distribution of emergency announcements and warnings whose message always provided key declarations which can, in and of themselves, not be proven, thus it and in whatever contentious dialogue arises, we see the following:
-- Those who make dialogue and question narrative identify themselves as beyond the pale, according to logically deduced evaluation as per state rhetoric.
+- Those who make dialogue and question narrative identify themselves as beyond the pale.
 - You could simply participate by restating what has been uttered by the state and reinforce the stated goals pertaining to the statements.
 
 ## Acting on Body is Acting on Mind
 
 Relinquishing the sanctity and sovereignty of one's body is simultaneously acting on the belief that one should relinquish one's mind. If you can no longer make decisions and act in the best interests of your person, then perhaps you shouldn't be making decisions about anything.
 
-The main issue is how so many men would necessarily come to behave as though their destiny is granted. (My belief?) The creation of one's own destiny is the extent to which one can remain humble while assuming role of creator.
+The main issue is how so many men would necessarily come to behave as though their destiny is granted.
 
 ## Dialectics
 
-The Covid era has been especially potent for transforming people's understanding or confidence in their capacity to understand, as well as imprinting cognitive association or linguistic triggers to completely guide and control their thoughts and emotions seemingly at will, at least for the most common among us.
-!TODO: is it only the "most common"? Isn't it all of us, but perhaps leading to different details in some of the lines of thinking?
+The Covid era has been especially conducive to transforming people's confidence in their capacity to understand their environment and themselves. The messaging and nudges generate cognitive associations and linguistic triggers to serve as implements to manipulate opinion and behaviour through inducing and directing emotional responses. This was done in a way which placed people in a state of mystification whereby they weren't so curious to understand so much as they were wishing to be assured that they were participating correctly and being led to the correct endpoint.
 
-Each human was classified as both the most precious resource, as well as the primary threat. That is not simply that persons who are ill were the threat and the infirm were precious, no, it was that every single human is to be treated as the primary threat at all times, and this is an aspect which still continues to this day in at least the medical services and private institutions whenever they detect an opportunity to practice their neutral behaviour.
+Humans were paradoxically classified as both the most precious resource, and the primary threat. That is not simply that persons who are ill were the threat and the infirm were precious, no, it was that every single human is to be treated as the primary threat at all times, and this is an aspect which still continues to this day in the medical industry, in private institutions, and even among a not-insignificant portion of the general public.
 
-!NOTE: Above: humans were classified into two categories - citizen and threat, with the former further subdivided into essential and non-essential.
-!NOTE: Above: it continues to this day both among public who consume certain media or are of a certain disposition, as well as certain institutions, but this isn't because of them taking an opportunity to practice a neutral behaviour - they are aligning with state and authoritarianism in a manner which reinforces biases and delusions.
+For the medical and pharmaceutical industry, continuing the procedures borne of the Covid era provides opportunities to validate previous behaviours, rationalize demands, such as additional data collection and confirmation of compliance, and inducing a sense of caution and reverence among customers and patients. It allows for a higher implied status of moral standing to which other statements can be validated, such as the virtuous characteristics of he caregiver. For the more ideologically adept working in those environments, they can compel group behaviour and deem it as a form of praxis in the sense of continuing a historical process towards world change.
 
-Yes, opportunity to do:
-- validate the mechanism
-- rationalize their extra demands
-- piggy back the initiative
-- do praxis
-  - proliferate for critical consciousness
-- appropriate as evidence for other issue
-- restructure organizations
+This gives institutions ample opportunity to validate both their and the state's mechanisms utilized to enforce a standards of authority and control, and given that the institutions depend and are affected by state funding and legislation, there is an incentive for the institutions to record data in a manner which reinforces the state's pronouncements. Institutions can rationalize extra demands by continuing to purvey the semblance of the threat and can, with the state, piggy back on one another's initiatives in order to enhance capacity to influence public perception while validating increased demands.
 
-!TODO: Rewrite the above in normal language, as there are some good points. Draft below:
-
-Yes, indeed, this gives institutions, particularly those of the medical persuasion, ample opportunity to validate both their mechanisms, and those of those which the state utilized to enforce a new standard of authority and control, and given that these institutions depend so heavily on state funding and legislation, it is a deadly cycle of reciprocation and narrow incentivization. Institutions can rationalize extra demands by continuing to purvey the semblance of the threat, and the institutions and state can piggy back on one another's initiatives in order to enhance their ability to communicate in public to improve public perception and opinion about themselves, and acquire additional resources (rationalize?). It also serves as praxis for collectivist consciousness, as this is always performed as a means of escaping the threat of existence as it currently stands, in its sinful state which begs for cleansing.
-
-Furthermore, any broad threat can always be used as a continuation of poor circumstances, which come to be associated with the issue du jour as it provides an endless stream of evidence. Lastly, it provides a good excuse to claim there is a need to restructure the organization, which is useful for purging undesirable elements or claiming additional power.
+Furthermore, any broad threat can always be used to excuse poor circumstances, which come to be associated with the issue du jour as it provides an endless stream of evidence. Lastly, it provides a good excuse to claim there is a need to restructure the organization, which is useful for purging undesirable elements or claiming additional power. In many respects, the Covid period served as an opportunity to shift the explicit objectives of an institution towards equity, initially through decrying the projected disparate impacts of Covid itself, and then using the language of crisis to begin describing the normal state of affairs for humans per group identity.
 
 Indeed, the issue, when championed and enforced through an authoritarian entity, becomes an extension of your own other favourite issue and then a mystifying argument is formulated to say they are the same issue, and that your model of it, which includes a new aspect that's been brought in through synthesis which accounts for your identified contradiction is a more intentional and appropriate means of addressing the issue.
 
-Some examples of this, over which we've seen an excess of communication over the past few years, might include the following:
-- Covid is actually social justice
-- Covid is sustainability
-  - is social justice
-- this is all evidence of transphobia and fascism-creep
+This was visible very early on, as the summer of protest coincided with the first year of the Covid era, and both medical professionals and politicians were adopting language by Neo-Marxist activists for peer review journals normally reserved for medicine and biology. Some examples of this, over which we've seen an excess of communication over the past few years, might include the following:
+- [AMMA Covid Impact](https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/health-equity/impact-covid-19-minoritized-and-marginalized-communities)
+- [AMMA Health Equity](https://www.ama-assn.org/delivering-care/health-equity/covid-19-health-equity-resources)
+- [Psychiatry Online: Syndemic](https://psychiatryonline.org/doi/10.1176/appi.ps.202000725)
+- [Politico: Public Heath Justice](https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2020/06/04/public-health-protests-301534)
+- [Social Determinants preprint](https://www.medrxiv.org/content/10.1101/2021.07.16.21260638v1)
 
 ### YT-CoV2
 
-The cult of covid was also expressed as being synonymous, equivalent and interchangeable with whiteness. This was evident quite early on when the there was a sleugh of rushed, ambiguous medical papers which blurred the lines in the sense of using medical and scientific language while being focused and concerned on sociopolitical issues which have been weaponized, such as Social Justice and antiracism.
+Whether a "syndemic" or "whiteness" as a factor in public health emergencies, the cult of covid blurred lines by using scientific language while focusing on weaponized sociopolitical issues such as antiracism.
+
+There are many ways of making these connections, needing only need a framing of disparity to champion collectivism and consolidation of power to central authority. Interestingly, dialectics of health equity involving the concept of whiteness can be handled in many ways such as to induce reflexive agitation among the public.
+
+White people are sometimes argued as being disadvantaged, by "conservatives" who don't know how to engage the discourse correctly, by claiming contradiction defying descriptions by Critical theorists. A common description involves juxtaposing against the "historically oppressed" moniker, leading to an implied need for "negation" of the problem variable. Critical theorists will even apply the term "disadvantaged" to white people by claiming that, in spite of the tools of whiteness concentrating power and wealth, those people who benefit are themselves a minority (like the 1%) who have leveraged whiteness and the ignorance and unconscious racism of white people, as well as the internalized racism of people of colour, to their advantage. This means that, even within the framework of Critical Race theory, white people can be both disadvantaged and the racist purveyors of hegemonic forces which drive oppression. This is a good example of argumentation built upon contradiction yet postured as reasonable. Nevertheless, it still sells the premise of the CRT mythos and Covidism just takes it a step further and embeds it in what is assumed to be hard science and medicine. If any don't agree with this "reasonable" analysis, they are simply suffering from false consciousness.
 
-There are so many ways of making these connections, and they only need some framing of disparity in any capacity so long as it supports collectivism and consolidation of power to central authority:
-- White people are sometimes argued as being disadvantaged, and this is put forward by those who don't know how to engage the discourse correctly as a contradiction which defies the description being put forward by the Critical Theorist.
-  - Negated through invocation of the "historically oppressed" moniker.
-- White people are disadvantaged statistically because even the tools of whiteness concentrate power and wealth for a small minority of white people or the white adjacent or otherwise beneficiaries of whiteness (that is to say, those people who somehow benefit from the use of a property or even simply those who do not denounce private property and whiteness as private property). This is a good example of making argumentation which postures itself such as to be reasonable in fully consolidating the contradictory elements in the analysis, such as the claim that though the fact of being economic disadvantaged seems to be statistically more relevant in terms of indicating problematic outcomes in different demographics, it's still fundamentally caused by the factors which are more central to the lense being applied and, as such, those who don't agree the analysis but who otherwise seem to fall under the description of those who are an exception or contradictory element, are simply suffering from false consciousness.
-  - If you don't see it, you are likely at least biased from the benefits it gave you or those you believe will come to you:
-    - Not proven per specific belief.
-    - White and yt-adjacent benefit simply by not having to directly deal with the conflict. In this way, there needn't be any strong piece of evidence, which is something we've discussed before. Instead, you simply need the absence of any evidence which is itself a form of evidence in the sense that one's disagreement is evidence sans any concrete evidence about why that disagreement might be.
-      - No conflict, no reason to change the comforting stupor of false consciousness.
-- So long as their plight is described as a consequence or lingering symptom of ailment that would otherwise be addressed by the distribution of power and wealth to entities that pursue collectivism, the rationale will be considered valid and legitimate.
+If you don't see the racism in medicine, it's likely you are biased from the benefits it gave you, as things could be much worse for you, and it is much worse for at least one who doesn't look like you. White and yt-adjacent benefit simply by not having to directly deal with the conflict.
 
-Ultimately, only the thing which addresses all effects, and thus the oppression models of the world, will be considered valid. This is, of course, because the ultimate solution is a totalizing and one, and its system for man's life and society is a totalitarian one. This is also known as (holism, and many others !TODO: enumerate and disambiguate).
+There needn't be any strong piece of evidence. The evidence is simply your lack of criticism. That you aren't suffering in conflict means you have no reason to leave the comforting stupor of false consciousness. So long as the proletarian plight is described as a symptom of ailment otherwise addressed by distribution of power and wealth to entities that pursue collectivism, the rationale will be considered valid and legitimate.
 
+Ultimately, only the promise to address all effects, and thus the oppression models of the world, will be considered valid. The ultimate solution is totalizing and its system for man's life and society is totalitarian. This is also known as holism.
+!TODO: HERE!!!! 
 ### Is a Marxism
 
 There have only been a handful of people who have come out and said that covidism is, in effect, another instance of Marxism. Many push back on that idea the moment it is uttered. This needs to be disambiguated like the others to show that this is not necessarily a component of Marx's predicated sequence of historical events en route to his utopia, but it follows the general thought as an evolution of oppressor and oppressed.