I remember the mindset of being confronted with the idea of sustainability. It was such a powerful proposition to know that entities too large to interact with on a personal basis are implicated in deliberate, large scale activity which threats my existence and all that I love.
Well, such a set would be impossible to enumerate, but there is a perception which gives attention to the very notion of discovering parts of the world which old secrets. Secrst about the nature of reality, and secerst about experience and personal destiny, whether made by oneself or not.
It certainly wasn't the feeling which suggested that I'd been doing the same activitiy as the large corporation, but that my natural path was set towards the secret discoveries and this impediment was suddenly threatening to prevent the discoveries from being possible.
Why not make the connection then that all human existence follows the same pattern of behaviour? Well, maybe I did, but the significance diminshes greatly once one considers the relative influence of just one large-scale player:
But why even feel guilty about it?
Boosters are a form of sustainability, and no one minds an increased dependence on boosters for immunity. They don't mind that the idea that their protection from disease be represented discretely as a sum total of the medical therapies they have received. It might seem like a stretch, as surely everyone recognizes the vulnerability of relying on an externality for something that you can, for better or worse, do inherently. So how does this get rationalized?
Activists believe the great darkness looms, and the concept that man's sin is worthy of a deadly disease is still not new to them. Not only does this make feasible the state of mind which agrees there is no avoiding certain infection by a super virus, but if the solution uses language promoting the activist endeavours they believe in, then the treatment becomes a meta physical or otherwise holy proposition.