It shouldn't amaze you, even if you aren't old enough to remember the mass cognitive dissonance that surrounded the USSR.
The left is not opposed to large business entities. There were plenty of them in the Soviet Union. They're opposed to entities that don't conform to whatever the leftist narrative is at the moment.
They were against Big Pharma back in the day because it was right-wing/capitalist/insert-buzzword-here. Then their thought leaders realized how useful it was in getting the general public to do what they want, so they pivoted and their followers pivoted with them.
Not only Big Pharma either. I'm not one to always go "Thanks Obama", but Obama was really instrumental in promoting the idea throughout the bureaucracy of a partnership between Corporations and Government. Where the government is supposed to enforce the law evenly to ensure a fair playing field, what they pivoted to was a carrot-and-stick approach where agencies have personal relationships with members of boards, the government makes "requests" through them, and the corpos get special treatment to break whatever laws they want as long as they comply with those requests. This includes hiring people from former intelligence agencies or the FBI to C levels. In other words blatant corruption and the embiggening of the Deep State in the name of "promoting the general welfare."
(And I only blame Obama for making it official but it's been going on at some level for decades. I think he was kind of a Manchurian Candidate to program people to accept shady things they were doing behind the scenes as good.)
That's the thing, I technically still have 90s Democrat beliefs.
Everyone should have free speech - this includes speech you don't like. Free speech protects minority views and views that are considered "reprehensible". You don't have to agree with the view to defend it
Big corporations are evil
Unions can be good if they are for trade jobs (automobile workers), but need to be banned/removed from white collar jobs like teachers and "journalists". They also need to be regulated to prevent them from growing too big in power.
Immigration is bad for the country because "da GEEBZ" ends up going to illegal pieces of trash who skipped the line. I'd rather if "da GEEBZ" exists, it goes to American citizens that need it.
Don't be explicitly racist to others. i.e. don't fucking walk up to someone in the street and start calling them niggers for no reason.
We should make fun of everyone because that's how we learn to get along, and if you're offended, fuck you.
All these beliefs now are considered "right wing", some of these beliefs can be coordinated properly into being "America First" nationalist beliefs too.
When I was able to wrap my head around the fact that it wasn't about the old left/right libertarian/authoritarian spectrum but rather globohomo vs nationalist, it made it much easier to visualize why it's far more important than the traditional left/right shit Westerners always bitch about.
When you view it from a Globohomo vs nationalist viewpoint then yes, some shit you do WILL make government bigger and spend money, but that's fine, because the shit you're doing is with the intent of making your country even more successful to be able to give the citizens more power over their own destiny, which ultimately strengthens the country itself as its citizens start appreciating the opportunities the country has given them.
They'll claim it was all bots pushing it and that they would never be so gullible.
Because we all know that it was bots who created HermanCainAwards and LeopardsAtMyFace and SelfAwareWolves, filled them with content, upvoted and shared them and stopped any critical thinkers by shadow banning them.
All bots, totally not idiots thinking that their baying for blood wasn't exactly like racism, sexism or any other hatred.
Interactions on that platform have fallen faster than anywhere else on the web since they went public with their stock.
Back onto Pfizer, it's cheaper for them to settle all the little cases than it is to take the knock for what they actually did. We need an all in class action lawsuit from everyone force to take their 'medicine'.
Seriously. I still lurk in /r/conspiracy and it's extra hilarious how swarmed over it is with NPCs that jump on anything against big pharma or the DNC.
Yup, it was always Digg 2.0 after Digg 2.0 died. And Digg was already extremely Left and very Liberal on most social issues even when it was in its infancy.
But it does show that those emergency use liability waivers are just pieces of paper. If push came to shove gov officials would sooner throw Pfizer under a bus than keep their own word at risk of losing everything. The politicians just need pushing hard enough they get scared and we may yet see justice in our lifetimes.
I think its more along the lines of the government itself being in a bit of a schism.
Those EUA were frankly, illegitimate, and based off falsified data. So you have one group in government, that doesn't have quite as much power, that is against allowing the EUA and actively opposing it or trying to. While the corrupt group, who presently holds much more power is supporting the EUA and doing their best to both CYA and also make sure they can squeeze as much money and power from it as they can.
It's like the vaccine, a partial immunity that fades a lot over time.
They can't be sued over the damage the vaccine caused, but they can be sued over false statements about it. You can't sue them for getting myocarditis or turbo cancer, but you can sue for them hiding from you that they knew you would.
There's pretty much no level of lawsuit "immunity" that can't be pierced in the case of sufficient negligence, recklessness, and fraud. The difficulty is always in proving it.
I'm sure Pfizer will agree that ''legal immunity'' dosen't actually protects you from lawsuits or severe, debilitating legal punishments.
It's only supposed to reduce the likelyhood of them dying from the direct lawsuit specified in the legal immunity, while overall increasing their likelyhood of death.
Come on now, vaccines legal immunity always worked that way.
I’m so old, I remember when reddit was anti-corporations. Now every subreddit bans anyone who questions the “vaccine”
It shouldn't amaze you, even if you aren't old enough to remember the mass cognitive dissonance that surrounded the USSR.
The left is not opposed to large business entities. There were plenty of them in the Soviet Union. They're opposed to entities that don't conform to whatever the leftist narrative is at the moment.
Sure, but that would require me to take literally anything they say at face value.
They were against Big Pharma back in the day because it was right-wing/capitalist/insert-buzzword-here. Then their thought leaders realized how useful it was in getting the general public to do what they want, so they pivoted and their followers pivoted with them.
Not only Big Pharma either. I'm not one to always go "Thanks Obama", but Obama was really instrumental in promoting the idea throughout the bureaucracy of a partnership between Corporations and Government. Where the government is supposed to enforce the law evenly to ensure a fair playing field, what they pivoted to was a carrot-and-stick approach where agencies have personal relationships with members of boards, the government makes "requests" through them, and the corpos get special treatment to break whatever laws they want as long as they comply with those requests. This includes hiring people from former intelligence agencies or the FBI to C levels. In other words blatant corruption and the embiggening of the Deep State in the name of "promoting the general welfare."
(And I only blame Obama for making it official but it's been going on at some level for decades. I think he was kind of a Manchurian Candidate to program people to accept shady things they were doing behind the scenes as good.)
"Obama was really instrumental in promoting the idea throughout the bureaucracy of a partnership between Corporations and Government."
That's called fascism, I think.
The WEF types have been trying to rebrand it "stakeholder capitalism."
because leftists don't care about hypocrisy. they only care about """winning"""
That's the thing, I technically still have 90s Democrat beliefs.
All these beliefs now are considered "right wing", some of these beliefs can be coordinated properly into being "America First" nationalist beliefs too.
When I was able to wrap my head around the fact that it wasn't about the old left/right libertarian/authoritarian spectrum but rather globohomo vs nationalist, it made it much easier to visualize why it's far more important than the traditional left/right shit Westerners always bitch about.
When you view it from a Globohomo vs nationalist viewpoint then yes, some shit you do WILL make government bigger and spend money, but that's fine, because the shit you're doing is with the intent of making your country even more successful to be able to give the citizens more power over their own destiny, which ultimately strengthens the country itself as its citizens start appreciating the opportunities the country has given them.
They'll claim it was all bots pushing it and that they would never be so gullible.
Because we all know that it was bots who created HermanCainAwards and LeopardsAtMyFace and SelfAwareWolves, filled them with content, upvoted and shared them and stopped any critical thinkers by shadow banning them.
All bots, totally not idiots thinking that their baying for blood wasn't exactly like racism, sexism or any other hatred.
Interactions on that platform have fallen faster than anywhere else on the web since they went public with their stock.
Back onto Pfizer, it's cheaper for them to settle all the little cases than it is to take the knock for what they actually did. We need an all in class action lawsuit from everyone force to take their 'medicine'.
I remember when punk rock bands didn't tell you to obey government guidelines or try to get you to vote a certain way.
Seriously. I still lurk in /r/conspiracy and it's extra hilarious how swarmed over it is with NPCs that jump on anything against big pharma or the DNC.
Older than me I guess. Reddit has been a conglomerate gathering of corporation circle-jerkers ever since I remember
Yup, it was always Digg 2.0 after Digg 2.0 died. And Digg was already extremely Left and very Liberal on most social issues even when it was in its infancy.
Oh, so is it now allowed to say the mRNA jabs cause infertility, stillbirths and miscarriages?
This is like going after Capone for tax evasion.
But it does show that those emergency use liability waivers are just pieces of paper. If push came to shove gov officials would sooner throw Pfizer under a bus than keep their own word at risk of losing everything. The politicians just need pushing hard enough they get scared and we may yet see justice in our lifetimes.
I think its more along the lines of the government itself being in a bit of a schism.
Those EUA were frankly, illegitimate, and based off falsified data. So you have one group in government, that doesn't have quite as much power, that is against allowing the EUA and actively opposing it or trying to. While the corrupt group, who presently holds much more power is supporting the EUA and doing their best to both CYA and also make sure they can squeeze as much money and power from it as they can.
Tax evasion brought Capone down, so maybe that's a good sign.
Didn't they get lawsuit immunity for it?
It's like the vaccine, a partial immunity that fades a lot over time.
They can't be sued over the damage the vaccine caused, but they can be sued over false statements about it. You can't sue them for getting myocarditis or turbo cancer, but you can sue for them hiding from you that they knew you would.
Does the legal ''immunisation'' also flips-over to the negative after a while and results in a higher likelyhood of lawsuits, and repeat-lawsuits?
Various courts have recently ruled that it is not, nor ever could be considered an actual vaccine.
Thus any immunity to lawsuits would be as fictional and fraudulent as the vaxx itself is.
I hope that precedent sticks.
Any links or info on this?
https://www.westernstandard.news/news/us-appeals-court-rules-covid-mrna-shots-could-be-considered-not-traditional-vaccines/55202
Good.
There's pretty much no level of lawsuit "immunity" that can't be pierced in the case of sufficient negligence, recklessness, and fraud. The difficulty is always in proving it.
no such thing
Texas also filed suit against them in late 2023 for similar reasons.
more
wait, Pfizer didn't even participate in operation warp speed?
I'm sure Pfizer will agree that ''legal immunity'' dosen't actually protects you from lawsuits or severe, debilitating legal punishments.
It's only supposed to reduce the likelyhood of them dying from the direct lawsuit specified in the legal immunity, while overall increasing their likelyhood of death.
Come on now,
vaccineslegal immunity always worked that way.