Leo Fernevak on Nostr: There is both incompetence and malice involved and they are not mutually exclusive. ...
There is both incompetence and malice involved and they are not mutually exclusive. Liars are often incompetent so I'd say there is a natural overlap between malice and incompetence.
Malice involves intentional harm and governments are prone to reason along the lines of the Trolley Problem; there is a willingness to sacrifice the lives of some for a believed or imagined 'greater good'. Typically the arguments involved just happen to expand the power of government.
On the moral level - if a person pulls a lever, or enacts a government policy - that with certainty will harm innocent people, that behavior is clearly a form of malice. It doesn't matter that the person falsely believes that they are helping the world; knowingly harming innocent individuals is unethical and malevolent.
How do we know that governments knowingly harm innocent individuals? Because of their track records. From forced sterilizations and physical lobotomies to chemical lobotomies and cruel experiments. Brief references would be Vipeholm in Sweden or the Tuskegee experiments in Alabama, US.
Vaccine mandates and the government-sanctioned discrimination of individuals based on vaccine-status was not merely a result of incompetence, but of direct malice; to willingly force or coerce individuals into injecting poorly tested and potentially harmful products.
In a free market, consumers purchase products they trust based on the understanding they have of their own risks and their personal medical condition. In a centrally planned society, governments collude with big pharma, orders large quantities of poorly tested treatments that there is no free market demand for and then force, or coerce individuals to inject these products while censoring and/or outlawing competing products.
Don't get me started on the U.N. Agenda 2030 that clearly depends on herding people into a feudalist system of CBDCs and social credit scores in order to implement net zero carbon and carbon allowances. Very few people would willingly be trapped in a social credit score system, so governments know fully well that they have to use herding, coercion and removal of better options to achieve the Agenda2030 goals.
The fact that CO2 is essential for plant growth and not a driver of global warming is obvious from the data. Government lies and propaganda informs us that their motivations are about control rather than proclaimed climate concerns.
Malice involves intentional harm and governments are prone to reason along the lines of the Trolley Problem; there is a willingness to sacrifice the lives of some for a believed or imagined 'greater good'. Typically the arguments involved just happen to expand the power of government.
On the moral level - if a person pulls a lever, or enacts a government policy - that with certainty will harm innocent people, that behavior is clearly a form of malice. It doesn't matter that the person falsely believes that they are helping the world; knowingly harming innocent individuals is unethical and malevolent.
How do we know that governments knowingly harm innocent individuals? Because of their track records. From forced sterilizations and physical lobotomies to chemical lobotomies and cruel experiments. Brief references would be Vipeholm in Sweden or the Tuskegee experiments in Alabama, US.
Vaccine mandates and the government-sanctioned discrimination of individuals based on vaccine-status was not merely a result of incompetence, but of direct malice; to willingly force or coerce individuals into injecting poorly tested and potentially harmful products.
In a free market, consumers purchase products they trust based on the understanding they have of their own risks and their personal medical condition. In a centrally planned society, governments collude with big pharma, orders large quantities of poorly tested treatments that there is no free market demand for and then force, or coerce individuals to inject these products while censoring and/or outlawing competing products.
Don't get me started on the U.N. Agenda 2030 that clearly depends on herding people into a feudalist system of CBDCs and social credit scores in order to implement net zero carbon and carbon allowances. Very few people would willingly be trapped in a social credit score system, so governments know fully well that they have to use herding, coercion and removal of better options to achieve the Agenda2030 goals.
The fact that CO2 is essential for plant growth and not a driver of global warming is obvious from the data. Government lies and propaganda informs us that their motivations are about control rather than proclaimed climate concerns.