Focused protection not lockdown!

Speedstick
Posts: 506
Joined: Sun Sep 20, 2020 8:27 pm

Focused protection not lockdown!

Post by Speedstick »

This morning l spotted an article by the BBC, ( please excuse me for reading BBC articles) which describes how the South Asian community is at greater risk from Covid.
Residing in the fine city of Leicester, l was already aware of this. The South Asian community due to genetic tendency are more prone to metabolic rate disorders, like diabetes of the eight highest boroughs for diabetes in the UK, 5 are in Leicester. Therefore this report even though l am sceptical of anything on BBC platforms, does not surprise me.
Reading between the lines though coupled with my own first hand experience of living in Leicester shows to me, that focused protection akin to something along the lines of the GBD, could have and should have been used to protect those vulnerable to the effects of Covid and save lives, rather than the utterly disastrous use of lockdown.
The government and SAGE must have seen and understood this surely, so lockdown must surely be viewed as deliberate sabotage of society!

miahoneybee
Posts: 1358
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2020 8:26 pm

Re: Focused protection not lockdown!

Post by miahoneybee »

It is speedstick.. and you have been given a pardon for daring to read the bias bullshit broadcasters..
:D

thinksaboutit
Posts: 562
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2021 11:38 am

Re: Focused protection not lockdown!

Post by thinksaboutit »

Speedstick wrote: Sun May 02, 2021 6:59 am This morning l spotted an article by the BBC, ( please excuse me for reading BBC articles) which describes how the South Asian community is at greater risk from Covid.
Residing in the fine city of Leicester, l was already aware of this. The South Asian community due to genetic tendency are more prone to metabolic rate disorders, like diabetes of the eight highest boroughs for diabetes in the UK, 5 are in Leicester. Therefore this report even though l am sceptical of anything on BBC platforms, does not surprise me.
Reading between the lines though coupled with my own first hand experience of living in Leicester shows to me, that focused protection akin to something along the lines of the GBD, could have and should have been used to protect those vulnerable to the effects of Covid and save lives, rather than the utterly disastrous use of lockdown.
The government and SAGE must have seen and understood this surely, so lockdown must surely be viewed as deliberate sabotage of society!
Perhaps you would like to propose in detail how such focussed protection would be accomplished.

Nobody
Posts: 201
Joined: Fri Nov 20, 2020 12:05 pm

Re: Focused protection not lockdown!

Post by Nobody »

This is a very interesting clip:

https://brandnewtube.com/watch/tedros-t ... kcS14.html

I think that a clear mark of ideological uses of language, that is, where the goal of the interaction is to manipulate, is the use euphemism since manipulation requires an occlusion of intention and so the language itself has to refuse to state explicitly what its expressive interest really is. This is why bureaucratic language is highly euphemised.
This clip is very interesting indeed because almost all of its real content is the inverse of what is expressed. The particularly significant formulations are where he says people will need to be "isolated and cared for" and "communities will still need to be engaged": in reality the surveillance he justifies annuls these modalities and I think this is the real goal of the lockdown. To change societies you have to destructure existing dispositions and this requires dislocating people because people who are socially embedded and realised regenerate the basis of their dispositions ineffably. This is why this virus has been seized by these people to institute the surveillance he justifies here which, under the guise of an invisible threat, instils conditions that separate.
The social structures and institutional frameworks being constituted via the virus are the real threat. The virus could have been used to affirm the basis of our civilisation and the crisis could have been used to reinvigorate democratic processes and institutions. Look at the Second World War, for example, where people were healthy as an effect of what Epidemiologists refer to as a "group density" effect. So, why have global governments not attempted to foster the "group density" that is known to foster health and well being?
Because health and well-being are not the goal of the institutions that are using these abstractions for their own purposes.

Post Reply