Yes, I think that's what she was saying. I'm actually okay with that as far as it goes, but how far it goes is exactly the problem. We were "in the dark" and things were uncertain, so it's best to finally forgive people who made the wrong guess about... outdoor masking, and the re-opening of schools? Those are her examples, as though those are the issues people are so bitter and passionate about now. She purposefully steers far, far out of the way to make this plea for "amnesty" without passing in sight of the things people are truly furious about--the lying and coercion on the one hand, the supposedly selfish noncompliance on the other. She limits the whole question to events that took place before the average person could get their bearings--and ignores everything that has happened since that time. The exception, the one place she dares mention anything after 2020, drives it home: it's okay if someone got J&J instead of Pfizer or Moderna, she says, because we really didn't know better yet. So many relationships still broken over that one!
This whole tack ignores the fact that most of the worst stuff happened much more recently, and that some of it just stopped or hasn't stopped at all. Vaccine mandates, with few people sympathetic to resistors, had just started a year ago. Disinvitations from Thanksgiving were last Thanksgiving. People whose loved ones are hurt or gone--whatever the actual cause, and whatever cause they attribute it to--are likely going to need something more than a plea for blanket "amnesty."
This plea also ignores the fact that being "in the dark" about whether these things were okay or not is more than a question of access to good information. The kind of ill some people have willed is a personal choice, no matter how dark it is.
I'm reading this article as part of whatever the strategy is that has mainstream voices recently and suddenly acknowledging that school closures, and lockdowns to a degree, were a mistake. They're testing out "No one could have known what we know now, we were moving at the speed of science, once the science told us more we changed our approach, that's what experts do" on issues that are further in the past and less charged, and they floated this headline to see how it's going. It's hard to imagine it's that facile, but I think that's the most likely explanation. The fact that people are rejecting it so forcefully and going right to the issues that do matter (like grandparents dying alone, the origin of the virus, the inefficacy of the vaccines, the safety of the vaccines, the mandates, and the lying-all-along that's becoming obvious to more and more people) pretty much means it's failed. Not sure I'm looking forward to seeing what they've got for Plan L, or whatever letter they're up to now, though.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
(no subject)
Date: 2022-11-02 06:17 pm (UTC)This whole tack ignores the fact that most of the worst stuff happened much more recently, and that some of it just stopped or hasn't stopped at all. Vaccine mandates, with few people sympathetic to resistors, had just started a year ago. Disinvitations from Thanksgiving were last Thanksgiving. People whose loved ones are hurt or gone--whatever the actual cause, and whatever cause they attribute it to--are likely going to need something more than a plea for blanket "amnesty."
This plea also ignores the fact that being "in the dark" about whether these things were okay or not is more than a question of access to good information. The kind of ill some people have willed is a personal choice, no matter how dark it is.
I'm reading this article as part of whatever the strategy is that has mainstream voices recently and suddenly acknowledging that school closures, and lockdowns to a degree, were a mistake. They're testing out "No one could have known what we know now, we were moving at the speed of science, once the science told us more we changed our approach, that's what experts do" on issues that are further in the past and less charged, and they floated this headline to see how it's going. It's hard to imagine it's that facile, but I think that's the most likely explanation. The fact that people are rejecting it so forcefully and going right to the issues that do matter (like grandparents dying alone, the origin of the virus, the inefficacy of the vaccines, the safety of the vaccines, the mandates, and the lying-all-along that's becoming obvious to more and more people) pretty much means it's failed. Not sure I'm looking forward to seeing what they've got for Plan L, or whatever letter they're up to now, though.
Jonathan.