We Need to Stop the Denial of All Types of Violence in Canadian Society and Address It All

JKR wrote:

The message there was: Covid doesn't care about protecting or hurting peoples feelings or protecting or taking away peoples rights. It just propagates.

LOL. Ok. Literally not one word of that message actually appears in the cartoon. I must be too stupid to pick up on all that subtext.

Indeed. And I'd seen that meme posted at least a dozen times before - every single time it was used as a mocking response to an unvaccinated person dying from COVID.

But yes... I'm sure you're right in your assertion that when the cartoon coronavirus states "I can fix stupid", it means some bullshit about hurt feelings and rights. It doesn't in any way suggest that it kills "stupid" people.

Douglas Fir Premier wrote:

Indeed. And I'd seen that meme posted at least a dozen times before - every single time it was used as a mocking response to an unvaccinated person dying from COVID.

But yes... I'm sure you're right in your assertion that when the cartoon coronavirus states "I can fix stupid", it means some bullshit about hurt feelings and rights. It doesn't in any way suggest that it kills "stupid" people.

Clutching your pearls won’t change the fact that Covid is killing droves of unvaccinated people. Trying to turn the Covid pandemic into a right-wing wedge issue is killing hundreds of thousands of people.

Douglas Fir Premier wrote:

Indeed. And I'd seen that meme posted at least a dozen times before - every single time it was used as a mocking response to an unvaccinated person dying from COVID.

But yes... I'm sure you're right in your assertion that when the cartoon coronavirus states "I can fix stupid", it means some bullshit about hurt feelings and rights. It doesn't in any way suggest that it kills "stupid" people.

I recently listened to a rant from a man whose wife died from cancer after being released from hospital 3 weeks early due to covid 19 overloading the hospital (US).

If you catch Covid-19 my bet is that you will go to hospital and expect other people to risk their lives looking after you as you lament your stupidity and admit you should have taken the damn vaccine. You will not accept your responsibility and die alone on the altar of your politics to protect others.

All the reasonable scientific and social arguments have been presented. Story after story of the unvaccinated dying leaves the unvaccinated unmoved.

Anyone who remains unconvinced has dug in their heels. It's not up to the rest of us to continue tip-toeing around the feelings of the unvaccined. Most of us are done trying to convince you of anything. We have moved on to "just stay the hell away from us" because shunning is our best defence.

I know a diagnosed narcisist. They thrive on drama so of course she resisted vaccination. She caved because she needed money therefore a job. Narcisists always choose self-interest. They are much easier to manage if you remember that.

Not every anti-vaxxer is a narcisist, the grand majority are not, but pretending they can be pursuaded through understanding and logic is as deluded as their stated reasoning for not being vaccinated. There are underlying issues whether or not they are aware of them.

The unvaccinated are going to continue dying at a far higher rate than the vaccinated. It is tragic that they will take some innocents with them. The irony is there will be fewer and fewer of them as they die off and most of them are conservatives or libertarians. I have heard references to Darwin. Nature's cullings can be cruel. Survival of the fittest includes having the ability to evaluate information, weigh the odds ,and take the safest path.

The stats in the US are becoming more and more stark. Republicans are dying off at a much higher rate than Democrats. Here in Canada the prairie provinces have the worse numbers.

Education and political views are having an impact on life expectancy.

Studies are showing that natural immunity from having had Covid is only lasting around 3 months.

In particular I don't want the information on pregnancy to be buried:

Pregnant women who get COVID-19 are five times more likely to require hospitalization than the average person, and 10 times more likely to need intensive care, according to data compiled by the Canadian Surveillance of COVID-19 in Pregnancy team.

Dr. Stephanie Cooper, a high-risk obstetrician at Foothills Medical Centre in Calgary, said more than 20 pregnant women with serious and critical COVID-19 were admitted to hospital in Alberta in August and September. All of them were unvaccinated.

Cooper did not treat Rosebluff-Thomas. She said medical teams are generally trying to keep fetuses inside the womb as long as possible to buy more time for maturity, but that emergency premature deliveries have been necessary to save the life of the baby or mother, or both.

One scenario is when a pregnant woman is so critically sick from COVID-19 that her blood must be oxygenated outside her body, allowing the heart and lungs to rest.

"If we're thinking a pregnant woman has to have that treatment, or even if we think potentially a pregnant woman is not going to make it, then we decide that we should deliver the baby — even if it is very premature — because we are very concerned that both the baby and the mom may not make it," Cooper said.

JKR wrote:

Douglas Fir Premier wrote:

I'm not clutching any pearls. You're more than welcome to snicker at dead people all you want. It's no skin off my nose.

All I'm saying is:
1) While it may make you feel superior, I don't think it's a very effective strategy if your actual aim is to persuade more people to get vaccinated.

and

2) You're clearly mocking unvaccinated people who die from COVID. Why not just own it? It's fine. It wouldn't lessen my opinion of you. But pretending that your cartoons have some deeper nuance beyond haha stupid dead people demeans both our intelligence.

People dying of Covid, often unnecessarily, is definitely not funny - it’s horribly tragic. Please don’t put words in my mouth.

Tell you what; you stop gaslighting, and I won't put words in your mouth .

Douglas Fir Premier wrote:

Tell you what; you stop gaslighting, and I won't put words in your mouth .

Putting words in someone else’s mouth is a form of gaslighting.

Douglas Fir Premier wrote:

Are you under the impression that I'm offended by the cartoons? I couldn't give a fuck. I deal in dark humour all the time.

Let me rephrase my two points.

If snickering about unvaccinated people dying from COVID gives you some form of satisfaction, go ahead and yuk it up (or as Arthur Cramer used to say; "fill your boots"). It probably won't persuade many people to get vaccinated, but that's not your job anyway.

If you try to tell me with a straight face that "You can't fix stupid. I can fix stupid", means some nonsense about hurt feelings and peoples rights, well, I'm sorry an eight-word single panel cartoon went so far over your head. Either that or you're gaslighting.

The word "stupid" was used rather tha say "foolish" because "you can't fix stupid" is a common saying. that tragically fits in this situation. Another would be "you can bring a horse to water but you can't make him drink it".

Gallows humour isn't "ha ha". Those of us who are vaccinated are angry at the risk you pose to others out of your selfishness and ignorance. We would much rather you get vaccinated but failing that you will pose an ever smaller threat as you die off or become convinced by all the other unvaccinated dying off. It would sadden me if you die because it is so unnecessary but it would be your choice.

How many pregnant women have to die for the rest to understand they will protect their fetus by being vaccinated?

The cartoon isn't aimed at you. Many of us, I would say most, are not interested in beating our heads against a brick wall.

Anti-vaxxers are a danger to society so if they die-off it reduces the risk of transmission for everyone else. I would prefer they get vaccinated but that is their choice.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_comedy#Nature_and_functions
Black comedy has the social effect of strengthening the morale of the oppressed and undermines the morale of the oppressors.[21][22] According to Wylie Sypher, "to be able to laugh at evil and error means we have surmounted them."[23]

That is why we the vaccinated laugh.

JKR wrote:

eastnoireast wrote:

for starters, how about those who already had covid, which is pretty clearly waaaay better and longer lasting immunity than an injection?

The evidence is not clear and more importantly how can the government know who has and has not been infected?

covid tests. but you knew that.
ps, europe is honouring natural immunity as protection.
next.

eastnoireast wrote:

europe is honouring natural immunity as protection.
next.

I’d be ok if here in BC the province added natural immunity as a criteria to our Covid cards if the provincial health care professionals supported that idea.

Douglas Fir Premier wrote:

That's cool. I'm pretty damn angry at a lot of people whose selfishness and indifference pose a far greater risk to my life than COVID. I know all too well that people from all points along the political spectrum consider my life disposable. It's kind of cute to see how indignant you people become when you imagine that your lives are being treated with the same callous disregard.

Douglas Fir Premier wrote:

And that is why I laugh right back at you. I am not my oppressors' keeper.

How are you being oppressed? It is not unjust for people to avoid those who refuse to be vaccinated against a contagious disease. The unvaccinated have been given plenty of time to gather information and do their civic duty.

Irony is self-defence against all the needless covid deaths and the collateral deaths of people delayed treatment due to covid. The grand majority of covid deaths in Canada are 100% avoidable if only the people that are able would get vaccinated.

True.

[quote=Pondering]

The irony is there will be fewer and fewer of them as they die off and most of them are conservatives or libertarians. I have heard references to Darwin. Nature's cullings can be cruel. Survival of the fittest includes having the ability to evaluate information, weigh the odds ,and take the safest path.

[quote=NDPP]

Now there's a keeper...

JKR wrote:

I think everyone who posts here on babble wants social assistance rates to be increased very significantly and substantially.

What does "want" have to do with the material world?

My guess would be that if each premier were to mail out a survey asking;
Do you think social assistance rates should be increased?
[ ] Yes
[ ] No
...most people who identify as Left would answer in the affirmative.

But that's not how change happens.

Politicians don't like to speak about social assistance. People don't cast their votes based on it. (If one were to enumerate a list of issues that determine their vote, where would social assistance come in? Top 10? Top 20? Lower?) Living wage advocates don't want their cause associated with us. Organized labour has little use for us. Speaking out about social assistance doesn't win you plaudits from old classmates on social media by showing off how much more enlightened you've become. It's just not sexy in that way.

Of those social assistance rates I posted from 2019, 11 of them could be doubled and still fall below the poverty threshold for their respective province. How do you think most people react when they're told that social assistance rates should be doubled? I'll tell you. They laugh and think you're out of your mind. What could change that? If those on the Left stopped acting ashamed to even mention it. If people started recognizing it for the public health crisis that it is. If progressives started speaking about social assistance with the same passion and sense of urgency as we speak about other forms of oppression. But until people are willing to put in the work to make such substantial increases seem reasonable, we'll be stuck where we are.

Those on the Left might like to see themselves as allies, but if that doesn't lead into speaking out and taking action, their "wants" are as meaningless as "thoughts & prayers".

So there! How dare you question the commitment and solidarity towards the poor by the Canadian progressive left!

kropotkin1951 wrote:

NorthReport wrote:

China actually has the correct approach. When a case of Covid19 is discovered the neighborhood gets completely shut down, nobody goes in or out except for survival supplies. And life goes back to normal after a relatively short time. None of the absurd pampering, no bleeding hearts there. Good on them.

I think that China and other Asian countries are doing way better than us. Strange though that on the one hand you praise the socialist governments actions on COVID and then in other threads you pump out piece after piece of war propaganda from NATO. Maybe we should just let them have their own system and stop trying to tell them what to do. Nobody in the world wants to have their country become Libya or Syria, which is what happens to countries we interfere in to protect their people from one party socialist governments.

Douglas, you raise so many good points. I too remember the Harris days and our activism in trying to overturn the disgraceful cuts to social welfare programs. It's been decades but I remember there being a campaign involving buying canned tuna. The important thing is that addressing inadequate social safety net infrastructure has completely fallen off the radar. Even the attention to homelessness, also very late in coming, fails to connect the dots to how our decades long deteriorated social welfare infrastructure underpins the homelessness crisis.

Douglas Fir Premier wrote:

This is a red herring. We don't have Basic Income. What we do have is a patchwork of social assistance programs - not one of them even remotely adequate. Advocating for the former is fine, but it does nothing to address the immediate crisis of poverty and despair. One could even argue that it distracts and absolves people from having any responsibility to fight for people on social assistance. (Although there's a special place in Hell reserved for folks in the Left who've allowed their opposition to some future Basic Income program to distract them from the fight to raise social assistance rates in the here and now.) I would also suggest that Basic Income plays into the taboo that's even crept into the Left around even acknowledging the existence of people on social assistance. It's much easier to say you want to give money to everybody than to come out publicly in support of 'those welfare bums'.

I have one or two slight misgivings about Basic Income, but would still jump nevertheless at the opportunity to dump ODSP in favour of a liveable, less restrictive, less bureaucratic program. But that's not an option that exists presently. Basic income won't replace social assistance in the near future. At least nowhere soon enough for those teetering on the edge.

Here in BC the NDP government has improved things for people on social assistance and on disability. It’s not as good as it should be but it has improved during the last 5 years. During that time rates have increased and more social housing has been established. Extra money for a transportation allowance has also been established. The NDP government is also working on a poverty reduction strategy. The NDP government has a long way to go but they are doing infinitely better than the previous government was.

Pondering wrote:

How about blaming the right for what the right does.

Again with the wildly misguided assumptions.

I speak out against the Right all the time.

But I've never walked a right-wing picket line. I've never done jail support for someone arrested at a right-wing demo. I've never been on a right-wing march. I've never volunteered for a right-wing cause. Nor donated to a right-wing project. I've never organized a right-wing teach-in. I've never given a speech at a right-wing rally. I've never joined a right-wing organization. I've never carried a right-wing flag, sign, or banner. Nor have I ever chanted a right-wing slogan. I've never offered billeting to ring-wing protestors from out of town. I've never postered for a right-wing event.

Only once - when I was 19 - did I ever vote for a right-wing party (and even that was an admittedly naive but inconsequential attempt at long game strategy, in a riding that has voted PC in 40 of the past 41 elections).

Basically, I have a million and one criticisms of the Right. But I've never held out any hope that the likes of Doug Ford, Erin O'Toole, Maxime Bernier, or many of their supporters might ever have my back. I've never heard any of them throw around phrases like "injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere", "solidarity forever", or "an injury to one is an injury to all".

But having been deeply involved in left-wing organizing dating back to when I was in high school, I guess after a few decades of showing up for other people's struggles, I've begun to wonder when - if ever - any of that solidarity will be reciprocated. I mean, I've never gotten involved in a cause with the expectation that I'm owed something back. I still fundamentally do hold onto the belief that my liberation is tied to that of others. But I have been aware for quite some time that my solidarity does seem to be traveling on a one-way street. I have no doubt that just about everyone I've known and organized with for decades 'wants' there to be an increase to social assistance rates. But except for the small number of people who are directly affected by it, the issue never seems to rise high enough on people's list of priorities to make them actually willing to do something about it.

Hell... at this point I'd even settle for performative allyship. I'm not asking people to drop everything else they're working on to fully devote themselves to fighting for liveable social assistance rates. I'm just saying that it would mean a lot if folks on the Left would maybe - just maybe - once in a blue moon say something unprompted in support of people living on social assistance. Like, just add it into the mix of all the other forms of oppression that you're so happy to speak about. That would at least be a start. I'm not sure what it is about that particular form of oppression that makes that seem so difficult. As I've said a few times, it seems that part of it is that it's not seen as sexy enough, and doesn't won't result in a lot of 'likes' and 'shares'. But there seems to be more to it than that. Shame? A subconscious internalization of right-wing talking points about raising taxes on 'hardworking families' to provide 'handouts' to the 'undeserving' poor? A secret worry that any such redistribution of wealth would be done at their expense instead of the uber-rich?

Douglas Fir Premier wrote:

Pondering wrote:

How about blaming the right for what the right does.

Again with the wildly misguided assumptions.

I speak out against the Right all the time.

"The left" focuses on housing and basic income all the time as well as the conditions that push people into precarious living conditions.

"The left" is dealing with a massive worldwide right wing economic system that is destroying the planet and a militaristic US playing chicken with China. There is a lot to pay attention to.