Episode-2726- Round Table Topics for 9-8-20 — 22 Comments

  1. I haven’t followed the rittenhouse story close enough to understand what it was about on really deep level but I was thinking that some of the Indians who ended up on reservations still didn’t regret being warriors or if they were killed their family didn’t regret that they where warriors. Some thought they should have resisted the Soviets who took over russia. A man tried to kill hitler and he failed and was caught. I think it’s hard to decide what you should do in a given situation if you don’t know what the future holds.

    Is it possible that a person could run away from a conflict or hesitate out of fear and later regret that because not having courage at a critical time could also be incredibly painful to live with or possibly because he neglected to protect others ?

  2. Not taking sides, just my thoughts. I think if you are not sure what to do then the natural thing to do is to do nothing which is probably where my head is at much of the time

    • Based on that ramble if you were taking sides I don’t think anyone would know it anyway. LOL

  3. Question for Jack… Would your opinion and attitude towards the effectiveness of masks be the same if there was NOT government strong-arm mandates requiring them?

    For months now I’ve noticed many people’s opinions on the effectiveness of masks, HCQ+zinc, Ivermectin, Vitamin D, social distancing, etc., seem to be change dramatically either favorably or inversely as a response to some position or mandate (or change thereof) from the government. Note that I am separating the EFFECTIVENESS aspect of these from the question of whether government has any business MANDATING or RESTRICTING them (which I believe they don’t but that’s a separate issue for another discussion). Seems to me we if we let a government position on any medical/protective measure (or almost any other issue really) influence us in EITHER direction, we are being manipulated to our potential detriment.

    • “Question for Jack… Would your opinion on the effectiveness of masks be the same if there wasn’t government strong-arm mandates requiring them?”

      Yes my opinion is not based on government or my own instinct (which was masks likely did work some) but rather 12 RCTs done over 7 decades that clearly show that any benefit is offset by harm. The end, it is not even an opinion at this point it is as close to “known science” as any science can truly be known.

      The studies that show any effectiveness show perfect use of the PPE in making it happen. The public is not perfect far from it. We are talking throwing away a mask at most every 30 minutes, wearing other PPE and impeccable hygiene. The world does not work that way.

      Since you homeschool try this experiment, have someone wear a mask for one hour. Let it sit for two hours, put it back on for 20 minutes. Then press the part that covers the nose and mouth to a gel and culture bacteria on the gel. Then imagine that times 100s of millions of people every day.

      They are setting public policy based on a laboratory environment, it is beyond stupid.

      • Fair enough. Just had noticed the big shift in your public stance over the past several months, and especially seeing the (dramatic?) negative reaction among most in the liberty community has me wondering about this general shift in attitude in the US. It’s something we don’t see AT ALL here, where the attitude is much more “meh” in either direction and the mask mandate isn’t really enforced… people who want to wear a mask do, and those who don’t want to generally don’t and don’t get shit for it. So I can’t help but suspect much of this is a negative reaction to the BS authoritarianism in much of the USA.

        Personally, my opinion is masks probably have limited utility for the public, but not for the reasons they think… probably not in completely preventing infection of the wearer, but possibly more so in reduced viral load exposure for the wearer and reduced spread of infection via tiny droplets for those near the wearer (which AFAIK hasn’t been studied much in RCT’s or otherwise). So if my current assumptions, subject to change, are true at all, I think it mostly makes sense for the average person to wear a mask only for short periods of time when in close or prolonged indoor contact with strangers. Thus I agree that asking people to wear them at all times is just f***ing stupid… from either a practical risk management OR a liberty standpoint. Hell, I don’t wear a mask really any more than you said you do… pretty much just when grocery shopping. But I won’t dismiss their limited potential benefits until I get better information.

        P.S.- I actually did something similar to your experiment, unintentionally, way back in February, only I didn’t need a bacterial culture gel… just a mask left in a coat pocket for a while and the smell was enough! Ever since then I leave any masks we re-use on the window sill to get some sun. 🙂

        • Yea I used to agree with your view here, may be a bit more pro mask actually. Then I read the science now I know the truth. The end.

          Limited effects are not beneficial if out weighed by negative effects.

          Nothing stops Covid, it is what it is, time for society to accept it and go on with life.

          Consider that places that did full lock downs and places that didn’t look about the same. If isolation didn’t stop it, a face diaper won’t.

        • The MSM framing of “stopping” Covid (which yes is absurd) is limiting, so why do you frame it that way with the issue of masks (or any other preventative measure) like they do? My rationale is more about creating better outcomes for infected individuals by reducing viral load exposure for oneself or others. And if you use masks like you or I do, what negative effect is there?

        • It isn’t about framing. It is 12 studies the first in 1947 the last in 2019 that 100% show that masks DO NOT provide better outcomes.

          It won’t have any impact to the positive but it will cause harm. This again is not my opinion it is in the data from a dozen RCTs.

          As to use masks like “you or I do”, I don’t think you know how I “use a mask”.

          I wear a gater when I have to to go into a store that requires it, nothing more. If a store has a sign but does not enforce it, off comes my mask. I only do it when forced to, when my need for an item in a store exceeds my stubbornness.

          I do not think healthy people wearing a mask is a good idea, I think it is dehumanizing, stupid and ineffective. I don’t “wear a mask” I put one on when I have to.

          This entire thing has done exactly what I said it would, it hit those who are susceptible to it first the death rate, ICU rate and hospital rates have all fallen like a brick. If we had just protected the most vulnerable and gone on with life this would be done by now, I am no longer willing to even flirt with the idea of pretending otherwise.

          “And if you use masks like you or I do, what negative effect is there?

          People don’t, people won’t, the negative effects are known and they are very negative.

        • “As to use masks like “you or I do”, I don’t think you know how I “use a mask”.”

          I’m going off of what you said on your own podcast (maybe a week or two ago), i.e. “you only put on your mask when you step in the store and take it off when you leave”. So yes that does describe me, with the addition of those rare occasions when I’m walking near any local police wearing their masks (different setting but same rationale). But that aside, the way you just now described how & where you wear a mask is STILL practically the same to what I’ve been doing. Last month the wife & I did a tour of western Mongolia for 10 days… I didn’t wear a mask ONCE the whole time, in or outside the towns (not in close, prolonged indoor contact and no enforced store policy, so I didn’t see a need). Please don’t mistake my thoughts regarding potential, possibly limited, utility of masks for a desire to actually wear the bloody things.

          And again, I don’t believe any of the studies (RCT or otherwise) you cite cover the aspect of improved outcome of infected individuals from decreased viral load exposure for the wearer and from the wearer. If you know of one I will certainly read it. I will also read anything you have regarding potential, medical/health negative effects. My current opinion is based off of limited potential benefit and practically no health downside, and if I see good information to the contrary I am open to changing my mind.

        • Eh, you know what on second thought let’s just leave it at ‘agree to disagree’. The fact is both your approach and mine come to more or less the same outcome (i.e. both of us will probably be just fine), so no sense trying to convince each other of nuances that won’t make a difference in the end result.

  4. But what should my attitude be about rittenhouse ? Even if I may not act the way he does; I mean you can talk about the art of war, a book I like, it’s not a dogmatic book saying you must behave in this way. Also, it’s different than foreign wars because the conflict is here within this country. I tried to listen to a podcast on rittenhouse but it was too dry so I shut it off and I wasn’t in the mood to listen

    When i listen to the art of war on audio, I just listen for inspiration or maybe ideas, tho I hadn’t done that in a long time

  5. I agree, the march towards dehumanizing “the other” has been kicked into high gear on both sides. It pains me that so many don’t see it, and pains me more to see some family getting caught up in it.

    There’s only one purpose to dehumanize another, and that’s to force our brains to allow us to commit violent acts on another human being. Effective & useful in war or life-or-death fights, but not in day-to-day social settings. “He’s not human, he’s a greedy, racist Trumptard!”, or “he’s not a person, he’s a godless, libtard sheeple!”… all of this just part of the cultural electric shocks administered to drive us to attack the other rat in the cage with us. It’s important to be able to acknowledge that even if a person or group is one’s opponent, they still have an innate humanity (generally speaking and excluding the truly predatory people). But the media seems to be conditioning that perspective out of the public.

    It’s far enough along that it’s inevitable it’ll end in more blood… the only question is whose and how much. The best most of us can do is not put ourselves in situations where it’ll cause more blood to be spilled, especially our own. There’s a lot of stupidity out there pretending to be bravery.

    • “There’s only one purpose to dehumanize another, and that’s to force our brains to allow us to commit violent acts on another human being.”

      Why do you think we shoot at human shaped targets with no features in military training? Exactly for this reason. At least in that case it serves to keep you alive as hesitation in combat gets you killed. What they are doing turning people in NPCs in the every day world serves only the war pigs and dogs of war.

      • I recall my favorite martial arts instructor telling us to think of our strikes in terms of striking a neck, or limb joint, or whatever given body part instead of thinking of it as hitting a person. He gave the same explanation. Most people need to remove the ‘human’ aspect (or be in a serious emotionally-charged state) before doing serious violence against another human being.

  6. Each side might be dehumanizing the other but what the left has been doing in the streets and the propaganda and trying to deny it is happening I find far more scary at the moment at least and more dangerous. I don’t get the sentiment that neither side really matters. That doesn’t seem to ring true to me.