An Honest Question

submitted by StillLessons from self.WorldNews

Anyone who has looked at anything I've written on here knows I am a "vaccine" skeptic (to put it mildly). Recognizing this, you will know that the question I'm about to ask is intended in no way, shape, or form to justify the pro-"vaccination" narrative. Rather it is something I am curious about, because like all of us, I'm still trying to sort out the ultimate motivation and goals of those who clearly want a society 100% comprised of compliant brainless worker bees producing goods for them. Needless to say, those creating this system consider themselves inherently superior to those they are working so hard to control.

With that caveat, here's my question:

The "vaccines" (actually a variety of platforms for genetic therapies) are clearly dangerous. If the goal is a population of compliant worker bees, does it not seem odd that these same compliant worker bees - who are easily identified by their willingness to accept these therapies - are precisely the population which will be culled as these therapies continue to lower the population? Why work so hard to kill precisely the people you (as a divinely superior being) want to have working to provide your comforts for you?

Any thoughts on this? Thanks in advance.

all 16 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 0 fun8 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I'm still trying to sort out the ultimate motivation and goals of those who clearly want a society 100% comprised of compliant brainless worker bees producing goods for them

They already have that.

Why work so hard to kill precisely the people you (as a divinely superior being) want to have working to provide your comforts for you?

Obviously they wouldn't. Depopulation was never a valid concern about the vaccine. More peasants is beneficial for everyone except the peasants.

My personal theory is after an accidental release of the covid bioweapon the powers that be scrambled to save their peasant stock, as a farmer would do for his livestock. There's a few side benefits, making money on the vaccines, an opportunity to experiment with a large population, and squashing free speech, keeping us noisy peasants from being as bothersome.

So business as usual. I don't think there's anything malicious behind the vaccine. I do have a concern for the long term effects, which are currently unknowable, as well as the push to ridicule people for having valid concerns.

Overall the vaccines are less likely to fuck you over than say... Wellbutrin, or any antidepressant, except almost nobody is up in arms about that one.

[–]StillLessons[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If they were interested in saving people, though, why so much effort into suppressing treatments that looked promising (HCQ being the posterchild)?

As to the other elements of the pharm complex being destructive, no question big pharma has been destroying human quality of life for decades now...

[–][deleted] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

There's a few possible reasons I can think of, and it probably involves a combination of factors rather than just one simple cause.

  • Medicine isn't a perfect science. A number of studies conflict with each other about the effectiveness of HCQ.
  • Trump recommended it and so it was rejected for political reasons
  • There's not much money to be made on HCQ
  • The new vaccines prove RNA vaccines can work, something that had been in development since 1989 but never tried
  • Some people are really hung up on the dangers of SARs, this is not the first scare.

[–]StrategicTactic 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I think you misunderstand the goal. It is not to create a population of compliant workers. That goal does not make sense. The only way to effectively do that would be to have some extermination program in place for those who refused the experiment, and simultaneously have a way of hiding such from those who did comply.

I do not think there is some secret goal of doing something crazy at all. I think there are people who have vested interests in certain corporations and are ensuring those corporations get amply compensated. The government is pushing the experiment to artificially create demand. This is why new strains are coming out, and we are told both that the existing treatment will prevent them and that people may need booster shots- get the old while we work on the new.

[–]StillLessons[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I've considered the "convergent interests" hypothesis, but there is one serious problem with it: they are destroying the engine which creates the wealth they would want to make. I don't think they're unaware of the effect Covid is having in the destruction of the economy, because every time somewhere manages to avoid this side effect, that place become enemy number 1 on their list. It sure appears they want to destroy the US economically.

Another possibility - which I have still not ruled out - is that the "leadership elite" are in truth stupid enough not to recognize that they cannot simultaneously enact a control system which is already eviscerating wealth-generation at warp speed and control the wealth they became accustomed to under the very system they are so thoroughly destroying. We may simply be watching human ignorance and stupidity distilled to a more pure form than ever before in history.

[–]StrategicTactic 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

I think you misunderstand the difference between wealth and money. Money only has the value we ascribe to it. Wealth is much more and can be measured in both monetary value and things. The money they create is used to buy things- such as Willie Gates buying up farmland. A person with a sustainable food supply is one of the wealthiest people in a collapse. If you add on a private group that can manage such land and another to protect it, you potentially have a seed for a new country, complete with the leadership. The key in having something like this is counting on the failure of all other groups. It wouldn't matter if you get a small Ancapistan going if it is surrounded by 3 major compliant cities that are about to starve.

As for the US in particular, I think the anti-US rhetoric we are hearing, from communism to "patriot" being labeled hate speech is plenty to identify that as a definite goal. The individualistic nature of Americans has always been a problem for those seeking to conquer it, and such conquest is one of the first necessary steps to creating a world government.

I too wouldn't discount ignorance, but I also do not think that such is the driving factor for every group. There are certainly people who can see what is happening- as evidenced by forums like this.

[–]StillLessons[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Actually, your first three sentences argue for precisely my point. I absolutely agree that money itself is just a construct. What they are actively destroying, however, is the production of true wealth. As long as we are locked down, divided, at war, etc, it is precisely the true wealth which suffers. There will be infinite money as shit goes down, but nothing to buy.

Your idea about buying up essentially the land for "a new country", that's interesting. I hadn't thought of it that way.

I fully agree the anti-US rhetoric is about crushing the entire concept of individual autonomy. That part of the plan is clear. They want a hive to run, not a place where the worker bees have any control whatsoever over our own lives. This is a philosophical point on which they could not be clearer. What terrifies me is that there may be enough people willing to live as they want people to live, that they could get away with this. If they can mobilize the mindless drones against individual autonomy (the purpose of Antifa, for example), I pray there are enough people on the other side of that equation.

[–]fschmidt 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Good question. The more intelligent of the elite, like Bill Gates, recognize that humanity is becoming unsustainably stupid. I worked at Microsoft in its early days and I was interviewed by Gates. He was obsessed with hiring intelligent people. So he clearly values intelligence over compliance. The whole vaccine program is extremely well designed to wipe out the morons. So I completely support the vaccine program and I encourage all morons to take it.

[–]StillLessons[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

The more intelligent of the elite, like Bill Gates...

And here is the problem. You are confusing material success with intelligence. Bill Gates does not have remotely the intelligence you are ascribing to him. He has the willingness to behave in ways most people wouldn't, to further his material ends. Don't confuse that with intelligence. Not the same thing at all. His lack of intelligence is demonstrated and will continue to be demonstrated with the repeated failure of his plans to work out as he envisions them. But he'll keep fighting the tide until he dies, just like the rest of us die. Upon his death, magic! It turns out he was just another fuckwad who spent his life making misery around him for millions of people. He's not the first nor the last; in the end just another man playing God and failing. There are so many examples like him in history it's absurd.

[–]fschmidt 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

His lack of intelligence is demonstrated and will continue to be demonstrated with the repeated failure of his plans to work out as he envisions them.

Examples?

[–]StillLessons[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Block the sun with particles in the atmosphere. Do that and you have the potential to destroy the agricultural capacity of our planet. A monumentally stupid idea.

His vaccination campaign against polio. Rather than eliminate polio, he has brought it back in southern Africa with a vengeance. Unfortunately, I must concede this one is only stupid if his goal was actually to eliminate polio. If the goal was just more of the same as what they want to do with Covid, I confess this one fits your argument better than mine...

First two, just off the top of my head...

[–]fschmidt 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Block the sun with particles in the atmosphere.

This isn't his idea, just something he partially funds.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/factcheck/2021/04/23/fact-check-bill-gates-not-trying-block-suns-rays/7310134002/

His vaccination campaign against polio. Rather than eliminate polio, he has brought it back in southern Africa with a vengeance. Unfortunately, I must concede this one is only stupid if his goal was actually to eliminate polio. If the goal was just more of the same as what they want to do with Covid, I confess this one fits your argument better than mine...

Yes, the latter.

[–]forgottenpasswordguy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

What do you have against the vaccine? Everyone I know that has had it is going about life as normal. To me the vaccine doesn't seem like much of a risk, but I also don't think covid is much of a risk either.

[–]StillLessons[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Within my universe, I know of two vaccine-related deaths. My universe is exceedingly small. I'm not a very social person. I can also come up with - people I know directly - about 40% reactions to the therapy which I would consider "adverse reactions". This goes well beyond a sore arm. In 15% of my circle, the reactions were described as an inability to breathe at full capacity (symptomatic of pulmonary distress) for a period of two weeks following the second dose. The other 60% within my circle describe just what you say here, no reaction at all. There will always be variability within any population. 40% is not a number I would be proud of, and the seriousness of the reactions (while simultaneously the MSM tells us to expect these reactions, describing them simply as the Fauci Ouchie...) has my attention. Two dead within a small subset such as my quite limited circle of friends and family (~15 people)? Something is very wrong here. Look at the work Charles Hoff, MD is doing in BC as well. Similar results.

Covid itself meanwhile is a manageable disease, as long as you have a healthy innate immune system. There are many people whose immune systems are not healthy, and these people should not be ignored, but given that they do have prior problems, there are many viruses which will cause this population problems, not just Covid.

[–]forgottenpasswordguy 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Well your world sounds different than mine, and I can see why you'd be against it given that experience, crazy stuff. The reactions beyond a sore arm do concern me, I have heard about people having that, nothing lasting that I know of, but still. Maybe I should wait it out for full FDA approval, I'm in a pretty low risk group for covid anyways, like you say it's manageable. Thank God we have the freedom to make these observations and decide what's best for us on an individual level.

[–]Smarterthanlastweek2 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

"The "vaccines" (actually a variety of platforms for genetic therapies) are clearly dangerous." I would say minorly dangerous, though each injection adds to that risk and you shouldn't have to have any you don't want. I don't expect any mass die off if that's what you're implying. I look at it as a way to push through requirement of vaccination on command, and $B's that will bring in.