I happen to know some persons who are decidedly not Republican but who declined the vaccine because of their positive experience with alternative health over the years. The persons I know just happen to be of an age you would call elderly.
Interesting. This is consistent with the evidence I've seen, showing that vaccine hesitancy was not primarily a political issue, but one relating to the persons' experiences with the healthcare system.
Re motivated reasoning. That is not reasoning of any kind. My assumption is that the people on one side have much more of this, and those on the other much less.
Here is one way of seeing who is likely not using facts and reason. Those with facts try to transmit them. Those without facts generally prefer to name-call, denigrate, insult. They may refer to "the science," but have generally not verified and definitely not explored data that does not go with their beliefs. So check with yourself. What's your preferred strategy? And look around you. Are people presenting miles of data? Or generally denigrating?
I hate both dems & republitards, I find Dems to be stupid and not fight for anything and think too highly of human nature, but Republicans tho to me are very hateful and so against change. I am neither, but I refuse to take the vaccine. Just like I am against the flu vaccine. You cannot cure a virus. You make it stronger & accelerate its mutation with all the shots. I am neither antivax. I have all my shots like polio, tetanus, hep and I give my dogs their rabies every 3 years, but no parvo or that other stuff because I think pharmaceutical companies are part of the root of all evil. They only want money and in the beginning Covid was a concern, but I have not worn a mask in public for about 3 months. My mom and sisters all had COVID. My mom lost her taste & smell. Sisters were bedridden for 2 weeks and I may be asymptomatic, but most likely I have it, but I rather get the virus and build immunity naturally. I am arrogant in my thinking that I will not die and I hated all the antimask Karens, but I just don't trust how fast it was made and these companies wanting you to buy their shit. I told everyone before I physically saw them I am not vaccinated and some friends declined to see me and I respected that, but I think it was all propaganda and to divide people and place their attention on sthg else. What happened to all the racial reform? For animal rights and climate change to me, any "propaganda" is justified and I do believe there is climate change and its very sad to me that the only way ppl listen about animal cruelty because it gets ppl concerned about humans and how itll affect their environment and their kids generations. Big Huggies 4 you Wayne ❤️❤️❤️❤️
There has never been debate, by the way, about the experimental mRNA injections. The mainstream has shut down, shut out, denigrated most fact-tellers. Debate - that would have ended the c-virus stuff - the lockdowns, mandates, masks. The facts are clear. The problem is that debate - the facts - were prohibited from getting into the mainstream. I do not see this as relating to political ideology. But I do see that the mainstream media has a Dem bias, and fortunately for Reps, they were therefore less trusting of mainstream media - very helpful when it came to making them less likely to take the shots.
Sep 21, 2022·edited Sep 21, 2022Liked by Wayne Hsiung
My first response. So much is missing here. Then, one thing jumped out at me: "Republicans are around 8 times more likely to decline a vaccine." I know a lot about the mRNA injections - and would never get near one. What is missing here? You say "Republicans are around 8 times more likely to decline a vaccine" without looking at information re the injections. From that you could go on to: why are Reps more aware of the dangers and Dems so horrifically much less? There is masses and masses of info available. Joe Rogan has interviewed 2 of the top doctors willing to go for the truth and save lives - at tremendous risk to their careers. Then, more: you extol compromise. I love facts, research, truth, human rights and freedoms. What compromise would you suggest: taking every second dangerous injection? Only killing half as many Jews in the Holocaust? Makes no sense whatsoever.
I wrote a lot more but somehow it didn't get posted. This is a quick rewrite.
My big thing: over and over, reading your piece, inside me it said: lots is missing and lots is also off-base.
By the way, I've done a lot of college teaching of critical thinking, logic - and also ethics,
And I see that now my first comment is there. Oh well, I don't make identical comments both times - though there is overlap.
Lots missing here. Yes, elevate curiosity. You will learn if you put curiosity above fear - as in the recent c-virus stuff. Now back to: lots missing here. You write: "Republicans are around 8 times more likely to decline a vaccine." I've always been a fact-explorer. And with the recent mRNA injections, there was massive evidence, months before they came out, that there were several cheap available safe treatments - lowering the death rate (according to recent studies) by 92%. In that case, why go near an experimental injection - which has proven a wise decision, as the injections have proven very dangerous, with 50% of the injected getting blood clots (most minor, but occasionally fatal). A question I ask: what makes the difference between Reps and Dems re the injections. Is it that, in general, Reps are more capable of looking at facts? I would also ask: why Democrats incredibly unable to look at facts regarding the injections? By the way, I'm not American. I'm from Canada, where the extremely anti-democratic hate-mongering anti-freedom Trudeau heads the government. Back to: lots is missing. You extol compromise. Why compromise and take, for instance, every second dangerous injection? Why not go for facts? I love facts, research, truth, exploration, investigation. I also love logic. And human and animal well-being. Anyway, you write, "Republicans are around 8 times more likely to decline a vaccine" without exploring that sometimes one side has the facts on their side. In this case, what has made it that Reps are on the side of the facts? And more, what has made 8 times as many Dems closed to the facts. By the way, should you want evidence re the dangers of the injections, I can provide masses and masses.
Wonderful that you are a learner. As I see it, we are on the same side: for truth, for human and animal rights, for empathy and caring. I see you are amazing, what you have been willing to do for animals, what you have been willing to experience, like those mother pigs, their nipples torn, still offering themselves to their piglets, like those dogs about to be butchered - including the one with the broken leg. I don't think I could have let him be killed.
I happen to know some persons who are decidedly not Republican but who declined the vaccine because of their positive experience with alternative health over the years. The persons I know just happen to be of an age you would call elderly.
Interesting. This is consistent with the evidence I've seen, showing that vaccine hesitancy was not primarily a political issue, but one relating to the persons' experiences with the healthcare system.
Wayne inspires me!
Here's a great post on getting through to people: https://drtesslawrie.substack.com/p/what-my-fellow-warriors-in-vienna Her big thing: rely on the heart, just be yourself, instead of giving piles of facts.
I've also done a couple of posts, plus have written extensively on good thinking. My most recent post: go easy, be calm, go slow. https://elsaiselsa.substack.com/p/dont-take-the-bait-the-bait-of-someones
Re motivated reasoning. That is not reasoning of any kind. My assumption is that the people on one side have much more of this, and those on the other much less.
Here is one way of seeing who is likely not using facts and reason. Those with facts try to transmit them. Those without facts generally prefer to name-call, denigrate, insult. They may refer to "the science," but have generally not verified and definitely not explored data that does not go with their beliefs. So check with yourself. What's your preferred strategy? And look around you. Are people presenting miles of data? Or generally denigrating?
I hate both dems & republitards, I find Dems to be stupid and not fight for anything and think too highly of human nature, but Republicans tho to me are very hateful and so against change. I am neither, but I refuse to take the vaccine. Just like I am against the flu vaccine. You cannot cure a virus. You make it stronger & accelerate its mutation with all the shots. I am neither antivax. I have all my shots like polio, tetanus, hep and I give my dogs their rabies every 3 years, but no parvo or that other stuff because I think pharmaceutical companies are part of the root of all evil. They only want money and in the beginning Covid was a concern, but I have not worn a mask in public for about 3 months. My mom and sisters all had COVID. My mom lost her taste & smell. Sisters were bedridden for 2 weeks and I may be asymptomatic, but most likely I have it, but I rather get the virus and build immunity naturally. I am arrogant in my thinking that I will not die and I hated all the antimask Karens, but I just don't trust how fast it was made and these companies wanting you to buy their shit. I told everyone before I physically saw them I am not vaccinated and some friends declined to see me and I respected that, but I think it was all propaganda and to divide people and place their attention on sthg else. What happened to all the racial reform? For animal rights and climate change to me, any "propaganda" is justified and I do believe there is climate change and its very sad to me that the only way ppl listen about animal cruelty because it gets ppl concerned about humans and how itll affect their environment and their kids generations. Big Huggies 4 you Wayne ❤️❤️❤️❤️
There has never been debate, by the way, about the experimental mRNA injections. The mainstream has shut down, shut out, denigrated most fact-tellers. Debate - that would have ended the c-virus stuff - the lockdowns, mandates, masks. The facts are clear. The problem is that debate - the facts - were prohibited from getting into the mainstream. I do not see this as relating to political ideology. But I do see that the mainstream media has a Dem bias, and fortunately for Reps, they were therefore less trusting of mainstream media - very helpful when it came to making them less likely to take the shots.
My first response. So much is missing here. Then, one thing jumped out at me: "Republicans are around 8 times more likely to decline a vaccine." I know a lot about the mRNA injections - and would never get near one. What is missing here? You say "Republicans are around 8 times more likely to decline a vaccine" without looking at information re the injections. From that you could go on to: why are Reps more aware of the dangers and Dems so horrifically much less? There is masses and masses of info available. Joe Rogan has interviewed 2 of the top doctors willing to go for the truth and save lives - at tremendous risk to their careers. Then, more: you extol compromise. I love facts, research, truth, human rights and freedoms. What compromise would you suggest: taking every second dangerous injection? Only killing half as many Jews in the Holocaust? Makes no sense whatsoever.
I wrote a lot more but somehow it didn't get posted. This is a quick rewrite.
My big thing: over and over, reading your piece, inside me it said: lots is missing and lots is also off-base.
By the way, I've done a lot of college teaching of critical thinking, logic - and also ethics,
And I see that now my first comment is there. Oh well, I don't make identical comments both times - though there is overlap.
Lots missing here. Yes, elevate curiosity. You will learn if you put curiosity above fear - as in the recent c-virus stuff. Now back to: lots missing here. You write: "Republicans are around 8 times more likely to decline a vaccine." I've always been a fact-explorer. And with the recent mRNA injections, there was massive evidence, months before they came out, that there were several cheap available safe treatments - lowering the death rate (according to recent studies) by 92%. In that case, why go near an experimental injection - which has proven a wise decision, as the injections have proven very dangerous, with 50% of the injected getting blood clots (most minor, but occasionally fatal). A question I ask: what makes the difference between Reps and Dems re the injections. Is it that, in general, Reps are more capable of looking at facts? I would also ask: why Democrats incredibly unable to look at facts regarding the injections? By the way, I'm not American. I'm from Canada, where the extremely anti-democratic hate-mongering anti-freedom Trudeau heads the government. Back to: lots is missing. You extol compromise. Why compromise and take, for instance, every second dangerous injection? Why not go for facts? I love facts, research, truth, exploration, investigation. I also love logic. And human and animal well-being. Anyway, you write, "Republicans are around 8 times more likely to decline a vaccine" without exploring that sometimes one side has the facts on their side. In this case, what has made it that Reps are on the side of the facts? And more, what has made 8 times as many Dems closed to the facts. By the way, should you want evidence re the dangers of the injections, I can provide masses and masses.
Really great feedback, Elsa. Appreciate your thoughts on this.
Wonderful that you are a learner. As I see it, we are on the same side: for truth, for human and animal rights, for empathy and caring. I see you are amazing, what you have been willing to do for animals, what you have been willing to experience, like those mother pigs, their nipples torn, still offering themselves to their piglets, like those dogs about to be butchered - including the one with the broken leg. I don't think I could have let him be killed.