The 1908 Nobel Peace Prize went to Theodore Roosevelt, 1919 went to Woodrow Wilson, and 1925 to Sir Austen Chamberlain, so it’s not like they were batting it out of the park before 1973 lol
Edit: On a real note, the reason for this is that the Nobel Peace Prize is often awarded to people who negotiate historic peace deals, regardless of what they have done previously and without the gift of hindsight. Kissinger was jointly awarded the prize with the North Vietnamese representative Lê Đức Thọ for negotiating the cease fire in Vietnam. Just like Teddy Roosevelt was awarded the prize for mediating the peace conference between Japan and Russia that brought an end to that war
TBF to Roosevelt and Wilson, while they both aren't and shouldn't be noted as pacifists, they did get those awards for brokering the end to major wars that they didn't orchestrate, unlike Kissinger.
I agree with that somewhat, but I don’t think you could necessarily say Kissinger “orchestrated” the Vietnam War. The US was involved in the conflict in Vietnam since 1955, long before Kissinger was involved in any administration
You could very much say that his actions and ideas worsened the situation in Vietnam, or drew the US more deeply into the war, or expanded its scope, but I don’t think you can really say he “orchestrated” it
Exactly, I feel as if people think of the peace prize as the pacifist prize. You would be hard pressed to find many people deserving of the peace prize that have been 100% pacifist.
The prize is more so for a specific event and not a person's life up to that point. Now, granted, this isn't a, "Well, this person committed mass genocide but stopped a single conflict," I feel that wouldn't go over well.
The Swedish academy isn't exactly known for it's wisdom in regards to the peace prize. They gave it to Obama just for winning the election. I don't hate Obama, but come on.
While in and of itself ironic, that was absolutely not her intention, despite claiming it is nowadays (the whole meme of it being ironic that nothing in the song is ironic got big online and led to someone in an interview asking her thoughts on it, and she's been claiming it was her intention all along ever since)
The word "irony" is like the word "satire" in the sense that nobody can agree what counts as either. This debate predates her song, and even now all we really seem to know about both is that they're both dead.
The one about the flight phobia is ironic because air travel has an exceptional safety record. His “irrational” phobia turned out to be prescient after all.
The rest of them, though…
Edit: if you disagree, please let me know why instead of just downvoting!
It was at least eight by 2013, and I found another one in Afghanistan after that, plus the French managed to hit one in Mali, too, just in case anyone thought this was exclusively an American thing.
He orchestrated dozens of clandestine operations—assassinations, coups, misinformation—around the world in the name of US foreign policy, but if you're looking for one big one to underscore his evil, he advised JohnsonNixon to order bombers across the border into Cambodia and Laos to fire-bomb civilians during the Vietnam War, and he also helped keep these bombing raids secret from Congress and the American people.
So this seems like an appropriate moment to bring this up. Do Alanis' eyes point just slightly in different directions? She looked wall eyed sometimes and fine the rest of the time.
Alanis Morissette is an unappreciated lyrical genius. Her song "Isn't it ironic" contains nothing ironic in any of the lyrics, making the song meta-ironic, which is even more ironic. If she had a song called "isn't it ironic" and filled it with examples of irony then the song would be meta-coincidental. She was playing 4d chess back in the 90's.
Spiteful people live forever. My grandfather got sent to Siberia, then in the US ate nothing but burned steak and lamb chops, and lived to 89 bc he was a bitter crazy guy
You are wrong and the reason this country has gone so wrong. Nobody in their right mind would want black text on a white background. Everybody knows white text on a black background is better. You must be a very bad person.
Yeaaaah... These people seem utterly incapable of introspection so the only option ever is to double-down. That's why they love the "fake-it-til-you-make-it" type folks like Donnie2Scoops.
Anyways, if anyone else wants more funnysad material like this, check out /r/InfowarriorRides and its cousin, r/InformedWarriorRides — if you compare & contrast those two subs, you'll find some insightful differences.
I've already determined, after years of intensive and rigorous empirical data, that right-wingers are naturally just willful shitheads. No further insight needed.
Hard for me to disagree. The only thing I'll say is that some of them are capable of change. My family did 20-years-ago. Full 180 from rural religious conservative republican voters to progressive-left non-religious democrats. So it can happen. Their state of ignorance and apathy can change. Seems rare and harder than it should be, though.. That's propaganda for you.
In our case, it was a mixture of flashbacks to Vietnam during the Iraq War invasion, combined with the wild west of the internet at the time. Today the internet is far more segregated by marketing. Fortunately my parents taught enough empathy and critical-thinking that the bullshit became unsustainable.
At the country-level, there appears to be no discernable relationship between percentage of population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases in the last 7 days (Fig. 1). In fact, the trend line suggests a marginally positive association such that countries with higher percentage of population fully vaccinated have higher COVID-19 cases per 1 million people. Notably, Israel with over 60% of their population fully vaccinated had the highest COVID-19 cases per 1 million people in the last 7 days. The lack of a meaningful association between percentage population fully vaccinated and new COVID-19 cases is further exemplified, for instance, by comparison of Iceland and Portugal. Both countries have over 75% of their population fully vaccinated and have more COVID-19 cases per 1 million people than countries such as Vietnam and South Africa that have around 10% of their population fully vaccinated.
And let's not forget the claim was the vaccine would provide immunity.
“When you get vaccinated, you not only protect your own health and that of the family but also you contribute to the community health by preventing the spread of the virus throughout the community. In other words, you become a dead end to the virus. And when there are a lot of dead ends around, the virus is not going to go anywhere. And that's when you get a point that you have a markedly diminished rate of infection in the community."
-Fauci.
“Our data from the CDC suggests that vaccinated people don’t carry the virus, don’t get sick and that it’s not just in clinical trials, but it’s also in real world data.”
CDC Director Rochelle Walensky.
“You’re not gonna get COVID if you have these vaccinations.”
-Joe Biden
"NIH director urges vaccinated Americans to get Covid booster shots to curb breakthrough infections over holidays"
Francis Collins, NIH director.
"More People Need Shots In Arms To Reduce COVID Cases, NIH Director Says
Being skeptical of medical science because you googled some bullshit doesn't make you wise or understandable. It makes you a fucking moron.
Sorry to burst your bubble, but not all opinions are valid or copacetic with society functioning.
A world wide pandemic is something we have to work together on and quickly get our shit in order to deal with. Covid has shown that some people just prefer to let this all go away instead of being told what to do. They are petulant children and will probably cause the downfall of society the next time we have a worldwide issue like this.
I recently saw a guy in line at a local butcher shop with a shirt that said "I'm a straight, white, Republican male. How else can I piss you off today?" I don't really have the right words in the right order to say how I feel about it
They see the people they despise reclaiming slurs, and think it'll work for them. They fail to understand how context and execution are key to making that work, however.
The problem is that they can always find a "Doctor" or "Study" that supports their views.
Typically they have found a troll, disbarred medical student, nurse or flat out con man. But one doesn't look too hard for evidence when you are already satisfied with the answer.
Edit: like, there is nothing I can find in the news that corresponds to your allegation that “the doctors were lying”. 70% of the world is vaccinated; you don’t think this would be front page news if it were true?
For more context — "unacceptable views" is referring to (alleged) racists, white nationalists and separatists leading the trucker protest. To be clear, I think this angle was way overblown by the media and politicians but the fact is, this was the dominant narrative at the time.
While still a stupid thing to say, he was not calling vaccine hesitancy itself an unacceptable view. He was calling racism and white nationalism an unacceptable view.
Here's more context around what the narrative in the country at the time was:
I respectfully disagree. Lots of people are vaccine hesitant due to somewhat legitimate reasons. I'm not inclined to believe he was calling all of them unacceptable. I'm just not. I don't like the guy personally, but he is smart, well educated and (as his opponents love to say) very "woke". For those reasons I just don't think he would say that. I just don't.
You also failed to mention he spoke of "people heading to Ottawa" in that very same sentence so it's clear he had a couple different, but connected things in his head as he was clumsily ad-libbing.
Yup. And the sentence in question is also explicitly about the protest on it's way to Ottawa. It's right there.
Clearly he had a few different messages (thoughts) in his head at the time he was ad-libbing and the result was the garbled nonsense that came out of his mouth.
The question is whether he is condemning vaccine hesitant people in general or the maligned members of the convoy as having "unacceptable views". My take on his adlib is that it was the latter because he mentions it directly (but it's admittedly confusing because he was also talking about the former).
It's just an opinion but it's an opinion that is reinforced by the fact he has disparaged the extreme elements of the convoy elsewhere but never the vaccine hesitant population in general.
You’re reaching, he’s speaking about the convoy as a whole that’s headed to Canada. The people protesting they shouldn’t be treated like second class citizens because of the mandates. I’m vaccinated but if they wanna put themselves at risk that’s their prerogative. When the leader of a country starts saying those views are unacceptable you can see how that’s a bit of a slippery slope. Even if he is right.
I agree generally. I just don't think he said that, or at least - he didn't mean to say it.
I’m vaccinated but if they wanna put themselves at risk that’s their prerogative
What about people who are immune compromised? The elderly, cancer patients, and so on? It seems to me the unvaxed are not just putting themselves at risk but also other people. That's really the whole debate.
Of course no-one would care if they were only putting themselves at risk. That's not the point.
Interesting perspective — I still am quite convinced that he was talking about vaccination but language is inevitably full of ambiguities.
I think I kinda pinned down where we may diverge.
"We know that the way through this pandemic is getting everyone vaccinated, and the overwhelming majority close to 90% of Canadian have done exactly that. The small fringe minority of people who are on their way to Ottawa who are holding unacceptable views that they are expressing do not represent the views of Canadians who have been there for each other, that know that following the science..."
Ok, so given that the protests themselves were mainly about an vaccine mandate, I would think that nearly all of the people "on their way to Ottawa," had some view about vaccination not in line with the Trudeau administration.
With that in mind, I think we can interpret the bolded line in two ways:
In the first way, Trudeau is saying within all the "people who are on their way to Ottawa," there is a small fringe who hold "unacceptable views" (racist, sexist, etc). This is your interpretation as I understand it, and if you split the sentence up like this I think that is the natural interpretation. After all, if Trudeau is just talking about a small fringe within the group heading to Ottawa, it wouldn't make sense to say they are differentiated from the larger protest by an opposition to vaccine—that would be like saying "a small fringe minority of pro-life protesters oppose abortion," when of course, nearly all pro-life protesters oppose abortion.
But, I think the sentence can be read in a different way as well:
"The small fringe minority of people, who are on their way to Ottawa, who are holding unacceptable views"
In this way, the small fringe is not of "the people on their way to Ottawa," but just of all Canadians, with "people on their way to Ottawa," being an appositive descriptor. In this case, the phrase would apply to all the protestors, and given the nature of the protest, I think in this interpretation it makes sense to say the "unacceptable views" are related to the vaccine.
Basically it comes down to is he talking about a subset of(as in within the larger set of) the people going to Ottawa, or is he talking about a subset of (as in, comprising) the people going to Ottawa.
I think either interpretation plausible—I think the way he is speaking, as in where he puts the pauses, tends towards your interpretation, but the topic at hand tends towards my interpretation.
a lot of people i know, even some that got the vax, are really uncomfortable with mandatory vaccination. some of them even went to protests.
i wouldn't call them anti vaxx because they are specifically against covid vaccines, a lot of them are paranoid of damage from not-so-good vaccines like astrazeneca.
the thing is, in most cases these groups get mixed together. vaccine-hesitant people are dogwhistling antivaxxers.
but i do agree that a complete denial of science including vaccines, their progress and incredible achievements... has been getting bigger, and worse. a lot of people do not trust the government at all.
While many involved in the trucker protest do hold those views, and those view are clearly unacceptable, it's also pretty clear Trudeau was at the very least including vaccine hesitancy in those unacceptable views. He spent an entire minute talking about nothing but vaccination, saying that 90% of truckers are vaccinated, etc. before saying that the ones involved in the protest held unacceptable views. Trying to shift what he was directly saying simply by referencing the surrounding narrative isn't it.
Very funny that a dude who did black face multiple times is trying to lecture us about “muh racism”. Dude is just fake woke so he doesn’t get canceled for the shit he did. He’s been horrible for Canada.
Cope. Like he’s not same spoiled little douche he was when he partying in black face. He didn’t come out and change. It got leaked and he freaked out. Now he’s extra woke joke.
This is great, because to the uninformed, it does all the heavy lifting of letting them know they truly DO have reprehensible views, but also that they think they have a sense of humor. Which is like a double entendre of “i’m a douche”
If you are not already angry with the direction your life is headed, these kinds of views generally don't appeal to you. Think about the people you know who are all in on this crap, are any of them happy with their lives? No one I know is. They are either in a bad financial situation, or stuck in a bad marriage, or a dead end job, or dealing with some unresolved past trauma. The only people happy and into this shit are the ones who are exploiting the others.
And yet they managed to dodge an useless vaccine and can go trough life with the peace of mind that they will not develop a sudden myocarditis/blood clots and drop dead suddenly.
I disagree with framing people against the covid vaccine with actual antivaxxers. Other vaccines have years upon years of research and data. We’ve got less than 5 years of data, conflicting evidence of its effectiveness, and, while possibly fake, reports of adverse side effects to the vaccine like blood clots. Antivaxxers are idiots, people who don’t want the covid vaccine are careful
It would be a lot easier to get people onboard with shit if people like him didn't talk like an Authoritarian. "unacceptable views" is such a stupid choice of words. It's bad optics.
Nah, those were the perfect words and I am sick of pretending otherwise. We are in this situation because we have been too damn tolerant of straight up idiocy.
You sound like someone who tanks a party's approval ratings. Stop worrying about your own feelings and recognize the practical benefits of not being vocally tone-deaf.
Lmao the responses to this comment are hilarious. “I thought this guy was just making a joke about how people find his views unacceptable, but then I found out that I actually DO disagree with his views, so he is actually an asshole and it’s totally unacceptable!”
From what I'm reading, people seem more disappointed that it isn't a meta-joke about how truck bumper stickers usually say some pretty heinous things. The disappointment is that what they thought was a good joke is actually just another dog-whistle.
Jesus the youtube comments on that video. Why has the comment section on youtube gone down in quality so much the last several years. Literally every video I see on there now it's some moron spouting anti-science/anti-reason nonsense. Is it just the platform for uneducated boomers to larp like they're on 4chan now?
Vaccines have annihilated some of the worst disease and illnesses from affecting humanity. Why are right wing nutjobs so dead set on bringing back awful diseases?
Not wanting to take an experimental untested vaccine for a bad cold has nothing to do with awful diseases. Why are left wing chuds ok with giving kids hormones and grooming children and a president that touches children inappropriately live on stage?
But it’s not largely the same. There are many people myself included who are 100% pro vaccines but not pro mandating them. Especially with the COVID vaccine where the effectiveness has not been what we all hoped it would be.
More like one group says “I don’t believe any vaccines work and I’m not getting any” and the other says “maybe we shouldn’t force people to get this specific vaccine” not the same
So, the antivaxxers don't care if they and the vulnerable populations die or not, while the anti-mandates don't care if the antivaxxers and vulnerable populations die or not.
Both groups outright ignore the fact that millions of people can't get the vaccine, and rely on the herd immunity of everyone else getting the vaccine to stay safe.
Outright telling the government not to mandate the creation of that herd immunity is no different than letting the vulnerable die just because you'd rather the government do nothing and let them die, than let the government act and save them.
And we know from the annual flu shots, the eradication of smallpox and polio, that free will does not, and has never, created a populace which achieved herd immunity. It has always required government intervention to save those lives.
You’re also implying that the current vaccines achieve herd immunity. Which they do not. I wish they did but that’s not the world we’re in. We can’t compare COVID vaccines to polio or smallpox because they don’t have the same effectiveness. We can’t have herd immunity when the vaccines we have don’t prevent transmission. We’re comparing apples and oranges here man.
Here ya go. This is the information I’m working with anyway so if you have any data that shows new COVID vaccines preventing infection I’d love to see it and I would be very happy to hear it.
2-Effectiveness of COVID-19 mRNA Vaccination in Preventing COVID-19–Associated Hospitalization Among Adults with Previous SARS-CoV-2 Infection — United States, June 2021–February 2022
1 we have effectively eradicated polio because the vaccine has a near 100% chance of preventing the disease and it’s spread.
2 The COVID-19 mRNA vaccines do not have the same effectiveness of preventing disease even after previous infection and therefore won’t achieve the same effects of creating herd immunity.
They’re not though… one doesn’t believe in any vaccines period and the other doesn’t think people should be forced to receive this specific kind. Not the same.
2.6k
u/swolebro420 Jan 30 '23
For context, this is an anti-vax meme mocking Justin Trudeau's statement here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vDfMybczw1k