MCViewPoint

As you’ll see below, masks served as a helpful signal. Wearing one meant you were virtuous. Even more important, if someone was spotted NOT donning the sacred fabric, then you knew that they were… thoughtless, anti-science, and even evil.

A little piece of fabric told them all of that.

First, it’s overwhelmingly common that what people claim is “Science” turns out to be something they were told by some authority. The people advocating a given claim by a scientist didn’t conduct the experiment themselves. Heck, they didn’t even read the study they’re citing. They remember a headline from somewhere or a tweet published by a public figure they trust.

https://theexitnetwork.substack.com/p/rachel-maddow-reveals-a-hidden-purpose?mc_cid=001aa5394a&mc_eid=112641d388

The Exit Network

Political division is a primary purpose for masking.

That’s a very big claim that requires evidence. We’re going to show you that evidence. But first, let’s get something out of the way…

This column is not an argument for or against masks. That’s been debated and covered elsewhere. Here, we’re more interested in the fact that both partisan teams view mask wearing as an important social signal. Indeed, on the pro-mask side, there’s the sudden, ironic urge to “question the science” after the CDC Director says something responsible…

People who’ve been vaccinated are safe without masks. At the same time, she won’t promise safety for the people who have not been vaccinated.

Finally, the government is practicing a measure of Human Respect — returning to the state where individuals can make and determine the personal risks they’re willing to accept or prevent. But the reaction of the pro-mask crowd demonstrates that there was something bigger than science at work here.

As you’ll see below, masks served as a helpful signal. Wearing one meant you were virtuous. Even more important, if someone was spotted NOT donning the sacred fabric, then you knew that they were… thoughtless, anti-science, and even evil.

A little piece of fabric told them all of that.

On that note, we turn to MSNBC host Rachel Maddow, who both admits to mixed feelings over the announcement and to acceptance of the CDC director’s guidance.

An ‘A’ for consistency

To be fair, Maddow deserves a high grade for being consistent. She’s an authoritarian — and that’s not a rude ad hominem statement. It simply means that she believes science is what the authorities say it is, and that we must follow the science as reported by those authorities.

It’s a valid point of view. Here’s why…

See the rest here

Be seeing you