Anti-vaxxer Monica Smit arrested for ‘incitement’
No idea who this Monic Smit person is or if they&#x27;re good, or bad, a criminal, misinformed, or a smart person doing good, but I do love how the discourse has become so homogenous, orthodox and unipolar that any dissent from a full embrace of vaccine and government policy not only earns the title &quot;anti-vax&quot;, but contains in that nouveau term-of-abuse the implicit notions both that: 1) dissent is bad, and 2) all dissidents are the same.<p>It&#x27;s like the Othering, abusive, zero-nuance, with-us-or-against-us wartime propaganda employed by every country in WWII.<p>This is an effective tactic to sideline, silence and discredit anything that does not agree with the theory that vaccines, lockdowns and other transient emergences of government policy and corporate interest are the only solutions. The dogma that ivermectin and ICQ have &quot;no quality scientific evidence&quot; supporting their efficacy, is belied by the mountain of research demonstrating massive improvement[0][1].<p>Sad and a total scandal not covered by the mainstream media that: 1) effective generic, out-of-patent, well-tolerated treatments are being suppressed in favor of profitable proprietary experimental vaccines delivered with cartel-like shenanigans (including access being contingent upon a country NOT recommending HCQ&#x2F;ivermectin and others); and, 2) researchers regularly use words like &quot;ineffective&quot;, &quot;no significant improvement&quot; in their conclusion sections even when their results show improvement.<p>Again, the same wartime propagandists&#x27; tactic is used. Support for HCQ or ivermectin is labelled as &quot;crazy&quot; and &quot;stupid&quot;, and only stories that associate such ideas with people who display other crazy or stupid behaviors are promoted. Sadly, even people in biology and medicine display the same herd behavior, which lets me think, &quot;These people do not know what they are saying is propaganda and wrong, they actually believe it!&quot;<p>In other words, they do not know that they are working as propagandists for  whoever benefits, but they do so anyway, and willingly, likely corralled in no small degree, by the collective glee and individual dopamine rush of feeling, &quot;We are so right, and smart! And that group there, man are they so wrong, and dumb!&quot;<p>I can&#x27;t work out who benefits the most: vaccine making pharma companies, governments or someone else?<p>[0]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;c19hcq.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;c19hcq.com&#x2F;</a><p>[1]: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;c19ivermectin.com&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;c19ivermectin.com&#x2F;</a><p><i>edit:</i> I guess I didn&#x27;t read the audience of this article here that well, because I expected that these well-written and impassioned pleas for a bit of open-ness in the discourse, as well as criticism and questioning of the homogeneity would be well received here. I feel pretty sad they weren&#x27;t because if people here don&#x27;t think critically enough, or have courage enough, to think outside the blinders that are so obviously on our society at this time, then who will? You know: the smart, savvy, mostly financially independent tech workers...if they can&#x27;t afford a bit of dissent, or critical inquiry, then who can, seriously?