I must declare my disappointment in the hostile factiousness and unproductive denominationalism of my compatriots in coronavirus skepticism. It is a malicious mythology that all of us must agree on every individual point, interpretation, and accusation. None of us can claim to possess all of the answers and to understand the entirety of this autocratic scheme in its absolute complexity. In this respect, I readily admit that I am just as ignorant as anybody else: I do not possess and never will possess a master’s knowledge of medical science, nor will I grasp the abstrusity of economics, nor will I bear personal witness to the executive operations of the federal government. Ergo, there are myriad problems that I cannot solve: I don’t pretend to know with certainty if the state engineered the coronavirus, or if the virus even exists at all. And in recognition of the limits of my wisdom, I have no right to reprimand, condemn, or exclude anyone whose subjective interpretations on these subjects differ from mine: the only commonality of necessity is our mutual apprehension of an active autocratic force.
Accordingly, I am calling on all of my brothers and sisters in this fight for physical and intellectual independence to cease their infighting forthwith. You must not pester and ridicule each other over a mere secondary difference of opinion. Are we in agreement that we are the unwitting combatants against an ascendant autocracy? If the answer is yes, then we are allies and we must acknowledge and respect each other as such. What does it matter if we disagree as to the autocratic architects’ identities, or the specific function of the vaccines, or the probability that a certain politician will do this or that? As long as we maintain our skepticism and suspicion on the most basic, general, and fundamental issues, then we needn’t entertain any additional opportunities for sectarianism.
My critics will indict me against my own embarrassing history of ideological intolerance on social media, and I plead guilty without qualifications or rationalizations. However, it may be that my own experience in the maladaptive nature and the destructive outcome of such behavior has gifted (or saddled) me with an uncommon understanding of why we must never indulge our inclinations to perform in this manner. If my warning is heeded and my advice followed, then I will be happy to accept any incidental damage to my reputation.
Sincerely,
Dack Rouleau
overwritten.org 