1007
Comments (41)
sorted by:
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
1
Churchill 1 point ago +1 / -0

I’m not sure he’s characterizing Fauci’s point correctly. I think what Fauci is effectively saying is that due to the increased footprint of human beings in the world and the increased rates of travel and interchange between people (think globalization), humans will come in contact with more disease agents like this that can spread rapidly. The risk of pandemics is increased.

So with COVID19, 50 years ago, this disease either would have stayed in the caves where the bats were (because people weren’t poking around in them) or if people came in contact, the disease would have stayed in China because there wasn’t much trade or travel with or to/from China. Even within China the disease might have been geographically limited because there wasn’t a lot of even inter-regional travel. But today these things can spread so quickly because of the amount of travel and trade.

Honestly it can be turned into an argument against globalization and borderless travel. Obviously the business world isn’t interested in that, so they’ll argue that people need to change their behavior to adapt to the new reality. Fauci’s taking the globalist side.

2
Scroon 2 points ago +2 / -0

I skimmed through the paper, and I think it's an accurate distillation of what Moren and Fauci are saying. That triangular Venn diagram, taken from the paper, is very telling. If you look at the lower right hand list, two of the items are "Lack of political will" and "Environmental degradation".

Both items are attempts to turn politics into an issue of "science and health". This way whoever holds authority in the science will be able to decide the outcome of the politics.

Science authorities are even more dangerous that political authorities because most people assume science is non-debatable. Thus whoever sits on the throne of science can effectively rule without question...as we have seen.