Rudolf Steiner: Vaccines to Kill The Soul?!

[Soul_of_Shu]

What do the guys on the video think? They think all of these measures are just part of the conspiracy leading us on a mechanistic slide to technological utopia. Who's the "us" and who's the "them"?

Actually, they explicitly state that they don't think this to be the case. Somehow we seem to have watched two different conversations, the version you listened to completely missing the nuanced context in which all this was explored.

Thanks, Dana, for this wonderful nuanced discussion in which both speakers reject simplistic conspiracy theories. By the way, no need for anyone to feel sorry for "poor 'ol Lou" whose posts have occasionally been censored as not yet sufficiently nuanced.

To be clear, it was never your capacity for nuanced discussion that was the concern. And you make a good point, in that there was a time when this thread would have gone far more in the direction of Jim's take on it, involving quite a few others, with a much greater moderation challenge proportional to the greater number of participants gone off in that direction. Now it seems the time is ripe, and the forum is indeed generally ready for that more nuanced approach, and so I'm not feeling the same wariness to be so guarded.

[Lou Gold]

Actually, they explicitly state that they don't think this to be the case. Somehow we seem to have watched two different conversations, the version you listened to completely missing the nuanced context in which all this was explored.

Thanks, Dana, for this wonderful nuanced discussion in which both speakers reject simplistic conspiracy theories. By the way, no need for anyone to feel sorry for "poor 'ol Lou" whose posts have occasionally been censored as not yet sufficiently nuanced.

To be clear, it was never your capacity for nuanced discussion that was the concern. And you make a good point, in that there was a time when this thread would have gone far more in the direction of Jim's take on it, involving quite a few others, with a much greater moderation challenge proportional to the greater number of participants gone off in that direction. Now it seems the time is ripe, and the forum is indeed generally ready for that more nuanced approach, and so I'm not feeling the same wariness to be so guarded.

I feel the authenticity and sincerity of your words. I'm pleased to be 'in process' as well on this.

[Lou Gold]

Returning to the beginning anti-vax section, which was my least favorite part, it's worthy to pass on the comments of one of my favorite science observers, Greg Nagle, who tracks the pandemic and reports from Vietnam:

Quicker to read Paul Kingsnorth.
And he is not vaxed which is interesting and is behind much of his opinions, But he is informed and someone can engage him in conversation>
But he is flat out wrong about this, and typical.
"Here we have a novel technology, never before used at scale or for this purpose, used to create a series of vaccines which have been rolled out to millions before their clinical trials are even complete"
the clinical trials were completed when they rolled them out in Dec 2020, His link on the uncompleted trials was from Sept 2020.
If he is sloppy on this, what else is he sloppy on?
and with hundreds of millions doses given out we know a lot more about them now,
Most of the vaccines used are not the mRNA type anyway, In the UK they probably used mostly the astrazaneca, and I did here in Vietnam, about 20% of the doses in ireland were not mRNA.
Most vaccines used across the world are Indian or Chinese, not Moderna or Pfizer, How about the Cuban vaccines? Are they part of big pharma? Or the russian and coming Vietnamese vaccines, There are now 25 different vaccines in use made in a variety of countries with many more coming soon.
https://www.nytimes.com/.../coronavirus-vaccine-tracker...
there are other errors and his credibility is.......bleak on scientific aspects
But aside from that, what exactly might he propose to do instead?
I see no informed insights here on how to actually deal medically with the reality of a very contagious virus.
https://paulkingsnorth.substack.com/.../the-vaccine...

I find myself more in agreement with charles Eisenstein although he bungles some of the science too.
He is mistaken about this, the vast number of people in hospitals with covid in the US were unvaccinated .
"They have woven a narrative in which the unvaccinated are a threat to society: spreading germs, filling up hospitals, breeding new variants. The science confirming these ideas is shaky at best, especially given how subject it is to financial and political influence."
More recently vaccinated people could be contagious but for less time, , 3-6 days versus 14-18 for unvaccinated,
But it is hard to parse out the science, and with omicron it is changing. And we know now that the resistance from the vaccines does not last long enough even after boosters,"
https://charleseisenstein.substack.com/

I'm adding Greg's comments here, NOT TO TAKE SIDES ON THE VAX, but to illustrate how damn difficult it is to ferret out the realities in the context of raging debate occurring even amongst very intelligent folks who may be wrong on the scientific particulars. Just imagine the challenges faced by a local public health official charged with a public safety mission and needing it explain to his constituency. It too often will simply boil down to "who do you trust?" and this is where things truly get murky and uncertain. This, too, seems as part of a new normal.

[Jim Cross]

What do the guys on the video think? They think all of these measures are just part of the conspiracy leading us on a mechanistic slide to technological utopia. Who's the "us" and who's the "them"?

Actually, they explicitly state that they don't think this to be the case. Somehow we seem to have watched two different conversations, the version you listened to completely missing the nuanced context in which all this was explored.

They do and they don't.

They say this:

It's a mechanistic technological control system that we are creating and we have been creating for a very long time and as charles said earlier the mechanisms for this were kind of all in place for a long time and when you say things like this this is when you get confused accused of being a conspiracy theorist um but as i said in the latest essay there's no there's no conspiracy involved you don't have to to imagine an evil kabal of people doing something secret or deliberately releasing viruses or whatever i mean this is simply the march towards uh mark zuckerberg's metaverse it's uh it's the march towards the world that silicon valley are very very openly trying to take us towards which is a world in which we are literally chipped digitally monitored controlled um that we move into a giant system of technological management on a global scale um and that this is the way in the view of people who want to do this that we can create a manageable equitable sustainable world

They say "you' don't have to imagine a conspiracy" then literally spout a conspiracy theory about everyone being chipped. One of the key Internet memes about the vaccine, of course, is that a vaccine puts a chip into you.

Who is supposed to reach out to who? Is it the "us" reaching to the "them" or vice versa?

There isn't really any possibility of conversation with somebody who is crazy.

[Jim Cross]

Returning to the beginning anti-vax section, which was my least favorite part, it's worthy to pass on the comments of one of my favorite science observers, Greg Nagle, who tracks the pandemic and reports from Vietnam:

Quicker to read Paul Kingsnorth.
And he is not vaxed which is interesting and is behind much of his opinions, But he is informed and someone can engage him in conversation>
But he is flat out wrong about this, and typical.
"Here we have a novel technology, never before used at scale or for this purpose, used to create a series of vaccines which have been rolled out to millions before their clinical trials are even complete"
the clinical trials were completed when they rolled them out in Dec 2020, His link on the uncompleted trials was from Sept 2020.
If he is sloppy on this, what else is he sloppy on?
and with hundreds of millions doses given out we know a lot more about them now,
Most of the vaccines used are not the mRNA type anyway, In the UK they probably used mostly the astrazaneca, and I did here in Vietnam, about 20% of the doses in ireland were not mRNA.
Most vaccines used across the world are Indian or Chinese, not Moderna or Pfizer, How about the Cuban vaccines? Are they part of big pharma? Or the russian and coming Vietnamese vaccines, There are now 25 different vaccines in use made in a variety of countries with many more coming soon.
https://www.nytimes.com/.../coronavirus-vaccine-tracker...
there are other errors and his credibility is.......bleak on scientific aspects
But aside from that, what exactly might he propose to do instead?
I see no informed insights here on how to actually deal medically with the reality of a very contagious virus.
https://paulkingsnorth.substack.com/.../the-vaccine...

I find myself more in agreement with charles Eisenstein although he bungles some of the science too.
He is mistaken about this, the vast number of people in hospitals with covid in the US were unvaccinated .
"They have woven a narrative in which the unvaccinated are a threat to society: spreading germs, filling up hospitals, breeding new variants. The science confirming these ideas is shaky at best, especially given how subject it is to financial and political influence."
More recently vaccinated people could be contagious but for less time, , 3-6 days versus 14-18 for unvaccinated,
But it is hard to parse out the science, and with omicron it is changing. And we know now that the resistance from the vaccines does not last long enough even after boosters,"
https://charleseisenstein.substack.com/

I'm adding Greg's comments here, NOT TO TAKE SIDES ON THE VAX, but to illustrate how damn difficult it is to ferret out the realities in the context of raging debate occurring even amongst very intelligent folks who may be wrong on the scientific particulars. Just imagine the challenges faced by a local public health official charged with a public safety mission and needing it explain to his constituency. It too often will simply boil down to "who do you trust?" and this is where things truly get murky and uncertain. This, too, seems as part of a new normal.

Lou,

Those are great quotes from Nagle that I agree with.

And it points out that the "facts" of Eisenstein and Kingsnorth are not facts. It is hard to have a discussion when one side doesn't know or won't accept the facts.

"But it is hard to parse out the science, and with omicron it is changing"

Exactly. Science can be slow and methodical. Experts are asked for recommendations and opinions when there isn't any evidence. So they try to answer based on past experience then, when they get some detail wrong, the anti-science folks jump on it. When evidence emerges that some of the recommendations made without evidence are wrong, then the anti-science folks are on it again. Soon there is massive distrust of experts among those who want to believe something different.

[Soul_of_Shu]

There isn't really any possibility of conversation with somebody who is crazy.

And that is the very credo of us-vs-them is it not? Each side pointing out that the other side is crazy, and can't be trusted.

They say "you' don't have to imagine a conspiracy" then literally spout a conspiracy theory about everyone being chipped. One of the key Internet memes about the vaccine, of course, is that a vaccine puts a chip into you.

No-one intended that there is some bad-guy conspiracy to ensure everyone being chipped, and Elon Musk is not considered part of such a 'conspiracy' with neuralink (no need to sneak it into a vaccine, they're already eagerly lining up on Wall Street, fists full of dollars), but actually just another brilliant myth-of-the-machine advocate, who is surely well-intentioned—how great to be able to turn on the smartphone with one's thoughts! But as always there is the huge potential for abuse of the technology, when your thoughts are now in the cyber-age database. Who needs self-inquiry anymore as a guide? The Machine will guide the way ... just like the Tower of Babel.

Anyway, I'm with CE, and while I don't find trepidation to be very helpful, one should be skeptical about any oh-so-comforting certainty about the ramifications of the myth of the machine as trusted guide and driver, or counter claims that it is on the road to dystopian hell, while in both cases the integral-mode ideation that will find the sanative balance takes a back seat.

[AshvinP]

There isn't really any possibility of conversation with somebody who is crazy.

And that is the very credo of us-vs-them is it not? Each side pointing out that the other side is crazy, and can't be trusted.

They say "you' don't have to imagine a conspiracy" then literally spout a conspiracy theory about everyone being chipped. One of the key Internet memes about the vaccine, of course, is that a vaccine puts a chip into you.

No-one intended that there is some bad-guy conspiracy to ensure everyone being chipped, and Elon Musk is not considered part of such a 'conspiracy' with neuralink (no need to sneak it into a vaccine, they're already eagerly lining up on Wall Street, fists full of dollars), but actually just another brilliant myth-of-the-machine advocate, who is surely well-intentioned—how great to be able to turn on the smartphone with one's thoughts! But as always there is the huge potential for abuse of the technology, when your thoughts are now in the cyber-age database. Who needs self-inquiry anymore as a guide? The Machine will guide the way ... just like the Tower of Babel.

Anyway, I'm with CE, and while I don't find trepidation to be very helpful, one should be skeptical about any oh-so-comforting certainty about the ramifications of the myth of the machine as trusted guide and driver, or counter claims that it is on the road to dystopian hell, while in both cases the integral-mode ideation that will find the sanative balance takes a back seat.

Yeah, Jim's quote doesn't mention anything about the chip coming via vaccine, but he read that into it anyway. I wonder if people even notice they are engaged in this projecting anymore... I suppose not, otherwise they likely wouldn't be doing it.

It is really frightening how saying we are moving towards digital monitoring is dismissed as a "conspiracy theory" when it has already happened, for all intents and purposes. It shows how little people are actually paying attention to what goes on around them.

[Jim Cross]

There isn't really any possibility of conversation with somebody who is crazy.

And that is the very credo of us-vs-them is it not? Each side pointing out that the other side is crazy, and can't be trusted.

They say "you' don't have to imagine a conspiracy" then literally spout a conspiracy theory about everyone being chipped. One of the key Internet memes about the vaccine, of course, is that a vaccine puts a chip into you.

No-one intended that there is some bad-guy conspiracy to ensure everyone being chipped, and Elon Musk is not considered part of such a 'conspiracy' with neuralink (no need to sneak it into a vaccine, they're already eagerly lining up on Wall Street, fists full of dollars), but actually just another brilliant myth-of-the-machine advocate, who is surely well-intentioned—how great to be able to turn on the smartphone with one's thoughts! But as always there is the huge potential for abuse of the technology, when your thoughts are now in the database. Who needs self-inquiry anymore as a guide? The Machine will guide the way ... just like the Tower of Babel.

Anyway, I'm with CE, and while I don't find trepidation to be very helpful, one should be skeptical about any oh-so-comforting certainty about the ramifications of the myth of the machine as trusted guide and driver, or counter claims that it is on the road to dystopian hell, while in both cases the integral-mode ideation that will find the sanative balance takes a back seat.

On "us-and-them" - I'm not seeing a lot of clear recommendations on moving beyond it in this "nuanced" discussion. Their conversation seems like insider "us" complaining about "them".

Probably every person promoting a conspiracy starts out saying: "I'm not trying to promote a conspiracy theory but..."

I think there are some perfectly valid discussions about digitalization, personal privacy, role of government, etc but why are we bringing the pandemic and vaccines into the discussion? They and most of their audience knows of the Internet meme about vaccines containing chips yet there are talking about everyone getting chipped while talking about public health measures and vaccines. Their "nuanced" argument seems really to a variant of the common conspiracy theories about COVID and the vaccines.

And as Nagle (or Lou) wrote there isn't a lot of alternatives to vaccines and health measures being discussed in their talk. It honestly sounds like their alternative is do nothing.

On the broader topic of the "machine" I'm trying to understand how we have gotten to the point where the mind-at-large and our unfolding spirituality has placed us in this position. Perhaps the mind-at-large is guiding us to the "machine". Perhaps we should surrender now. Maybe it's a Thinking Machine. If evolution has put us in this position, why wouldn't we simply accept it? Resistance is futile. Perhaps you have vastly misunderstood what the evolving Godhead was intending.

[Soul_of_Shu]

On "us-and-them" - I'm not seeing a lot of clear recommendations on moving beyond it in this "nuanced" discussion. Their conversation seems like insider "us" complaining about "them".

Once again, seems we listened to a different conversation, as perhaps we're both hearing what we expect to hear, while deaf the rest. And what I heard was we really need to stop doing that ... clearly a work in progress.

And as Nagle (or Lou) wrote there isn't a lot of alternatives to vaccines and health measures being discussed in their talk. It honestly sounds like their alternative is do nothing.

Nowhere in that trialogue did I hear anyone say that it would be better to do nothing, or that novel vaccines should not be one of the options, or that we'd somehow be better off without them—even if PK feels that he should be the one to decide what 'better off' is in his own case. Just that us-vs-them claims of "you're the crazy ones", with a mutually dismissive "why-even-bother" attitude preempting any nuanced approach to the discussion is not a good option.

On the broader topic of the "machine" I'm trying to understand how we have gotten to the point where the mind-at-large and our unfolding spirituality has placed us in this position. Perhaps the mind-at-large is guiding us to the "machine". Perhaps we should surrender now. Maybe it's a Thinking Machine. If evolution has put us in this position, why wouldn't we simply accept it? Resistance is futile. Perhaps you have vastly misunderstood what the evolving Godhead was intending.

Something to ponder, and get back to you about ... without de facto dismissing you as 'crazy.'

[Jim Cross]

On "us-and-them" - I'm not seeing a lot of clear recommendations on moving beyond it in this "nuanced" discussion. Their conversation seems like insider "us" complaining about "them".

Once again, seems we listened to a different conversation, as perhaps we're both hearing what we expect to hear, while deaf the rest. And what I heard was we really need to stop doing that ... clearly a work in progress.

And as Nagle (or Lou) wrote there isn't a lot of alternatives to vaccines and health measures being discussed in their talk. It honestly sounds like their alternative is do nothing.

Nowhere in that trialogue did I hear anyone say that it would be better to do nothing, or that novel vaccines should not be one of the options, or that we'd somehow be better off without them—even if PK feels that he should be the one to decide what 'better off' is in his own case. Just that us-vs-them claims of "you're the crazy ones", with a mutually dismissive "why-even-bother" attitude preempting any nuanced approach to the discussion is not a good option.

On the broader topic of the "machine" I'm trying to understand how we have gotten to the point where the mind-at-large and our unfolding spirituality has placed us in this position. Perhaps the mind-at-large is guiding us to the "machine". Perhaps we should surrender now. Maybe it's a Thinking Machine. If evolution has put us in this position, why wouldn't we simply accept it? Resistance is futile. Perhaps you have vastly misunderstood what the evolving Godhead was intending.

Something to ponder, and get back to you about ... without de facto dismissing you as 'crazy.'

Nowhere in that trialogue did I hear anyone say that it would be better to do nothing

Neither did they say what we should do,. Nor did I see any acknowledgement of any value to any public health measures. A nuanced discussion would be looking at different kinds of health measures and have discussion of pluses and minuses. Do we close schools even though children do usually become very ill?? How many days should people quarantine after exposure? Who shouldn't take the vaccines? How do we handle the immuno-compromised who may still be susceptible after vaccination? Where should masks be required? That is what a nuanced discussion would be like. It would acknowledge both sides of the arguments.

The mindset at work here is one that is reflexively anti-science, anti-modernity. There isn't any nuance whatsoever. The only understanding they are seeking is an understanding of their own and others anti-science position. It is also a mindset that wants to fit everything into the same narrative. The narrative is that the modern world is bad and getting worse.

Something to ponder, and get back to you about ... without de facto dismissing you as 'crazy.'

Maybe a different topic.