Truth incites anger.
FACT: citizens lost their jobs/businesses because the needs of the collective took priority over needs of individuals, even in areas with few cases. That's communism (collective>individual).
"Comply or we'll die!"
Deaths from CV<Deaths from collapsed economy https://twitter.com/catturd2/status/1254384032055463937

2) We'll never be able to prove a negative.
Unless we can run alternate realities & time travel to monitor each, we can't disprove: "We'd have had millions more die if we'd not shutdown".
Likely many more deaths, but more than from collapsed economy?
Can't prove either way.
But-

3) Something unproven, untested, and "guessed" at is given the weight of fact. No matter what one's emotional response to "Comply, or we DIE!", the truth is that no one knows how many lives were saved by shutting down the country. It is a phantom argument, much like...

4) when someone claims a person's "intent". We cannot prove or disprove the inner thoughts of another person; we can only infer based on actions.
We can infer that freedom of movement will cause many more deaths by a communicable disease, but we can't prove or disprove numbers.

5) So, when we must make big decisions that will impact millions of people, we have before us:

1. Cost of staying open (how many will die from the virus?)
2. Cost of shutting down (how many will die from a collapsed economy?)

Of the two, we have more cost data for scenario 2.

6) There is only phantom data for the cost of staying open, as no one has any experience with this particular virus and the "experts" are compromised. They have profit motives and ideological associations with the global agenda who outlines using a pandemic to force change.

7) However, there is much data to study the cost of a collapsed economy- percentages based on risks to public health from joblessness, for example. We can break things down into other risk categories as well:
- alcohol
- domestic abuse
- mental illness
- nutrition
- homelessness

8) We are to accept a phantom data set (unknown virus) supports higher risk than a relatively known data set (the dire affects on public health from a collapsed economy) is the greater risk, and therefore submit to the needs of "the collective" (society as a whole), knowing that

9) individuals will suffer.

Communist challenges are the opposite of how reality TV shows work. We don't get the easy ones first, and build up. We get the hard ones first, because we'd catch on quickly to the easy one and we'd not comply.

Here's the ethical challenge:

10) Hard challenge: do we fear the virus more than a collapsed economy?
With this challenge, people will shame us and say we'd kill "Grandma" out of greed.
Fear + Shame + Confusion (Unknown data to base decisions on, "experts" unreliable)
Because of this... we are divided.

11) Much of our division falls along the political divide, which is a tell for what the battle is mostly about.

Later, there will be "Easy" challenges, but by then, we are overtaken and it will no longer matter if people are aware that it is communism that governs us.

12) For example-
Imagine this permanent change... Essential workers are allowed to work. All others must choose to stay home & accept a basic income (low, but meets basic needs, assuming food/supplies are available), or change to an Essential job.
Non-essential jobs banned.

13) Global needs certain jobs, but not others. For the good of the collective, individuals must work the jobs that are needed. Dreams, vocations, callings, special talents- "God given" is not how careers are made. Government mandate is.
Most would say COMMUNISM!
Easy challenge

14) We're not given an Easy challenge first, as we'd be united in recognizing the tell tale "needs of the collective over the needs of the individual" as what it is:
communism.
We're given a difficult challenge (virus) meant to divide, make us uncertain, & even defend communism

15) The speed in which the "resist and obstruct" global-aligned coup-marchers imposed illegal mandates would indicate that they had orders to do exactly that. "Make them uncomfortable", exert control, roll out the spy drones (did they have those stashed in their basements?),

16) and use the crisis to push a wishlist of money-laundering embezzlement schemes, election rigging tools, and so much more.
All while grooming the populace for a permanent transformation into global communism. "No border, no wall, NO USA AT ALL", "by any means necessary".

17) How many deaths would be acceptable Collateral Damage for communists?
History can give us an idea.
Somewhere, there are balanced approaches to how to deal with an unknown, potentially fatal, highly-contagious, bio-weaponized, virus.
Was the approach taken balanced?

18) Of course not!
The approach taken was made devoid of any consideration of the cost of economic shutdown. It was propped up solely on phantom data (that could be right or wrong, impossible to prove either way) of how many people would be killed by the virus.
Now, we can...

19) agree that the extreme measure to save people from the virus was the right path, no matter how many MORE lives may be lost via economic collapse. We may even choose to ignore the ruination, grief, despair, anxiety, stress, broken marriages, domestic abuse, break in education-

20) and so much more- we may choose to ignore ALL the societal costs of economic collapse that will be felt for decades and by multiple generations, including those not yet born...
But we cannot make facts untrue, or "guesses" true.
Something is either true, or not.

21) The needs of the collective over the needs of the individual IS a trait of communism.
This is the style of governance we're living under right now. Fact.
Real public health & safety cost to economic collapse- people will die. Fact.
People will also die from the virus. Fact.

22) So, what we're divided about is whether or not communism was the only way to handle the virus.
The needs of the individuals were not prioritized, the needs of the collective were.
Will America continue to defend communism, when the collective's needs aren't so frightening?

23) Is it OK to mandate who is Essential, permanently?
If not, then it's not OK to do it temporarily.

"Temporary" grooms.
Opens the door.
Keeps the door open.

Fear is a mighty weapon and it can cause us to commit to extreme "solutions".
They were prepared with lockstep action

24) They lie to us continuously.

Trust God and yourself.
All others have conditional trust on a sliding scale, with those in power over us at the very bottom...
communists- no trust at all.

/end thread/