It only sort of makes sense viewed through the lens of Reaganism. I can explain --
To reiterate, under the political philosophy of Reaganism, the federal government is allowed *only* these three purposes: maintain a military, siphon money and power to rich people, and prevent, by any means necessary, effective opposition to Reaganism.
Reaganism as I've defined it pertains specifically to the federal government, but as a governing philosophy it applies to states, counties, cities -- all the way down. So, Republican governors operate according to the principles of Reaganism.
Under Reaganism, no government at any level has an obligation to protect the health & well-being of any individual. Not even the wealthy! Only their wealth has to be protected, not their persons.
This is pretty straightforward under regular (non-pandemic) conditions. Wealthier people have access to health care in a "free market" sense, while the poor die, and wealthier people generally think that's fine.
Health care under Reaganism is unevenly distributed and EXTREMELY expensive, with most of that money siphoning upwards to, for example, CEOs of health insurance behemoths. All fine, according to Reaganism.
Your purpose, as a serf under Reaganism, is to generate wealth that can be extracted. Economic activity is required for this to happen. So, Reaganism wants you to have a job, spend all your money, get saddled in debt... as long as the money keeps flowing upwards.
So under the pandemic, the very extremely super rich have gotten WAY richer, which you would think would satisfy the requirements of Reaganism... vox.com/recode/2020/7/…
But, one thing, if you're one of the many jobless people staying home, you're not doing your part to *generate* wealth for the wealthy. Also, something else --
Even though you and I might see very clearly that the end point of Reaganism is "five guys on the entire planet have literally all the money," I think there are a lot of lower-tier rich people who still think the goal is to put money in THEIR pockets.
You know, the kind of low-key rich people who always dominate your local Chamber of Commerce & inevitably vote Republican.
I think it's that level of rich person who is really pushing against the anti-pandemic restrictions. That guy who owns five steakhouses and a golf course.
From their perspective, anti-covid restrictions are wrong and bad because they diminish economic activity in order to protect people's health.
Under Reaganism, "protecting people's health" is not a good reason to do ANYTHING, let alone violate rule 2 of Reaganism.
So, with that as the conclusion, they argue backwards. The virus is a hoax, it isn't that bad, only people who aren't like you will suffer from it, we fixed the virus already, you should get to make an individual choice about personal level of risk, etc.
But it's all driven by the underlying philosophy that protecting the health of human beings is actually a bad and incorrect thing for government to do.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with McJulie, doing no-social-media January, really

McJulie, doing no-social-media January, really Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @mcjulie

Jul 23, 2023
This bubbled up in my feed again and I still think it’s fascinating in a meta way

Why does a certain kind of Christian think “hyper-feminization” in churches is a problem?

Why does he seem to imagine the solution lies somewhere in the direction of marketing?
The FIRST time I saw it in my feed, I wanted to make an obvious Simpsons-type joke: serve beer and put a sportsgame on, of course, why is that even a question?
But also, Mark Driscoll, the first person I’m aware of to popularize the theobro approach, was doing this specific thing, “trying to appeal to men” more than 10 years ago… is it working yet? Why or why not?
Read 51 tweets
Jul 4, 2023
Something just occurred to me, as we're dealing with aging parents family stuff, is that the evangelical Church is terrible for families.
One of the reasons my family isn't closer right now is because those of us who stopped believing in church ended up drawing away from the family, and the church sets everything up so it's kind of inevitable.
I don't observe a similar dynamic in my spouse's Catholic family, but it seems really common among white evangelical Protestants, for the kids who stop believing to pull away very strongly from the family as young adults.
Read 20 tweets
May 24, 2023
There are people in the replies acting like this is some kind of wacko fringe theory and I really don't understand it. Like... it's very basic market theory that companies charge the MOST they think they can get away with, right?
The only thing that ever held prices down was "nobody will buy this for that price" and also some kind of pressure to sell.
I mention "pressure to sell" because apparently real estate can just sit there, overpriced, for years on end, with nobody buying it.
Read 4 tweets
May 23, 2023
I'm an ex-evangelical who frequently critiques Christianity, and I hate what the Christian fascist movement is doing in places like Texas more than I can express in words.

But I would never call "religion" (broadly speaking) evil and usually push back on such sentiments. Why?
When I was in the process of what we currently call "deconstructing" (it was the 80s & 90s) I did a lot of research and hard thinking about religion itself -- where did it come from, why did it exist, what were the different kinds?
I still remember the "mind blown" sensation when I took my first comparative religion class and realized that other religions didn't necessarily work in the same fashion as Christianity at all --
Read 22 tweets
May 23, 2023
The plethora of inexplicable terfy comments below this is what told me it was A Thing and I looked for the origin point:
What the hell is wrong with anti trans bigots that they don't know how public restrooms OR women's bathing suits work?

These are very BASIC things, relatively unchanged since my childhood in the 1970s.
Read 5 tweets
May 23, 2023
Hey, yeah, wow, I grew up reading all that stuff too, but I noticed it was fiction
Science fiction did help me imagine potential futures in real life, I'm not going to deny that. But even the canonical classic "all time greats" of SF include plenty of dystopias, such as 1984, Brave New World, A Canticle for Liebowitz...
The whole idea of humanity as "spacefaring" depends not only on technology that doesn't even REMOTELY exist yet, it ALSO depends on the idea of what you might call a life-hospitable universe.
Read 11 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Don't want to be a Premium member but still want to support us?

Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal

Or Donate anonymously using crypto!

Ethereum

0xfe58350B80634f60Fa6Dc149a72b4DFbc17D341E copy

Bitcoin

3ATGMxNzCUFzxpMCHL5sWSt4DVtS8UqXpi copy

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us!

:(