The last 18 months have split populations along personality traits.
People higher in neuroticism & agreeableness favour lockdowns, mask mandates & mass vaccination.
People lower in neuroticism & agreeableness do not.
Also explains why it's largely split along political lines.
It has little to do with IQ, 'following science', or 'wanting to kill grandma'.
It reveals how different personality types respond to perceived threats.
Same pattern in every country...
It's why you can predict other traits off something as simple as attitude towards masks.
Agreeable people tend to 'go along to get along' and are less questioning of authority.
Disagreeable people are the opposite.
Neurotic people are more anxious and prone to fear and worry.
Low neuroticism people are the opposite.
It all makes sense through this lens.
This is also why both 'sides' piss each other off.
Side A views the other as selfish, uncaring & reckless. Unwilling to sacrifice personal autonomy for 'the greater good'.
Side B views the other as sheepish, cowardly, and naively compliant. Willing to sacrifice our freedom.
Understanding personality models helps you to understand the world better.
So if you're wearing a mask outside whilst fully vaccinated, I still think you're a weirdo. But I technically understand you... And support your right to be weird. 😂
Already seeing the 'this is an oversimplification!' comments.
Yes. Everything on Twitter is an oversimplification guys. You'll adapt. 😄
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
I just want to remind everyone that if you'd all said 'no' to the lockdowns and mask mandates (like I suggested over a year ago), then all of this nonsense would have ended by last summer.
And no, everybody wouldn't have died...
The totalitarian litmus test was failed.
And virtually nobody wants to acknowledge those of us who warned EARLY about how this would inevitably lead to rolling lockdowns, incoherent restrictions, and the normalisation of governmental overreach.
People always like learning the hard way.
Wish I'd been wrong.
Now, we have politicians, media pundits, and public 'health experts' all over the world who are drunk off their own power and don't want to relinquish it. They love the control. And they've become richer in many cases.
It is concerning that providing FACTS that could potentially discourage someone from taking the rona jab, is considered 'anti-vax' or 'spreading misinformation'...
Why is informed consent being actively discouraged?
This makes me even more skeptical about the situation.
Before taking any medical treatment: from vaccines, to pills, to surgeries, the potential patient should be as informed as possible about the potential benefits and potential risks.
Short and long term. Objectively.
This is basic ethics and should not be discouraged.
Even more peculiar is hiring influencers, celebrities, etc. to promote a medical product, with NO MENTION whatsoever of potential adverse effects, despite there being so many.
I personally believe this is unethical and reckless.