Conspiracy Theory The Russell Brand thread
- Thread starter GoEaglesGoSGIO
- Start date
- Tagged users None
- Oct 21, 2011
- 1,896
- 7,516
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
A great video from Russell Brand about the WEF and social credit systems.
He also mentions that the NHS in the UK have a similar system to the myHealth app here in Australia that they automatically opted everyone into, that has admitted selling patient data to third parties. As far as I know in Australia the opt out period was extended indefinitely, so if you are wary of where such a system might be heading you can still opt out of it.
- Sep 3, 2019
- 17,293
- 50,140
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Most sense he made was in "Forgetting Sarah Marshall"
Lol another comedian who became a virus expert overnight and then at even more amazing speed, became an even bigger expert on geopolitics in the former USSR region.
How he crammed in those decades of study while doing stand up and scores of movies is amazing.
What other world issues is he a professor of? I guess we'll have to wait and see what sends the telegram groups into a frenzy next, to find out!
How he crammed in those decades of study while doing stand up and scores of movies is amazing.
What other world issues is he a professor of? I guess we'll have to wait and see what sends the telegram groups into a frenzy next, to find out!
Attachments
- Oct 12, 2017
- 9,310
- 28,549
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Some people don't like how popular Brand has become saying people should make up their own minds or people might have rights in his own humorous way and encouraging an open conversation while looking at and critiquing published reports.
- Oct 12, 2017
- 9,310
- 28,549
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
Vaccine efficiency aside - why has it been so hard to gain access to data about vaccines that we the public paid for?
Progress was made, but clearly not enough. The errors of the last pandemic are being repeated. Memories are short.
Today, despite the global rollout of covid-19 vaccines and treatments, the anonymised participant level data underlying the trials for these new products remain inaccessible to doctors, researchers, and the public—and are likely to remain that way for years to come.
This is morally indefensible for all trials, but especially for those involving major public health interventions.
Pfizer’s pivotal covid vaccine trial was funded by the company and designed, run, analysed, and authored by Pfizer employees. The company and the contract research organisations that carried out the trial hold all the data.
And Pfizer has indicated that it will not begin entertaining requests for trial data until May 2025, 24 months after the primary study completion date, which is listed on ClinicalTrials.gov as 15 May 2023.
The lack of access to data is consistent across vaccine manufacturers. Moderna says data “may be available … with publication of the final study results in 2022.” Datasets will be available “upon request and subject to review once the trial is complete,” which has an estimated primary completion date of 27 October 2022.
- May 8, 2006
- 5,038
- 4,559
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Brand is big on revealing ''the truth'' as long as it's not directed at him.
Like the truth of how does he make his money? Well, like everyone else on YouTube he's courting a certain audience, which spend a lot of time and gather a lot their information online. If you look how he's presenting his content and how it's change over the last couple of years, he can clearly see that the money (subscribers) can be made by turning up the dial on certain issues/talking points whilst avoiding others.
Increased talking points: Vaccine mandates, online censorship, criticism of mainstream media, ''Big tech'' criticism of ''the West'' and its institutions, criticism of Joe Biden, Bill Gates, Anthony Fauci, Jeff Bezos etc
Avoided talking points: criticism of Donald Trump, criticism Republicans and other right wing authoritarian govts or moevments, climate change, COVID death statistics etc
Guys like Rogan, Brand, Peterson etc - they are in competition with traditional media sources (who obviously present a very distorted narrative of news), so these guys are presenting a ''counter-narrative'' whilst encouraging that people ''make up their own minds'' they are obviously persuading their audience what to think.
The Brand/Rogan etc counter-narrative ignores inconvenient truths in the same way the mainstream media narrative does.
It's very rare these days that Brand will even criticise the Tories - even though they've destroyed his own country UK with Brexit, people in the tenements Brand probably grew up in can't afford food or heat. But these are not hot button issues which drive clicks and online traffic for his now, increasingly right wing audience.
Brand is first and foremost a performer trying to make a living. And performers have to tell engaging stories. You can see in his videos he's always doing to the plug-in ''come see me live, come see my show''
In fact, Brand reminds me of the protagonist in the Black Mirror episode Fifteen Million Merits. If you're not familiar with the story, here's the key takeaway at the end.
Bing passionately and angrily rants about the heartless, artificial system they live under. Hope declares the speech the most heartfelt in Hot Shot history and offers Bing his own regular show on one of his channels.
Bing is shown recording his show, where he rants while holding the shard to his neck. Despite criticising the system on his show, he now lives in much larger quarters, and the episode ends with him looking out from his room at what appears to be a vast green forest.
Last edited:
- Oct 21, 2011
- 1,896
- 7,516
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Why shouldn't he talk about these things? Mandates and censorship are at the very heart of authoritarianism, people are rightfully worried about it (and other things like police brutality, freezing bank accounts). It isn't being talked about in mainstream media, so people will find other avenues to engage with it. Of course the increased censorship will mean that some topics will become completely forbidden, and at that point you will only have the govt and their propaganda arms pushing their own agendas.
As for what he isn't talking about, Trump has been out of office for over a year now, why would anyone who doesn't suffer from trump derangement syndrome be interested in him. If you need your daily dose of trump outrage i'm sure there is no lack of sources for it. Covid deaths already have 24/7 blanket coverage, we had a span of a few months last year where there was zero cases in the state of vic, it still got talked about incessantly.
Why is there so much angst recently about people like Brand talking about what isn't being talked about elsewhere? Do you think that the govt and huge global corporations should decide what is acceptable to be spoken about? If so, why?
- Oct 12, 2017
- 9,310
- 28,549
- AFL Club
- Fremantle
- May 8, 2006
- 5,038
- 4,559
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
There's no reason why he shouldn't talk about things like vaccine mandates. I myself find them problematic. But its disingenuous to completely ignore the overriding reason for them (public health). If governments didn't enforce mandates there would inevitably more COVID-related sickness and death continuing to overwhelm the health system. Brand largely chooses to ignore this reality. He chooses instead to direct attention to boogie men he knows will provoke his audience - Biden, Fauci, Pfizer's profits etc, etc. Again - COVID vaccinations have been a largely imperfect and flawed response to a once-in-a-century pandemic. But it's misleading (deliberately so) to pretend that vaccines have saved many, many lives and insinuate that the mandates are part of some deep state conspiracy to rob people of their freedoms. It's a difficult choice government's the world over have had to make.
The reason Brand doesn't talk about Trump and Republican's is precisely because it's the endless topic of discussion of mainstream media (as you call it, ''Trump derangement syndrome'') and this is how he wants to differentiate himself. But if he's going to interpret Biden's every action as nefarious, is he not just presenting a similar bias - but just towards Biden instead? Again, it's important to give proper context to these things. Biden is a corporate Democrat who will largely protect the interests of corporate America. Trump & Republicans tried to end America's democracy by declaring a fair election invalid and then marshalled a deadly coup against the Capitol. Which of these is worse?
It's clear as day that Brand is cynically trying to court a Trump audience - I saw one video ''So...Trump was right about this!'' Interesting framing. He's doing exactly what he accuses the mainstream media of doing - pretending to represent both sides of an arguments whilst clearly framing arguments in a ways which appeal to his audience. Representing the likes Biden and Trudeau as authoritarian leaders but being very mild and not so casually brushing past criticism of actual authoritarians like Trump and Putin.
And if Brand is so concerned about people's liberties and freedoms, why doesn't he express outrage about Republicans seeking systemic efforts to strip people of voting rights? To prohibit women from having abortions?
I think we know the answer to that question - because he knows his audience (largely male and increasingly right wing) either doesn't care about these measures or more likely, supports them.
I do not think large corporations should control what is spoken about. Some of what Brand discusses is important. However, he's increasingly falling victim to audience capture. Just because corporations are a huge problem, doesn't make ignoring right-wing fascists an answer.
Last edited:
- Oct 21, 2011
- 1,896
- 7,516
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
The "public health" line doesn't hold up to scrutiny though. The vaccines were supposed to stop the spread of covid. It didn't do that. It was just a month or so ago that Dan andrews was on tv saying that if you got a booster shot you could not contract covid, only to then get covid. The vaccines have been a massive failure, yet they continue to be held up as some beacon of hope for humanity. There is a reason the govt wants to mandate booster shots every 3 months, and that is because any beneficial effect they give lasts no longer than that. Factor in that for the first 2 weeks after a dose you aren't protected either, and you have to start wondering what the point of them is. You seem to have the idea that people only start questioning things AFTER watching Brand or Rogan, but it is a case of people being attracted to the few people who talk about what they already know, vaccine mandates are BS and they serve no purpose. It should have been obvious when the politicians exempted themselves from the mandates, as well as all the other restrictions they placed on regular citizens that the mandates/restrictions were BS. If covid were as bad as it was made out to be, there would be no question that everyone would follow these directions.
Once again with trump. I don't care about him. Enough has been reported on him over the last 4 years to last a lifetime. Nothing he did escaped scrutiny. Brand talks about the issues that the mainstream media (free to air tv stations and radio, and FOX and CNN in america) will not address. I don't watch all his videos so can't comment on Biden, but Trudeau froze the bank accounts of people who had donated money to the truck convoy. If canada is a free democratic country then its citizens should be able to peacably protest/spend their money as they will. It is fact a dictatorship now, peaceful protest is only allowed at the discretion of the govt. You may not spend your money how you want, only on govt approved activities. None of this rates a mention in the media. Anyone who values freedom and democracy should be outraged that it has happened. It is no wonder Brand is becoming increasingly popular, everywhere you turn on the internet all you get is people defending the atrocious things that happen, depending on how they are presented by the mainstream media. If trump froze peoples bank accounts for protesting against him and his policies you would be outraged. Why doesn't it happen when Trudeau does it?
You are just spouting the talking points that increasingly get pushed in the media. Trump didn't seek to strip voting rights from anyone, this was simply made up. Abortion is a touchy subject, I am against a ban on it. It is interesting that you bring it up though, since the mandates hold a similar position of "my body my choice". The rest of your argument is the same sort of crap that is pushed everywhere, that anyone against vaccine mandates is a fascist, or has been groomed by some sort of online fascist network which is using opposition to vaccines to recruit people into their beliefs. Fascists and nazis simply don't exist in the numbers you seem to think they do. And to accuse Brand of jumping onto the fascist bandwagon to increase his subscribers on youtube is deluded. You mentioned Jordan Peterson earlier, he has also been accused of the same thing. This label of "right wing fascist" is being increasingly used to discredit discussion about important subjects, like vaccine mandates and the increasing authoritarianism we see in countries all over the world. It isn't as if you could describe fascism as being in favour of personal freedom, so why do people who advocate for it get called a fascist, or a tool of fascists?
- May 8, 2006
- 5,038
- 4,559
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
The vaccines were not primarily to ''stop the spread of COVID'' it was to reduce the impact of severe illness and death in the community and yes it has achieved that. Unvaccinated people overall (particularly in the older age bracket) are 10-15x more like to die from COVID than vaccinated. The ''public health line'' absolutely holds up and the data supports it. Mutations of the virus have reduced the vaccines ability to stop transmission. The vaccines are not perfect but they are very good and far, far better than nothing or whatever quack home treatments guys like Rogan peddle.
Given that the vaccines has not proven to reduce transmission much at all, I agree in hindsight the mandates were pointless. But they still had the effect of ensuring Australia had a very high vaccination rate, which means we'll much lower per capita death rate from COVID now and going forward. It's a difficult trade-off for people's personal liberties, but given that the data shows the vaccines work with very minimal side-effects - I contend that public health should override personal liberty in a public health emergency.
I largely agree that Trudeau's actions seem like an overreach and vaccine protestors have been conflated as all being security threats when there definitely is a argument to be had about mandates. The mainstream media has definitely made anti-vaxxers to be easy whipping boys and whilst I personally approve of the vaccines I know the shaming of those who don't only has a deleterious affect. But Canada is not a dictatorship based on this one incident of overreach. Russia is a dictatorship. And at no stage in the next 20 years or longer will you find Canada trying to annex Alaska. Or would Trudeau not accept the results of an election he lost and incite a mob trying and kill his enemies. I understand you're ''over Trump'' but put pretty much anything in the context of what he did i.e. trying to overthrow an elected government and that will put some of Brand's concerns a bit lower in the food chain.
Republicans (of which Trump is their leader and presumptive nomineee) have historically sought to strip voting rights from particularly African Americans and there is a concerted effort in Republican legislatures to enact this prior to he upcoming elections. Of course I'm not making this up. You're just completely unaware of it.
Abortion is interesting re the ''my body my choice'' and the same principle applied to the mandates (which Ive already said I have issues with for this reason). The difference is whether you (as I do) acknowledge the COVID is a pandemic that has already killed between 6-20 million people and would have killed many more if not for the vaccines. Even if the vaccines don't prevent transmission, governments should be aiming to prevent as much death and illness from a known virus as much as possible - hence one argument for the mandates. There is no public health argument whatsoever for outlawing abortion. That's pure exertion of power and control over women to make decisions on their behalf. If the Brand's and Rogan's are real about their stance of the government not interfering in people's medical decisions they would discuss repealing of abortion rights much more often (as opposed to never - and we know why) - it's because a) it doesn't personally affect them and b) even if they were against it, voicing such an opinion would result in them losing a huge swathe of their audience - (and after all its all about their $$, not people's freedoms) because ultimately these are performers giving an audience more of want they want to hear. Not actual discussion and context.
Lastly, I didn't say Brand/Peterson are fascists, I said that they conveniently overlook fascists like Trump/Republicans while calling things like vaccine mandates fascistic.
Governments and corporations all over the world are constantly encroaching on people's personal freedoms, mainly through collection of their data. There will never been any stopping this as data has become to valuable and the corporations and government who own it, too powerful. The COVID vaccine mandates are incursion on personal freedom, but it hasn't been concocted purely for the purpose of exerting power. It was mandated for public health purposes to a) reduce the number of people in the community that will die or develop significant illness from COVID and b) to reduce transmission of COVID (which became redundant due to the rapid number of variants). I personally am against the mandates because the vaccines don't reduce transmission. But I can understand the rationale of governments imposing the mandates at the time.
you seem to think that because mainstream media present a distorted/biased framing of the news that it should be disregarded completely. All media organisations have distortions and biases baked into their coverage and its important to be aware of that. By the same token, you should acknowledge Russell Brand's increasingly distorted and biased framing. He is (as you say) presenting things the mainstream news won't cover. And some of that information is useful to know. But that doesn't mean he isn't over-correcting and establishing a counter-narrative to the mainstream narrative, rather than actually really analysing the pros and cons of the issues he discusses. He's performing, just like CNN, Fox etc.
Last edited:
- Oct 21, 2011
- 1,896
- 7,516
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
All your points above are what has been presented in the media. You acknowledge they are performers, they have massive advertising revenue at stake as well as the personal agendas of the owners. They also have the backing of world govts. Russell Brand is just one person who spruiks his comedy shows at the end of his videos.
I don't think he is over correcting at all, just presenting items of interest, such as the WEF bragging that they've penetrated the Canadian govt and have half of them in their thrall. I don't expect Trudeau will hold a press conference to announce that he is pushing the WEF agenda, as Klaus Schwab has claimed. You admit he puts out useful information but then claim it is just a counter narrative with no substance. I think the world would be a much better place if we had an honest media, but that just isn't going to happen. Calling anyone who goes against the mainstream a grifter, as you have done in a very roundabout way with Brand, is just to discredit anything they say. You call him a hypocrite, but all we get is hypocrisy in the mainstream media, they will push whatever narrative is beneficial to them and the interests that fund them, to the tune of billions of dollars a year. You only have to look at the way the BLM protests and lockdown protests have been handled in the media in australia. One group had the police on their knees, the other group had their doors kicked in for posting on facebook.
- May 8, 2006
- 5,038
- 4,559
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Of course my points are what is being presented in the media, a wide range of media. You're points are what is being presented in what I would suggest is a narrow range of alternative news sites such as Russell Brand. You are being naive to think the same commercial incentives that distort the mainstream media agenda, do not also distort the agenda of celebrity or independent online content creators.
I did not say his counter narrative had ''no substance'' - you're trying to create straw man arguments to say I'm contradicting myself. I said some of what Brand presents has substance, just like some of what is reported in various mainstream media outlets (to varying degrees) has substance, but they all have an agenda - mainly financial - to emphasise what they think their audience wants to hear and carefully avoid any context which might cast doubt on whatever strident positions they take. I've already explained to you how Brand is doing this. You called Canada a dictatorship, which it is clearly not. Australia is not a dictatorship, even though I have serious problems with its governance. But if you were to watch Brand's video's on both countries COVID responses, he's leading people to believe that they are. He's ignoring all context as to why these measures are being put in place and sadly, he doesn't even seem curious to explore it. One of Brand's good points I thought until recently was his ability to listen and engage in discussion. Now he just preaches from a soapbox like nearly everyone else, mainly I assume because its better bang for his buck.
- Oct 21, 2011
- 1,896
- 7,516
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
yes you think he's a grifter, it's a common slur on bigfooty. Pharma companies spend billions on advertising every year, why should I trust that the places they spend that money will remain impartial? We are at the point where pfizer documents have been released showing they knew about adverse effects (which have been censored all over the internet) and anyone who talks about it is called a grifter or some other smear is applied to them. You acknowledge the financial gain that mainstream media recieves yet follow their narrative without fail whilst rubbishing anyone who speaks against it.
- May 8, 2006
- 5,038
- 4,559
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
Once again, more straw man arguments. I didn't say grifter. I said financially incentivised by online algorithms to produce content which will increase his audience/viewership.
I acknowledge that almost all news organisations are incentivised by commercial gain. I don't follow their ''narrative without fail''. In fact, I barely watch mainstream media at all because it is run primarily for commercial interests.
I get most of my news from various independent media sources, some of which I donate to on Patreon. That is the more transparent way of delivering news because you are not beholden to advertisers, which people like Brand are, and all commercial interests will distort and skew presentation of news.
- Oct 21, 2011
- 1,896
- 7,516
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
That is the definition of a grifter.
You are following the narrative though. All your points above are what is pushed in the media, even the whole "vaccines were never meant to stop the spread".
How is Brand beholden to an advertiser? He just promotes his live shows, didn't realise he had a sponsor. And wherever you are getting your news from, how do you know that they aren't tailoring how they report on issues to maximise their patreon donations?
- May 8, 2006
- 5,038
- 4,559
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
No it isn't. You're just choosing that word because don't like my criticisms of him, and want to project that I'm dismissively slandering him, but I've gone to great length providing my reasons.
Firstly, You seem to be a bit confused by what ''the media'' is, and think you're somehow pure and uncontaminated in not receiving information from the media. The media is can be any intermediary who is broadcasting information. Unless you are are witnessing the things you talking about first-hand, you receiving the information through some form of media (whether mainstream, alternative or independent).
When you say ''All your points above are what is pushed in the media, even the whole "vaccines were never meant to stop the spread" this is a nonsense argument.
Which media in particular are you referring to? Keeping in mind that I don't really get my news from mainstream media - but more reliable sources.
The argument for the mandates was largely twofold (for anyone who actually tries to understand vaccines), protect yourself (still valid IMO) and protect others (transmissibility - not longer valid IMO). Various media (which you obviously consume) have latched on to the ''well you can still catch COVID when you're vaxxed therefore the vaccines are pointless and don't work''. This is wrong because it incorrectly assumes the whole point of the COVID vaccines is to stop transmission completely, which was never, ever promised by any pharmaceutical company or government. And besides, the vaccines still offer the recipient great protection against severe illness and death.
Brand collects advertising revenue through his videos like most other public figures who broadcast on YouTube. That's perfectly fine. But ultimately he's going to be leveraging audience engagement and data to drive future content and increase subscribers. At no point in the foreseeable future will be start bringing scientists on and start going through the data about vaccine efficacy and COVID, because that does not fit into his counter-narrative and his business model to drive up subscriptions to his channel. Eventually the lists of subjects he discusses will because confined to the few issues which are driving the most engagement, but doesn't much mean he's presenting unvarnished truth about those issues. Just sufficiently whipping up viewer hysteria about them.
Of course Patreon could be abused in this way, for my donations it really is about maintaining the integrity of medium, so those media providers don't have to rely on advertiser dollars, which in turn means integrity becomes compromised - becomes more about short-form gratification, click-baity titles, getting engagement at any cost.
Last edited:
- Oct 21, 2011
- 1,896
- 7,516
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Your criticisms of Brand are what is called being a grifter. If you won't accept that then don't mention it again.
As for what mainstream media is, it is newspapers, radio, TV. Call it legacy media if you want. A regular person cannot engage an audience via them because they have no access to them. One of the great things about youtube is you can probably find any sort of content you want, because anybody can upload a video. The fact you thought that stopping transmission was never what the vaccines were about shows why regular people uploading videos is so important.
LOL, we have had the US president claim you can't get covid if you're vaccinated, as well as the premier of Vic claiming if you get the booster shot you can't get covid (and then promptly getting covid himself). It was literally the selling point, the 95% efficacy claimed by the pharma companies seeking emergency approval.
As for what mainstream media is, it is newspapers, radio, TV. Call it legacy media if you want. A regular person cannot engage an audience via them because they have no access to them. One of the great things about youtube is you can probably find any sort of content you want, because anybody can upload a video. The fact you thought that stopping transmission was never what the vaccines were about shows why regular people uploading videos is so important.
- May 8, 2006
- 5,038
- 4,559
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
I know what you're referring to regarding Biden, where in the same town hall he corrected himself and said that vaccinated people are less likely to catch the virus than unvaccinated people and, if they do catch it, are less likely to get sick, which aligns the the CDC advice on vaccinations. So he misspoke and then corrected himself.
When did Andrews say if you get the booster shot you cant catch COVID?
Once again another straw man argument - I didn't say I thought ''stopping transmission was never what the vaccines were about'' - it was certain part of the intention, but the main intention was reduce widespread death and illness (compared to before the vaccine was available) which in countries now widely vaccinated and out of lockdown, it has achieved. You know this and so does Russell Brand. And it you don't, just look at the numbers.
I stand by my criticisms of Brand. I don't think he's a grifter yet but he's well on his way to becoming one. It's one thing for the Brand's of the world to ''raise questions'' can call places like Canada ''dictatorships'', entirely another to propose what the actual solutions should be in balance public health concerns during a pandemic.
You think you're not consuming mainstream media but you're actually consuming for more of it than I am, through Brand outrage of ''how mainstream media is corrupt and only responds to commercial interests'' - we get it an that's true - there's nothing groundbreaking there. Mainstream media distorts facts to suit their agenda which people like Brand and Rogan zero in and to present themselves as paragons of truth. But they're only presenting a a curated and increasingly distorted (I would argue) snapshot of the news and issues themselves.
- Oct 21, 2011
- 1,896
- 7,516
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Andrews said it at a press conference sometime this year.
I don't agree that the vaccines have been anything other than a failure, the fact you need a booster every 3 months should show you that. I also don't believe that covid is as dangerous as you make out. You seem to think covid deaths have been underreported, yet murder victims get counted in the official covid death count.
And you consume mainstream media without realising it, all your takes in your posts in this thread are the approved narrative. Wherever you get your information is just repeating what you would hear on tv or radio.
I don't agree that the vaccines have been anything other than a failure, the fact you need a booster every 3 months should show you that. I also don't believe that covid is as dangerous as you make out. You seem to think covid deaths have been underreported, yet murder victims get counted in the official covid death count.
And you consume mainstream media without realising it, all your takes in your posts in this thread are the approved narrative. Wherever you get your information is just repeating what you would hear on tv or radio.
- Oct 21, 2011
- 1,896
- 7,516
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
Here you go
- Oct 21, 2011
- 1,896
- 7,516
- AFL Club
- Collingwood
His latest video is about the mainstream media, big tech and how it will effect independent content creators.
When it comes to holding peoples lives over their heads and restricting access to the system, coercing and pushing a vaccine (that doesnt stop you getting it), im personally gonna err on the side of bodily autonomy and freedom of choice, like alot of others.
Anyway... The collapse or winding down appears iminent. An unsolveable combination of some/all of; over consumption, resource and energy scarcity, food shortages, conflict, nuclear winter, overpopulation, biosphere degradation and runaway climate change.
We all saw what happened with our peers and their toilet paper. Plus most of our peers didnt want to have a choice or want a choice for anyone else and because of that they arent safe to be around.
Anyway... The collapse or winding down appears iminent. An unsolveable combination of some/all of; over consumption, resource and energy scarcity, food shortages, conflict, nuclear winter, overpopulation, biosphere degradation and runaway climate change.
We all saw what happened with our peers and their toilet paper. Plus most of our peers didnt want to have a choice or want a choice for anyone else and because of that they arent safe to be around.
