Bioethics expert Dr. Aaron Kheriaty says that competing political ideologies and liberal democracy are being replaced by a stealthily evolving technocratic biosecurity surveillance regime.
What might come next after the demise of democracy, or more specifically a constitutional republic? Seriously? There is some question about the outcome? Why it will inevitably be followed in short order by chaos and a totalitarian state run by mediocraties. That has been the history of civilization from time immemorial.
"And, as already noted, Kheriaty also says it must be understood that traditional political divisions over ideologies no longer matter." Must disagree. The Republican point of view on limited government and attempting to reign in government intrusiveness is a far better choice than the Democrats who are pushing full blown globalist/WEF/marxist ideologies. The distinction in the party is still important--whether you want to arrive at global government overnight vs in a hundred years.
Dr. Kheriaty may not have chosen his words right, but I know exactly what he means. The point is that the construction of this dystopia, currently taking place largely out of public view, will have a far greater effect on our society than anything currently being debated across the partisan divide.
I agree with you that those backing limited government are perhaps the one positive move we see to resist this. But Kheriaty concedes just this when he says that the debate will be "between those who will accept a technocratic biosecurity surveillance regime and those who will resist.”
Sadly, when the day comes to actually "vote" on implementation, there will be enough (so-called) Republicans in the YES column to bring it across the finish line. The voices of true freedom, although numerous, are by and large are not sitting in the halls of government.
True. I don't know when this interview was conducted, but it is curious that there was no discussion of the recent election as if it didn't matter. Certainly President Trump has already made a great number of appointments of freedom fighters to key posts and rolled the Totalitarian Doomsday Clock back a few minutes at least.
As Dr. Khaeriaty surely knows, the biggest problem has been that our federal courts have refused to allow standing for many who sought redress from overbearing state regulation in the Covid Era. Even the Supreme Court declined to find violations of Freedom Speech in the egregious censorship on social media directed by the federal government.
I blame Deep State control of John Roberts and other Supreme Court justices setting the tone from the top. We need a new Chief Judge and more true Conservative justices like Gorsuch, Alito and Thomas.
Why blame control of the justices when they don't need to be controlled? When they're already down with it and like the outcome, intend the outcome they need no external threat or manipulation. They need no Deep State to prevail upon them; they are the Deep State. Whatever that means these days. Point is, why blame fear when simple greed and ego is all it takes?
I am not sure if Supreme Court Justices have the same opportunity for graft that Congress Critters do, but my point is we need more solid Conservatives on the court. Whether the Deep State has something on Roberts, as many believe, or he just wants to be in with the In Crowd, he has been a disaster as Chief Judge.
He provided the crucial vote to pass Obamacare, refused to intervene in the stolen election of 2020, steered the court away from taking any stand on Totalitarian Covid rules and most recently allowed the Federal government to continue their censorship through coercion of Social Media.
I understand that's your point. I also am making the point that Roberts isn't being intimidated, coerced or trying to be in with the "in" crowd. That's too charitable. He's one of them, operates fully within his own volition. He *believes* in the agenda. A true believer in evil is far more dangerous than a simple grifter and opportunist. I don't think he deserves the charity. That's too sympathetic. I was even too charitable to suggest greed and ego plays a role.
We are going digital whether we like it or not. Most like it. You have to use your phone and a QR code in many restaurants. I used to watch YouTube videos on google, now you are forced to watch them on YouTube along with all the advertising. So, the question is not about living in a world where everything is controlled by AI, but how do we erect digital fences to protect our privacy and anonymity? Bitcoin is decentralized, and the banks and black rock are buying it in bulk, so they will have privacy. Most likely they will tether it to a currency that does not provide anonymity for the public, who become bound in a new form of slavery. Every worker will have their life force siphoned, and control will be exerted by digital penalization. The average person won't be able to own land, or afford a home, and their choice on how to use earnings will be restricted. So, we should be working on laws to prevent this, and AI to protect us, not exploit us, whilst still being able to operate in a digital landscape. Look already at how much the customer has to contribute to a business, where once it was the salesperson or customer service that did the work. In health clinics you have to do a lot of interaction through a portal with no human help. Self-checkouts in markets and banks have limited person to person help. AI customer service which is inferior to speaking with a human being is everywhere. I believe the companies of the future that do provide human customer service will have the edge, and people will be willing to pay more for it. Try finding a person in a big box store to help you find something, no wonder Amazon is so successful, it is extremely convenient, and there are people at the drop off to help.
What might come next after the demise of democracy, or more specifically a constitutional republic? Seriously? There is some question about the outcome? Why it will inevitably be followed in short order by chaos and a totalitarian state run by mediocraties. That has been the history of civilization from time immemorial.
Camps …always the camps
"And, as already noted, Kheriaty also says it must be understood that traditional political divisions over ideologies no longer matter." Must disagree. The Republican point of view on limited government and attempting to reign in government intrusiveness is a far better choice than the Democrats who are pushing full blown globalist/WEF/marxist ideologies. The distinction in the party is still important--whether you want to arrive at global government overnight vs in a hundred years.
Dr. Kheriaty may not have chosen his words right, but I know exactly what he means. The point is that the construction of this dystopia, currently taking place largely out of public view, will have a far greater effect on our society than anything currently being debated across the partisan divide.
I agree with you that those backing limited government are perhaps the one positive move we see to resist this. But Kheriaty concedes just this when he says that the debate will be "between those who will accept a technocratic biosecurity surveillance regime and those who will resist.”
Sadly, when the day comes to actually "vote" on implementation, there will be enough (so-called) Republicans in the YES column to bring it across the finish line. The voices of true freedom, although numerous, are by and large are not sitting in the halls of government.
It's a big club. And they're not in it.
True. I don't know when this interview was conducted, but it is curious that there was no discussion of the recent election as if it didn't matter. Certainly President Trump has already made a great number of appointments of freedom fighters to key posts and rolled the Totalitarian Doomsday Clock back a few minutes at least.
As Dr. Khaeriaty surely knows, the biggest problem has been that our federal courts have refused to allow standing for many who sought redress from overbearing state regulation in the Covid Era. Even the Supreme Court declined to find violations of Freedom Speech in the egregious censorship on social media directed by the federal government.
I blame Deep State control of John Roberts and other Supreme Court justices setting the tone from the top. We need a new Chief Judge and more true Conservative justices like Gorsuch, Alito and Thomas.
Why blame control of the justices when they don't need to be controlled? When they're already down with it and like the outcome, intend the outcome they need no external threat or manipulation. They need no Deep State to prevail upon them; they are the Deep State. Whatever that means these days. Point is, why blame fear when simple greed and ego is all it takes?
I am not sure if Supreme Court Justices have the same opportunity for graft that Congress Critters do, but my point is we need more solid Conservatives on the court. Whether the Deep State has something on Roberts, as many believe, or he just wants to be in with the In Crowd, he has been a disaster as Chief Judge.
He provided the crucial vote to pass Obamacare, refused to intervene in the stolen election of 2020, steered the court away from taking any stand on Totalitarian Covid rules and most recently allowed the Federal government to continue their censorship through coercion of Social Media.
This is not a Conservative!
I understand that's your point. I also am making the point that Roberts isn't being intimidated, coerced or trying to be in with the "in" crowd. That's too charitable. He's one of them, operates fully within his own volition. He *believes* in the agenda. A true believer in evil is far more dangerous than a simple grifter and opportunist. I don't think he deserves the charity. That's too sympathetic. I was even too charitable to suggest greed and ego plays a role.
AK needed on the Trump team!!!
Only one way to deal with a tyrant
Oh this is gold, because it is succinct and easy to share with those who are in the dark.
We are going digital whether we like it or not. Most like it. You have to use your phone and a QR code in many restaurants. I used to watch YouTube videos on google, now you are forced to watch them on YouTube along with all the advertising. So, the question is not about living in a world where everything is controlled by AI, but how do we erect digital fences to protect our privacy and anonymity? Bitcoin is decentralized, and the banks and black rock are buying it in bulk, so they will have privacy. Most likely they will tether it to a currency that does not provide anonymity for the public, who become bound in a new form of slavery. Every worker will have their life force siphoned, and control will be exerted by digital penalization. The average person won't be able to own land, or afford a home, and their choice on how to use earnings will be restricted. So, we should be working on laws to prevent this, and AI to protect us, not exploit us, whilst still being able to operate in a digital landscape. Look already at how much the customer has to contribute to a business, where once it was the salesperson or customer service that did the work. In health clinics you have to do a lot of interaction through a portal with no human help. Self-checkouts in markets and banks have limited person to person help. AI customer service which is inferior to speaking with a human being is everywhere. I believe the companies of the future that do provide human customer service will have the edge, and people will be willing to pay more for it. Try finding a person in a big box store to help you find something, no wonder Amazon is so successful, it is extremely convenient, and there are people at the drop off to help.