Friday, February 28, 2020

What to do right before the end of the world

The apocalyptic mood at many places has been predicted in many science-fiction movies. My most favorite one is Sexmission (Poland 1983). (Cheeky) Max and (shy) Albert volunteer in a hibernation experiment by Prof Kuppelweiser in 1991. Instead of 1994, they are woken up in 2042 in a society led by the League of Women. Kupperweiser has also invented a special bomb that has destroyed the male genes.

Kuppelweiser must have worked for the Wu-Chan Institute of Virology because, as Parravicini pointed out, Covid-19 may damage kidneys and testicles. The feminist ideology rules in that strange society (but much more relaxed than the SJWs today!) that lives, as we learn soon, under the ground. The ladies are told that the Earth's surface is uninhabitable which is a sophisticated lie designed by Her Excellency (who ultimately turns out to be the sole male survivor) to control the women more easily – that theme was a successful prediction of the global warming hysteria.



Two women's institutions argue whether Max and Albert should be destroyed or just castrated. The men want to live in freedom at least for two weeks when the air in their suits will be enough – a great theme that freedom is really important for men – and Lamia, a blonde open-minded and horny researcher, ultimately helps them and becomes a cornerstone of the reconstruction of the old orders. Aside from the dictatorship of feminism, the movie has predicted the government's would-be scientific fabrication of evidence for environmental catastrophes.



These guys chose freedom – which ultimately lasted much more than two weeks because the Earth's surface was perfectly inhabitable, despite the propaganda. Max lived with Lamia and Albert picked a former apparatchik who has seen the truth. If you knew or thought that the end is near, what would you do? In some other science-fiction movies, people learn that their death is near and they really enjoy the last period of their life and they try to arrange things so that they're left with no money at the end etc.

That's what you could do as well – if you believe that the life will really be miserable because of natural causes. In principle, the panic buying in the supermarkets could accelerate at least parts of the economy. I am really terrified by the people who say "I don't support the hysteria but I have filled my basement with food, masks, cleaners, and other things". If everyone did it, the shortages would be omnipresent. Why do such people – softcore or hardcore preppers – seem unaware of the obvious fact that what they are doing makes them some of the most hysterical people on Earth? This conclusion boils down to a childishly simple mathematical argument, doesn't it?

Does it make sense to sell stocks? Most conceptually, a stock price equals the mean value of the discounted after-tax sum of dividends over the future. Well, if the future is going to be short (or if the post-pandemics profits will be much lower), not too many dividends will be paid before the world ends and indeed, the price of stocks could go down. But is that a complete argument? Not really. The identity I mentioned (stock price is the sum of dividends) depends on the assumption that after the expected end of the company, there will be some lasting equilibrium. You need it to thermalize the money from different sources.

But if there is a looming end of the world, such an equilibrium doesn't exist in the infinite future (and you can't compare the profits required from stocks and bonds, among other things). More seriously, you really don't care what assets you're left with at the very end. Instead, you probably need to return to the maximization of some overall utility function of your life which could mean "live as much as you can" and die when you spend everything. Shouldn't people try to be more cooperative before the very end, like e.g. in Mars Attacks?

My worst expectations were surpassed again when I saw how the anti-Trump pundits in the media and social networks (plus some people whom I considered somewhat close) were (and probably still are) literally excited by the crash that has already taken place and by the possibility that the stock market crashes even more severely and perhaps the whole capitalist society collapses soon. The survey in which the New Hampshire Democrats said that they mostly preferred the eradication of mankind by the extraterrestrial invasion over the Trump reelection is clearly true. I just can't understand this behavior and "system of desires". Whoever wants such things is clearly and unquestionably evil, isn't she or he? And it wasn't just Trump haters where I observed this asocial value system.

Trump wants to make the world and America great and all Americans should be happy (and he has done a lot in this direction); his haters want misery and death for many people or everyone as long as it helps them with their obsession to remove the president. They are pure evil. The people who short the market now are clearly evil, too. They are clearly manipulating the prices and increasing the risk of the systemic collapse that may arrive because of a self-fulfilling prophesy. None of these people really feels associated with the things that have been built or invented on this planet, with the things that work and serve the humans. They are not a part of the "constructive mankind". Whatever is your political affiliation, if you feel to be a part of the people who have "built quite some impressive things on this planet" before it all collapsed, you just cannot be enthusiastic about the collapse of the very foundations of the capitalist economy. For those of us who feel a part of the "constructive clique", the collapse is a collapse of a part of our creation. We have indirectly contributed to the assets by terms with the positive sign. Or at least we think in this way.

By being happy about the general decline, those evil people pretty much openly declare that they have only made contributions with the negative sign – and that they basically hate those whose sign is positive. They have considered the world, mankind, companies, or the economy as an enemy of a sort, something that they at most sucked blood of. That's a necessary condition for them to celebrate the decline.

The hysteria mostly exists in the media but lots of people believe the stuff in the media – they are mindless sheep – and are hysterical, too. Panic selling of stocks and panic buying of some products in the shops are manifestations of that. But there are other places. Near the Chinese border in the Far East, the Russian city of Khabarovsk doesn't show any signs of hysteria (even though it shows empty hotels because the Chinese tourists cannot come).

Some things about Russians may be unlikable but this is so likable. They're so calm. They know that Russia is a huge country and only 2 infections have been detected, both of them were Chinese nationals. So they find the mandatory masks useless. The Chinese virus threat may be close but they just don't care. Vodka may kill them just like the virus. ;-) I think that they effectively think as the U.S. grandma on Twitter who said that she didn't care about the virus, she has already survived many, and if the Lord tells her it's her time, she will simply go. That's charming. Similarly, a much younger and hotter @MarieVandyyy wrote:
The hysteria is wild.

Maybe I’m the only one, but I’ve made peace that if I get coronavirus and die, maybe that’s the way it was always meant to be.

Not going to stop living my life or even worry about it.
How do you feel, obnoxious snowflakes, that someone simply is a higher-category human than you are?

One should do all the straightforward enough things to prevent the propagation of a disease if one is around. But one shouldn't go intensely or insanely beyond that. If Nature really wants to change the effective temporary laws of Hers (=Nature) on Earth, She will and it's foolish for us to prevent Her from doing so or to pretend that we stand above Her. It's dumb to pretend that politicians should or can deny the laws of Nature. One shouldn't try to become extremely hostile and egotistic, either, even though it's clearly an instinct for people to be reduced to animals trying to save themselves when the risks become real. But if you really assumed that the end is near, does it really make sense to be obsessive about the things (and some extra safety) that you receive in the last period? Does it really matter whether you will live for 3 more months or 4? I think that many more people should be wiser and leave a better impression about themselves that will be stuck near the end-of-the-world brane for the eternity.

But there is an obvious reason why people should try not to be nasty egotist animals now. And the reason is the "risk" – an extremely huge one, although the people brainwashed by the propaganda love to deny that it is a huge "risk" – that the disease will basically be a dud, like so many diseases before Covid-19. But these intense times are still an apparent "period of a crisis" in which characters are shown more explicitly than in the boring business-as-usual. And many people will remember how others behaved.

The New York Times published Let us call it the Trumpvirus by a lady named Gail Collins. The subtitle says "If you're feeling awful, you know who to blame". I just find it absolutely incredible that the newspapers that I used to consider pretty professional publishes this kind of unbelievably malicious yet stupid garbage. Blaming Trump for the virus is totally insane (unless there is some totally special conspiracy that is supported by no evidence whatsoever). It is a Chinese virus and Trump is just a leader of one of the large countries that managed to keep the number of infections at "dozens or a hundred" and the number of fatalities at zero. By many policies that were viciously attacked by the Democrats similar to Collins just a month ago (like the cancellation of the flights between America and China).

How could his record be better than zero fatalities? Minus pi fatalities? What does this Schumer say about the unpreparedness? How could have Trump shown his preparation more than he did? Schumer might already be shooting the patients dead, like his comrade Kim Jong Un, but Trump has a more humane approach to everything.

Returning to the New York Times hateful inkspiller, why would you blame Trump if you're feeling awful? Almost everyone who feels awful in the relation to the virus today feels awful because he's been fed by tons of fear, superstitions, cherry-picked and dramatized semi-facts, misinterpretations, distortions, and vitriol by the overwhelmingly left-wing media. It's very clear whom you should blame if you're feeling awful and it's not Trump. Trump is fudging obviously a good guy here. To organize medieval-style witch hunts against Trump by illogically associating him with this virus is just completely shocking.

We thought that we were living in a 21st century society that differs from the medieval one. But these people are just like the dishonest medieval bigots. Just like in the 17th century (OK, this is technically modern era) plague episode, some Italians are accusing others of spreading the virus in ointments. The accused people are called "untore" and that appears in the Italian idiom "Dagli! All’untore!" that survived up to the present. We're back there. A secretive South Korean church is accused of the same things although I am less certain it's untrue in that case, especially because the church is secretive even from my perspective. ;-)



Americans who don't remember plague in Italy should simply re-watch the video about the Salem Witch Trials – we have been to the museums there years ago. What can you learn from the video? The video even teaches us how much time it will take for almost everyone to recognize that the Democrats were standing on the wrong side of the history.

But you just shouldn't invent accusations that don't have a solid enough basis. It's evil. It's immoral to turn some random people into villains who are destined to be treated terribly by a mob. The virus is most likely natural and even if it were man-made and/or leaked by a mistake or a bad intent, (it changes some truth about the history and original sin but) it doesn't really change almost anything about the right ways to react to the propagation of the virus. Why does this mentality seem so widespread now? Why is it especially widespread in the U.S. Democratic Party that is supposed to produce a viable alternative to Donald Trump? At least some Sanders folks rejected the requests to attack Trump in the relationship with the virus. But so many others are doing just that. It's the most obviously fraudulent "argument" against Trump ever. Don't they understand that every fair person may see that they're nasty pests? And they should be treated as nasty pests. They are much more dangerous for our civilization than a coronavirus.

More generally, the amount of fanatically presented negative stories in the media that were supposed to be "against Trump" was just astronomical in recent years. Russia collusion hoax, impeachment over a hysterically presented kosher call to Ukraine, climate change and its application to assorted weather phenomena, assassination of an Iranian guy that must have caused a new world war, and many many more. None of these criticisms is justified by the Democrat Party and MSM pests seem to believe that when they present 50 hysterical hostile anti-Trump lies, they may replace a true one. They can't. Sadly, many people have been turned into nasty pests – brainwashed Democrat Party voters – anyway. This fact is creating a lot of tension. The tension between the good people and pure evil has been with us since the beginning of the human race.

I really feel that the evil people are too widespread, too numerous, and too powerful for the life in America to normalize anytime soon. Some grander methods to reduce the amount of pure evil in the U.S. and in the world will have to be found and applied.

And that's the memo.


P.S.: Some of the insanity is comical, except for owners of a brewery. A week ago, I joked that people might think that the Corona beer infects you with the Coronavirus. Well, the sales have really dropped a lot! As someone argued, the markets are always right. They may rename themselves to a harmless brand, e.g. Ebola beer.

No comments:

Post a Comment