3 Comments
User's avatar
⭠ Return to thread
NeverForget1776's avatar

True and I did not debate or question that the no heat for 6 hours things is bad. My focus is on the 19c cap because that's where all dialogue in the news media about this will take place. One of 2 things is either going to happen, either the No heat for 6 hours was included as a false flag compromise or all debate/discussion about the policy will be focused solely around the 19c cap.

RED HERRING: The no heat for 6 hours nightly thing may have been added with the purpose of being removed later so as to make the 19c cap seem like a reasonable compromise. It is after all a very drastic step to take and if energy supplies were truly bad enough to warrant it then you’d think there’d be more restrictions in place that are throughout the day. Something about the 6 hours of no heat just doesn’t square up. I believe after enough pushback/debate and maybe even some actual deaths because of it they will change the policy, removing the no heat at all and either make the 19c cap longer or possibly even reduce it to say 18c.

NOT A RED HERRING: If the no heat for 6 hours is not there so as to be removed later then you can bet all dialogue/debate around the policy change will be limited to the 19c cap. No one will be allowed to discuss the no heat for 6 hours thing. Some talk will leak thru such as live conversations with non-corrupt politicians but the vast majority will be focused solely around the cap which by itself does not sound unreasonable during an energy crisis.

Which ever one it is you have to work within what they will allow and in both scenarios its discussion of whether or not a 19c (or lower) cap is reasonable or not and few are going to say it’s not reasonable because as humans we don’t want to be isolated as that guy who refused to make a reasonable compromise that others were wiling to make and you will be made out to be the selfish person who refused to make a small sacrifice. They used this same tactic with great effect on masking and vaccine acceptance. As humans we quickly adapt so once they get enough public buy-in to the 19c cap it’s only a matter of time before they start to reduce it in small reasonable sounding increments. If the end goal is to get us down to say 10c they aren’t going to go from 19c to 10c in one go, they will do it in 1 degree increments over time. Incrimentalization is a highly effective tactic for those in power to change society.

It all about psychology and you have to play that game. If the no heat thing is not a red herring they are not going allow any debate about, not in the media/news. Instead we have to point out how the 19c cap is about getting that initial limitation and how like with all tings the government does, it they will expand it over time in small increments.

Expand full comment
Sophia's avatar

that’s why people should be focused instead on making the policy makers adhere to the same rules :) this is all that’s needed, although it will take a lot of time and effort, with the drastic measure of simply destroying the infrastructure that leads to their homes and offices to prevent them from ever using it. it can be done remotely, no need to actually get inside… just make it unusable.

it won’t even take many people to achieve, but I’d really like to hear how a member of the general public will defend the right of those who make their kids and elders suffer, to keep their priviledges :) I bet, people will cheer…

Expand full comment
NeverForget1776's avatar

You can destroy society without destroying your own home or even business. They've been doing tis already for years, decades even; it's called a controlled demolition. Public leaders will claim they are gong thru the same pain and suffering but they are professional liars and since they are in control they will keep things opaque so we the peasants are not aware of what is really happening.

Expand full comment