How we all ended up in a world of dystopian come true


Many people like to read books, or better, watch spectacular films about the dystopias of the future, where heroes challenge the inhuman system and either defeat it or naturally perish in an unequal struggle. Then the book is finished, the film ends, and we exhale happily, rejoicing that all this was not in reality. They tickled their nerves a little, allowed them to scare, and then returned to their normal life, where nothing of the kind is simply impossible. Or maybe?


Dystopia come true


In part, we have this delicate topic already concerned, considering the issue of the formation of the so-called three-polar world. The fact is that all this was described back in 1943 by the brilliant and perspicacious British science fiction writer George Orwell. In his novel "1984" there are three superpowers continuously fighting among themselves for disputed territories and making alliances, "Oceania", "Eastasia" and "Eurasia", in which the current AUKUS alliance (USA, Great Britain and Australia), China with its satellites are quite guessed and partly the modern Russian Federation.

Surprisingly, the Englishman already then, in the middle of the 20th century, predicted a lot of what has become commonplace today. This is the image of "Big Brother" who is constantly watching you, and totalitarian propaganda with its constant rewriting of history, which manages to present white as black and black as white, and artificial intelligence as a prototype of a neural network that creates certain works, and Technology converting speech into text, and huge floating fortresses, either aircraft carriers, or bulk islands, etc. An amazing gift of foresight!

All this has already come true, and what is most annoying is that "1984" is precisely a dystopia. An interesting fact. It is believed that Orwell made fun of the "totalitarian USSR" and "Stalinism", but the "scoop" has been in the past for 30 years. Nevertheless, in 2013, the famous British publication The Guardian conducted a survey among its readers, and suddenly it turned out that 89% of them recognized themselves in George Orwell's "dark fantasies". In London, they are even thinking of removing the novel "1984" from the school curriculum, since a thinking person, having read it, may think too much.

All animals are equal. But some animals are more equal than others


This is the famous "commandment" from another Orwellian work called Animal Farm. It will allow us to rethrow a semantic bridge from 1943, when this story was written, to 2021. Let's see what the talented Briton predicted is happening right now.

Before his further reflections, the author of these lines considers it necessary to make a few explanations. Coronavirus infection really exists and poses a danger to the health and life of people, therefore it is necessary to fight it. The reasoning will concern how it is worth trying to do without crossing the line of humanity, and whether this is possible at all.

So, what do we have by November 2021. For the second year, the entire planet is terrorized by the new coronavirus infection COVID-19, and humanity suffers from it and from some methods of fighting it. “Newspeak” has already formed: “Waxers” and “Anti-Waxers” have appeared. The former support the idea of ​​mass vaccination, the latter oppose for various reasons, which we will talk about later. There is a "Big Brother" who, with his methods of combating COVID-19, divided society into two unequal parts and now watches over the "anti-axers".

To be honest, it all looks very unpleasant. In the so-called "anti-vaccination" automatically got not only principled "anti-vaccination", but also people who do not fully trust the authorities in general, as well as people who, perhaps, would like to be vaccinated, but cannot because of the withdrawal for medical reasons. Moreover, all of them are now noticeably infringed upon in their civil rights. Without a QR code confirming that they have been vaccinated against coronavirus, they can no longer visit large stores, service establishments, and they are seriously discussing that they will not be sold tickets for trains and other transport. At the same time, all the "anti-axers", ideological and forced, now find themselves pushed literally face to face in small stores, where they can infect or get infected in the same way. And those who are ready to be vaccinated on pain of restrictions on their rights stand in huge queues at vaccination centers. In other words, the very idea of ​​such restrictions inevitably turns into some kind of absurdity.

We will not dive deeply into the medical aspect of the problem, but let's touch on the legal one. This division of the population into two categories with different rights is somehow beginning to resemble the shameful phenomenon of segregation that only recently flourished in the United States.

Segregation (segregatio - separation, isolation, removal, separation) is the forced division of people into racial, ethnic or other groups in everyday life.

Needless to say, the division of society into vaccinated and unvaccinated with the defeat of the latter in civil rights violates the Constitution of the Russian Federation, in particular Chapter 2? For example, Article 19 states that everyone is equal before the law and the courts:

The state guarantees the equality of human and civil rights and freedoms, regardless of gender, race, nationality, language, origin, property and official position, place of residence, religion, beliefs, membership in public associations, or other circumstances. Any form of restriction of the rights of citizens on the grounds of social, racial, national, linguistic or religious affiliation is prohibited.

AND "also other circumstances". Article 21 of the Basic Law of the Russian Federation says that the dignity of the individual is protected by the state, and nothing can be a basis for belittling it:

No one should be subjected to torture, violence, other cruel or degrading treatment or punishment. No one can be subjected to medical, scientific or other experiments without voluntary consent.

It also says about freedom of movement, freedom of thought and speech, etc. But, on the other hand, Article 17 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation says that the exercise by a citizen of his rights and freedoms should not violate the rights and freedoms of other citizens. Then we ask ourselves the question, who is violating whose rights? Do "Waxers" restrict the civil rights of "anti-waxers", or are "Waxers" violating the right of "Waxers" to health and safety?

The question is very controversial and controversial. It's even more important to understand where this is going. Today we quite unexpectedly found ourselves in the world of the most real dystopia. What's next? Will we defeat the coronavirus infection and rewind everything as it was before? Or is it now that the "digital concentration camp" with total control and QR codes, about which so many people are talking, will become a new reality? Will Big Brother let us go?
24 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Dear sofa expert. 9 November 2021 14: 15
    0
    Then we ask ourselves the question, who is violating whose rights? Do "Waxers" restrict the civil rights of "anti-waxers", or are "Waxers" violating the right of "Waxers" to health and safety?

    Maybe you will be able to answer yourself not this question, if you imagine such a situation that is quite real for today: you yourself, or (God forbid!) You, with your sick child, come to the hospital for any emergency help, but They tell you: we can’t help you, as the hospital is already packed to capacity with the notorious “anti-axers” choking on covid. I wonder if at this moment you will experience a feeling of "universal love" for people who have consciously decided for themselves not to be vaccinated, and this may have brought the hospital to a collapse, and you yourself (or your child) have not been left a single chance to survive.

    What's next? Will we defeat the coronavirus infection and rewind everything as it was before?

    To do this, answer yourself - who will win? On whose neck will this victory be "rode"?
    Here is the winner and decide what and where to rewind.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 9 November 2021 14: 45
      0
      Maybe you will be able to answer yourself not this question, if you imagine such a situation that is quite real for today: you yourself, or (God forbid!) You, with your sick child, come to the hospital for any emergency help, but They tell you: we can’t help you, as the hospital is already packed to capacity with the notorious “anti-axers” choking on covid. I wonder if at this moment you will experience a feeling of "universal love" for people who have consciously decided for themselves not to be vaccinated, and this may have brought the hospital to a collapse, and you yourself (or your child) have not been left a single chance to survive.

      I understand your position. Let's try to develop the logic further.
      Let's imagine that 100% of the population took root under the pressure of the authorities and society. But at the same time, people still get sick, albeit in a milder form. Here you come with a sick child, and you are answered exactly the same, that there are no places, and they are needed by the elderly and people with serious illnesses. What's next? Who is to blame and what to do?
      At the same time, the Constitution and the inalienable rights of the individual have been violated. What about the legal and ethical side of the issue?

      To do this, answer yourself - who will win? On whose neck will this victory be "rode"?

      Let's say the medics beat the covid. And in a year or two, a new infection will appear.
      1. Dear sofa expert. 9 November 2021 15: 36
        +1
        Let's imagine that 100% of the population took root under the pressure of the authorities and society.

        Why is it necessarily under pressure?) And if you start at least with the execution of an elementary civic duty? Before their own children, relatives, Motherland, in the end.
        A soldier who avoids fighting the enemy is called a deserter. A pandemic is the same war, only the enemy here is a virus. Herd immunity is not created by itself, but by a specific level of "immunity". And it is created either by survivors of the disease, or vaccinated.
        It turns out, let others fight, and I, like smart, sit on the sidelines?)
        Not a very nice civic position, or?

        But at the same time, people still get sick, albeit in a milder form. Here you come with a sick child, and they answer you exactly the same that there are no places

        They are mildly ill at home, and do not clog the valuable beds of the intensive care unit.

        At the same time, the Constitution and the inalienable rights of the individual have been violated. What about the legal and ethical side of the issue?

        That's it. Why should the "waxers" adapt to the needs of the "anti-axers", and continue to protect them from severe illness?
        Didn't want to be vaccinated? For God's sake! Ill - do not go to the doctors, do not fill up valuable hospital beds with your carcass, do not spread the infection, sit at home in self-isolation and survive as you decided for yourself.)

        Let's say the medics beat the covid.

        Well, it is not the doctors who will win, but those who follow the recommendations of the doctors. )

        And in a year or two, a new infection will appear.

        It will appear, we will decide as it becomes available.
        1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
          Marzhecki (Sergei) 9 November 2021 15: 38
          0
          Why is it necessarily under pressure?) And if you start at least with the execution of an elementary civic duty? Before their own children, relatives, Motherland, in the end.
          A soldier who avoids fighting the enemy is called a deserter. A pandemic is the same war, only the enemy here is a virus.

          People are all different. I have acquaintances, educated people who flatly refuse to give the vaccine. Think. that this is how they take care of themselves and their family. Like this.

          That's it. Why should the "waxers" adapt to the needs of the "anti-axers", and continue to protect them from severe illness?
          Didn't want to be vaccinated? For God's sake! Ill - do not go to the doctors, do not fill up valuable hospital beds with your carcass, do not spread the infection, sit at home in self-isolation and survive as you decided for yourself.)

          Who is there more in the world, waxers or anti-axers? Who should obey whom, the majority or the minority? smile
          1. Dear sofa expert. 9 November 2021 16: 20
            0
            People are all different.

            That's right.

            I have acquaintances, educated people who flatly refuse to give the vaccine. Think. that this is how they take care of themselves and their family.

            Being educated and being educated are not the same thing. To fool yourself, and even more so to others, with all sorts of "conspiracy theories" is not a sign of education. Rather, it is elementary and dark ignorance. )

            Who is there more in the world, waxers or anti-axers? Who should obey whom, the majority or the minority?

            Populism.
            The banal shortage of a vaccine in the world is not yet an indicator of the level of the majority and the minority, within the framework of everyone's personal conviction.
          2. Dear sofa expert. 9 November 2021 16: 30
            -1
            Who is more in the world, waxers or anti-axers?

            By the way. Looked at the official statistics of the WHO.
            To date, 7.306.942.772 vaccines have already been delivered in the world.
            The number, as it were, is impressive. Or?
            1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
              Marzhecki (Sergei) 9 November 2021 16: 32
              0
              Let's narrow it down to Russia smile

              Populism.

              Democracy smile
              1. Dear sofa expert. 9 November 2021 16: 46
                -2
                Let's narrow it down to Russia

                What is the purpose of narrowing?)
                1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
                  Marzhecki (Sergei) 9 November 2021 16: 46
                  +1
                  Well, we, like, talked about Russia.
                  1. Dear sofa expert. 9 November 2021 17: 09
                    0
                    Well, we, like, talked about Russia.

                    Yes, about Russia. And therefore, it is very important for me that Russians better take a positive example from the indicators of world statistics than from the negative of your, poorly concealed, and frankly, harmful anti-vaccination propaganda. The propaganda is, in fact, obscurantism and blatant ignorance.
                    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
                      Marzhecki (Sergei) 9 November 2021 17: 23
                      -2
                      Well, actually my whole family and I have taken root. So don't be fooled by me smile
                      As a basic lawyer, I am interested in the legal side of the vaccination campaign and violations of inalienable human rights and freedoms in my country.
                      To which I directly indicated in the text of the article. hi
                      1. Dear sofa expert. 9 November 2021 17: 47
                        -1
                        As a basic lawyer, I am interested in the legal side of the vaccination campaign and violations of inalienable human rights and freedoms in my country.

                        So then defend the rights of everyone, not just the unvaccinated. At the very least, people who help fight the pandemic by participating in the state vaccination program also have their rights and freedoms.
                        Personally, I (I already, as Gorenin spoke))) would do this:
                        Would completely remove all restrictions. If you want - get vaccinated, if you want - get immunity through the disease (if you survive). Natural selection, so to speak. Nefig burden the health care system with your personal "beliefs".
                        In hospitals, introduce a strict quota for intensive care beds for the unvaccinated, so that there are enough places for people with other health problems (they also have rights and freedoms).
                        By the way, the unvaccinated should not be an unnecessary threat to the health of the medical staff (they also have rights and freedoms!), And should receive treatment only from the same “convinced” doctors, like themselves. Where they will look for them is their own business.
                        Nursing staff should have the personal right to decide whether or not to expose themselves to unnecessary risks, whether or not to receive such patients.
                        And no prohibitions and infringements. How do you like that as a lawyer?)
                      2. consultant Offline consultant
                        consultant (Vladimir) 10 November 2021 15: 59
                        0
                        Quote: Marzhetsky
                        As a basic lawyer, I am interested in the legal side of the issue ...

                        The question is actually much broader. Why no one is outraged by fines for not wearing a seat belt ??? Indeed, in this case, a person controls only his (!) Life. Antivaxers, on the other hand, endanger the lives and health of many, but at the same time they scream about their rights. So let them be realized in isolation from others.
  2. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 9 November 2021 17: 49
    0
    Quote: Dear sofa expert.
    So then defend the rights of everyone, not just the unvaccinated. At the very least, people who help fight the pandemic by participating in the state vaccination program also have their rights and freedoms.

    Didn't I write about this right in the text of the article?
    Quote myself

    It also says about freedom of movement, freedom of thought and speech, etc. But, on the other hand, Article 17 of the Constitution of the Russian Federation says that the exercise by a citizen of his rights and freedoms should not violate the rights and freedoms of other citizens. Then we ask ourselves the question, who is violating whose rights? Do "Waxers" restrict the civil rights of "anti-waxers", or are "Waxers" violating the right of "Waxers" to health and safety?

    The question is very controversial and controversial.

    What do you reproach me for?

    Would completely remove all restrictions. If you want - get vaccinated, if you want - get immunity through the disease (if you survive). Nefig burden the health care system with your personal "beliefs".
    In hospitals, introduce a strict quota for intensive care beds for the unvaccinated, so that there are enough places for people with other health problems (they also have rights and freedoms).
    By the way, the unvaccinated should not be an unnecessary threat to the health of the medical staff (they also have rights and freedoms!), And should receive treatment only from the same “convinced” doctors, like themselves. Where they will look for them is their own business.
    Nursing staff should have the personal right to decide whether or not to expose themselves to unnecessary risks, whether or not to receive such patients.
    And no prohibitions and infringements. How do you like that as a lawyer?)

    If they pay taxes and deductions to the Federal Migration Service, then they have every right to medical assistance. Is not it so?
    In your opinion, it turns out, pay the state to pay, but solve your own problems. This does not suit me as a lawyer. hi

    I am in favor of finding a more legal and at the same time humane approach.
    1. Dear sofa expert. 9 November 2021 18: 09
      -1
      What do you reproach me for?

      Initially, in the absence of a clearly expressed civic position.

      The question is very controversial.

      Further, this demagoguery, a la: whether to go to fight, or it is better to sit out, let others fight for me ..

      Rights and freedoms have nothing to do with it.

      Your doubts also concern the benefits of this very vaccination:

      I have acquaintances, educated people who flatly refuse to give the vaccine. Think. that this is how they take care of themselves and their family. Like this.

      That is, while praising the "education" of your acquaintances, you indirectly put yourself on their side, sharing their point of view, and thereby create an emotional preponderance not in favor of vaccination.

      At the same time, you absolutely do not give yourself a report (or do you still give it away?) That you are writing to a very wide audience, and your opinion may have a far from positive impact on people who have not yet decided.
      1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
        Marzhecki (Sergei) 9 November 2021 18: 21
        +1
        Initially, in the absence of a clearly expressed civic position.

        I have my own civic position on all major issues, but I do not always express it. In this article, I have tried to be above it.

        Further, this demagoguery, a la: whether to go to fight, or it is better to sit out, let others fight for me ..

        You started to go to war with demagoguery, I didn’t write a word about it.

        Rights and freedoms have nothing to do with it.

        The article is about rights and freedoms, reread

        Your doubts also concern the benefits of this very vaccination:

        Nowhere in the text of the article have I expressed doubts about the benefits of vaccination. Moreover, in the commentary, I indicated that I was vaccinated myself and with my family.
        I insist that you cite a quote where I am campaigning against vaccination in the article, or take your words.

        That is, while praising the "education" of your acquaintances, you indirectly put yourself on their side, sharing their point of view, and thereby create an emotional preponderance not in favor of vaccination.

        My friends are entitled to their personal opinion. Having indicated their education, I emphasized that these are not ignorant marginals.

        At the same time, you absolutely do not give yourself a report (or do you still give it away?) That you are writing to a very wide audience, and your opinion may have a far from positive impact on people who have not yet decided.

        My article is not aimed at turning someone away from vaccination, but at trying to stop violating the constitutional rights and freedoms of my fellow citizens and sliding into the "dystopia" referred to in the text. What is the essence of the violations, I explained to you in detail. In particular, you proposed to deprive people of medical care to which they have every right. I disagree with that.
      2. BMP-2 Offline BMP-2
        BMP-2 (Vladimir V.) 11 November 2021 01: 18
        -2
        You have a strange civic position: to impose your expert delusions on the undecided! laughing Guys, I understand that you are far from medicine, biology, virology, because you are discussing the behavioral dilemma "do - not do" instead of figuring out "how will this help?" Knowing the materiel, there is no longer any need to "influence someone", because in this case you understand what you have to do yourself. In fact, there is nothing complicated in this situation, it is enough just to answer two questions: 1) is this virus highly variable? (Yes); 2) if we assume that the vaccine will indeed be effective (since if not effective, then there is no point in injecting by definition), then what copies of it (mutations) will survive? (to the greatest extent capable of adapting to the action of the vaccine, because no one has canceled natural selection among viruses either. That is, new, even more aggressive and rapidly multiplying strains than delta will appear). Still have questions?
  3. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 9 November 2021 18: 30
    +1
    A contrived topic.
    In many countries, foci of an epidemic and more terrible, a strict quarantine decided everything.

    Here, the authorities simply tremble for income, so the garbage comes out.
    Example: in our country, the poor Chinese could be immediately quarantined in the Far East, and the rich Elita, who returned from Italian boutiques infected, could not be touched ...
    Yes, and "Optimization" not only passed with us ...
  4. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 9 November 2021 18: 33
    0
    Quote: Sergey Latyshev
    A contrived topic.

    What is artificiality in particular?
  5. steelmaker Offline steelmaker
    steelmaker 9 November 2021 19: 49
    0
    Today I watched the news. Russia opened its borders with ten more countries. Is it strange that we have some kind of fight with covid?
    The government is fighting inflation, but twice a year it raises the prices for gas, electricity and heat. And at the same time, salaries and pensions practically do not grow. Is it a strange fight against inflation?
    100% of human health depends on proper nutrition! What are the governors doing? They make an admission system to the stores! Everything is done on purpose.
    Zinc, potassium, vitamins A, B1, C - affect the cardiovascular system.
    Zinc, selenium, Iron - on the human immune system.
    Zinc - a cup of cocoa per day, onions - 100g. per day, almonds 10 pcs. or pine nuts per week.
    Iron - sesame halva is the leader in iron. Enough once a week seafood.
    Selenium - one egg a day, beans, pistachios,
    Potassium - 100g. potatoes contain 500 ml. g - 1/6 of the daily requirement.
    Dates - contain 23 types of amino acids that are not found in other fruits. 10 pieces. a day is enough for the daily intake of magnesium, copper, sulfur, 50% iron, 25% calcium.
    Eat right and you won't have snot, let alone viruses! And don't forget that 50 gr. cognac a day is not only not enough, but also useful!
  6. zenion Offline zenion
    zenion (zinovy) 10 November 2021 19: 52
    0
    This all happens before the start of a huge, planetary war. The guilty ones were found, but no guilty ones. A thermonuclear bomb will compare everyone. It used to be a revolver. And then there will be a planet of the apes, as predicted. On the occasion of the vaccination. It can infect all the unvaccinated. And no one gives a guarantee that with the vaccination there will be no death, there are no undying ones for a long time.
  7. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 11 November 2021 07: 26
    0
    Quote: BMP-2
    You have a strange civic position: to impose your expert delusions on the undecided!

    Can you be more specific about what and to whom I impose?
    The article did not address the medical aspects of vaccination at all. It is dedicated to violations of the constitutional rights and freedoms of Russian citizens.
    So take it easy on the "expert delusions". I just perfectly understand what I am writing about. And people like you and my opponent are engaged in substitution of concepts, organizing demagoguery and offering to deprive some of the Russians of access to medical care just because their opinion does not coincide with yours.
  8. aquarius580 Offline aquarius580
    aquarius580 12 November 2021 14: 16
    0
    Too difficult. Look at things easier: from the point of view of well-known UN documents. There are at least two of them: Nuremberg Codex и Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Genocide. So.
    1) Any medical product must obtain approval from the appropriate authority. Approval can be full or provisional.
    No "covid vaccine" has gone through the full course of vaccine testing and is therefore an experimental drug.
    Next, we read the text of the Nuremberg Code, starting with point 1. Google is in your hands; the document is as clear as a child's tear.
    For those who decide to act contrary to this Code, soap and a rope are prepared at the end of the journey. According to recipes from 1946.
    2) The above Convention equates depriving people of the opportunity to earn a living as an attempt to commit genocide... Mass layoffs of people under the false pretext of "refusing vaccinations" (see above: this experimental substances) - equivalent of attempted genocide by deprivation of livelihood... That is, as in paragraph (1), a crime against humanity. At the end of the road - in the same way, soap and a rope for all implementers of the project "compulsory vaccination against covid".
  9. Evgeny Vinokhodov (Evgeny Vinokhodov) 13 November 2021 18: 09
    +1
    George Orwell wrote the 1984 book What Britain Is Becoming.