Yes to all of this, in so many ways, and I have experienced the same divides as you. Vaccine division as well as timber community division.
I think that, when it's all said and done (which I reckon isn't far off), we will see that the most lasting harm from the whole pandemic and how it was handled is not long covid, nor is it vaccine injuries, but is the creation of a new trauma within a society that is so poor at handling traumas.
In fact, this is our time to do what we can to heal trauma. To reconcile, as you say. Every generation is given a chance to look at its trauma, to look at the polarisation created, and heal it. Some do it well, and then that healing can heal society. Some less well, and so the original wound reverberates down the ages.
For me, these wounds heal with generosity of spirit. I don't think we are there yet. I want to say that when I bring up the vaccine thing in conversation, people are understanding and want to heal the divide. That's not really true. Most times the vaccine conversation doesn't even start, and if it does come up, we collectively dance around it. I contribute on this score, as I'm weary of the slights cast my way for choosing not to take the vaccine. But maybe this is where my courage needs to enter, to sherpa a conversation into this seemingly treacherous terrain.
Who knows? What I do know is that we, collectively, need to get better at finding a middle way that's crafted in honour, respect and generosity rather than power, contempt and compromise. Imagine the world we could create if we grew upon each other's uniqueness rather than cut each other down to size?
Perhaps the time is not yet right, and these conversations will come easier in the future.
It is difficult in that it is not only courage that is required, but also a willingness to contemplate a different framing of the issues - a framing in which the assignment of right and wrong or good and bad is reversed. Many people seem unable to take that step, stopping instead at the comfortable conclusion that the opposing side is at best ignorant and at worst maliciously evil.
I appreciate this. And it seems to tick a lot of boxes for me, as someone who is unvaccinated, involved in forestry in the PNW, and who has lowkey been meditating on the question of animism, for want of a better word, for years now.
Regarding level 1, I suppose indeed "acknowledgment" is what I'm looking for. A kind of closure, before this recedes from consciousness in a state not fully resolved, but still rankling below the surface.
Practically, what still concerns me are the vax mandates that are kinda mitigated at this point, but still technically present. For instance, at my work, unvaccinated people can, as of quite recently, return to the office along with the vaccinated people, who were invited back some time ago, but we are still technically set apart and distinguished on this score. My employment is still under the terms of a special "accommodation," which people who provided proof of vaccination do not require, and some additional restrictions are still placed upon me as part of this.
As the question of mandates recedes from consciousness, my fear is that this situation is forgotten about and never entirely resolved, with the mandate still remaining on the books.
All manner of obsolete laws and regulations remain on the books, and I suppose this is no different - it won't change until someone puts a concerted effort into changing it.
It would be helpful if the CDC or NIH, perhaps under new management, would explicitly recommend *against* any covid vaccine mandates remaining in place on the basis that the shots have no bearing on infection and transmission rates and mandates therefore constitute unfair discrimination. That might be enough to convince the holdouts, though I would still want to have an open conversation and acknowledgement with friends and family and colleagues rather than memory holing the whole thing.
I agree that if the CDC put out the message that mandates make no sense given what we know now about the jab, my workplace would probably change its policy. It may not be too cynical of me to suppose that some of these things remain in place because leaders don't want the perceived liability, political or legal, that would come from pursuing a course at variance with what is still perceived to be official guidance.
But will the government ever admit so directly that they were wrong, and that the season of mandate mania they put as through turns out to have been misguided? I am not, as they say, holding my breath--even though, in a better world, I believe they could make the admission while still saving face.
I will continue to work against memory holing at my workplace though. There is the feeling that the topic of the vaccine mandate is taboo to speak about openly, a feeling that is reinforced by the confidentiality around the accommodation process, as that proceeds for individuals one-by-one in private meetings with HR.
I decided to break the seal of secrecy around it by forwarding the most recent personal communication from HR--which included the "accommodation update" document allowing me back in the building--to many of my colleagues, so that they could see what I have been dealing with.
It was a small breakthrough for me personally, as I find there is a level at which I am ashamed to speak about it--not so much because of the fact that I haven't received a covid shot, but more on account of the way that I have been treated by the powers that be. It's as though I believe at some level that I have been "bad" to end up here, as it were like a child put into timeout, although I am at peace with the decision itself not to receive the jab. At a personal level, my colleagues have been supportive, even those who rushed out to get the jab as soon as it was available.
I'm not holding my breath either, but I do think there is a way they could do it with weasel words. Something along the lines of saying that the jabs have been successful, but now that everyone has some degree of immunity and hospitalizations are low there is no longer any justification for mandates. I suspect that as awareness of vaccine injuries continues to seep into the mainstream, the CDC etc. are going to realize that any remaining mandates serve as opportunities for potentially high-profile lawsuits as well as barriers to a more complete memory-holing of the issue, and so I actually wouldn't be too surprised to see an official attempt to convince the true believers to drop them relatively soon.
Yes to all of this, in so many ways, and I have experienced the same divides as you. Vaccine division as well as timber community division.
I think that, when it's all said and done (which I reckon isn't far off), we will see that the most lasting harm from the whole pandemic and how it was handled is not long covid, nor is it vaccine injuries, but is the creation of a new trauma within a society that is so poor at handling traumas.
In fact, this is our time to do what we can to heal trauma. To reconcile, as you say. Every generation is given a chance to look at its trauma, to look at the polarisation created, and heal it. Some do it well, and then that healing can heal society. Some less well, and so the original wound reverberates down the ages.
For me, these wounds heal with generosity of spirit. I don't think we are there yet. I want to say that when I bring up the vaccine thing in conversation, people are understanding and want to heal the divide. That's not really true. Most times the vaccine conversation doesn't even start, and if it does come up, we collectively dance around it. I contribute on this score, as I'm weary of the slights cast my way for choosing not to take the vaccine. But maybe this is where my courage needs to enter, to sherpa a conversation into this seemingly treacherous terrain.
Who knows? What I do know is that we, collectively, need to get better at finding a middle way that's crafted in honour, respect and generosity rather than power, contempt and compromise. Imagine the world we could create if we grew upon each other's uniqueness rather than cut each other down to size?
Perhaps the time is not yet right, and these conversations will come easier in the future.
It is difficult in that it is not only courage that is required, but also a willingness to contemplate a different framing of the issues - a framing in which the assignment of right and wrong or good and bad is reversed. Many people seem unable to take that step, stopping instead at the comfortable conclusion that the opposing side is at best ignorant and at worst maliciously evil.
I appreciate this. And it seems to tick a lot of boxes for me, as someone who is unvaccinated, involved in forestry in the PNW, and who has lowkey been meditating on the question of animism, for want of a better word, for years now.
Regarding level 1, I suppose indeed "acknowledgment" is what I'm looking for. A kind of closure, before this recedes from consciousness in a state not fully resolved, but still rankling below the surface.
Practically, what still concerns me are the vax mandates that are kinda mitigated at this point, but still technically present. For instance, at my work, unvaccinated people can, as of quite recently, return to the office along with the vaccinated people, who were invited back some time ago, but we are still technically set apart and distinguished on this score. My employment is still under the terms of a special "accommodation," which people who provided proof of vaccination do not require, and some additional restrictions are still placed upon me as part of this.
As the question of mandates recedes from consciousness, my fear is that this situation is forgotten about and never entirely resolved, with the mandate still remaining on the books.
All manner of obsolete laws and regulations remain on the books, and I suppose this is no different - it won't change until someone puts a concerted effort into changing it.
It would be helpful if the CDC or NIH, perhaps under new management, would explicitly recommend *against* any covid vaccine mandates remaining in place on the basis that the shots have no bearing on infection and transmission rates and mandates therefore constitute unfair discrimination. That might be enough to convince the holdouts, though I would still want to have an open conversation and acknowledgement with friends and family and colleagues rather than memory holing the whole thing.
I agree that if the CDC put out the message that mandates make no sense given what we know now about the jab, my workplace would probably change its policy. It may not be too cynical of me to suppose that some of these things remain in place because leaders don't want the perceived liability, political or legal, that would come from pursuing a course at variance with what is still perceived to be official guidance.
But will the government ever admit so directly that they were wrong, and that the season of mandate mania they put as through turns out to have been misguided? I am not, as they say, holding my breath--even though, in a better world, I believe they could make the admission while still saving face.
I will continue to work against memory holing at my workplace though. There is the feeling that the topic of the vaccine mandate is taboo to speak about openly, a feeling that is reinforced by the confidentiality around the accommodation process, as that proceeds for individuals one-by-one in private meetings with HR.
I decided to break the seal of secrecy around it by forwarding the most recent personal communication from HR--which included the "accommodation update" document allowing me back in the building--to many of my colleagues, so that they could see what I have been dealing with.
It was a small breakthrough for me personally, as I find there is a level at which I am ashamed to speak about it--not so much because of the fact that I haven't received a covid shot, but more on account of the way that I have been treated by the powers that be. It's as though I believe at some level that I have been "bad" to end up here, as it were like a child put into timeout, although I am at peace with the decision itself not to receive the jab. At a personal level, my colleagues have been supportive, even those who rushed out to get the jab as soon as it was available.
I'm not holding my breath either, but I do think there is a way they could do it with weasel words. Something along the lines of saying that the jabs have been successful, but now that everyone has some degree of immunity and hospitalizations are low there is no longer any justification for mandates. I suspect that as awareness of vaccine injuries continues to seep into the mainstream, the CDC etc. are going to realize that any remaining mandates serve as opportunities for potentially high-profile lawsuits as well as barriers to a more complete memory-holing of the issue, and so I actually wouldn't be too surprised to see an official attempt to convince the true believers to drop them relatively soon.
Huh. I hadn't thought of it quite like that. Maybe an official desire to memory-hole the whole business will work in my favor in a sense... !