When it comes to spreading disinformation about climate change or the risks of smoking, I can clearly see how it protects economic interests (e.g. the value of the assets of the fossil fuel industry or the tobacco industry). I therefore understand that these lies are (have been) regularly pushed by people who do not necessarily believe in them.
But what are the strategic considerations behind the active spread of anti-vax theories? Who gains from this? Is it just an effective topic to rile up a political base? Because it hits people right in the feels? Is it just a way to bring people together on one topic, in order to use that political base for other purposes?
Or is anti-vax disinformation really only pushed by people who believe it?
I actually got perma-banned from a subreddit for expressing my opinions on this.
Some people get downright hostile about anti-vax ideology. However I think there is some cause for concern there. Keep in mind just getting an injection regardless of what’s in it carries some risk. I don’t see any economic or political motivation behind anti-vax ideology other than a legitimate concern for public safety. No doubt there’s economic motivation for pro-vax ideology.
Some may take anti-vax ideology to an extreme, but then some may be too trusting of the system. There are wide opinions about many of the systems we live under, not just vaccination. I’m less trusting of all the systems that make up our society more than I’ve ever been. There’s a number of reasons I feel that way. The main reason is I simply don’t trust our leaders and institutions to make public safety a priority. I mean how many times do they have to demonstrate this before the average person gets the memo.
Does your distrust also include peer reviewed science?
Less so than other institutions that are driven by corporate profits. However, the scientific community is not devoid of corruption either. You can find a scientist to say whatever you want with the right paycheck, happens all the time.