Divisive? How?
And what's wrong with divisive debates?
Do we need more Faucism? Let the people see whatever evidence hasn't been destroyed and make up their mind. I don't need a government Czar to make informed conclusions.
Do we need more Faucism? Let the people see whatever evidence hasn't been destroyed and make up their mind. I don't need a government Czar to make informed conclusions.
I honestly believe that Fauci did a great service to his country and it was a capstone in his truly productive career. It's OK to appreciate good work. Think about his work environment, the risks involved, and the pace at which all the facts were unfolding. It is our good fortune that someone with deep subject knowledge and skill at communication was available at all.
Don't take this as an argument against your main point. I agree that we should have the guts to engage with good faith in divisive debates. The "good faith" part is important because it keeps us united as people despite the potential immiscibility of our ideas.
Don't talk about that or don't question the conclusion we came up to because it could create some discomfort.
Very similar to fascism/authoritarianism but with beautiful words.