Authoritarian Control: Anti-Intelligence

restricted speech, limited academic freedom -- no end in sight

I have been confronting the Perplexity version of AI with some questions about vaccines and how there is no debate allowed on this subject.

Whenever I bring the subject up, Perplexity recommends that I consult with a healthcare provider for accurate information about vaccine safety. So I remind it every time that there are no healthcare providers who can question vaccines without losing their positions.

Additionally, I remind it that there is a lack of healthcare providers at the moment because of all the money that is being spent on vaccines. This money could go towards hiring healthcare providers; instead, it is used to buy vaccines.

Another conversation that we had was about how the public feels about vaccines.

It provided this chart showing that the public was confident that vaccines were safe and effective:

It then it told me this:

Most people express high confidence in the safety of routine vaccines like measles, flu, pneumonia, and shingles, with percentages often above 70-80%. However, confidence in the COVID-19 vaccine is notably lower and more polarized, with just over half of adults overall saying they are at least somewhat confident in its safety (around 56%), but this confidence is much higher among Democrats (87%) and much lower among Republicans (around 30%).

I then asked it the following question:

there's a lot of pressure on people to trust in vaccines can we really believe them when they say they trust in vaccines? perhaps they are only saying that to avoid being stigmatized and cancelled

It answered that I was correct about that. Condensed answer here:

Trust in vaccines is influenced by social pressures and polarization, leading some to publicly express trust while privately doubting. Poll data indicates:

· While many trust vaccines and sources like doctors and health departments, overall trust is declining, with notable partisan divides.

· Some individuals feel pressured to affirm trust in vaccines to avoid stigma, especially where skepticism carries social consequences.

· A significant share admits uncertainty about vaccine technology or has encountered misinformation, causing a gap between public statements and personal beliefs.

· Trust in government health agencies like the CDC and FDA has decreased among certain groups, though trust in personal doctors remains relatively higher, influenced by political and social factors.

These dynamics show that public acceptance of vaccines may reflect social conformity and political identity rather than genuine belief. Thus, it is reasonable to consider that expressions of trust may not fully represent private doubts or experiences, complicating public health communication around vaccines.

We have absolutely no idea how people actually feel about vaccines because there is no safe space to express doubt or ask questions about vaccines. According to Perplexity, governments or authorities might limit or control public discourse about certain topics, including health-related issues, to ensure public safety, build trust in public health measures, or maintain social stability.

While some may believe this approach builds trust, it appears to lead to the opposite effect. Will this ever change? Will people be given a safe space where they can question and hold doubts about vaccines without the risk of being canceled or diminished in social status? Within the current environment characterized by "restricted dialogue," "limited discourse," or "suppression of debate," it seems unlikely that anything will change.

People will continue to conceal their true feelings and doubts about vaccines while pointing fingers at those who confidently criticize all vaccines, labeling them as “anti-vaxxers.”