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?
It sows distrust in authority, so that those people will listen to fringe voices. These fringe voices tend to be grifters, scamming the rubes.
Politically it’s a binary issue, no room for compromise. If you’re anti-vax, you’re voting for the Republican candidate, despite what the other guy might be offering. So, this locks in votes and also plays into the long term strategy of having an uneducated underclass incapable of critical thinking. This provides cannon fodder for the politicians, and low paid drones for the fat cats.
