Why are we finding it so hard to agree on a way forward? (sic)

in response to the themes in:
https://www.anhinternational.org/news/pandemonium-within-a-pandemic

Pandemonium within a pandemic - ANH

The chart should stipulate died WITH or suspected to have and thus assigned to covid19.
Has anyone died SOLEY as a result of covid-19?
Of those few put forward - are they the result of an already undermined and dysfunctional immune response - not least as a result of medical interventions as well as the result of disproportionately fearful  or ill advised medical treatments?

"Why are we finding it so hard to agree on a way forward?"

There is no process of agreement - but only of compliance - or else!
Narratives are dictated - and when they can mask in 'the Science' they do - and when scientific evidence does not support the narrative it is ignore, smeared or declared fake.

Who sets these narratives, frameworks of regulations and enforcement?
Is it a pathological agency of focused fear gone viral by design?
As a fear of loss of both face and control, seeking 'survival' in such terms by limiting awareness and scope of life in expression? IE: Suppress consciousness enough to breed out the traits that the 'Big Pharma' considers weeds or pests or simply liabilities.

You might note that the weaponised narratives operate to effect new regulatory controls.
The vaccine in an of itself doesn't matter, except as a carrot or a stick, but the regulatory mandates for track and trace, medical passports, and the setting of human beings as perpetual agents of infection to be suppressed and controlled under a bio-security state, matters, not just as a restating of control, but as the basis of another round of marketising and weaponising nature at genetic levels of industrial exploitation. The 'drive for the vaccine' is a seedbed of highly targeted but framed biotech-research under contractual agreements with its funding source. The intention and expectation is to launch a Bio-tech era of corporate management and application of developing biotech research and the seedbed is being prepared for its applause and acceptance. It may extend the virological model, but is fundamentally the same underlying archetypes of weakness and inadequacy requiring intervention and management of defence against 'threats' that can be assigned to genetic susceptibility as well as pathological agencies - including the threat of 'bio-weapons'.
The threat doesn't need to be real. But does have to be really believed.
This is currently demonstrably true.
The Coronavirus in itself is a cold virus.
Over 80% of over 65s were found asymptomatic in a recent study.
So crying Wolf! and assigning almost all deaths as 'covid' along with tests that the nobel winning inventor stated was unfit to be used as a diagnostic tool. And now antibody tests that  - even if truly specific to cov19  - can mean anything.
Narrative dictate under pretence of a pretext set in plausible deniability - of plans already set.
Do we have a voice?
Or are we consumed assets under a system running as a sealed unit with no user access apart from those who set its parameters. Rigging the operating system goes back to the moneylenders in the Temple - and before.
Those that own the frameworks on which people depend can choke them of their needs if they do not comply with demands. Such is cartel-monopolism and market or mind-capture.
I would like to see a process of communication in finding ways that embody and support wholeness - but this global movement is set too big to fail - and that means everything else is subordinated and sacrificed to 'make a new order' in our own image - or at least in terms the mindset of possession and control.
What could possibly go right - except to recognise by extremis that our fear delivers us to evil and must be unmasked and truly addressed where it is - instead of assigning its shadow to others (real or imagined) and attacking or denying them.
Can the serving ranks of 'believers' wake to their false allegiance and withdraw support so as to open the way to address our needs rather than weaponise under false pretexts to market 'solutions' that generate dependency and loss of freedom and responsibility?
Give unto Caesar what is due unto the powers in the world, and give unto Life and the source of our shared life what is due to the living.
The Pantheon was dedicated to all the Gods - and Pandemonium was coined as the 'house or place of all demons' - or fears given power, that seem to operate a will of their own.
Our current mythology looks down on a magical and superstitious past as if from a superior freedom from both.
Recognising the core narrative archetypes or patterns from which our thought and behavioural response automatically and logically proceed is from a willingness to question our 'consensus' reality - but not as an attack by which to break it down and replace our own self-vindication. There is always a baby in the bathwater of what blind and binary judgement discards or denies - and so there is a place for structures and systems of controls - within a truly living context and not in place of this.