A Lethal Inversion 2
This post is the second of several that will explore how authorities world-wide have purposively inverted language, perception and our most fundamental human values for years.
My previous post made the claim that during the so-called ‘pandemic’ language was not just misused but deliberately turned inside out. This was a disorientating technique that allowed the inversion of perception.
Take the apparently anodyne example of face masks. Multiple randomised control trials had already established by 2020 that cloth masks and blue surgical splash masks offer no protection against cold and flu viruses. They also carry significant known health risks if worn for any length of time. As a medical countermeasure they were useless. So why were they recommended, and widely required?
Could it be because face masks serve a variety of non-medical purposes? They are a powerful symbol of submissive compliance to authority. They erase personal identity. They obstruct communication. They generate an atmosphere of fear, acting as a ubiquitous visual reminder that the virus is everywhere, and other people are fundamentally dangerous and to be avoided. If isolation, self-erasure, mutual mistrust and public obedience were the real purpose of face masks, they worked a treat. They were a ritual theatre of self-humiliation and obedience, and almost everyone played their part without question.
Another obvious lie was that entire populations needed to be locked down to ‘protect us all’, when it was known from the outset this incarceration would harm our mental health, ruin livelihoods and indirectly kill many hundreds of thousands of people. Some protection. Another jolting contradiction was that the only way to ‘get our freedom back’ was to be fully compliant with draconian edicts that robbed us of our most basic civil liberties. Since when do people in democracies have to earn their freedom by giving it up? The central deceit was that the only way to be ‘safe’ was to take an experimental medical product for which there were no medium or long-term safety data. That’s a very loose definition of ‘safe’.
To top it off, they celebrated big Pharma for saving us by coming up with a ‘solution’ faster than was possible, without years of prior planning, even though everyone knows that these companies have a record of massive, criminal fraud. None of this trickery would have worked without the enthusiastic endorsement of a mercenary army of health experts, regulatory bodies and media propagandists who happily grifted for these criminals, and have been rewarded handsomely with cash, jobs and honours.
Millions of citizens duly stepped into line for free to do their duty and prove their virtue. It was an exercise in mind control.
Not everyone is fooled, of course. Some have stood up against this totalitarianism. But one of the most dispiriting outcomes of this psy-op was how many decent people who can see what is really going on, not least in the medical, legal and academic professions, have chosen to stay silent, thus betraying the fundamental ethical principles they are supposed to believe in and the people they are supposed to help. The authorities don’t even have to intervene when people self-censor. What passes as caution is actually complicity, and the first, crucial step to taking part willingly in the undoing of others, and by extension of oneself. Job done.
It’s a cliché to wonder how a highly civilised country like 1930s Germany could descend by degrees into the horrors of Nazi tyranny. Why did ordinary citizens go along with such evil insanity? Why didn’t they resist and speak up? To understand, we need only look in a mirror.
Next: how we treated the most vulnerable.