Tactics of the Propagandists: Part 7

In Part 7

Nothing Matters but Short-Term Physical Health

Repetition, Repetition, Repetition

Only the Short-Term Matters

Fake Scientific Studies

Advertising and Signs

Home Incarceration… it’s FAAAANTASTIC!

Victim-Blaming

Propaganda of the Chinese Communist Party

Erasing Revealing Statements

Disinformation about COVID Transmission and Treatment

Hiding Long-Established Public Health Norms

Prosecution as Propaganda

“Come up with a Viable Alternative or Shut Up”

Lockdown Critics Are Bullies

What do you value in life? You value physical health, I’m sure. Who doesn’t? I’ll bet you also value enjoying life! Was I right about that, too? Life has so many forms of value. How about helping others? Many people consider that important in their lives. Perhaps that is why you are on this website — to gather information for advocacy. Personal development is also important to many people. It can be development of physical skills, mental resilience, spiritual growth, or another form. For many people, learning and growing as a person is why life exists in the first place.

Human life holds much potential beyond the absence of physical disease. Do you think that being physically healthy is the only reason you are on this earth? I didn’t think so. No one thinks that. Except lockdown proponents. They take every opportunity to tell us that the ocean of suffering caused by social distancing is irrelevant, and in fact, good, because it means that we are giving World War III: Battle of the New Cold Virus our best effort. The refrain of the propagandists is that the only value of life is being free from disease. That is not a position anyone in the world would have agreed with prior to 2020. 

Let’s admit it, our brains are not exactly wired to be logical. With a few simple tactics of dark psychology, people will believe anything. One of these is repetition. Hearing something over and over is a form of mental conditioning. No matter how crazy a view seems to someone at first, if she hears it enough, there is a good chance she will start believing it — and with conviction! Every advertising and public relations professional is aware of this phenomenon. Marketing experts know, for instance, that you won’t decide to buy their client’s product if you see one advertisement for it. They therefore design an advertising campaign for their targeted customers to view the product’s ad x number of times over a number of months in order to generate interest.

The first time someone hears a view, he will ask himself if it is credible in order to decide if he should accept or reject it. An interesting thing happens after he hears the view numerous times — he stops analyzing it for credibility. Somehow, just hearing a view enough times trains our brains to accept it as true without us even consciously examining it for validity. Even a theory that is confidently rejected at first can become solid conviction after hearing or reading it dozens of times.

The influence of repetition has been utilized by lockdown propagandists. They repeat their cheap slogans like “Stay safe” or “Protect your neighbors” so much that our minds accept the social distancing premise even though it does not intellectually make sense to us. The army of propagandists — news anchors, politicians, radio DJ’s, actors in commercials, highway message boards — constantly repeating “Stay 6 feet apart” and “Stay at home” overwhelms and conditions our brains to accept these morally and intellectually indefensible positions.

The underlying pretext of the lockdown message is that only deaths in the present month matters. Lockdown propagandists know that social distancing will kill most of the population in the long-term so they tell the public that only deaths in the current part of the year are relevant. Listening to the people around you talk, you can see how effective they have been. No one ever mentions that pandemic restrictions decrease life expectancy and will kill billions of people in time. People only discuss the daily, weekly, and cumulative death counts from COVID. 

Many low quality studies have been used to support the case for lockdowns, from those utilizing bad science to outright scams. There was a study which showed that the British economy will be worse off without a lockdown because everyone will be home sick with coronavirus. From Sweden and other non-lockdown countries, we know now that is not true. The less social distancing, the better the economy. 

Another phony study, from the same disgraced University of Cambridge that brought us the economic ‘study’ above, uncovered that lockdowns make people happy. According to these corrupt academics, Britons were unhappy at the start of the pandemic before lockdowns began and once imprisoned at home, they all became happy again! What moron would believe such nonsense? 

A collaborative report by a number of British universities on human rights and lockdowns proclaimed to the world that lockdowns don’t violate any human rights and should continue. Lockdowns are the biggest violation of human rights in the history of the world. These charlatans are no better than the academics that lent their approval to the Holocaust in Germany. We must call out these frauds and ban them from using computers again so they cannot produce more society-destroying propaganda. Many of them secretly work for the Chinese Communist Party (CCP), which created the lockdown hoax.

There was a study published in The Lancet showing once-and-for-all that HCQ does not work to treat COVID. The study was exposed as a fraud and retracted. There was a whole campaign against HCQ being used for SARS-CoV-2 despite the fact proven by over 100 studies that it is effective. China produced studies showing the effectiveness of early mechanical ventilation for COVID, which turned out to greatly increase mortality. How sick is it to create fake studies and expert testimonials to prevent people from receiving proper medical treatment? 

Lockdown propaganda has invaded every aspect of our lives. You cannot turn on the TV, radio, or internet without being bombarded by commercials and ads guilt-tripping and shaming you into staying home. You cannot walk downtown without seeing a number of advertisements to mask up or signs telling you to stay 2 meters from others. Even electronic highway signs are constantly ordering us to “Stay home” and “Avoid non-essential travel.” 

What about advertisements warning about the harms of social distancing? There are none. Probably because they have been banned by the government. 100% of signs and advertisements related to restrictions express the anti-rights side, inundating us with society-wrecking propaganda. There are no commercials educating people on the harms and lack of scientific validity of social distancing, nor are there signs posted in parks comparing the death rate of social distancing to SARS-CoV-2. With advertisements and signs immersing us in propaganda everywhere we look and no counter-propaganda to balance it out, it is no wonder why lockdown indoctrination is so common.

House arrest has been marketed to the public as a prize to be enjoyed and relished. Our political leaders tell us how much they enjoy being home most of the time. Public service commercials show people basking in their neverending home time, reminiscent of McDonald’s “Ba da da da da… I’m lovin’ it!’ commercials. Propagandists of all sorts, including journalists and television and radio personalities, repeatedly tell us how much they love all the time they get to spend at home as if home incarceration is a reward for which we should be grateful. 

This makes people feel like they are the only ones who are suffering due to the isolation when, in fact, everyone is — they just don’t have the courage to be open about it. Worse still, it has created a social norm in which people need to keep up appearances by showing others that they are thriving and enjoying home isolation. That is a destructive norm because it forces people to hold in and hide their pain. Please drop the act. Tell your friends how much the isolation is bothering you. They will probably respond that they feel the same way and are relieved they’re not alone!

Celebrities have jumped on the “Ba da da da da… I’m lovin’ lockdown” bandwagon. Through social media and TikTok videos, they discuss how much they love being home all the time along with the visual proof. It is in the best interest of famous people to tow the mainstream narrative, no matter how much they disagree with it, in order to maximize their popularity. Low popularity means retirement for people in the entertainment industry.

The people who extol social isolation as enjoyable are clearly propagandists and liars. No one likes to be constantly alone or spend all their time at home. Either their job depends on them going along with the scam or they are weaklings desperate for social approval. Nevertheless, there is an upside to this propaganda technique. While fighting for human rights is essential, so is trying to make the best out of a bad situation and not allowing despair to engulf you.

Is it any surprise that the politicians that have committed crimes against humanity accept no responsibility for their acts? Politicians responsible for social distancing laws consistently say that the laws only exist because people have not distanced intensely enough in the past. “If people would have just stayed at home in the first two weeks of lockdown, coronavirus would be eradicated and we wouldn’t still need to socially distance after all these months!” they shout at us. 

How cruel this ploy is! Abusers of any sort frequently blame their victims, telling the victims that they deserve to be treated harshly because they are inadequate in some way. Politicians using SARS-CoV-2 to grab power are no different. Of course, it is our own fault that we are imprisoned at home, we just had to grab that latte with our friend the other day. The insane thing is that politicians blame victims for pandemic restrictions even when cases are low. Infectious diseases like SARS-CoV-2 never go away — they become endemic like the cold or flu once a certain threshold is reached; a scientific reality called herd immunity. 

But lockdown propagandists including scientists and politicians are claiming that we can eradicate the virus if we would just wear masks and stay home as much as we can. That is not possible. Herd immunity will keep infection levels low and the best way to get herd immunity is for low-risk people to get infected with SARS-CoV-2. After an individual is infected, she has 100% immunity for years. That is much better than the 90% immunity for a few months and unknown long-term health risks from the COVID vaccines. If anything, it is altruistic to get infected. After the infection clears, you are contributing to herd immunity, you won’t be able to infect others (unlike those vaccinated), and you are hastening the end of lockdowns. 

The belief that it is the fault of the public that social distancing laws are in place is widely held. It is common to hear people expressing that view. Please don’t be one of them. SARS-CoV-2 will never go away. There are many industries that are essential that have to continue during lockdowns and many activities, such as buying food, that everyone has to do, making a true lockdown impossible. You are unconditionally entitled to your fundamental human rights and anyone who takes them away from you is unconditionally guilty of a serious offense.

Since December 2019, the government of China has carried out a massive international campaign to promote lockdowns using dark propaganda. Tactics include:

• • 1. Hundreds of thousands of fake social media accounts promoting lockdowns and shaming politicians who don’t use them
    2. Fake videos of people in Wuhan fainting or dropping dead from coronavirus, and of an absurd level of spraying disinfectant
    3. Publishing fake scientific papers 
    4. Directly pressuring foreign governments to lockdown 
    5. Promoting lockdowns through control of the WHO and academics throughout the world

For more information on the CCP’s lockdown propaganda campaign, we recommend an article by lawyer Michael Senger in Tablet Magazine and an open letter by Senger and other experts.

In an effort to cover up fraud, important articles and documents have been altered. The definition of “herd immunity” on the WHO website, for instance, was thoroughly altered in late 2020. The original definition, according to Harvard epidemiologist Martin Kulldorff, would be considered accurate by any infectious disease epidemiologist. The new definition, however, is suspect. It was rewritten to define herd immunity as a product of vaccination alone. That is false — herd immunity is also achieved through exposure to the pathogen in question. It appears that the definition was revised to advertise Xi Jinping’s social isolation-is-healthy falsehood.

In 2009, the WHO changed its definition of “pandemic” to remove the element of a large amount of deaths. One month later, it declared a pandemic of swine flu. The “pandemic” ended up not taking more lives over and above the normal level of global flu deaths. Many experts believe that the 2009 swine flu saved thousands of lives by displacing the regular flu, which has a much higher mortality rate. Without changing the definition of ‘pandemic,’ there would have been little basis for the ensuing effort for mass vaccinations.

Related to the 2009 fake swine flu pandemic, Forbes removed a 2010 article from its website in October 2020 about the situation. “Why The WHO Faked a Pandemic,” brought to light the WHO’s inappropriate alarmism over what was only a mild flu. Undoubtedly, there are many other instances of documents being quietly erased or rewritten to support the pro-lockdown narrative.

In order to make social distancing out to be the only option to prevent COVID-19, propagandists have hidden the role of immunity and treatment. Like all types of respiratory infections, exposure does not necessitate infection. If you have a strong immune system, you can breath in SARS-CoV-2 laden air and your immune system will fight the virus preventing you from becoming infected. Propagandists don’t mention this scientific fact so that their audience will think that only distancing and masks prevent infections.

According to some of the world’s top infectious disease experts, such as Sunetra Gupta and Michael Yeadon, approximately a third of people cannot get a SARS-CoV-2 infection due to cross-immunity from exposure to similar cold viruses (also called “coronaviruses.”) There is good scientific support for this theory, however, you won’t hear about it from journalists because they want you to think that herd immunity is very hard to contain, when we were already halfway there when the SARS-CoV-2 outbreak began.

To the consternation of the medical community, lockdown propagandists have not only hidden, but actually tried to discredit effective treatments for COVID-19 such as HCQ, monoclonal antibodies, and convalescent plasma. Journalists and paid “experts” falsely claim that there are no effective treatments for COVID-19, while touting ventilators as the only treatment (although ventilators kill more COVID patients than they save). Lockdown propagandists want the public to think that there is no treatment for COVID so only social distancing and masks will prevent a severe infection.

Prior to 2020, a large-scale lockdown has never been implemented. Smaller quarantines had been used in Africa to contain Ebola, a virus with a 50% mortality rate. Not only had large-scale quarantines never been used before 2020, the public health field was opposed to them. Pandemic preparedness plans were in existence all over the world prior to 2020 and to my knowledge, none of them included quarantines for healthy people, not even voluntary quarantines. Why would they? Quarantines cause intense suffering, health problems, and violate many basic human rights.

That lockdowns, as we know them, were the invention of Xi Jinping is a fact you will never hear from the news media. They like to speak of lockdowns as if they are a widely accepted public health practice. On the contrary, even government’s recommendation of self-isolation is universally rejected in public health literature. WHO guidance on pandemic control likewise rejected the use of quarantining health individuals. Voluntary quaratines of infected persons was the closest thing to lockdowns recommended in the public health field prior to 2020. All that changed abruptly when the Community Party of China began using mass quarantines in 2020 and the corrupt WHO soon promoted them.

Legal punishment for noncompliance of COVID restrictions is obviously a powerful deterrent to resisting the COVID cult. A related deterrent that is more insidious is the showcasing of people who are experiencing legal troubles from noncompliance. For instance, the media loves to make a circus out of someone who has paid a large fine for throwing a party. Hosting a get-together is a lightning rod for intense villainization in the press. The media is clearly making an example out of these individuals to scare the rest of us into submission. The heavy fines and the public villainization are both powerful deterrents. Very unfortunate because socialization is essential for wellbeing. Organizing social events should be celebrated and encouraged.

Publicity for arresting and jailing people for not distancing is undoubtedly a strong influence on public behavior. Fear of being put in jail is enough to scare people to behave in any self-destructive way. Right now (Feb 2021) in Alberta, Canada, there is a pastor who is in jail for holding church services. The police told him he will only be released if he promises to not hold any more worship services. The pastor has so far not agreed to that, so he sits in jail indefinitely. How’s that for sending a message to the whole country to think twice before having any kind of gathering?

A common rhetorical tactic used by politicians who have committed the lockdown crime is to tell their critics that if they don’t like the lockdown, they should “Propose another workable solution,” or “Come up with a practical alternative.” Lockdown critics have offered better alternatives, but politicians portray those alternatives as ‘not doing anything.’ 

This tactic is a play on the cognitive bias that ‘more is more’: the greater the intrusion of public policy into people’s lives, the greater the positive impact of the policy must be. The best alternative to lockdowns, the one which best safeguards wellbeing and rights, is for government to do absolutely nothing. Anything they “do” to “protect health” from COVID only harms health. Vaccination with a drug that has undergone the standard safety-vetting process (which current COVID vaccines have not) is the only thing that our government can do to help us. Covering our faces and isolating us from each other only does harm.

Another alternative to general lockdowns is an age-restricted lockdown. I am not advocating this as quarantining anyone is immoral, but it is less immoral than quarantining everyone. Focused protection, in which the elderly are assisted in voluntary self-isolation, is also a better alternative to a lockdown, although in 2021, it is no longer necessary since herd immunity is rapidly approaching. 

The claim that lockdown critics have no better alternative is false. Politicians can play the “We’ll choose a better option if we find one” card because lockdown critics cannot get their voices heard, so people don’t even realize that they do have better options.

It makes me wince when I read in the paper the completely fabricated claims that critics of COVID restrictions are bullies. Do people actually believe that when they read it? I have never seen any evidence of this in person or online. It is the sadistic adherents to the lockdown cult that bully, degrade, and spread rumors about the innocent citizens that speak up about the harms of COVID restrictions. 

This tactic is a good example of how propaganda works. Everyone who first hears the talk of anti-lockdown activists being bullies knows that it is untrue. However, by being delivered with intense emotion and repeated over and over, people start believing that which their logical mind has rejected.