The phrases “Life imitates art” and vice versa are often bandied about because they work. In this case, the Eloi from H.G. Wells’ The Time Machine came to mind after talking with a parent of one of my kids’ classmates at a kid sporting event. Puffing up proudly, he declared that both he and his wife had been fully vaccinated, that their older child had been too, and that as soon as their other kid was 12 they’d get be Jabbed too.
He asked if I was vaccinated, and I said “No”. When he asked why, I said that I had some serious safety concerns about this emergency use authorization stuff including the fact that no mRNA treatment having ever made it through human trials before, and the rush to get this out. I mentioned the Nuremberg code, and said that for a virus that has about a 99.8% recovery rate for people under 70, I was not scared…. His smile became this fixed , eyes unresponsive, just nodding a la OK, whatever, just get away from me you conspiracy monger you.
I have received reaction like this after reaction like this – politeness maintained but otherwise a dismissal of anything that might indicate the Jab could be a threat. Not just polite dismissal… an absolute, utter incuriosity. Which, like the man in the movie, makes me want to lose it:
On my old blog I had several pieces regarding the utter inability of any new information to penetrate the minds of Leftists – Teflon Intellects, I dubbed them. So, on a recent piece by our host comes this comment (replying to my comment, actually) that meshes perfectly with this quote by Frantz Fanon:
“Sometimes people hold a core belief that is very strong. When they are presented with evidence that works against that belief, the new evidence cannot be accepted. It would create a feeling that is extremely uncomfortable, called cognitive dissonance. And because it is so important to protect the core belief, they will rationalize, ignore and even deny anything that doesn’t fit in with the core belief.”
There are myriad quotes about it being easier to fool people than getting them to admit they were fooled – one such:
EMOTIONS TRUMP REASON
I don’t recall where I saw it, but there was a quote to the effect that we are not rational beings with emotions, but rather emotional beings who can reason. Consider Rule 3, which I put into this looooong Covid link aggregate (Rules 1 and 2 also included for completeness):
Rule 1: It doesn’t matter what’s true, it’s what you can get people to believe.
Rule 2: If you control the information flow, you control what people believe.
Rule 3: If your information manipulates emotions to make people believe they are good and virtuous for believing what you want, no facts or reasoning will undo those beliefs.
And that’s the key to the Church of the Covidian, to Socialism, to Wokeness, to every single thing the Left does: manipulate what people believe through the selective – mendacious – presentation of information to get people to feel virtuous, good, noble, kind, intelligent and educated, etc., when they believe what you want them to believe. Do this and they will never deviate from that belief – for to deviate would mean that their self-image would crumble. Add in a few simple rules and they will act to advance The Cause without understanding they’re pawns being used.
Few people have the introspection and strength to fundamentally examine and self-correct, especially when it risks their own self-image, plus risks their being socially shunned, or even canceled, by those around them. Dopamine rushes from colleagues, friends, and family approving your beliefs are a very powerful operant conditioning effect.
Aside: I do have a theory on how this can be broken. It’s worked for me… sometimes. I’ll write about it anon.
We have a world filled with people that stare at the glowing screen and unquestioningly believe whatever pronouncements flow from it. They are assured that the screen speaks Truth, and that anything else are lies from those who want to mislead them. They are assured that if they believe the screen’s Truth that they are good and noble people, wanting to save others, and that anyone who doubts the screen’s Truth is evil who wants people to die.
How do we fight this? More importantly, should we try? Or do we simply prepare for the final death-struggle against people whose survival instinct has atrophied, and who believe the glowing screen with near religious zeal?
I am torn. I do not want people to die from what is looking like a long-lead-time blood clot death from the Jab:
But more and more Yuri Bezmenov was right – no matter what evidence you present, it’s ignored. Consider this, Jummai Nache: 47-year-old Minnesota woman gets both legs and hands amputated after severe Pfizer mRNA adverse reactions, with a link to this disturbing piece about the omerta against saying anything negative about the Jab:
He said that the last time paramedics came to his house (there were at least seven times in six weeks), they told him not to mention the vaccine to the doctors when he arrived at the hospital. The paramedics said he would have a better chance of receiving real treatments if he kept quiet about the Moderna shot.
People who can gloss over even a scintilla of a frisson of fear from this poor woman’s story, or the increased deaths and side effects, or the medical industry pushing-pushing-pushing The Jab uber alles, will not accept anything.
A man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still.
This is a saying my late father once said to me. People will not believe until it affects them personally.
We’ve tried. We’ve begged, pleaded, and presented evidence. I, for one, will not stop writing but I know that when the mass die-off happens I’ve done my best. So I conclude, heavily: Let them die happy, thinking they’re virtuous and good and all. In the meantime, focus on saving what you can.
I think this is pretty much the same thing that Dr. Thomas Kuhn describes in his 1969 book, The Structure of Scientific Revolutions. Great read if that kind of literature grabs you. Here’s a short .pdf that is a synopsis of sorts: http://csmgeo.csm.jmu.edu/geollab/Fichter/Geol364/kuhn.pdf
While Structure is a somewhat dry read, another work titled The Copernican Revolution (same author) is a more fun read. Both works explain Nitzakhon’s observations. It’s a matter of paradigms. And, unfortunately changing a paradigm is darned difficult.
From the .pdf cited above:
Or, to state it another way.
Paradigms guide normal science until unresolvable problems presented by nature cause a crisis and the formulation of an alternate paradigm (i.e. a revolution) to guide future research (i.e. a new state of normal science)
Why is it like this?
Because everyone agrees on what they know.They agree because the education system inculcates them in what they are supposed to know – which is the current paradigm.To be a science all the practitioners must agree on the problems which exist.Kuhn argues that a science does not come into being until all practitioners accept a paradigm. ADVANTAGES? – in a very complex world it guides what you choose to look at. Without this, fact gathering is random, like classical induction. DISADVANTAGES? – restricts what can be believed or what is possible (like a religious creed).But the second great insight that Kuhn had was how paradigms break down and lead to revolutions.Revolutions are not precipitated by some maverick, inside or outside the discipline.Revolutions are usually precipitated by the most knowledgeable and experienced scientists in the current paradigm.As Normal Science progresses, anomalies arise in observations and experiments.These are facts which do not fit the paradigm, so, of course, people do not know what to do with them. They cannot be explained.The importance of an experienced practitioner steeped in the paradigm is that they are the ones who are best prepared to recognize the anomaly for what it is.But these anomalies are at first ignored because no one knows what to do with them. In time, however, anomalies accumulate, and become so blatant that they cannot be ignored.Precipitates a revolution when some brilliant, young practitioner just entering the field, but not blinded by the paradigm recognizes that the anomalies are anomalies to the paradigm because the paradigm is wrong.Leads to breakdown of old paradigm – a revolution.Historically this is a very messy time.Nature herself starts to say, “Your ideas do not work.”But it is very hard to give up the security of the known paradigm and dive off into the unknown.Much resistance exists because it requires a complete breakdown with the past and reexamination of everything that is known.Some people will never go along, and sometimes the revolution is not complete until the old guard has all died.
I did get the Moderna vaccine, after dragging my feet for some time. No reactions (although, when I mentioned that I had experienced major reactions to meds before, the people in charge kept me for over 1/2 hour, observing and making sure that I was safe). No problems since (or, for that matter, before).
I believe that I already had COVID, in early November, 2019. I was sick for almost a month with a respiratory illness. Fortunately, I was already taking HCQ for arthritis, and was able to heal eventually. But, I was a sick puppy while it lasted.
I will not, however, take any booster shots; not even if they threaten my health insurance or ability to fly. Just done with that.
I suspect that this will dwindle away when the upcoming flu season is less serious than last year’s. They, of course, will attribute the improvement to vigorous enforcement of vaxxing. They will hide the MANY Black people who refuse to ‘get the shot’. La, La, La – don’t exist.
I can’t be bothered to get all excited about it – I have certifications to finish, a home to move into, a new great-granddaughter to see, and a ham shack to set up. Just too busy to bother.
“Not discussing my personal medical history with a stranger.Fuck off.” is my standard answer.