This is the continuation of my last week’s article which dabbled in the weaponization of the following words: anti-vaxxer, far-right, conspiracy theory/-ist, anti-(masker/science/lockdown), misinformation (dis- & mal-). It really was just the tip of the iceberg and you can read it here.
This week, I’d like to get into some defensive and protective strategies for combatting the current onslaught of Orwellian language in this unrelenting information war. Though, I feel calling it an information war is only part of the story. The war is also an ideological one and one on our way of life.
It is also a war on our very humanity. If you think this is hyperbole, consider the transhumanist agenda being embraced by some of the most powerful and influential people and organizations on Earth. Here’s a taste of their perspective from Yuval Noah Harari - who is a WEF agenda contributor and adviser to Klaus Schwab, founder of the World Economic Forum - which is still filled with euphemisms and an intentionally more digestible version of their vision. Nonetheless, every time I watch it, I projectile vomit from the depths of my soul towards this soulless vampiric shell of a homo Saipan.
Okay, now that I had that little rant, let’s get back to shielding ourselves from the weaponized language that is being fired from the mortars of politicians, media, and pop culture.
I think it is worthwhile to give a specific example and then offer my strategies in relation to it. Rather than reiterate some of what I’ve said about the terms I reviewed last time, let’s take one from the honorable mention list I made but didn’t delve into.
Natural immunity.
I think the above headline from Mother Jones, “Smart [cough, cough], Fearless [spat out my coffee] Journalism [uncontrollable laughter]”, is a great example of this weaponization.
I have to comment that their tagline is in complete opposition to their perspective in this article.
If they were “smart”, they would know natural immunity is a long existing established fundamental of medicine and health. Without it, it would be impossible for us to have made it this far as a species. Remember, vaccines have been around for a tiny fraction of our existence.
Using the word “fearless” while dismissing natural immunity as “dangerous theory” is about the most irrationally fearful thing someone could do. Also, adding “anti-vaxxers” to the headline is fear-mongering by leveraging a loaded term - of the propagandizing media’s creation (or co-creation) and perpetuation - which drips with hysteria and concern.
After this, “journalism” certainly doesn’t belong anywhere alongside the brand called Mother Jones. Read the whole article and you’ll see that I’m being gentle and kind here.
Already, I have begun one of my defensive tactics in combatting the word weapons being slung with intent. It is a fairly instinctive one for those of us with any proclivity or training in formal logic - use rational and sound argumentation to reveal invalid premises, fallacies, weak logical positions, and unsupported conclusions.
Let’s summarize this protective tactic as demonstrably proving unsound argumentation and place it in a list of the tactics I lean towards.
Protective Tactics to Combat the Weaponization of Language
1. Demonstrably proving unsound argumentation
This can be quite laborious but, for some of us, it is fun and helps others in our camp see the strength of our rational position. It might also bring fence-sitters over.
However, it often doesn’t work to turn an antagonist into an ally because if they have bought in to the Orwellian Ministry of Truth agenda, then they are no longer functioning with reason.
You cannot reason with the unreasonable.
To quickly get back to the natural immunity argument, here’s a citation directly from the CDC’s website (which has been combative towards anything other than vaccines for covid but has been forced to retreat on some fronts more recently):
Active Immunity results when exposure to a disease organism triggers the immune system to produce antibodies to that disease. Active immunity can be acquired through natural immunity or vaccine-induced immunity.
Natural immunity is acquired from exposure to the disease organism through infection with the actual disease.
Vaccine-induced immunity is acquired through the introduction of a killed or weakened form of the disease organism through vaccination.
Either way, if an immune person comes into contact with that disease in the future, their immune system will recognize it and immediately produce the antibodies needed to fight it. Active immunity is long-lasting, and sometimes life-long.
Bret Weinstein and Heather Heying are excellent at this. They do a great job dismantling poor logic and poor science in this video that they put out in response to the Lancet paper, which concluded that natural immunity was as good or better than two dose vaccinated immunity.
Here’s a quick video I made for TikTok which was taken done for… I have no idea… maybe because the Lancet is fake news. So, I uploaded it to Rumble, where I will be putting in more efforts going forward.
You might wonder why they don’t like the paper since it aligns with their (and my) position on natural immunity). Well, even though the paper is willing to support the FACT that natural immunity is robust and valuable, it does not give it enough credit and it is dishonest about how it compares to vaccinated immunity. The proper conclusion would be that vaccinated immunity is far inferior to natural immunity.
2. Calling out the ad hominem attacks while highlighting a lack of addressing the content of the claim
Call them out. Remind them they are using dismissive, dehumanizing and othering language while being neglectful of logic. It is illogical. It is unscientific. It is anti-intellectual - to put it back in their labeling terms. It is a display of laziness and closed-minded prejudice. It is non-inclusive. This term should borrow down on the Woke mob as they prize inclusion - except for those they deem not worthy (laughable) - as the foremost of virtues… to signal as much as possible.
Again, the unreasonable cannot be reasoned with. They are likely to go silent with this retort… but that’s probably worth it. No?
3. Ignoring the venomous language entirely
Maybe the most wise and time conserving approach is to just ignore them and their terms. Forgive them for they know not what they do. Unfortunately, some of them do. With these, we don’t need to forgive but we can disarm them by ignoring them. They lose power when we do not feed it.
4. Agreeing on our differences
Another similar approach is taking the higher road. One can simply acknowledge that we see the world in a different light and we will have to go our own way in peace. Maybe they don’t want to accept that. If so, break out tactic one and let them know it is time to be logical about the content. They will need to prove all their points with evidence and sound argumentation. If they are not willing, it is time for them to backdown and back away.
5. Being proud of the label
This is where I am a lot these days. If someone calls me a conspiracy theorist, I would say thank you. It is so much more preferable than being a complicity theorist or a coincidence theorist. Us conspiracy theorists have the best record of wins for three seasons in a row. We are true world champions. Celebrate it and yourself. You are not asleep and indoctrinated.
Do you have others? Please share.
I feel like I need to discuss the weaponization of the term freedom more. Do you want me to tackle this next? Let me know.
Definitely DO discuss the weaponization of the term "Freedom". It has been inverted, subverted, maligned, manipulated, mutilated and extraordinarily "rendered" (did I mention water-boarded?) to mean the precise opposite of the very foundational meaning that underpinned western liberal democracies.
You could start with this "case study" and forensically vivisect the Orwellian absurdities you find within.
The Ottawa truck convoy has revealed the ugly side of freedom - Globe & Mail, February 22, 2022
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-ottawa-truck-convoy-has-revealed-the-ugly-side-of-freedom/
I would do it myself, but I seem to be suffering from some persistent, chronic cognitive trauma-fog up in my "penetrated cabinet" these days. Will Advil or something help with that? Or do we need regime change? And what about my former family members, friends and neighbours? They seem to have gone all LumpenBorg on me, insisting that "resistance is futile" and "you will be assimilated". Shit! I hope it doesn't involve needles. I hate needles!
I can just feel that ectoplasmic projection of a human being mentioned above in your post exsanguinating my "free will" from me at this very moment!
Please...for the sake of us all...deal with this Freedom issue. It's under assault.
Very thoughtful and coherent summary.
I think it is useful to remember that when we have the opportunity to engage with those who disagree we are not trying, necessarily, to convince them that they are wrong. That is almost always futile. If someone believes the absurd narratives so vehemently that they are willing to openly attack us they usually have another agenda or they are hopelessly lost in false-equivalency arguments and dogmatic thinking. Cracking dogma is a particularly difficult task.
The point here is that the goal is to convince those who are silently in attendance, those watching the exchange, the fence-sitters that you allude to. This is why it is crucial to maintain clarity and even-handedness without getting triggered. Our demeanor is key and the current situation demands that we rise above if we are truly interested in helping humanity.