I've little patience for people I need to lie to.

in Informationwar6 months ago

Of course, we don't call it lie. We use cutesy, non-descript terms like "agree to disagree" or "compromise" or "playing nice so people will like you". But as long as it's something that goes against your fundamental, authentic self, it's an untruth. And untruths are lies.

Following the pandemic, this bizarre new breed of citizen arose. The perpetual victim. Well, arose, chances are they were already there, but even they were catching on to the manipulation tactics deployed against them. What I mean is that person who, all though the pandemic supported the lockdown and the restrictions, gave no shits about their unvaxxed neighbor, got all the boosters, and then had the audacity (when, for some reason, news of the "dubious" chemicals in vaccines went mainstream) to play the victim.

A friend tried to do that just earlier. Sent me this video of someone talking about the risk of myocarditis and so on and so forth for people who got vaccinated. Of course, playing the "poor me" card, conveniently forgetting that when she went to get the booster, she was all smug and holier-than-thou. I didn't forget. What the hell, we weren't allowed anywhere much, so I got room to remember the little things. The same person who, when we went to a light show event and I got denied entry because of the digital pass thing, didn't bat an eye. Didn't raise a finger to defend or argue for me.

I don't need that, I can argue for myself, but still. I replied to her text with a somewhat snarky "you wouldn't listen when I told you...", to which, for a brief moment, she admitted. Yet in the same breath, changed the story - actually, if I think about it, they were forcing us at school. I had no choice.

You always have a choice.

You chose not to make a fuss. You chose the easy option that still allowed you to go to Starbucks. But that was still a choice. A lot of people, like this friend, like to pretend there's a reprieve when you make bad choices. A third party (in this case the university, government, or the ever-ominous "them") you can blame, and of course, it's much harder and much more unpleasant to take ownership of your poor choices.

It irritated me, seeing her shirk responsibility so easily, and for a few minutes, I debated doing one of those nice "lies" I mentioned earlier. A quick "them bastards" would've done well enough, yet I couldn't bring myself to do it, so went full rant on her. I try to keep the anger out of these sort of conversations, as it does little good, but I did...

...point out the lack of personal accountability.

Because that's, in the end, how they'll "get you" in the next crisis scenario. Obviously, it won't be exactly the same. They won't ask you to keep the 2m distance or wear a mask. Maybe. A good psycho would make the next "disaster" completely different. Duh. This isn't your average serial killer B movie, where the killer does the same thing in the exact same way with variations of the exact same person. It's much more nuanced.

Which is why we need to focus less on the details, and more on the traits that will survive from one crisis to the next. Such as lack of ownership. Such as buying into this bullshit victim mentality. Because if you go away from Covid-19 thinking, like these people, that oh maybe they lied but I was tricked. I didn't know. It's not my fault...well, chances are you're gonna think that again and again.

WhatsApp Image 2023-08-18 at 19.39.58.jpeg

I wrote a few weeks back about the lessons I took from my experiences in the pandemic. What I learned, among other things, was that you can and should stand up for your rights, and read up more on what those rights are.

I'm not taking away the illegality of mask mandates.

What I am taking away is that it takes ten minutes to research my Constitutional rights, or half an hour to listen to one of those "kooky" alternative public figures who did the research and tell me why mask mandates aren't legal.

The difference between focusing on insignificant details (in the long run) and changing your overarching mentality.

... point out you chose a vague "them" over people who loved you.

As I told my friend, it's very telling that so many people chose to believe in the mainstream media, in politicians and "the powers that be" over their own friends, relatives and fellow citizens. What benefit could I possibly get out of my friend not getting vaccinated? What reason would I have to lie?

Easy, accessible questions.

Now, what benefit could "they" get out of her getting jabbed? And what reason would they have to lie?

Just these four questions, if more people were able to remove ego (that says "I'm right just because I'm me and I don't wanna look stupid in front of you"), and answer these questions genuinely, less people would now be worrying about the consequences of the Covid-19 shot(s).

Will such people change their thinking?

Honestly, I'm doubtful. Because most of them aren't asking why, which is the truly important question.

See, I don't think it's enough to go along with this "oh they tried to poison me" scenario simply because you saw a video on Facebook or Instagram. As the old "crazy conspiracy theorist" adage goes, if it's hit your mainstream media outlet, it's probably not incendiary revolutionizing new information.

Rather, I think people need to ask themselves why this was done, and the truth is, it's a scary question. I spent the pandemic fighting this bullshit, and haven't figured it out. Population control, elimination, and so on and so forth. As I was saying, I think there's quite a few reasons, and that's what more people need to follow.

It's very touching that some of these people "caught on" to the dangers of an experimental, aggressively promoted new treatment. About three years too late, but it's still earlier than some who still don't spot the link between the many boosters and the seemingly continuous cold they've had for eighteen months and counting.

But to answer my question, no, I don't think these people will change how they think. Some, but in the end, probably too few to make a difference. Because generally, going along with this is a sign of poor reasoning, a lack of critical thinking, and a massive ego problem. So rather than admit that they were wrong and that they habitually make poor life choices based on the above thinking and reasoning lackings, they'll most likely go along with whatever merriment "they" next throw our way.

P.S.: This, like all my posts on the topic, is not an invitation to argue about the Covid vaccine saves lives vs kills. I, unlike many of my peers, have done my research, and do take pride in my own critical thinking and reasoning skills. So I'm good.

banner.jpeg

Sort:  

I'm glad I didn't get it, and a lot of people in my immediate life didn't either. I've asked myself many of those questions and spent a good bit of time looking into the whole thing.

But, one thing that I'm not sure about is - hypethetically, if it was about population control, why would they want to get rid of all the people who are easily controlled and manipulated? That's one question I have no idea how to answer.

I've started to believe that there isn't some all powerful "them" with a plan, and instead there are just corrupted idiots in power who haven't got a clue what they're doing. The pandemic made me start thinking that, because of what an absolute mess it was.

I wondered that, too. I think reducing population is a simplistic answer, to be fair. At the same time, humanity won't survive with the people who follow and are easily manipulated. If we're gonna cull the population, we'd better keep the free thinkers and the ones ready to oppose authority, rather than the ones to follow. I mean sure, they'll follow you, Joe Leader, but then you'll eventually die, and what's left is a mass of ignorant, stupid people. With them, society perishes. Sorry for sounding crude, but if there are people out there thinking along these lines, I imagine they're pretty crude, also.

Well yeah, I mean in a perfect scenario - if culling people can be a good scenario - free thinkers and innovators would be the people we'd want to keep around. The place would be pretty boring if there were just dry-shites left behind.

I think the easiest way to cull a large swath of the population in the space of days and weeks would be to, start a scamdemic, make everyone take something and make that a hot-button issue, and bombard people with it - to the point that they in fight with each other over it - then come out and say that those two years were wasted over essentially a cold, and those shots you got are pointless, as are the boosters. Then make the whole world mistrust the government, then release the real bug, and when lockdowns come into effect, nobody will listen and it'll spread really quickly.

Then the only people left will be captive Humans who are traumatised and already afraid to leave their houses or socialise, hence why they're still around. Then you have really easy to control people who don't have the social skills to demonstrate or protest.

Realistically though, if that ^ scenario were the case, then the only people to be blamed for the death of countless millions would be the ones who ignored the guidelines, so technically, fault couldn't be pinned on anyone in particular.

Honestly, that would be a good way to get rid of a large portion of the population. Thankfully, I don't think we're there. If they started telling people the same (or slightly modified) shit now, I'm pretty sure many of them would still buy it.

Really?
Were there some people who supported the lockdown?

Cuánta belleza!!!