The Psychological and Intellectual Damage of the “Scamdemic”

“There’s a very firm psychological reason why the catch phrase of the day is ‘follow the science’ and not ‘confirm the science’, ‘validate the science’, ‘debate the science’ or ‘replicate the science.’ Science is never settled or followed unless evil is trying to set up a trap for the public.”

— Jason Christoff

Absolutely.

When architects of the scamdemic orchestrated their manipulation, they were careful to rely on the use of AUTHORITY as truth — not reason, facts and logic as truth.

You don’t rationally, authentically persuade someone with authority. You persuade them through facts and argumentation. The government never attempted to do so, nor even acted as if it expected itself to do so.

It simply said, from the get-go, “Here’s an expert. The expert says lock down. The expert says social distance. The expert says this is the worst, most deadly virus since the 1920s, or maybe ever. Do what the expert says or you’re going to die.”

The expert was supposed to be an expert because he (or she) has an M.D. But then other experts with M.D.s questioned the first expert. Don’t listen to them, we were told. They don’t work for the government. Even some who worked for the government (or used to) began to offer facts or logic to question what the original experts said. Don’t listen to them, either. They’re traitors. Or insurrectionists. Or — the most inconceivably evil thing imaginable — a Trump supporter. Ironic, since Trump himself bought into the scamdemic, at least at first.

In the end, we were left with the Orwellian/Randian/Hitlerian spectacle of “Dr. Fauci.” Dr. Fauci, we were told, IS the science. Listen to him and nobody else. Of course, he said 100 different contradictory things a day. No worries. The media captured the things that served the narrative, and ignored the rest.

HOW you know what you know is the most important thing. Your facts must be accurate — but you must be sure that you’re reasoning and thinking with facts and logic, at all times. The process is not infallible. That’s precisely why we don’t say, “Follow the science” — at least, not if science and objective knowledge are truly our goals.

We don’t even follow reason, strictly speaking. We use reason as a guide — to objective truth. An expert worthy of the name shows you the PROOF — not the conclusion independent of any reasoning. A rational expert does not need guns, mandates, emotional intimidation, a compliant and dishonest media or social shaming to convince you. He only needs truth, the willingness and the ability to express it. If he can’t, then he’s no expert and you should ignore him.

You follow the process of objectivity and intellectual honesty wherever they lead you. In other words: the polar, precise opposite of absolutely everything that has happened in the last 3 years.