Should we unite or divide?
We appear to be living through a blatant attack on what it means to be a sovereign human being. With our freedoms being eroded from all angles and the worrying shadow of a digital, programmable monetary system looming, we plebs must sharpen our focus. If humanity is to prevail against the accelerating rise of technocratic totalitarianism, fostering unity is perhaps a better strategy. Division is rarely going to be useful: siloing people off into smaller and smaller groups until they inevitably become units of one. Communicating properly and respectfully (and where possible in person) with those we disagree with is a good place to start. If they refuse to engage in meaningful debate with those holding opposing views, preferring ad hominem attacks and propaganda techniques (e.g. repeating the ‘conspiracy theorist’ trope on a loop) that is probably a very good indicator that they are not to be trusted.
It has certainly been an ugly few months in the so-called freedom movement. The moniker ‘movement’ seems jarring given how disparate and incohesive the varying groups are. Recently, tensions have been visibly mounting. There seems to be an ever-increasing purity test in the mix that almost everyone will eventually fail. The Controlled Opposition label is slapped on at will, even in the absence of any solid evidence. It is not surprising that most people no longer know who to trust and what to believe. Perhaps that is exactly the intention.
The problem with unforgiving purity spirals is that they don’t allow for people to change their minds. They tend to result in conformity of thinking with people’s beliefs being pushed to extremes. None of us are omniscient and acknowledging and accepting we will each be wrong about some things is a critical starting point for us to function as a civilised society. For those living with teenagers, it is striking how often they say ‘you can’t say that!’. Self censorship is becoming embedded in the younger generation as a result of cancel culture and the ability to permanently record every utterance. As a society we have to resist this voluntary silencing. Every voice must be respectfully heard because we can only reach for the truth through a collective understanding of the world, coming at it from differing angles. HART has remained a broad church with a variety of views, all of which are respected, even while not always being held by everyone within the group.
As an example of mounting tensions, the sparring between Team Tobes and Team James on London Calling’s recent episode reached uncomfortable levels, as Delingpole’s frustration at Young’s assertion that none of the last 3 years’ events were conspiratorially contrived reached its zenith. Conversely, Young is perhaps right in saying that we mustn’t simply sit around saying the end is nigh and surely not everyone who has been complicit was signed up to an agenda. It is important to continue to resist the mission creep and his work in setting up the Free Speech Union has been a godsend to many who have dared to poke their heads above the authoritarian parapet, not to mention the Daily Sceptic’s prolific output. What is notable about this example however, is that their friendship always prevails and they manage to put differences aside and return for the next round. Heated debate is healthy and is a good workout for your opinions – can you adequately defend them? If not, perhaps they need adjustments.
We have also of late had to contend with the ‘whoops the science changed’ brigade (it didn’t by the way). A recent podcast with Alex from Thinking Slow points out something that will chime with many who have been on Team This Is Completely Nuts from the start. Disgruntled critics note that some of the individuals who got everything very wrong in terms of the vaccine are now omnipresent telling the public how it really is, when there are plenty of other examples of expert voices who have been right all along. It doesn’t make a whole lot of logical sense, although in fairness, not much does these days. The volte-face from certain individuals, without acknowledgement of their previous errors has understandably ruffled feathers but the fact is, those who have had a change of heart are perhaps much more powerful weapons in bridging the gap between Team A and Team B. This is perhaps to do with shortening the gap of cognitive dissonance – after all, they got it wrong too.
From the narrative enforcers’ perspective, the fractious in-fighting must look satisfyingly demoralising. If the mission is indeed ‘divide and conquer’ then ‘they’ seem to be doing a cracking job without much effort at all. That said, it is important to remain vigilant. We must assume that there is going to be genuine Controlled Opposition and therefore we have to scrutinise people’s actions. It doesn’t even need to be deliberate. Certain individuals may unwittingly just serve as useful idiots, pushing various anti-human agendas whilst convincing themselves they are being strategic or playing the game. It is not a game, it is a psychological war. If the lines of truth continue to be bent by those supposedly on ‘our side’ then we will likely be conceding ground on a daily basis. Characters now blaming everything on lockdowns whilst refusing to engage on the topic of vaccine harms are not being strategic, as they may claim. They are just lying or obfuscating the truth. At this point, it is not an acceptable position for a single real journalist to hold given the overwhelming body of public domain evidence on vaccine harms, and there is nothing strategic about such an approach. The recent Spiked smear piece by Fraser Myers entitled The delusions of Andrew Bridgen was such blatant propaganda that it raised distinct questions as to why they would publish such an article. When asked whether they have received pharmaceutical funding, the silence was deafening. During a subsequent GB news interview, Myers dropped the ‘anti-vax conspiracy theorist’ trope more times than a well trained parrot, refusing to engage on the scientific facts clearly and articulately presented by Bridgen. We have also had the so-called Lockdown Files, farcical in their anti-climactic theatre. They were far more notable for what was omitted than what was allowed to be published. Such bread and circuses allow a miniscule shifting of the Overton window, dutifully staying within sharply defined boundaries whilst leaving out huge chunks of reality.
Amongst the (often deliberate) confusion it is important to remain optimistic because demoralised doom and gloom can never be productive. It is worth watching this interview with of ex-KGB defector Yuri Bezmenov (ironically from 1984) to remind ourselves that demoralisation is a very effective weapon of the enemy. In a psychological war being fought largely online, confusion, psychological isolation and demoralisation are master strokes. Remembering to stop and smell the roses whilst keeping a discerning eye on proceedings and holding people to account will be the new martial art of our time. And we all need to become black belts, sharpish.